NAD 1700 pre and NAD 2400 amp

EndersShadow
EndersShadow Posts: 17,678
edited November 2011 in Electronics
Would these items be worth trading a HK 3490 for? I know the NAD 2400 has got some darned good power to it, but not sure about the 1700 pre.

I believe the 1700 doesnt have coaxial or optical in, but not sure.
"....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963)
Post edited by EndersShadow on
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • Evrythngmatters
    Evrythngmatters Posts: 187
    edited November 2011
    The preamp and amp are imo much better. If you are looking for more modern connections like optical then I would stay with the HK. If you are just looking to improve sound quality then this will do it. Run to the trade, don't walk.
    You must make sure that the 2 are in good condition though inside and out. Make sure the insides are not covered in dust or smell like smoke. If they do do not buy them. All that crap does is shorten the life of the electronics.
    Everything matters. That is all.
    Money cannot buy happiness, but it sure can buy a bad **** boat to pull up along side it though.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • EndersShadow
    EndersShadow Posts: 17,678
    edited November 2011
    Evrythngmatters wrote: »
    The preamp and amp are imo much better. If you are looking for more modern connections like optical then I would stay with the HK. If you are just looking to improve sound quality then this will do it. Run to the trade, don't walk.
    You must make sure that the 2 are in good condition though inside and out. Make sure the insides are not covered in dust or smell like smoke. If they do do not buy them. All that crap does is shorten the life of the electronics.

    Yeah I would do that for sure. My ONLY hangup is the lack of coaxial. Right now my 2 channel's source is my computer via coaxial. I would need to find someway to convert it. My options are a Asynchronous USB to RCA DAC or just a regular DAC. But with cash being tight I would prob try to flip the 1700 pre for one w/ coaxial input
    "....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Evrythngmatters
    Evrythngmatters Posts: 187
    edited November 2011
    Having a pre and amp will improve the sound for sure but at what cost to the setup you have now. These NAD pieces can be had at any time in the future. If funds are tight I would stick with what you have and in the future make a trip down NAD lane.
    Everything matters. That is all.
    Money cannot buy happiness, but it sure can buy a bad **** boat to pull up along side it though.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • EndersShadow
    EndersShadow Posts: 17,678
    edited November 2011
    Evrythngmatters wrote: »
    Having a pre and amp will improve the sound for sure but at what cost to the setup you have now. These NAD pieces can be had at any time in the future. If funds are tight I would stick with what you have and in teh future make a trip down NAD lane.

    Eh, I might be able to work out the problem w/ the pre shortly as a squeezebox touch and a Musiland Monitor 02 are on my list of items for Christmas lol......

    The NAD amp gives me flexibility in speakers now w/ regards to good clean power for SDA's, Maggies and other speakers on my list.....
    "....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Evrythngmatters
    Evrythngmatters Posts: 187
    edited November 2011
    EndersShadow wrote: »
    Eh, I might be able to work out the problem w/ the pre shortly as a squeezebox touch and a Musiland Monitor 02 are on my list of items for Christmas lol......

    The NAD amp gives me flexibility in speakers now w/ regards to good clean power for SDA's, Maggies and other speakers on my list.....

    I kinda went your route many times and while I did not have to worry about the budget so much I went overboard. One piece of gear leads to two then three. You get the idea. If I were you I would weigh the pros and cons to each choice,sleep on the decision,and then see if you still feel all warm and fuzzy about it. Many times I made the "audio" choice instead of the "correct" money choice. That's part of the journey though. It's like anything in life, it has its ups and downs. Best of luck and btw that amp is almost bulletproof. A no brainer purchase if well maintained. Off to play some BF3.
    Everything matters. That is all.
    Money cannot buy happiness, but it sure can buy a bad **** boat to pull up along side it though.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dorokusai
    dorokusai Posts: 25,576
    edited November 2011
    I've owned that combination and it was excellent.
    CTC BBQ Amplifier, Sonic Frontiers Line3 Pre-Amplifier and Wadia 581 SACD player. Speakers? Always changing but for now, Mission Argonauts I picked up for $50 bucks, mint.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • inspiredsports
    inspiredsports Posts: 5,502
    edited November 2011
    The 1700 was NAD's top-of-the-line preamp/tuner in their "Monitor" series circa 1987. The 2400 (100wrms @ 8 ohms) and 2600 (150wrms @ 8 ohms) were their top-of-the-line amps.

    I've had my 1700/2600A completely gone through by In House Stereo Repair and while they are my "second string", it's not by much. Right now I have my tube gear hooked up to my SRS 2's and the NAD gear hooked to my 2B's.

    I've been listening to the NAD/2B rig all day, every day for the past couple of weeks burning in the inductors I replaced in the 2B's. I have to say the sound is amazing, especially considering age and price.

