Which specs are better?

[univera]

I am doing some research on two similar amps, and wondered what technical gurus thought was the more desireable amp:

First is the NAD 2200, 100 WPC @ 8 ohms, <120 Damping factor, +-6 DB headroom. This isn't the PE model, but I belive the power ratings are the same for that one. (The PE may have more more headroom, but I'm not certain.)

Second is NAD 2200A, 150 WPC @ 8 ohms, <100 Damping factor, +- 4 DB headroom.

Both have equal distortion rating and seem to have the same dynamic power ratings.

Are they tossups? What is more important, 50 extra WPC while giving up 2 db headroom or 50 WPC less but 2 extra DB headroom? I don't understand damping, but everything else I am clear on. Curious what the veterans think and what you would choose if you were going with one versus the other.

2200A:

Continuous output power into 8 ohms 150W (17dBW) Rated distortion (THD 20Hz - 20kHz) 0.03%

Clipping power (maximum continuous power per channel) 200W

IHF Dynamic headroom at 8ohms +7dB IHF dynamic power (maximum short term power per channel)

8 ohms 400W (26dBW), 4 ohms 600W (28dBW), 2 ohms 800W (29dBW)

Damping factor (ref. 8ohms, 50Hz) >120 Input impedance 20kohms / 820pF

Input sensitivity (for rated power into 8ohms) 1.2V

Frequency response 3Hz - 100kHz / +0, -3dBdB Signal/noise ratio ref. 1W 100dB

ref. rated power >117dB THD (20Hz - 20kHz) <0.03%

2200 specs:
http://207.228.230.231/info/NAD_2200.pdf

[Sherardp]

I would go for the 2200a more power to play with, whats the price difference between the two?

[univera]

I would go for the 2200a more power to play with, whats the price difference between the two?

It's not so much a price difference as a learning experience as to what carries more weight. I have a 2200 and a 2200A is available as well. If my recevier using the 2200a doesn't sell, I was considering keeping it and biamping another rig. That would be a super SS setup. The "A" models don't come around often while the 2200's are plentiful.

[Dennis Gardner]

Funny that NAD did this since, 100 watts with 6 db headroom = 150 watts with 4 db headroom. Basically the same amp output measured differently.

I would hope that the newer version wasn't simply a rerated version. Sounds like something Sony would be guilty of huh?:eek:

[Sherardp]

Funny that NAD did this since, 100 watts with 6 db headroom = 150 watts with 4 db headroom. Basically the same amp output measured differently.

I would hope that the newer version wasn't simply a rerated version. Sounds like something Sony would be guilty of huh?:eek:


Definitely

[univera]

Funny that NAD did this since, 100 watts with 6 db headroom = 150 watts with 4 db headroom. Basically the same amp output measured differently.

I would hope that the newer version wasn't simply a rerated version. Sounds like something Sony would be guilty of huh?:eek:


Dennis, you seem to feel the numbers are equal. However; the "A" model does have what I believe are left and right gain controls on front. The 2200 does not have that feature, so they aren't exactly the same. The NAD site doesn't give any info on the "A" model other than listing it as the amp section of the 7600 receiver. It was designed as part of the monitor series and was the top of the line amp offered during that time.

[jdhdiggs]

Get the A, the dynamic power is virtually identical, the sustained power is a bit more important. In the end, I really like the gain controls. It gives you some freedom in the future.

[mhardy6647]

Buy on the basis of sound, not specs. The spec wars ended about 25 years ago.

[univera]

Buy on the basis of sound, not specs. The spec wars ended about 25 years ago.

MRH, agreed, but one can't always listen ahead of time...and, NAD is as honest as they come about ratings, so this is a fair analysis, IMO. Plus, I was essentially trying to determine if 2db headroom difference was really any difference of if 4db was plenty as I suspected. Best regards.