2. amps-preamps
  3. 1228017900

Mac 6500 integrated or NAD M3 integrated?

Used, of course. Both really seem like excellent units, with the NAD being cheaper and having more power. I'm drawn to both, and have a NAD HT receiver that I really like.

I live in a townhouse, so I can't "crank-it" so to speak. I listen to all music.

I'm new to all of this of course, so bear with me. :)

Thoughts or advice are sincerely appreciated.
jt3
2 responses Add your response
art80342
65 posts
 
if u are new ... suggest upgrade step by step... nad M3 is cheap but good with impecable build quality ... enough power to drive any speakers and easily half or 1/3 price of mac 6500...

or imho, u will be better off with a tube hybrid or nait 5i??? world class sound without an arm / leg especially in view tat u can't crank up all the way.

get a couple of horns and low volume will be so lively ... just my 2 cents worth...
hieule5
115 posts
 
Second Mr Art80342 idea. NAD M-3 is a very capable amp that can drive any tough speaker loads and yet very musical. I like NAD M-3 because it is better built and better priced. Way cheaper than Mac.
Log in to respond
More to discover
80x80
EMM Labs PRE
80x80
Aurorasound PADA-300B Hybrid Mono-blocks
80x80
Electronics Expo 3612610
Peavey PV 10 AT 10 Channel Compact Mixer PEV03612610