Tim Gillett wrote:If that was typical for the many examples sold, NAD would have received many customer complaints within the warranty period, not to mention probably scathing reviews by the reputable HiFi press of the day. Did that occur?
The hi-fi world is very strange, and PR plays a big part.
Just by changing the colour, and removing a few knobs, can make an average unnoticed amplifier sell like hot cakes, and it imediatly gets a "Best Buy"
A friend worked for a top PR company, and he had the accounts for a couple of well known hi-fI companies, and he not only engineered this to happen, but witnessed its success.
Also, unfortunately a lot of people wouldn't know a good sound if it hit them in the face, and they don't care, all they really care about is the name and how it looks, but that's OK, it's their money.
There was a bit of a thing going on in the 80's, some people were saying that a Thorens 160 we'll set-up with a decent arm sounded better than a Linn Sondek, and a guy wrote to a magazine saying that, a month later he wrote in withdrawing his statement, I wonder what side his bread was buttered?
I'm not saying that certain well known brands aren't brilliant, they are, NAD aren't one of them though! I just think that sometimes people fall for the hype and convince themselves that some equipment is actually good when it obviously isn't.
Forget money, pretend it's not an issue, I wouldn't own a Linn turntable, or any British amplifiers, or speakers, I wouldn't say I was a hi-fI freak, I like a combination of looks and sound, a compromise, and I listen to most of my music on a John Lewis portable radio, rarely my stereo, but sometimes it's nice to hear "the big picture" like going to the cinema.
It may seem that I care more about hi-fI than I actually do, but sometimes it's easy to have the wool pulled over our eyes and our wallets emptied, for gear that is basically just not worth it.