Thoughts on NAD M25 multi-channel amp.

pearsall001

I've been giving a lot of thought about a multi-channel amp lately. As Cfrizz would say...buy a good one once & you're done!!! I've done a lot of research at read a ton of reviews on quite a few amps from various manufactures. I have to admit I am a bit biased towards NAD because I like their "house sound", conservative power ratings, performance & their customer service has been top notch for me. I thought about a 5 channel amp but now I'm leaning to a 7 channel amp & use the two unused channels to bi-amp my mains. I know it's not identical to using a separate amp to bi-amp but it still is a nice feature.
http://nadelectronics.com/products/home-theatre-amplifiers/M25-7-Channel-Amplifier/details

I know there's plenty of great multi-channel amps out there to choose from but the NAD is tops on my list. I'm buying used vs new.

nooshinjohn

Sounds like a good call for you then. The amp appears to be a modular "card-type" design. Can you get any pictures if the inside of the amp?

pearsall001

I haven't come across any pics of the unit's inside layout yet.

mantis

I have not heard this amp in person but we have the 2 channel integrated on the floor and it sounds amazing. Your welcome to stop by and listen to it , it should give you a good idea on how this awesome amp performs. I'll ask the guys and see if anyone has Installed it.

dave shepard

pearsall001 wrote: »

I haven't come across any pics of the unit's inside layout yet.

Why would you need to see the inside layout? Would that make or break your decision?

Dave

hearingimpared

Phil, you already answered your question. NAD is NAD and you won't get much better until you get into the higher end multi-channel amps which will come with a price tag to match.

nooshinjohn

dave shepard wrote: »

Why would you need to see the inside layout? Would that make or break your decision?

Dave

I was the one that asked.:)

I have some suspicions as to the lineage of the amp that the OP is asking about.

nooshinjohn

I found an interior shot of the amp. It uses a module type design as I suspected. Not saying this is good or bad, but I prefer a massive power supply rather than individual amp cards.

FTGV

nooshinjohn wrote: »

It uses a module type design as I suspected.

As do the vast majority of multi ch amps,though all channels share a single common supply.

but I prefer a massive power supply rather than individual amp cards.

With that hefty transformer in the front of the chassis, the power supply looks to be plenty capable.Idealy each channel module would have its own independent transformer but that would push the price up substantially.

Kex

I'm sorry this is going to be such a long post, but I've been giving some thought to this myself of late. For Home Theater, I truly question the necessity of an amplifier with the NAD receiver, even with difficult speakers. My model T754 is rated 70w/ch, or 90w/ch in stereo, but delivers reference level sound effortlessly IME. The four underside fans keep the "heat sink" area (that runs from front to back, under the vents in the center of the top cover) almost completely cool at all times. The rest of the cover remains cool too, with the exception of a little bit of warmth coming from the vents on the front left side (there's a little rectangle of vented cover space there). I think the cover on your unit has the same layout.

Two channel listening is more demanding IMO. I've tried recently using a two-channel NAD 216 THX amplifier alongside the T754 -the transformer in that thing was pretty impressive for just two channels BTW. Other things I've tried were the JoLida integrated hybrid (30w/ch for the SS amplifier section), but I can't use that for my current "music priority" main speakers since I'm using Mark & Daniel Mini Monitors that have only 83dB efficiency, and are rated 3-6 ohms, so not friendly for the JoLida 1301 I own (some other models may be 4 ohm capable).

1) For Home Theater, I'll probably always want a NAD. The only other brand that has caught my interest is Pioneer Elite (but I won't change unless I get a chance to try one out first - and like it too). I'm considering the T785, taking advantage of the twin torroidal transformers in that model. If I decide to get an amplifier (for peace of mind more than anything else) the T765 will give me the same processing as the more expensive models, so the money saved will contribute to the amplifier purchase.

If Home Theater were the only consideration, and I decided I did want an amplifier, I'd probably just get T955 for the five main channels, or even limit it to driving the front three, and let the highly capable receiver drive the others. I know the ratings are relatively modest, but I trust in the dynamic power of NAD equipment from experience, especially since my NAD T754 is far more dynamic than some ... ahem, ... external amplifiers (that shall remain without name to avoid the flame-happy fanboiz of that particular brand).

There's a link below to a review of the T955, and even though the same brand with the flame-happy fanboiz has taught me to not trust in reviews too much, I found that many of the characteristics of the sound described in this review also applied to the T754 and 216 THX.

