Review and Measurements of NAD T758 V3 AVR

[peng]

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.

I hear you, my optimism is based on the following facts:

- The little WX-A50 manage to fit in Amir's orange band, beating out quite a few dedicated DACs.
- The AV8805 did score well on his bench if it wasn't set back by the unusual filter setting that Marantz programmed.
- Dr. Rich confirmed what I saw on on the schematics of the 2017 D&MAVRs and Marantz AVPs, that they have upgraded the preamp, those are no longer the LSI chips (specifically the Renesas chips) Anthem and NAD still seem to be using, Yamaha too, but those Rohm chips the recent Yamaha models used, seem to have better specs than the Renesas chip that Dr. Rich had written about in the past.

The schematics of the 2017 D&M AVRs/AVPs show the line analog input has a direct path that bypasses the ADC and DAC and go straight to the preamp/vol control section, so no double conversion required for the direct/pure direct modes.

 

[digicidal]

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

I'm looking forward to a test of the HTP-1... after reading through the RMC-1 owners thread in the lounge - I swear I went back in time. Gave me some very bad memories. I'll do amps again, maybe even multiple times from Emotiva... but subs and processors... nope, not again. I guess I just have a more flammable bridge than some people.

 

[xhattan]

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.

Look man, I never meant to criticize your work. Of course it´s nice to have better information about a device one wants to buy. But THD or DAC quality isn´t the only data to be taken into consideration in the final result. Room correction in a multichannel device has a capital importance and yet you disregarded the T758 without even testing its primary feature, a feature that will have a real sonic impact as opposed to THD measurements that 99.999999% of humans won´t even perceive .

Yes, I made a mistake associating THD with DIRAC implementation, but I was thinking about the final result one gets after properly calibrating speakers with the DIRAC software; a result that, in my case, had jaw dropping sound (a few people, of course, had different results, which is normal). Hence, I concluded that something was missing in your "not recommended" opinion. And I was right. So, I just suggested people to give it a try before making a decision, based on my personal experience, as I thought that, despite the bad THD, maybe the room calibration would still be able to provide excellent sound under normal situations. And @Flak confirmed that DIRAC will override linear distorsions. And my suggestion came accompanied with warnings about issues and shortcommings of the T758v3 too. I was only trying to be helpful.

Finally, as per your promise(?), if you show me another AVR with DIRAC (any brand will do, I´m a fan of DIRAC, not NAD), for less than $1500, with much better measurements, I would thank you, would buy it, and promise to never, ever come back again to your site, as diverging opinions here are not well regarded.

I will find a comfortable chair to sit and wait...

 

[JoachimStrobel]

I disagree.
There are many multichannel albums around, and more produced monthly.
And there are lots of older multichannel productions that had been downmixed to stereo in the past, now being available in the original format.
You can also find immersive multichannel albums being produced these days.

I have bought more than 100 multichannel+immersive titles this year only (haven't bought any 2 channel music recently, only Tidal streaming), and haven't found time to listen to all of them yet.

Sorry for the off topic but I couldn't resist

Have you got any websites where I can find those recordings?

 

[BDWoody]

I have owned several high end AVRs, including Denon´s 4520CI, Yamaha Aventage, Pioneer SC-75 (grrreat THX AVR) and SC-85. The NAD T758v3 is far better than any of them, with DIRAC making a huge difference. Sound is breathtaking and bass management is far superior. However, I use it in a small room and have never pushed it beyond -5 dB and have an Emotiva 5 channel amp taking care of atmos and center duties. Speakers are Kef LS50 for fronts and center and smaller Kefs surrounds for rest of 5.1.4 setup.

The NAD has several issues, specially with ARC, but sound isn´t one of them. Check the thread at AVS and almost anyone will atest to that. I accept that maybe its DAC may be sub pared (NAD won´t even disclose the brand), but DIRAC makes it up for that. Room correction will always, always, always be more important for sound than a DAC, and if correctly implemented, DIRAC WILL provide a very pleasurable sound experience (at least for 95% of the people who have actually heard it). I really think the tested device must have some kind of flaw. And even if it doesn´t, consider that any distortion is only measurable (and hardly perceptible) at reference levels, so loud it will really be annoying to ears in a normal room.

I do have a separate 2 channel setup for music, so can´t give an opinion on that. However, my 5.1 music blu rays (Steven Wilson, Porcupine Tree, Rush, Roger Waters, Marillion, etc.) sound absolutely sublime with the NAD.

Bottomline, don´t toss the T758 aside yet. Give it a try and take a personal informed decision.

I'd rather wait until one performs acceptably on it's own merits, in addition to ones it gets for paying the licensing fee to Dirac.

The argument is then, even with a box this schitty, DIRAC still makes it sound great. Hmmm...

Other options for that that don't involve the tradeoffs.

 

[restorer-john]

But THD or DAC quality isn´t the only data to be taken into consideration in the final result. Room correction in a multichannel device has a capital importance and yet you disregarded the T758 without even testing its primary feature, a feature that will have a real sonic impact as opposed to THD measurements that 99.999999% of humans won´t even perceive .

If one was to test and report on every parameter and functionality in a typical modern AVR the reviews would be 30+ pages long. Where do you stop and what do you include?

It's a receiver, and yet nobody tests the tuner itself, do they?
If it had a phono stage (I don't believe it does) do we test that comprehensively as well?
It has a headphone jack, do we measure all the headphone stage (if it has one or just a resistor) characteristics?
Do we measure single, 2ch, 3ch, 5ch and 7ch amplifier performance into 8/4/2 ohms in both continuous and dynamic conditions? (there's 7+ hours worth of work there alone)
Do we measure channel separation across alternate line level inputs, overload characteristics, absolute phase, square wave response, susceptibility to shutdown, behaviour into reactive loads etc etc?

Every feature set adds a whole set of parameters to test, many of which Amir doesn't have the capability to currently test, so he focuses on the parameters and tests refined over a period of time, to give easily comparable results.

Room correction is a nebulous feature to test at best. I'd be steering well clear of that.

 

[xhattan]

I'd rather wait until one performs acceptably on it's own merits, in addition to ones it gets for paying the licensing fee to Dirac.

The argument is then, even with a box this schitty, DIRAC still makes it sound great. Hmmm...

Other options for that that don't involve the tradeoffs.

There are none, unless you double the price. And yes, DIRAC makes the T758v3 "box" sound great.

 

[BDWoody]

There are none, unless you double the price. And yes, DIRAC makes the T758v3 "box" sound great.

So, we can reduce your original post claiming this to be the best receiver you've ever had, to being simply an endorsement of DIRAC?

I will buy that... DIRAC can be amazing!
Why didn't you just say so?!

 

[RichB]

If one was to test and report on every parameter and functionality in a typical modern AVR the reviews would be 30+ pages long. Where do you stop and what do you include?

It's a receiver, and yet nobody tests the tuner itself, do they?
If it had a phono stage (I don't believe it does) do we test that comprehensively as well?
It has a headphone jack, do we measure all the headphone stage (if it has one or just a resistor) characteristics?
Do we measure single, 2ch, 3ch, 5ch and 7ch amplifier performance into 8/4/2 ohms in both continuous and dynamic conditions? (there's 7+ hours worth of work there alone)
Do we measure channel separation across alternate line level inputs, overload characteristics, absolute phase, square wave response, susceptibility to shutdown, behaviour into reactive loads etc etc?

Every feature set adds a whole set of parameters to test, many of which Amir doesn't have the capability to currently test, so he focuses on the parameters and tests refined over a period of time, to give easily comparable results.

Room correction is a nebulous feature to test at best. I'd be steering well clear of that.

I like the idea of testing AVR amplifiers with the same rigor as a stand-alone amp since that was a primary purpose of buying the one-box solution. At least make sure they can drive 4 ohms without current limiting or shutdown.

- Rich

 

[amirm]

Look man, I never meant to criticize your work. Of course it´s nice to have better information about a device one wants to buy. But THD or DAC quality isn´t the only data to be taken into consideration in the final result. Room correction in a multichannel device has a capital importance and yet you disregarded the T758 without even testing its primary feature, a feature that will have a real sonic impact as opposed to THD measurements that 99.999999% of humans won´t even perceive .

We don't know what percentage of people can perceive such distortions. We do know that it the only way to be sure people can't hear them is to perform far higher than this product does. You know, at least to the level of the Apple dongle at $9.

Here is the big picture: the kind of flaws that I found are very easy to fix. Take them one by one:

1. Documentation. Why on earth isn't it documented that the 7.1 analog input is so much more performant than the CD analog input? Why is the CD analog input digitized, and processed without due notice to the user?

2. Audio pipeline. There needs to be a diagram to show all the processing blocks for all inputs and routing. One needs to know if the internal processing is 96 kHz and not waste time feeding it 192 kHz, etc.

3. Audio DSP pipeline needs to be tested to be transparent. No improper resampling. No limiting. No lack of dither, etc. This is mostly software.

4. Hygiene of DAC implementation. I am confident a month of testing and circuit modification would result in far better performance.

NAD cannot hang its hat on Dirac. Anyone can license that. If they want to sell excellence in sound reproduction as their brand represents, then they need to do the above right.

I don't mind your posts specifically. What I mind is the general tendency to cloud the issues here and defend the manufacturer. The outcome will be that the manufacturer would read them, take comfort in the defense, and do nothing.

So if you want to see improved products, it is best to not keep stating the obvious: "oh it has Dirac." We know. I said it in the review. I said it has a big effect. But again, Dirac is not property of NAD. Their job was to build the hardware and software and on that front, I have to give them a failing grade.

 

[xhattan]

If one was to test and report on every parameter and functionality in a typical modern AVR the reviews would be 30+ pages long. Where do you stop and what do you include?

It's a receiver, and yet nobody tests the tuner itself, do they?
If it had a phono stage (I don't believe it does) do we test that comprehensively as well?
It has a headphone jack, do we measure all the headphone stage (if it has one or just a resistor) characteristics?
Do we measure single, 2ch, 3ch, 5ch and 7ch amplifier performance into 8/4/2 ohms in both continuous and dynamic conditions? (there's 7+ hours worth of work there alone)
Do we measure channel separation across alternate line level inputs, overload characteristics, absolute phase, square wave response, susceptibility to shutdown, behaviour into reactive loads etc etc?

Every feature set adds a whole set of parameters to test, many of which Amir doesn't have the capability to currently test, so he focuses on the parameters and tests refined over a period of time, to give easily comparable results.

Room correction is a nebulous feature to test at best. I'd be steering well clear of that.

Well, DAC, THD, SINAD, were tested. So, review was goaled towards sound performance.

So, we can reduce your original post claiming this to be the best receiver you've ever had, to being simply an endorsement of DIRAC?

I will buy that... DIRAC can be amazing!
Why didn't you just say so?!

If making people laugh is your goal, I must say that you´re very good at this...

 

[amirm]

Finally, as per your promise(?), if you show me another AVR with DIRAC (any brand will do, I´m a fan of DIRAC, not NAD), for less than $1500, with much better measurements, I would thank you, would buy it, and promise to never, ever come back again to your site, as diverging opinions here are not well regarded.

We tolerate dissent more than any forum I know. To wit, I registered on AVS Forum last week to answer protests like yours and they instantly erased my registration. Didn't even tell me why. One minute I could log in, the next morning I was gone.

What we are telling you is that we as I and the community serve a purpose. That is, deeply look under the skin of these products and tell you if they are well engineered or not. We are uniquely equipped to do so. You have me with tons of free time, equipment and experience applied. You have membership that cares enough to send such gear in. Join us in making sure the effort generates results rather than claiming victim this way.

 

[BDWoody]

Well, DAC, THD, SINAD, were tested. So, review was goaled towards sound performance.


If making people laugh is your goal, I must say that you´re very good at this...

Those are basic measures of competence, not 'sound performance.' It's not fundamentally competent.

 

[xhattan]

We don't know what percentage of people can perceive such distortions. We do know that it the only way to be sure people can't hear them is to perform far higher than this product does. You know, at least to the level of the Apple dongle at $9.

Here is the big picture: the kind of flaws that I found are very easy to fix. Take them one by one:

1. Documentation. Why on earth isn't it documented that the 7.1 analog input is so much more performant than the CD analog input? Why is the CD analog input digitized, and processed without due notice to the user?

2. Audio pipeline. There needs to be a diagram to show all the processing blocks for all inputs and routing. One needs to know if the internal processing is 96 kHz and not waste time feeding it 192 kHz, etc.

3. Audio DSP pipeline needs to be tested to be transparent. No improper resampling. No limiting. No lack of dither, etc. This is mostly software.

4. Hygiene of DAC implementation. I am confident a month of testing and circuit modification would result in far better performance.

NAD cannot hang its hat on Dirac. Anyone can license that. If they want to sell excellence in sound reproduction as their brand represents, then they need to do the above right.

I don't mind your posts specifically. What I mind is the general tendency to cloud the issues here and defend the manufacturer. The outcome will be that the manufacturer would read them, take comfort in the defense, and do nothing.

So if you want to see improved products, it is best to not keep stating the obvious: "oh it has Dirac." We know. I said it in the review. I said it has a big effect. But again, Dirac is not property of NAD. Their job was to build the hardware and software and on that front, I have to give them a failing grade.

Ok. I get it. It´s not really the sound that bothered you, but other shortcomings. I understand it and all this issues (and more) have been extensively debated at the AVS thread.

Have a good one!

 

[xhattan]

We tolerate dissent more than any forum I know. To wit, I registered on AVS Forum last week to answer protests like yours and they instantly erased my registration. Didn't even tell me why. One minute I could log in, the next morning I was gone.

What we are telling you is that we as I and the community serve a purpose. That is, deeply look under the skin of these products and tell you if they are well engineered or not. We are uniquely equipped to do so. You have me with tons of free time, equipment and experience applied. You have membership that cares enough to send such gear in. Join us in making sure the effort generates results rather than claiming victim this way.

Just on curiosity, as I´m new here and haven´t read other reviews. Is there an AVR that has a state of the art calibration (at least Mult XT32) that has nice measurements and costs less than $1000?

 

[peng]

Just on curiosity, as I´m new here and haven´t read other reviews. Is there an AVR that has a state of the art calibration (at least Mult XT32) that has nice measurements and costs less than $1000?

As I mentioned, I am pretty sure the Denon AVR-X3500H, X3600H, Marantz SR5013, SR6013, Yamaha RX-A2080, Onkyo TX-RZ820 will measure better than the NAD. However, that's just my expectation based on the S&V reviews on the T758 V3, and also based what I saw on the schematic diagrams and block diagrams of the T777 and the 2017 Denon/Marantz AVRs. Until at least one of those are measured, we don't know for sure. Hopefully someone will send Amir one of those as I doubt he would buy one for $599-$699 from Amazon.com. Technically speaking, he can get it in and test it right away, then return it, but I do not believe he would do such a thing.

By the way, I just did my first experiment using Dirac Live with my separate preamp/power amp, very impressed with the user interface, no time to do AB comparison yet.

 

[audimus]

I understand it and all this issues (and more) have been extensively debated at the AVS thread.

Have a good one!

I am not so sure about the “understand it” bit or the “extensively debated” given you just posted this on AVSforum

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/2895049-nad-758-v3-321.html#post58539810

I can confirmed[sic], as per Amir himself admitted, that all testing was done without any calibration by DIRAC. Guys at that site are really agressive when you disagree with their guru. I told them to give the NAD a try as DIRAC could maybe override the pretty bad distorsion [sic] measurements. And a guy over there that works at DIRAC confirmed that, indeed, linear distorsions [sic] would be overrided [sic]. They said the Arcam was better, and didn´t even considered the difference in price. Really obtuse people.

If you read any thread here that you are not vested in, you will find a lot of dissent and debate. If there is any intolerance, it is for ignorant debate. Such as spouting off on things, where it is obvious to most that you have no idea what you are talking about like “linear distorsions” or what Dirac really does. AVSforum is a lot more tolerant of such things and posts like the above given that is more of a norm there than here. To each, his own.

And Amir is labeled a well-known “Internet agitator” in that thread and said like it is a bad thing.

 

[BDWoody]

Ok. I get it. It´s not really the sound that bothered you, but other shortcomings. I understand it and all this issues (and more) have been extensively debated at the AVS thread.

Have a good one!

 

[peng]

Of course Dirac can/will correct linear distortions (FR), that is a main function/objective of room EQ programs, whether it is Dirac, Audyssey, Trinnov, YPAO, Anthem ARC or others that work.

 

[T3RIAD]

Damn, this disappoints me as I was thinking the T758 would be my next purchase.

Having established that all AVRs are basically crap, does anyone know of a way to get Atmos, Dirac, and a decent DAC into the same system without doing an A-to-D conversion?

Are there Blu-ray players that will decode Atmos and output 7.1.4 channels of digital PCM?