NAD C 399 HybridDigital DAC Amplifier

[Alexx]

Sorry if I insist
some owner of the Nad 399 can check if the tone control is activated and deactivated from the menu (ON-OFF) the speakers make a noise like "Knock"
I don't know if my model is broken and they do all this.
Thanks so much.

 

[Jone5]

Oh my, seems that the C399 suffers from the same intersample distortion as the rest of the NADs, m33, c658 etc. And to top that, the issue is not fixed while enabling the tone controls Perhaps since they dont seem to lower the headroom at least by subjective listening. Maybe this is the little harshness I was noticing from the start. Can someone confirm that the M10 for some reason do not suffer from this?

Noticed while listening to this

It has some distortions even when sub turned off, maybe the production is compromised but with sub on its almost unlistenable… I kinda hoped that they would have learned from the past mistakes. I guess not many owners yet, but if someone can confirm, I would appreciate.

@Alexx, yes turning tone controls on and off results into small knock sound.

 

[Alexx]

Jone5: Thanks then it's not faulty I thought it was faulty
(they are all like that).

For your problem I don't understand if it only does this with the Bluos module (I don't have it).
Let me know so I check.
Thank you.

 

[pogo]

And to top that, the issue is not fixed while enabling the tone controls Perhaps since they dont seem to lower the headroom at least by subjective listening.

This is probably due to the different design architectures. Now NAD really has to come up with a solution, if this should be the case!

 

[Alexx]

The subwoofer output comes out very low that I had to turn the volume of the B&W Subwoofer to maximum to hear it.

So many times it doesn't even turn on that it doesn't detect the signal.
Do you know if it is possible to adjust the output signal on Sub 1 and 2?
Thanks so much.

 

[unexperienced]

Someone from the owners, made a picture of the amplifier inside please.

 

[Alexx]

338 / 5.000

Risultati della traduzione​

Purtroppo l'ho rispedito indietro... Troppi rumori strani, uscita del subwoofer troppo bassa e non c'è possibilità di aumentarla (ho dovuto alzare molto il volume per farlo attivare) in più ho dovuto mantenere il volume del sub sempre al massimo. Come caratteristica, ho preferito di gran lunga la serie 368. Ora devo trovare un'altra marca. Mi dispiace.

 

[unexperienced]

Personally, I think NAD made a huge mistake by abandoning the full 4-channel concept used in the NAD M12 and previously used in the NAD C390 and then the NAD M32. Having stopped going in this direction, they have lost and will lose quite a large audience in the end. Since, for example, I was and am an adherent of this concept (band-by-band amplification with the possibility of bi-amping and separate adjustments of the high-frequency channel and low-frequency channel). It is because of this that I personally switched to Lyngdorf and have no regrets

 

[Jone5]

Personally, I think NAD made a huge mistake by abandoning the full 4-channel concept used in the NAD M12 and previously used in the NAD C390 and then the NAD M32. Having stopped going in this direction, they have lost and will lose quite a large audience in the end. Since, for example, I was and am an adherent of this concept (band-by-band amplification with the possibility of bi-amping and separate adjustments of the high-frequency channel and low-frequency channel). It is because of this that I personally switched to Lyngdorf and have no regrets

Can you elaborate a bit, since I'm not familiar with the mentioned models and what feature you are referring to? At least M12 and M32 do not seem to have two separate configurable preouts for bi-amp?

Having owned a TDAI-2170 I don't see any additional features with this respect, and the lack of possibility to modify the desired response of the room perfect makes it undesired to me. On the other hand, usability and integrity of the audio DSP algorithms seems to be of a different level with Lyngdorf, NAD should do their homework in this respect. Subjetive quality-wise, NAD M10 was at least an improvement over the TDAI-2170 but I have not heard the TDAI-3400.

 

[unexperienced]

Can you elaborate a bit, since I'm not familiar with the mentioned models and what feature you are referring to? At least M12 and M32 do not seem to have two separate configurable preouts for bi-amp?

Having owned a TDAI-2170 I don't see any additional features with this respect, and the lack of possibility to modify the desired response of the room perfect makes it undesired to me. On the other hand, usability and integrity of the audio DSP algorithms seems to be of a different level with Lyngdorf, NAD should do their homework in this respect. Subjetive quality-wise, NAD M10 was at least an improvement over the TDAI-2170 but I have not heard the TDAI-3400.

Have you ever dealt with professional equipment? For example, amplifiers such as Crown I-tech or any other professional amplifier that has four independent amplifier channels with an active digital DSP on board? I'm trying to understand how you can better explain what I mean and what kind of devices C390, M32 and M12 are.

 

[Jone5]

Have you ever dealt with professional equipment? For example, amplifiers such as Crown I-tech or any other professional amplifier that has four independent amplifier channels with an active digital DSP on board? I'm trying to understand how you can better explain what I mean and what kind of devices C390, M32 and M12 are.

I surely know the functionality you are referring to, but is this really implemented in C390, M32 and M12? I tried to look at the manual of M12 for example and did not found any of that mentioned.