Review of the T955: http://www.hometheatersound.com/equipment/nad_t955.htm

2) For Music, I've tried SACD playback (using an analog connection for each channel) as well as the NAD EARS surround format with standard CD's (using an optical connection). I actually really like EARS, and prefer it to any of the surround formats for two channel, such as Dolby ProLogic. It sounds more like an improved two channel mode than a surround mode to me.

After trying the 216 briefly, I do think that an amplifier is nice to have for music with difficult speakers like my current ones, at least with the T754 (which is rated more modestly than most NAD receivers). Because I really only feel the amplifier is preferable for the front pair of main speakers, I've actually been leaning more and more toward the C275BEE two channel amplifier. The dynamic ratings reveal quite a bit of extra headroom when compared to the M25 or the equivalent "classic" model, the T975. Using this with a receiver such as your T765 might give you the best of everything for under $1000 (refurbished pricing from Spearit Sound).

Part of the reason I'm attracted to the C275BEE was the addition of some extra muscial punch when I added the 216 THX, (test listening for this was in stereo only, without the subwoofer, center or surround speakers being active), but also, it got warm over the two large heat sinks on the sides during extended playback at reference levels with my difficult speakers, and I think the available free space inside a two channel amplifier is bound to help long term performance when compared to the multiple channels crammed into a T975 or M25. Both of the latter use fans to control the temperature BTW.

3) The Conclusion, and my suggestion, therefore, would be to forget about the M25, use the power you already know you have with the T765, but add some extra punch for music listening with a two channel NAD that also matches the "classic" style of your current receiver, rather than the more flashy styling of the Masters Series range of NAD. If you're buying used, the C270 and C272 also show up from time to time, which will save you a few hundred dollars compared to the C275BEE. In fact, I'd probably buy two (or even three) of these before I would buy a five or seven channel amplifier for approximately the same price.

If you really feel you want additional multi-channel amplification, then consider the T955 (without fans) for the three front channels ($800 shipped new), or even the T975 ($1,800 shipped refurbished), but why bother with the M25, unless perhaps you're only considering it because of recent AudiogoN sales for under $2,000?

T975 - 7x140, or 230w/ch dynamic power. http://nadelectronics.com/content/100304143024-NAD_T975.pdf
T955 - 5 x 100, or 150w/ch dynamic power. http://nadelectronics.com/content/100304143155-NAD_T955.pdf
M25 - 7 x 160w, or 220w/ch dynamic power. http://nadelectronics.com/content/100218100426-M_Series_data_sheet_M25.pdf
C275BEE - 2 x 150w, or 250w/ch dynamic power. http://nadelectronics.com/content/100419142513-NAD_C275BEE.pdf

Pricing: http://www.spearitsound.com/nad/nadspec.htm

pearsall001

Nice write up Kex. I've always been a fan of NAD for all the reasons you've just stated. Plenty of real world performance, not a lot of useless bells & whistles & the ability to run 4ohm loads all day long without breaking a sweat. Even a 2ohm load can be handled with their dynamic power. But I must confess though that the M25 is still tops on my list. I think the M25 takes even their great multi-channel amps to a whole new level. Not to mention how gorgeous it looks.

dave shepard

pearsall001 wrote: »

I've been giving a lot of thought about a multi-channel amp lately. As Cfrizz would say...buy a good one once & you're done!!!

http://nadelectronics.com/products/home-theatre-amplifiers/M25-7-Channel-Amplifier/details

I totally support and agree with what Cfrizz stated, the same goes with speakers. Those two items are the last to be upgraded and you would only have a need to do so when your looking for a change.

Dave

searay40dad

Yes, very nice practical write-up Kex. I followed your logic when putting together my system--although maybe the result was driven moreso from budget vs. free choice--and I can say I'm pleased. but, wow, the thought of throwing an M25 into the mix would just be a tough one to handle. oh, the agony...HA!

good point on the chassis space. I also wonder about the physics here...isn't one 2-channel C270/272/275 amp nearly the same physical dimensions as an 755/765/785/ etc AVR or multi-channel amp such as 955 or 975? if so, then from simplistic engineering perspective, it would seem that a 2-channel amp is designed to dissipate heat better...and 2 external amps even better yet (i.e. 4 channel power in twice the volume of both space and metal). mabe forced cooling negates the need for larger sinks & space.


Anyway, i'm new to all this and your forum. threads like this are great, especially us long-time NAD loyalists.

Good luck with the decision Pearsall...its gonna be sweet anyway you go I'm betting!

Kex

pearsall001 wrote: »

... But I must confess though that the M25 is still tops on my list. I think the M25 takes even their great multi-channel amps to a whole new level. Not to mention how gorgeous it looks.

