Review and Measurements of NAD T758 V3 AVR

[audimus]

My point has always been that even assuming the NAD has a lousy DAC and engineering, it will SOUND better than ANY of its competitors at similar price, thanks to the state of the art room correction it comes with.

Do you realize that your previous comment suggested that THD and SINAD issues can be corrected by Dirac room correction? And therefore the measurements without Dirac do not matter? This is utter nonsense that no one has confirmed because it isn’t true. It just seemed like defensive and ignorant pie-throwing to see what sticks.

Another unit with Dirac would also be improved as well and this is not because of NAD. What the measurements show is that turning Dirac on in this unit is putting lipstick on a pig. You are arguing it does not matter because no one can see the pig for the lipstick, at least not until now.

My conclusion is empiric, as I have owned several devices that even at heftier prices didn´t come close to the NAD T758 V3 in clarity, image, dynamics and bass management. This has just been confirmed by @Flak

This might be just sloppy writing but it is very disingenuous. Your subjective conclusions are yours, there is no argument for or against subjective opinions. But you are making it look like a Dirac employee is agreeing with that evaluation of NAD. Company policy would possibly even prevent him from making any product endorsement like that.

It is possible to have an intellectually honest debate without the hyperbole and incorrect insinuations and statements. This is why I was wondering if this was a troll account.

 

[amirm]

My point has always been that even assuming the NAD has a lousy DAC and engineering, it will SOUND better than ANY of its competitors at similar price, thanks to the state of the art room correction it comes with. My conclusion is empiric, as I have owned several devices that even at heftier prices didn´t come close to the NAD T758 V3 in clarity, image, dynamics and bass management. This has just been confirmed by @Flak.

What would your opinion be if we found another product with Dirac that has far superior measurements? Don't care? Don't want people to know and have a preference on that basis?

When we started to test amplifiers, we had nothing but poor performance. It took a while until we found the likes of Hypex NC400, Benchmark and Purifi. I hold out hope that this will happen with AVRs.

If not, then I am hoping a year from now some of them will attempt to fix these issues as has happened in DAC companies like Schiit. Indeed, in DACs and now headphone amplifiers, there seems to a gold rush toward superb engineering. I don't see why we should settle for less in AVR where such improvements do not cost anything but better care and testing.

 

[617]

I look forward to seeing more AVR measurements. I think we can agree that headphone amps and DACs are pretty much solved audio problems - with reasonably priced units offering essentially perfect performance. We have a few power amps which, although expensive, offer unimpeachable performance. AVRs? They all seem to be pretty bad so far. This NAD unit is an embarrassment, and it is highly suggestive that price does not correlate to engineering quality with AVRs, although more data is needed.

 

[JJB70]

I am a little sceptical about the idea that dirac or equivalent systems negate other performance parameters. I think that these systems are excellent, I also think systems need a certain level of uncorrected performance for optimisation tools to work well.

 

[amirm]

Back in 2014 I tested a number of products in the context of evaluating their HDMI performance: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/a-deep-dive-into-hdmi-audio-performance.56/

Even then, AVRs struggled to do well. To wit, here is the jitter rejection:

The only all-in-one unit that did well was the $40,000 Mark Levinson 502 Processor. At least then, you could get statement products that did well in that market. Alas, HDMI killed many small companies from getting into AV processor market. Chip companies would not support them due to small volume and without it, implementations were very hard.

 

[GrimSurfer]

I look forward to seeing more AVR measurements.

I'd love to have your sense of optimism, @617 .

My fear is that @amirm will have to wade through a vat of $hit before finding the one exception to the rule that AVR manufacturers have knocked out products which are more engineered to a price point than a performance one.

 

[amirm]

My fear is that @amirm will have to wade through a vat of $hit before finding the one exception to the rule that AVR manufacturers have knocked out products which are more engineered to a price point than a performance one.

I think AVRs and Speakers are the next frontiers we have to take on, pain and all. Both are heavy and expensive to send around. But what choice is there?

 

[peng]

While I understand the argument of "preference", that is not my goal, nor should it be anyone's goal, in recreating audio or video. Years ago, a neighbor of mine came over and said the baseball caps on the "Red Sox Players" were brighter and better on his Sharp TV. I explained this projector was calibrated and it was more accurate. He didn't seem to care. When a friend came over wearing a Red Sox cap, and the colors matched my screen, he asked me to come over and calibrate his Sharp TV.

The point of the story is most people want what's accurate, but don't know what that is, so they simply prefer one sound or image over another. When they actually know that they are inaccurate, I believe many people will want accuracy over preference, IMO.

That may be true to some extent, but I know for a fact that many people prefer exaggerrated, i.e. not accurate bass. That's just one example. Aside from inaccurate bass, many people like the mid range Klipsch towers sound, and BB seems to be selling them by the tons, that's another example. I don't find those speakers accurate at all in the mids and highs, but again, seems that a lot of people "prefer" or heir sound characteristics, not just their price.

 

[GrimSurfer]

I think AVRs and Speakers are the next frontiers we have to take on, pain and all. Both are heavy and expensive to send around. But what choice is there?

I so wish I had connections in Stockholm with the Nobel Committee.

You are a good man, @amirm

 

[617]

I'd love to have your sense of optimism, @617 .

My fear is that @amirm will have to wade through a vat of $hit before finding the one exception to the rule that AVR manufacturers have knocked out products which are more engineered to a price point than a performance one.

My optimism stems from the observation that these AVRs are unnecessarily bad; if they are outperformed by sub 10 dollar DACs it implies that one might have great performance almost by accident.

I would love, love to simplify my hifi and just have an AVR but as of yet no products seem to fit the bill.

 

[GrimSurfer]

That may be true to some extent, but I know for a fact that many people prefer exaggerrated, i.e. not accurate bass. That's just one example. Aside from inaccurate bass, many people like the mid range Klipsch towers sound, and BB seems to be selling them by the tons, that's another example. I don't find those speakers accurate at all in the mids and highs, but again, seems that a lot of people "prefer" or heir sound characteristics, not just their price.

A lot of people can't tell the difference between $5 wine in a box (or goon bag, to use that delightful Aussie term) and reasonable quality plonk that has been fermented, bottled and stored somewhat responsibly.

The crime isn't not being able to tell the difference. The crime is in refusing to believe the possibility that there is a difference, and why.

 

[peng]

I think AVRs and Speakers are the next frontiers we have to take on, pain and all. Both are heavy and expensive to send around. But what choice is there?

I am confident that you if you can get them on your test bench, you won't be disappointed with the Denon, Marantz and Yamaha's mid range AVRs made from 2016 to present. That's based on what I saw in some of their schematics. Arcam's should measure well, but they are expensive.

Don't you think the AV8805 is as good as many of the DACs you recommended if you can exclude that distortion spike that will not affect the audible band? I mean the spike caused by Marantz's intentional choice of the slowest slope filter..

 

[digicidal]

I would be perfectly fine with I would begrudgingly accept mediocre DAC performance from an AVR/Processor if they at least provided a reasonably clean analog input and preamp section. Then at least I could add a cheap, great-performing DAC to use for stereo, and the internal one only for surround duties. Not an optimal solution by any means... but when the preamp section is a pathetic as well - there's not much to work with IMO.

Of course, with so many models processing everything digitally, there's no point in even thinking in that direction, since it will AD-DA out the same crappy DAC in the end. So we're back to multiple boxes for separate media types or paying north of $40K for a one-size-fits-all solution. Sigh.

 

[GrimSurfer]

I'm open to the possibility that the brands mentioned by @peng have the potential to get the DAC stages right. I'm less certain that they can get the preamp and amplification stages to the point of delivering low distortion and sustaining rated power in all channels. It is often the power supplies that are chinzy. These add weight (shipping cost), size (form factor), and power consumption (heat) that get in the way of accounting and marketing goals.

 

[audimus]

I think AVRs and Speakers are the next frontiers we have to take on, pain and all. Both are heavy and expensive to send around. But what choice is there?

Perhaps crowdfunding the shipping charges? Seems a bit unfair to have people willing to loan their equipment to pay those shipping charges as well. Cost me $200 two-way to have an Adcom receiver shipped for service. It is that heavy.

Just a thought.

 

[digicidal]

I'm open to the possibility that the brands mentioned by @peng have the potential to get the DAC stages right. I'm less certain that they can get the preamp and amplification stages to the point of delivering low distortion and sustaining rated power in all channels. It is often the power supplies that are chinzy. These add weight (shipping cost), size (form factor), and power consumption (heat) that get in the way of accounting and marketing goals.

Part of the reason I prefer PrePro's (well that and I prefer to run active speakers anyway)... unfortunately, a great many of those are simply the AVR of that brand/price point with the amps removed and added balanced outputs - but not much else optimized (if anything at all). They often aren't even truly balanced.

 

[Dj7675]

My point has always been that even assuming the NAD has a lousy DAC and engineering, it will SOUND better than ANY of its competitors at similar price, thanks to the state of the art room correction it comes with. My conclusion is empiric, as I have owned several devices that even at heftier prices didn´t come close to the NAD T758 V3 in clarity, image, dynamics and bass management. This has just been confirmed by @Flak.

So, putting a tag of "not recommendable" on this AVR, based solely on measurements of distortions that are inaudible for anyone not borned in the planet Krypton, should at least be put to the test by giving the AVR a personal try and then deciding with your own ears if it´s worth it or not. DIRAC is not cheap, and NAD had to cut costs on other areas in order to provide the only AVR in market to provide DIRAC and BlueOS at this price. Mainly, only 3 HDMI inputs, 7 amplifiers, only one sub out, a sub par DAC apparently, and no video processing whatsoever.

Other people have mention Arcam as a better choice and they may be right (although a guy at AVS named Markus767 proved their bass management was faulty), but I dare anyone to get the cheapest DIRAC Arcam (7 channel 550 model for $2900 refurbed, $3500 new) for $1400 new or refurbed for $1000. I dare you. Apples with oranges.

Finally, I´m not here to bash the work of people at this site. It´s great for the audio community to have someone actually exposing the weaknesses of equipments and letting companies know that we are watching. And I can´t say that I´m not disappointed with NAD after reading the measurements, but I understand that costs had to be cut down somewhere.

Just a couple of comments
-In my opinion, on this site it is most definitely appropriate for not recommend the NAD T758 based on the measurements. After all, that is what this site is about-providing measurements that show well engineered products that do not introduce noise and distortion into the audio signal
-I am no expert at all, but when a DAC measures the worst of any tested so far, it is worthy of discussion and consideration
-Does this mean that consumers can choose to ignore these measurements because it sounds good to them, in their particular room etc? Absolutely.
-For me, I am on the fence about keeping the unit in our living room due to low volume listing, high noise floor in that room, a very bad room for audio, and Dirac does a really good job in this room. However, in my theater where and I listen at a much higher volume, I will be looking for something else. As in all things YMMV with my opinion as someone who has had it in our theater for around a year and a half.
I hold out hope some hope that NAD will respond that it should test better and send another unit to test, but if they don't I think the results measured here are what they are.
Hopefully we will here some good news from the Anthem MRX520 when it is measured.

 

[RichB]

I would be perfectly fine with I would begrudgingly accept mediocre DAC performance from an AVR/Processor if they at least provided a reasonably clean analog input and preamp section. Then at least I could add a cheap, great-performing DAC to use for stereo, and the internal one only for surround duties. Not an optimal solution by any means... but when the preamp section is a pathetic as well - there's not much to work with IMO.

Of course, with so many models processing everything digitally, there's no point in even thinking in that direction, since it will AD-DA out the same crappy DAC in the end. So we're back to multiple boxes for separate media types or paying north of $40K for a one-size-fits-all solution. Sigh.

I use the Benchmark LA4 to provide a direct path for the Oppo UDP-205 DAC on one input and the XMC-1 on the other. This can also be achieve with any DAC with volume control using a manual or automatic switch like the ARX ARX-RS-1 trigger controlled siwtch.

Also the XMC-1 has a Reference Stereo for the XLR's:

Balanced Input to Balanced Output (Reference Stereo Mode):

• THD: <0.0005% @ 1 kHz.
• THD: < 0.002% (20 Hz to 20 kHz).
• IMD: < 0.004% @ 1 kHz.
• S/N ratio: > 123 dB (A weighted).
• Frequency Response: 5 Hz to 80 kHz (+0 / -0.1 dB).
• Crosstalk: <100 dB. (sic, should be >100 dB)

It can be done for a lot less than $40K.

- Rich

 

[digicidal]

I use the Benchmark LA4 to provide a direct path for the Oppo UDP-205 DAC on one input and the XMC-1 on the other. This can also be achieve with any DAC with volume control using a manual or automatic switch like the ARX ARX-RS-1 trigger controlled siwtch.
...
It can be done for a lot less than $40K.

- Rich

You are correct it can... although Emotiva PrePro's are permanently off my list due to past experiences. However, your solution is exactly what I meant by "multiple boxes or" in that sentence. Admittedly the $40K bit was hyperbole based on @amirm posting the graphs with the ML unit at that price, however I think it's safe to say that it's incredibly difficult to achieve for less than $5K at the least. Just the XMC-1 and LA4 in your setup are well north of that figure.

 

[RichB]

You are correct it can... although Emotiva PrePro's are permanently off my list due to past experiences. However, your solution is exactly what I meant by "multiple boxes or" in that sentence. Admittedly the $40K bit was hyperbole based on @amirm posting the graphs with the ML unit at that price, however I think it's safe to say that it's incredibly difficult to achieve for less than $5K at the least. Just the XMC-1 and LA4 in your setup are well north of that figure.

Yeah, it's expensive but at least it performs.
That ARX RS-1 is a cool XLR switch $260 and powered only by the trigger. Add a Topping balanced DAC and you are still under a grand.

For my next processor, it will be either an RMC-1 or HTP-1. I wont buy without real specifications posted or provided on the sly

- Rich