    I've thought about selling this combo in the past to try something else, but every time I listen to them for a while I can't really figure out why I would want to change.

    I understand your desire for coaxial, but even with advances over the years you'll be hard pressed to beat the 1700's performance in the bargain price range.


    P.S.: I know vinyl is probably the last thing on your mind, but also wnat to mention the 1700's phono section is Excellent with a capital E!
    VTL ST50 w/mods / RCA6L6GC / TlfnknECC801S
    Conrad Johnson PV-5 w/mods
    TT Conrad Johnson Sonographe SG3 Oak / Sumiko LMT / Grado Woodbody Platinum / Sumiko PIB2 / The Clamp
    Musical Fidelity A1 CDPro/ Bada DD-22 Tube CDP / Conrad Johnson SD-22 CDP
    Tuners w/mods Kenwood KT5020 / Fisher KM60
    MF x-DAC V8, HAInfo NG27
    Herbies Ti-9 / Vibrapods / MIT Shotgun AC1 IEC's / MIT Shotgun 2 IC's / MIT Shotgun 2 Speaker Cables
    PS Audio Cryo / PowerPort Premium Outlets / Exact Power EP15A Conditioner
    Walnut SDA 2B TL /Oak SDA SRS II TL (Sonicaps/Mills/Cardas/Custom SDA ICs / Dynamat Extreme / Larry's Rings/ FSB-2 Spikes
    NAD SS rigs w/mods
    GIK panels
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • EndersShadow
    EndersShadow Posts: 17,678
    edited November 2011
    inspiredsports wrote: »
    The 1700 was NAD's top-of-the-line preamp/tuner in their "Monitor" series circa 1987. The 2400 (100wrms @ 8 ohms) and 2600 (150wrms @ 8 ohms) were their top-of-the-line amps.

    I've had my 1700/2600A completely gone through by In House Stereo Repair and while they are my "second string", it's not by much. Right now I have my tube gear hooked up to my SRS 2's and the NAD gear hooked to my 2B's.

    I've been listening to the NAD/2B rig all day, every day for the past couple of weeks burning in the inductors I replaced in the 2B's. I have to say the sound is amazing, especially considering age and price.

    I've thought about selling this combo in the past to try something else, but every time I listen to them for a while I can't really figure out why I would want to change.

    I understand your desire for coaxial, but even with advances over the years you'll be hard pressed to beat the 1700's performance in the bargain price range.

    Thanks for that info. Thats kinda what I saw online but its always good to get it verified by people. Coaxial is not really a desire so much as a need as w/o it I have no means to listen to my 2 channel setup as I am all computerized :smile:. However there are many options as mentioned in the USB to RCA DAC area that are decently priced, so it wont be too hard to get that.

    Yeah Indyhawg has a NAD amp and man does it sound good. It drove NooshinJohns Maggies with NO issues at all :smile:
    inspiredsports wrote: »
    P.S.: I know vinyl is probably the last thing on your mind, but also wnat to mention the 1700's phono section is Excellent with a capital E!

    Well it is HOWEVER I did just get a cheap TT from a guy at work. So allowing the NAD phono section to do its thing help the cheaper TT sound a tad better
    "....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • nclh7
    nclh7 Posts: 38
    edited November 2011
    I've got the 1700. It replaced a far more expensive pre. About the coaxial, have you thought of a 1/8 to RCA cable? Also lossless on an iPod or iPhone is fantastic as a source. DAC's can be had on eBay for $70 delivered with fantastic DA chips in them.

    I don't see any problem.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • EndersShadow
    EndersShadow Posts: 17,678
    edited November 2011
    nclh7 wrote: »
    I've got the 1700. It replaced a far more expensive pre. About the coaxial, have you thought of a 1/8 to RCA cable? Also lossless on an iPod or iPhone is fantastic as a source. DAC's can be had on eBay for $70 delivered with fantastic DA chips in them.

    I have, but here is the thing, the DAC in my computer (which I would be using) are horrible compared to the ones in the NAD. I would prefer to send the source signal out as digital and let something with better DAC's do the decoding.

    I also dont like the 1/8 to RCA concept as a whole, nor do I like the Ipod idea as I have most of my library in FLAC on my computer and would prefer to stream that to my setup rather than lossy files at this time.

    The signal matters and I want to keep it as clean as possible.
    "....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • nclh7
    nclh7 Posts: 38
    edited November 2011
    No DAC in the NAD. Streamed music is often significantly compressed during the streaming process.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • EndersShadow
    EndersShadow Posts: 17,678
    edited November 2011
    Well then, time to start researching cheap used DAC's that accept coaxial then lol.....

    Havent heard back from the seller yet but hoping I will today.
    "....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter