NAD 2200 Vintage Amplifier Review

[EJ3]

Does this look familiar as per the 2 PTC inrush current limiter devices that you removed from the +/-95 V DC rails?
View attachment 389991
View attachment 389992

The 2700 is an evolution of the 2200. And my 2200's are an evolution beyond that.
I could have started with 2700's but the 2200's were on hand.

 

[Doodski]

The 2700 is an evolution of the 2200. And my 2200's are an evolution beyond that.
I could have started with 2700's but the 2200's where on hand.

Both appear to be very nice amps with cool designs for very fair prices too.

 

[EJ3]

Both appear to be very nice amps with cool designs for very fair prices too.

I like the 2700's looks but worry about the cosmetics deuteriation and the ability to get something in place that looks reasonable.
Of course, now we have 3D printing available (and could even do something identical or completely different).

 

[Machismo]

Does this look familiar as per the 2 PTC inrush current limiter devices that you removed from the +/-95 V DC rails?

Yes indeed, it has been many years, but I recall they were PTC:s on the higher voltage rails and they do work by getting hotter and then working as a limiter so yes, I think those were the ones. Next time I go to the place where the amps are I will open one to double check what I did.

Oh one more thing about these amps, since they don't have fans, people should never stack them on top of each other unless they leave a gap of several inches with some spacer blocks. I also never put any other device directly on top of them so the air flowed freely. Overheating is poison of course.

 

[galhist]

Hi all. Thank you for creating such an amazing forum.

Given all of the discussion, I'm wondering what's best to do with ~$500: get my NAD 2200 retrofitted and performing well for the foreseeable future or go with any of the great options that are now available at the sub-500 price point.
Has anyone been able to directly compare something like the NAD 2200 with, for example, the Fosi V3 mono? I realize that the V3 has some better metrics but I am curious about transient power delivery, even at non-crazy listening levels.
Any thoughts would be appreciated!

 

[EJ3]

Hi all. Thank you for creating such an amazing forum.

Given all of the discussion, I'm wondering what's best to do with ~$500: get my NAD 2200 retrofitted and performing well for the foreseeable future or go with any of the great options that are now available at the sub-500 price point.
Has anyone been able to directly compare something like the NAD 2200 with, for example, the Fosi V3 mono? I realize that the V3 has some better metrics but I am curious about transient power delivery, even at non-crazy listening levels.
Any thoughts would be appreciated!

I have 6 of the NAD 2200's, (3 of which I got very close to new & have been done by Peter @Quirk Audio [including the one tested here] {as well as 2 NAD 2100's also done by Peter} and run them in either bi-amped or tri-amped setups (including passive subs). (With some bridged mono).
I have heard other peoples setups, of course.
But nothing that ever made me say "Hey, I'd like to do that" (except for Triple Benchmark's [and that may have been visual, you think?]).
So, you pays your money & makes your choices.

 

[Roland68]

Hi all. Thank you for creating such an amazing forum.

Given all of the discussion, I'm wondering what's best to do with ~$500: get my NAD 2200 retrofitted and performing well for the foreseeable future or go with any of the great options that are now available at the sub-500 price point.
Has anyone been able to directly compare something like the NAD 2200 with, for example, the Fosi V3 mono? I realize that the V3 has some better metrics but I am curious about transient power delivery, even at non-crazy listening levels.
Any thoughts would be appreciated!

I have a few amplifiers, including two revised Nad 2200. Many other current amplifiers had to go again after a comparison with the Nad 2200. A friend was there with his new V3 monos for a comparison, good, but we both felt that the Nad was ahead, and not just in terms of performance
I don't know which amplifier can deliver this performance so well in terms of sound for the price.
Then there is the lifespan - a refurbished Nad 2200 should last another 30 years. The lifespan of good switching power supplies is more like 10-15 years and often only medium quality is used.

 

[DWPress]

Now I'm almost feeling bad about selling my 3 units!

 

[EJ3]

I have a few amplifiers, including two revised Nad 2200. Many other current amplifiers had to go again after a comparison with the Nad 2200. A friend was there with his new V3 monos for a comparison, good, but we both felt that the Nad was ahead, and not just in terms of performance
I don't know which amplifier can deliver this performance so well in terms of sound for the price.
Then there is the lifespan - a refurbished Nad 2200 should last another 30 years. The lifespan of good switching power supplies is more like 10-15 years and often only medium quality is used.

At this point, my NAD's MAY outlast me with no further work (I am currently getting further work on me).

 

[Roland68]

At this point, my NAD's MAY outlast me with no further work (I am currently getting further work on me).

Unfortunately I know this too...

 

[galhist]

I have a few amplifiers, including two revised Nad 2200. Many other current amplifiers had to go again after a comparison with the Nad 2200. A friend was there with his new V3 monos for a comparison, good, but we both felt that the Nad was ahead, and not just in terms of performance
I don't know which amplifier can deliver this performance so well in terms of sound for the price.
Then there is the lifespan - a refurbished Nad 2200 should last another 30 years. The lifespan of good switching power supplies is more like 10-15 years and often only medium quality is used.

Understood and thanks! I love my 2200 as well. My *only* concern then at this point is the lack of balanced interconnects. I was picking up some interference from a nearby plasma TV a few years ago but that also could have been the aging unit.

 

[EJ3]

My *only* concern then at this point is the lack of balanced interconnects. I was picking up some interference from a nearby plasma TV a few years ago but that also could have been the aging unit.

If I had something in my home putting out that kind of interference, & it could not be repaired, out it would go.
Who knows what it might be doing to my family or myself? Can't have it around if one needs balanced cables to keep interference from happening.
That is why I don't use them. The interference is a warning signal: DANGER SOMETHING IS WRONG!

My only wish for the NAD 2200's is meters. The quiet genius of an audio engineer, Bjorn Erik Edvardsen (Chief Designer of NAD & very hands on with the NAD 2000 series), also had a large influence on the design of the PROTON

This is (mostly) from: https://therobbcollections.blogspot.com/2018/07/proton-audio-nad-and-dynaco-are-cous

PROTON Audio, NAD and (Later, not earlier) Dynaco are Cousins.
Bjorn Erik Edvardsen, had a lot of influence here with Dynamic Power on Demand Amplifiers.​

NAD is well respected as is Dynaco which is a much older company and originally American. PROTON came about in the early 1980's and were built in the same factory as NAD equipment, but of course they were completely different circuits and products.
Guess what Proton AA1150 and D1200 have?:

So, at some point in time, I will have one or more of these operating my 80 HZ & below subs.
Primarily to have dancing meters.

 

[SirPaulGerman]

I have a D1200 in mint condition, got it for less than $100, how close is the design of the D1200 to the Nad 2200 ?

 

[Doodski]

I have a D1200 in mint condition, got it for less than $100, how close is the design of the D1200 to the Nad 2200 ?

Here are diagrams for the Proton D1200 and the NAD 2200 for your comparison viewing pleasure.

 

[SirPaulGerman]

I have no idea on how to read a schematic
which one is better ?

 

[Doodski]

I have no idea on how to read a schematic
which one is better ?

The Proton has higher rail voltages and that gives it a higher bridged mode operation power output. They both use a similar although different execution design and so if one sounds better that remains to be seen. I like them both. The NAD can be modified as members here have pointed out for a very high power output and service is readily available at Quirk Audio.

 

[EJ3]

The Proton has higher rail voltages and that gives it a higher bridged mode operation power output. They both use a similar although different execution design and so if one sounds better that remains to be seen. I like them both. The NAD can be modified as members here have pointed out for a very high power output and service is readily available at Quark Audio.

Sorry, minor correction here: that would be "Quirk Audio"

 

[EJ3]

I have no idea on how to read a schematic
which one is better ?

Because it has meter's, I want a Proton (or 2) for my subs.
Not because it is any better hat the 6 NAD 2200's (in Tri-Amped systems) & 2 NAD 2100's that I have now but
Because it has DANCING METERS for the subs!

 

[Doodski]

Because it has meter's, I want a Proton (or 2) for my subs.
Not because it is any better hat the 6 NAD 2200's (in Tri-Amped systems) & 2 NAD 2100's that I have now but
Because it has DANCING METERS for the subs!

Those meters where considered very attractive back in the day and they still are. Considering the simplicity and long lasting nature of the lamps illuminating the meters I would consider a LED illumination to not be a tasty MOD.

 

[EJ3]

With LED you have many color choices at any moment!