Harman/Kardon or NAD

[Polk & H/K]

I am buying 2 LSi 7 or 9s. H/K 645 or NAD T753 what is the best way to go?

[Bill Ayotte]

Looking at the H/k, but never owning that particular receiver, I would buy the Nad...More power, and I know the H/K is high current, but the C320 Bee I've got is a little powerhouse....That 6x70W will sound like 6x140w at least....More along the lines of 200w/ch. It will push those LSi's nice and hard...

[aaharvel]

Get the NAD no question. IMO not even close.

[JimBRICK]

NAd, I love mine :)

[dudeinaroom]

When I first got my sda's I was thinking of getting an hk, so I dropped them an e-mail. They replied yes it is a common ground amp, and no It won't handle a 4 ohm load which the lsi's are

[venomclan]

NAD.

Harmon International, parent company of H/K was just sold a few days ago to private equity firms. Many beleive that they will dismember the company for profit and we will soon see H/K's at Wally World. Don't shoot the messenger.
v

[dorokusai]

Nad.

[Nostalgic]

No experience with the NAD. I am pushing 2 LSi15's and an LSiC with an HK 635 with no issues.

Still want to get a separate amp though.

My vote would be to pick up an HK635 on HK direct for about $400 shipped. Use the extra money for a separate amp.

EDIT: This isn't a vote against the NAD. I only recommend the above if you decide to go for an HK. Also, the Quality Control Issues are REAL with HK. AWESOME AVR's for the money but you may have to cycle through a few to get a good one. (Which of course sucks).

[JimBRICK]

Nad.

I bought mine from Doro and It's wild

[Polk & H/K]

I have the H/k 635 and it cannot drive 4 ohms.

[Nostalgic]

I have the H/k 635 and it cannot drive 4 ohms.

Not sure why it won't for you but it powers mine plenty loud without getting too hot.

[dane_peterson]

H/K may not put in the specs that it can drive 4ohm speakers, but that's not to say it can't be done. Denon and other AVR manufacturers do not provide 4ohm specs in their AVRs either, but it's not like the signal just gets disconnected or something. They'll still produce sound.
With that said, I too would tip my hat to the NAD.

[MSALLA]

H&K makes a good product but NAD is a better unit.

[shack]

Not even close....NAD!

[snow]

NAD no doubt here. Hmmm.... This makes +10 for nad we cant all be wrong.


REGARDS SNOW

[ben62670]

Not knocking NAD at all, but I have the AVR-235, and it drives 4ohms pretty well. Check out the current specs on HK's site. You will be surprised. The main reason I went with HK is because of its pre-out capabilities. It puts out a super clean warm sound for a receiver being used as a pre. I really love mine. I think a lot of the recommendations for the NAD are very qualified if you don't plan on adding an amp latter. I paid about $250 for mine from HK direct on Ebay shipped. Mine puts out 65 per channel very clean. In fact I still use the center channel from the receiver to power the center channel, and it keeps up very well with my SDA-SRS's with 400 watts of Adcom power.

[engtaz]

Why is everybody pushing their NAD's on Polk & H/K. LOL

[venomclan]

Why is everybody pushing their NAD's on Polk & H/K. LOL

I can do what I please with my NADs. I have bail money.
V

[marker]

The HK is a MUCH better surround processor in terms of chips, DACs, and features, and even though they make very, very good if not great analog pre-amp and power amp sections, for driving LSi though, the NAD is the better way to go here.

[BottomFeeder]

NAD!

Love my C320Bee!

[Polk & H/K]

What do you guys think about the Cambridge Audio Azur 640R?

[shack]

Another good product. CA is very comparable to NAD in quality and value.

[marker]

IMO, they are actually even a little better than NAD in value, just as NAD seems to be a little better than Rotel in value.

For example, the CA 540R retails for like $700, but yet it has a toroidal transformer (the lowest priced AVR on the market that does if I'm not mistaken), along with 24 bit/192 kHz DACs. The closet NAD models to it price wise, the T743/T753, only have EI core transformers and 24/96 DACs.

As for the 640R, check this out: :D

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/rec...-receiver.html

"The Cambridge Audio Azur 640R was a pleasure to measure, as it consistently delivered expected behavior and declined to snap fuses, smoke circuit boards, or require resetting, despite the usual abuse. Better still, it also set new receiver benchmarks on test after test: perfect (yes, perfect!) scores for PCM-stereo linearity at -90 dB and real-world (dithered) signal-to-noise ratio (plus superb 96-kHz/24-bit S/N), best-ever excess-noise figures, and stereo output power that could probably sneak by on a "150 watts x 2" model. Multichannel Dolby Digital results were just as fine, and the Azur 640R did indeed deliver its full rated power with five channels driven before clipping — and very nearly did so with seven channels stressed. It's quite nice, once in a while, to have test-bench results (acquired, as always, after listening/writing is complete) coincide so well with listening opinions, reconfirming that maybe one really can hear a difference now and then."

[SolidSqual]

I have the NAD C272. I can't speak about the receiver, but I can say my 272 sounds better and delivers more power to my LSi15s than my former Parasound HALO A23. That says a lot about quality and construction. NAD all the way. Plus you don't want that annoying blue ring.

[shack]

IMO, they are actually even a little better than NAD in value, just as NAD seems to be a little better than Rotel in value.

For example, the CA 540R retails for like $700, but yet it has a toroidal transformer (the lowest priced AVR on the market that does if I'm not mistaken), along with 24 bit/192 kHz DACs. The closet NAD models to it price wise, the T743/T753, only have EI core transformers and 24/96 DACs.

As for the 640R, check this out: :D

http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/rec...-receiver.html

"The Cambridge Audio Azur 640R was a pleasure to measure, as it consistently delivered expected behavior and declined to snap fuses, smoke circuit boards, or require resetting, despite the usual abuse. Better still, it also set new receiver benchmarks on test after test: perfect (yes, perfect!) scores for PCM-stereo linearity at -90 dB and real-world (dithered) signal-to-noise ratio (plus superb 96-kHz/24-bit S/N), best-ever excess-noise figures, and stereo output power that could probably sneak by on a "150 watts x 2" model. Multichannel Dolby Digital results were just as fine, and the Azur 640R did indeed deliver its full rated power with five channels driven before clipping — and very nearly did so with seven channels stressed. It's quite nice, once in a while, to have test-bench results (acquired, as always, after listening/writing is complete) coincide so well with listening opinions, reconfirming that maybe one really can hear a difference now and then."

Having heard quite a bit of NAD, Rotel, and CA gear, I would rate them as pretty much equals. Each has their stong points and it really is a matter of taste and prefernce. They all have generally recieved high praise from the various industry "reviewers " (if that has any value). I personally could put together a system consisting soley of gear by any of the three or a mix and match rig and be quite happy. As always you really just have to give them a try and see what you like.

[marker]

Yep, CA is definitely comparable to NAD and Rotel, but with AVRs that are usually at better prices for comparable models though.

I've owned both the CA 540R and the NAD T753 ... and even though it retails for less, I still have the CA 540R. ;)

[ben62670]

I have the NAD C272. I can't speak about the receiver, but I can say my 272 sounds better and delivers more power to my LSi15s than my former Parasound HALO A23. That says a lot about quality and construction. NAD all the way. Plus you don't want that annoying blue ring.

I love the blue ring:)

[scottdwagner]

Agree with the above. You can get a H/K 635 for pennies on the dollar. Use it as a preamp and buy a separate amplifier. You need a lot of juice, more than most receivers will provide to push those LSi's. Plus, as processing technologies evolve, the pre/pro's devalue quickly and become outdated with each new iteration of surround format. A good quality amp, however, will never go out of style and most likely, will not need an upgrade for quite some time. It's what I did anyway...

[Ern Dog]

I love the blue ring:)

Me Too!

[SolidSqual]

I'll admit the blue ring is nice to look at . . . unless you like to listen in pure darkness. Then you gotta put some duck tape over it or somethin.