I believe that the 2100 is the half powered sibling of the 2200.Does anybody know what the differences are between the NAD 2200 and the 2100 amps?
Does anybody know what the differences are between the NAD 2200 and the 2100 amps?
None of my non-digital Audio equipment is newer than 1996 (Dual 1229 TT running into an APT/Holman Pre phono section,which, due to distance of the run, Pre outs to a line input of a second APT/Holman Pre, which has a Technics SL-M3 [1984-88 computer servo controled linear tracking TT] in one of it's phono inputs, NAD Tuner, the OPPO 205 & a KENWOOD KX-W8050 cassette deck, an AKAI X-1800SD reel to reel and a not TOL (but coming soon) DAC going into 3 NAD 2200's running bridged mono for each channel {L,R & Pair of Dual 4 Ohm voice coils subs}) This has been & is my long term (but continually evolving) daily setup. With checkups every few years (like one does with a car), there is preventative maintenance done & upgrading some of the internal electronics parts from time to time but it keeps on satisfying my ears/eyes.Like a Ferrari...lots of good clean power but not reliable enough to make it a long term...daily driver. Always liked NAD for what they stood for...a stepping stone.
If you have no intention of using it: please PM me: [email protected] & put NAD 7600 in the subject line.I have a NAD 7600, which is a receiver with the 2600 power amp stage. HUGE amounts of power! I don't use it any more, but it's an impressive thing. The remote control "brain" has had some issues, but in it's day it had a very good tuner, fine discrete FET phono stage, and ALL THAT POWER. I bought in 1988.
Also never solder without a hat.Never solder or desolder without pants.
Use a solder sucker or solder braid wick to absorb the solder on the PCB.
The main culprit with NAD is that they often fail and you can be sure they do. It's a good amplifier to buy if you can get it for cheap and fix it yourself.
Their AVR's and C3xx series are the best (worst?) example - mediocre solder job, cheapest capacitors money can buy and very questionable if not stupid design decisions to place capacitors in pretty much sealed cans with class A driver stages or directly next to a hot heatsink of a voltage regulator.
I've done a 370 once, never ever again. Had to replace almost every electrolytic capacitor and have spent hours fixing bad solder joints on the thing.
You have about 100% chance it's already partially decayed if you find one for sale online.
And don't even start me on their CDP's....great while they work but they break down due to mysterious reasons, not only because of laser and electrolytics failing.
It's a shame because otherwise NAD gear really does sound very good and often delivers more than what they promise.
Yes, a 216 THX for the main L & R & a 218 THX for the subs. That is a wonderful system.I know there's people looking to find this amp after this review. Here's some NAD power amps that should be good alternatives to this model (if found in good condition): 216 THX (125W / 8Ω), C270 (120W / 8Ω), 214 (80W / 8Ω), 218 THX (200W / 8Ω).
These are models made between the 2200 and the C320BEE (both measured very well).
I can conclude the same no issues with my c370. It is something as to Google for a medical treatment you always find the bad experience however 90% does not have any problems whatsoever they have nothing to complain about.I use a NAD 1600 preamp and a C272 power amp daily with no issues. The 1600 was purchased new in 1991. The C272 is a bit younger, purchased in 2005. It replaced a Proton AA-1150 that had developed significant THD problems.
The older NAD stuff was better quality than mass market and was well-engineered for value (see Amir’s review). I could afford “better” now, but for my second system, it performs admirably.
The solder sucker is not a gimmick if you buy one that actually works. The good one's are not expensive. This is a proper solder sucker model that has become a industry standard amongst solder suckers around the world.New replacement relays received from Mouser today. I will try the trusty solder wick.
I always thought the solder sucker thing was sort of gimicky.
If the wick comes up short I will try the solder sucker.
Thanks DT
Those were both expensive and postage to Europe was just crazy ($ 185). I finally ordered them yesterday at desertcart for half the price at Amazon. I payed € 56 + € 5 postage for 4 relays. Haven't got them yet.The original part is Taiko Rxs 2405U, a suitable replacement should be this one
I always thought the solder sucker thing was sort of gimicky.
If the wick comes up short I will try the solder sucker.
I've used the same one for years. It's built very well. Dropping it on the floor and vigorously pumping it to clear the pulled solder does not damage it. Very good plastic used in it's construction. It will last you a long time.
That's a nice selection of solder suckers there @restorer-johnI only use wick in certain rare situations. I'd never use it for through hole solder removal, just flat lands or perhaps a wholesale clean up along DIP lands after crusty solder was removed. Always have a tub of flux too- it really helps if you are a solder-wick-meister.
The temperature controlled desoldering station gets used for leaded and lead free (higher temp), double sided/multilayer or just if I'm feeling a bit lazy.
There's four manual solder suckers on my bench ranging from a precision Japanese one that is incredible in tight spots, to a big bastard solderpult (actually a Japanese Goot) and a few others in between, including my old favorite, a Scope made in the 1970s.
View attachment 69126
That's a excellent idea having the soft silicon tip and a gentler recoil for sensitive work.The tips are soft, silicone tube
another excellent idea.put some stainless steel wool in the tube between the intake and the filters.