Ah! So the truth will out! If it's because of "how gorgeous it looks", then your fate is sealed, my good Sir, and there's no point in trying to use the analytical approach to convince you otherwise! I think you had better just get one and be done with it in that case!

There are two for just under $2,000 on AudiogoN right now (before shipping, but maybe you could negotiate that, or even split it, since they weigh over 100lbs boxed). One sold recently for $1,700 "firm", and it was gone in a flash BTW. I think it's unlikely you'll find them for less, but sometimes I've seen bargains on eBay for some other NAD gear. I don't think the discreet NAD look, and lack of flashy buttons or lights, always goes down very well with the average eBay buyer.

Spearit Sound also sells used gear and former demo units in one section of their website, which at least gives you the option to ask all the right questions to a true professional before purchasing, but you'd have to watch constantly and wait for one to become available.

http://www.spearitsound.com/specials.htm#Multi-Channel_Power_Amplifiers_

searay40dad

I've had good experiences with new and used/demo NAD gear from these guys. I like to check in on their "recent addition" gear in the USED link. Seems like they have Masters Series demo specials semi-often.

http://www.saturdayaudio.com/

Kex

searay40dad wrote: »

I've had good experiences with new and used/demo NAD gear from these guys. ...

Good to know. They also sell regularly on AudiogoN, including one of the M25 units currently offered there IIRC.

Bedpan

No doubt NAD makes some nice gear although it can be a little colored at times. You're best bet is an Emotiva XPA-5. Reference quality sound for only $799 new.

concealer404

Bedpan wrote: »

No doubt NAD makes some nice gear although it can be a little colored at times. You're best bet is an Emotiva XPA-5. Reference quality sound for only $799 new.

:rolleyes:

hearingimpared

Bedpan wrote: »

No doubt NAD makes some nice gear although it can be a little colored at times. You're best bet is an Emotiva XPA-5. Reference quality sound for only $799 new.

NAD is known for their warm house sound, there is no "at times" here. You either like the sound, which I know for a fact that Phil does, or you don't. I don't know if comparing NAD gear to Emotiva gear is sound advice as I've never heard Emotiva gear, but everyone is entitled to their opinion.

I'm just curious. Have you compared NAD gear to Emotiva gear? What experience do you with either? Can you post the differences and your like and dislikes. I'm very curious as I've yet to see anyone here speak NAD and Emotiva in the same sentence so you insight and experiences would be appreciated.:)

Kex

I've never heard anyone suggest NAD sound was "colored at times" before, so that's a first, and it's certainly not my opinion. I would describe NAD sound as leaning slightly toward the warm side of neutral, and it's very consistent, even over twenty years of different product generations. In any case, either you are of the belief that all amps have a "house sound" and could therefore be described as "colored at times", or all amps are equal, and the more watts the better.

As for comparing NAD and Emotiva, I have owned both, and clearly the modest numbers from NAD appeal to my ears and listening tastes more than the big numbers Emotiva likes to boast about. Personally, I would spend $1,000 on a C275BEE long before I would spend $825 on an XPA-5. You only have to try a NAD integrated rated at 40-50w/ch, or a JoLida integrated rated at 30w/ch to make sense of this IMO. YMMV, of course.

Maybe I just don't have what it takes to appreciate "Reference quality sound".

Zitro

Kex wrote: »

I've never heard anyone suggest NAD sound was "colored at times" before, so that's a first, and it's certainly not my opinion. I would describe NAD sound as leaning slightly toward the warm side of neutral, and it's very consistent, even over twenty years of different product generations. In any case, either you are of the belief that all amps have a "house sound" and could therefore be described as "colored at times", or all amps are equal, and the more watts the better.

As for comparing NAD and Emotiva, I have owned both, and clearly the modest numbers from NAD appeal to my ears and listening tastes more than the big numbers Emotiva likes to boast about. Personally, I would spend $1,000 on a C275BEE long before I would spend $825 on an XPA-5. You only have to try a NAD integrated rated at 40-50w/ch, or a JoLida integrated rated at 30w/ch to make sense of this IMO. YMMV, of course.

Maybe I just don't have what it takes to appreciate "Reference quality sound".

My 50wpc NAD C320BEE is still one of my favorite amplifiers I've heard, and is easily my favorite if you consider price. You need to far surpass the $400 MSRP to get a good increase in SQ, and that's what NAD is all about. Plus, they handle the 4 ohm load of my LSi7's without breaking a sweat; its never gotten more than slightly warm.

