My c372 went up in smoke 6 months after the warrenty expired. Not good for an amp of this supposed quality and price. Nad did repair it free of charge. When I got it back I found it had also destroyed my new ($1800) speakers. The damage to the speakers was not covered by the speaker warrenty. Less than a year later the amp has again has gone up in smoke. It has never been abused driven hard or abused in anyway at all. If I have to pay to get it repared this time I will choose to buy anpther brand.

I previously had written a very positve review of this product but I take it all back. Two nights ago the amp blew up in flames. I was lucky to save my house and myself let alone the rest of my electronic equipment. The amp was not even on. It was on the standby mode. I wrote to NAD but, of course, they have not responded.

Beware of NAD products

power, mid-range, price

volume control

Just want to add that Iin Oct 2008, my 4-year old 372 'blew up' late one night after having been left on at low volume (1/4 on the dial). No problem - I took it in to the NAD agents (Sydney, Australia) and they were most sympathetic and helpful, obviously recognising the issue. I had thought that they would knock me back due to being out of warranty, but no, the amp was repaired the same day at no cost. Of course it is part of the well known syndrome affecting some of these amps, but all credit to NAD for responding so rapidly to defuse what could have been an unpleasant situation as I wasn't going to slink away without putting up a decent fight. Importantly, the ventilation around my amp is more than adequate (4 years later!) so the problem had to be with the machine. I have owned NAD eqpt all my life really, starting with a 3020 and will continue to do so. Just a qucik remark on performance of the 372: I have always been happy with the 372 but a tad disappointed with the bass reproduction - now that it has a new power board and other gizmos (I am no audio-nut) it is performing better than ever and I am absolutely thrilled with the smoother, meatier, more sensual and tighter way in which the bass is handled by my Krix Euphonix floor-standing speakers in a bright, small room. A happy and relieved customer indeed.

Customer Service

no complaints - see story above

Great Build

Lack of bass,very unclear sound,just not ok

Had this amplifier fiour about 4 days for testing from the local dealer.I must say i agreee with some of the guys on audioreview.Something is totally wrong with this amplifier.It has a huge lack of bass and the sound image is very blurr and unclear.I now own the c355bee wich as power is much weaker than the c372 and surprisingly better sounding and seems more powerfull.Also the tone controls are practically usless.Hope Nad will see the problems on the c372 .(every brand has it's ups and downs )

Similar Products Used:

Nad c355bee,Marantz,Grundig Finearts,Kenwood

power,precise,clear,after break inn.

long break inn.

Great amp,beautiful soundstage,very smooth,it took a while for it to break in,at first it was sounding a little harsh,but after a month or so it just smoothed out and keeps sounding better and better,speaker selection is also very important,if you dont like the sound,try changing your speakers,i have run NHT,and HK fifty,good biwire jumpers changed the sound as well. great amp under $2000.

Similar Products Used:

onkyo integra IA,old HK IA.

Sound, power.

none for the price.

Very neutral sounding amplifier. Authoritive and controlled bass. Pleasent treble. Great value for money. I tried this with a tube pre and the sound just perfect.

Similar Products Used:

Marantz

Power

Lack of warmth or personality

I was disappointed, as it seemed much thinner than what I had anticipated. I have since learned that NAD had / has a propensity for using sub-par capacitors. Mine blew after only a year. I replacing with upgraded capacitors and giving it another chance.

Hookup flexibility

Thin sound. Lack of musical impact.

I have owned mainly NAD gear since 1982 and have been completely satisfied with it. Recently I looked for a new NAD receiver or integrated amp and finally settled on the C372 since I was familiar with NAD. During my search one dealer told me that NAD was under new ownership but didn't indicate that as a negative. Anyway, after listening to the C372 compared to my other NAD amplification, which consist of a 2200 power amp/1130 preamp combo (over 20 years old) and a 7140 receiver (over 10 years old), the new C372 sounds weak, thin and almost budget quality in terms of musical impact. The 2200 is 100x2 and the 7140 is 40x2 but even my 40 watt NAD delivers a lot more impact. The advantage of the C372 is a little better sound stage/imaging but not enough that worth buying to replace my old gear. The C372 also offers my flexibility in connecting other components/speakers/subs, etc. In a way I am disappointed that NAD's has not seemed to maintain it's muscle when it comes to musical impact due to the fact that I have relied on NAD for audio more than 20 years.. I am afraid to invest further in NAD at this point. I guess its time to venture on to new horizons. I suppose if you are not familiar with vintage NAD components and sound, the C372 may be just what you are looking for. It think its time for me to move on.

Similar Products Used:

NAD 2200 amp. NAD 1130 preamp. NAD 7140 receiver. NAD 510 CD player. NAD 410 tuner. Mission 760 Argonaut Speakers

NAD C-372? Garbage! It worked only one year and a half. CD Player NAD C-542 was even worse. It worked only six months.
I own also a Technics integrated amplifier since 1975 and it is still working.

Very good sound with massive authority due to the watts.
Thrilling focussed and punchy bass, not out of proportion with mid and high frequencies.(that is connected optimal, see above)
Its like a car with a big engine, driving slowly you can also sense the bennefits.

Unfocussed when connected conventional, see above.
Volume adjustments go in to big steps (using remote)

After 2 years finaly got the potential out of my 372 by connecting it with biwire cable, with 4 plugs on each side of the cable.
Strangly using normal good quality speakercable (QED XT300) did`t bring out the dynamics and focus it can.
By putting the 8 plugs in my amp i had to use speakergroup A & B and now it operated in bi - amping mode seperating high and mid-low frequencies.
A lot of connecting surface, cable surface and bi-amping mode just made a huge difference.
The magazine `What Hifi` wasn`t very enthausiastic about this amplifier (giving it 2 out of 5 stars) in contrast to it`s EISA award winning predecessor the C370.
In hynesight i` have to agree since il dosed bass and lack of weight and scale are a thing of the past.
I still think it`s strange and poor that connecting it in the old-fashioned single wire way gave such relative poor results.

Similar Products Used:

Nad C272, REGA APOLLO, Clearaudio Smartphono, Canton Vento 807dc, Oehlbach XXL series 6 biwire cable.