I'm just curious if that ever was the case and your comparison to Lyngdorf in this respect, which at least in my experience does not do much more that the NAD counterparts. You can perhaps individually set the high and lowpass and the filter order. Correct if I'm wrong, maybe there is some FW updates with added functionality in the recent 2 years.

I also see the benefits of full multichannel dsp processor as as preamp (not only 4 ch if you have more than 2way speakers) if you want to have active crossover and amplification and I think thats a different story and not the targeted audience of NAD or Lyngdorf.

 

[unexperienced]

I surely know the functionality you are referring to, but is this really implemented in C390, M32 and M12? I tried to look at the manual of M12 for example and did not found any of that mentioned.

I'm just curious if that ever was the case and your comparison to Lyngdorf in this respect, which at least in my experience does not do much more that the NAD counterparts. You can perhaps individually set the high and lowpass and the filter order. Correct if I'm wrong, maybe there is some FW updates with added functionality in the recent 2 years.

I also see the benefits of full multichannel dsp processor as as preamp (not only 4 ch if you have more than 2way speakers) if you want to have active crossover and amplification and I think thats a different story and not the targeted audience of NAD or Lyngdorf.

Fine. So you perfectly imagine the architecture and device of these devices at a fundamental level. That's exactly how the C390, M32 and M12 are arranged. They are based on the Zetex DDFA chip. This is nothing more than a four-channel DAC with built-in DSP. Trust me and don't look at their user manuals. Many do not know about their functionality because they simply do not have them and cannot understand it in practice.
I had all these (C390, M32 and M12) three devices in my possession. And I know what I'm talking about. Plus, I'm good with electronics. In these devices the approach to professional equipment is applied. At the software level, the capabilities of the built-in DSP are reduced to a minimum. Those. so that they are not too obvious for a simple user. Although these chips provide such an opportunity. These are the only three devices in all NAD lines that have this functionality.

 

[unexperienced]

Another question is that audiophiles sometimes adhere to the Old Believer postulates and negatively look at all sorts of modern gadgets such as dsp, but this is a completely different question.

 

[pogo]

I was and am an adherent of this concept (band-by-band amplification with the possibility of bi-amping and separate adjustments of the high-frequency channel and low-frequency channel).

I can't quite follow/agree with you here, as these capabilities are also present on the C399 with DL, automated as well as manually fine-tuned (DL TargetCurve based).
Fixed on C399, C658: 80Hz x-over frequency
Variable on M33, M10 (V2): 40-200Hz x-over frequency

 

[NewShoes]

Fixed on C399, C658: 80Hz x-over frequency

Is the subwoofer crossover fixed even with the Bluos/Dirac module installed? And do you know if the C399 is able to apply a high pass filter to the mains with and without the Dirac module?

I know the M10 can do this, and with a variable crossover too. It's weird how few integrated amps are capable of high pass filtering when you connect a sub.

 

[pogo]

Correct, the current M-models have a different architecture and can do this.
The C399 gives a fixed 80Hz physically. Of course, you can also go below that directly on the SW or influence it via the DL TargetCurve. A high pass filter for the mains as for the M-models is also not used for the C399. But here you can also influence it within certain limits via DL.

 

[Jone5]

Correct, the current M-models have a different architecture and can do this.
The C399 gives a fixed 80Hz physically. Of course, you can also go below that directly on the SW or influence it via the DL TargetCurve. A high pass filter for the mains as for the M-models is also not used for the C399. But here you can also influence it within certain limits via DL.

The C399 with BluOS module acts exactly as M-models, crossover is adjustable 40-200Hz and highpass is applied to the mains. Without BluOS module the crossover seems to be fixed (80Hz?). I got to play around with a demo unit without the bluos module and it did not seem to have any crossover selection in the menu. Now with the module installed it is also adjustable from the device menus and of course from the bluos app.

I kinda see the BluOS module as a pretty vital part of the C399.

 

[Alexx]

Confermo.

Per strane scelte commerciali il 399 senza modulo bluos non può agire sul Subwoofer
assurdo.

E' fisso a 80 HZ... ho rispedito il mio 399 perchè l'uscita sub è talmente bassa che per attivare il subwoofer devo alzare il volume dell'amplificatore al 30% usando l'ingresso analogico mentre al 55-60% se usando il digitale ingresso.

Il volume dedicato del subwoofer per poterlo ascoltare deve essere sempre il massimo.

Ora non so se prendere un 388 che dovrebbe essere più maneggevole o prendere un Rotel 1572... devo decidere.

 

[pogo]

Ora non so se prendere un 388 che dovrebbe essere più maneggevole o prendere un Rotel 1572... devo decidere.

The C388 will not behave any better. For you, a working C399 with DL would actually be a very good solution. It also offers the possibility to switch on your SW via a trigger signal.

 

[Alexx]

@pogo: In precedenza avevo un Nad 368 ma non mi dava tutti questi problemi.
Per questo pensavo ad un 388 (più potenza e allo stesso modo per gestirlo senza i vincoli del modulo Bluos).

Pensi che questo sia sbagliato? Non userei mai il modulo Bluos, è qualcosa che non mi serve, non mi serve il wifi.

Questo è il motivo per cui stavo valutando anche il Rotel 1572 ma non lo conosco come suono.
Grazie.