I doubt I will upgrade until I can afford the M3 integrated

hearingimpared

Kex wrote: »

I've never heard anyone suggest NAD sound was "colored at times" before, so that's a first, and it's certainly not my opinion. I would describe NAD sound as leaning slightly toward the warm side of neutral, and it's very consistent, even over twenty years of different product generations. In any case, either you are of the belief that all amps have a "house sound" and could therefore be described as "colored at times", or all amps are equal, and the more watts the better.

As for comparing NAD and Emotiva, I have owned both, and clearly the modest numbers from NAD appeal to my ears and listening tastes more than the big numbers Emotiva likes to boast about. Personally, I would spend $1,000 on a C275BEE long before I would spend $825 on an XPA-5. You only have to try a NAD integrated rated at 40-50w/ch, or a JoLida integrated rated at 30w/ch to make sense of this IMO. YMMV, of course.

Maybe I just don't have what it takes to appreciate "Reference quality sound".

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA @ your reason for editing!!!

BTW, excellent points made above and it's basically saying what I wrote in a previous post.

pearsall001

Kex wrote: »

Ah! So the truth will out! If it's because of "how gorgeous it looks", then your fate is sealed, my good Sir, and there's no point in trying to use the analytical approach to convince you otherwise! I think you had better just get one and be done with it in that case!

There are two for just under $2,000 on AudiogoN right now (before shipping, but maybe you could negotiate that, or even split it, since they weigh over 100lbs boxed). One sold recently for $1,700 "firm", and it was gone in a flash BTW. I think it's unlikely you'll find them for less, but sometimes I've seen bargains on eBay for some other NAD gear. I don't think the discreet NAD look, and lack of flashy buttons or lights, always goes down very well with the average eBay buyer.

Spearit Sound also sells used gear and former demo units in one section of their website, which at least gives you the option to ask all the right questions to a true professional before purchasing, but you'd have to watch constantly and wait for one to become available.

http://www.spearitsound.com/specials.htm#Multi-Channel_Power_Amplifiers_

Now I wouldn't go that far even though the M25 is a looker for sure. I do base my decision on performance first, cost, then if the piece happens to be high on the eye candy chart then that's a plus.

spearitsound & saturdayaudio are approved NAD online dealers (got that straight from an email to NAD).

As Joe has mentioned I do like the NAD "house sound" & that is a big factor in choosing my purchase. At the M25's price point there is stiff competition but for now the M25 is still #1 on my list.

heiney9

Bedpan wrote: »

No doubt NAD makes some nice gear although it can be a little colored at times. You're best bet is an Emotiva XPA-5. Reference quality sound for only $799 new.

Emo is even more colored. NAD everytime over Emo.

H9

Bedpan

heiney9 wrote: »

Emo is even more colored. NAD everytime over Emo.

H9

Emotiva makes very neutrel sounding amps. www.emotiva.com.

nooshinjohn

You could grab a Mcintosh MC7205 in that price range as well...

pearsall001

Bedpan wrote: »

Emotiva makes very neutrel sounding amps. www.emotiva.com.

I'm sure Emo makes a good amp...I've looked at them & I'm not really interested. I'm looking for feedback on the NAD M25 amp & possibly others in that same price range.

I'll have to check into that Mac MC7205 also. Thanks for the info.

concealer404

Bedpan wrote: »

Emotiva makes very neutrel sounding amps. www.emotiva.com.

"Neutral" is not a word that most people who have heard them AND other gear would use to describe Emo amps.

Regardless. This is not an Emo thread. This is a NAD thread. Please feel free to start another thread telling everyone to buy Emo amps.

Bedpan

pearsall001 wrote: »

I'm sure Emo makes a good amp...I've looked at them & I'm not really interested. I'm looking for feedback on the NAD M25 amp & possibly others in that same price range.

I'll have to check into that Mac MC7205 also. Thanks for the info.

Nothing wrong with that. NAD makes great gear too. If you like a colored sounding amp then you can't do much better than NAD.

heiney9

Seems like a lot to spend for a HT set-up, unless you're looking for the Ultimate set-up. Certainly miles better than Emo or Outlaw. Of course Rotel makes a multi-channel amp as well as Adcom, Parasound, Lexicon, Sunfire, Cineova.

I would think a NAD T-975 would be more than sufficient. What processor are you running with it? Why not look into the powerhouse NAD receiver? How much do you need for HT especially if you're running a powered sub?

Just throwing some idea's out there.

H9

nooshinjohn

xcapri79 wrote: »

But it's ok to talk about MacIntosh?:rolleyes:
Let's be fair ok?

Last I checked, the OP is open to other considerations, and to be fair, Mcintosh trumps Emo every single time.;)

What I fail to understand is why every single thread discussing amps must be infected with Emo. Can't you guys just give it a rest already?:mad: