Interested to see how NAD T778 measures and performs

[Puddingbuks]

You’re my hero.

 

[starfly]

Received the unit yesterday, dropping it off this afternoon for testing. I'll probably hook it up and listen to it for a bit before reading the review in case the headless panther makes an appearance.

Probably a good idea, haha Looking forward to those measurements, hopefully Amir can prioritze this one. A lot of interest in AVRs.

 

[nick-v]

I'll be very interested to see the review.

Interestingly, I have a T758 v3 in my bedroom system driving some excellent BG Radia in-walls. I can't correrlate how good the system sounds to how terribly the T758 measures, maybe because Dirac is so good? Hopefully this one has been competently engineered, fingers crossed.

 

[iLoveCats]

I predict a headless Panther incoming, but your sacrifice for the AVR sound quality campaign will be remembered.

 

[Karl 22]

Stay Away - Very Important


My first experience with the NAD T778

Iv’e texted NAD concerning hardware issues as well as software issues.
My NAD T778 has now been returned to the dealer for service.

- Occasionally the front panel on the receiver won’t show on start-up.

- I’m losing picture through the HDMI-switch when playing PS4/XBOX ONE S.

- There’s also a software issue that’s been confirmed by NAD. Some of the saved pre-sets on DIRAC sometimes get lost.

- The receiver is highly sensitive after disconnection the main power-cord, even though I’ve shut the main power button on the back of the receiver first. After the receiver been without power for a day, (and not in standby) – It’s acting strange. Sometimes for security reasons, I’ve unplugged the receiver during a thunderstorm.

- When shifting movies with different formats, the receiver won’t switch between the different formats automatically.

- The receiver eventually shut down, and wouldn’t start up and went completely dead.

This is a receiver for about 3000 euro, and the build quality is really crap. The sound quality is some of the best I’ve ever heard. But the build quality is really disappointing. I’ve asked my local dealer to tell me where It’s manufactured (China, or other country in Asia) But he could not give me a sufficient answer) Please text the following critique to NAD. The build quality is really disappointing. Not ready for market at this price.

Please look at customers reviews on Cruchfield

Build quality put's it to shame

The thing is; NAD T777 was sold out in Sweden at the time I bought the NAD T778.

Like all new models from NAD; especially the receivers; they suffer from what we call in Swedish: “Barnsjukdomar”, translating: “The diseases affecting a newborns during their first year”.

This is no excuse. The company sells NAD T778 at a hefty price: 3000 euro, and refer to it “Their reference avr”. I’m having a hard time figuring out what’s so special about it?

The specs are there, as well as the sound quality, but mine has broken down after only two months.

I grew up during the 80-ties, with my dad buying “The Monitor Series”. At the time NAD was a brand to be reckon with! There’s been no problem with this power-amp, expected from a faulty left channel after 30 years, and which can be expected, as well as forgiven.

f you read about the NAD T747 you’ll probably see that it was actually Philips receiver disguised in a NAD box. The same goes for NAD Silverline S300, and where customers eventually found out that it was a Gryphon.

NAD today is still selling their established concept “Music First” but they’ve been sloppy ever since the early 2000.

My father bought the NAD T754, and had to return it due to a bad subwoofer output. The subwoofer was making terrible noises even though not receiving a signal.personally owned the NAD T753v2, and was experiencing hum in several speakers.

The dealer later discovered how internal cables was moving freely inside several of these receivers delivered from the factory; and how the cables unfortunately got in contact with sensitive components inside the avr. So as a result of this: NAD decided to put all their sensitive components on separate circuit boards instead. I had to return this unit for a brand new one, and this was 2005 I think?

I got in contact with another customer with a different problem: The NAD T787. The owner told med about this unforgiving hum due to two oversized trafos, which was too big to function properly inside the smaller box. The customed sent the unit back to NAD several times, but never got it performing the way it should.

So why am I still buying in to the company’s concept? I guess it’s due to the nostalgia.

As a kid I grew up with their “no nonsense philosophy”. My first integrated amp was the NAD 3020, a great sounding receiver for a 16 year old getting his first hifi-gear ever.

NAD today is just another sloppy brand, which has been compromised – buing low level components from other manufactures. I guess this what happens after hifi-brand’s been around for a couple of decades.

I don’t think I’ll settle for a new unit, and with great sadness leaving NAD for Denon instead.

 

[Karl 22]

Crutchfiled Reviews of the NAD T778

https://www.crutchfield.com/S-lmbLdELdxh2/p_745T778/NAD-T-778.html

 

[Jukebox]

Received the unit yesterday, dropping it off this afternoon for testing. I'll probably hook it up and listen to it for a bit before reading the review in case the headless panther makes an appearance.

That's a great news! Was waiting for this review since I currently have sold my former Marantz receiver and thinking between Denon x3700 +power Amp vs T778. This review should make the decision much easier.
Thanks for the effort to provide this receiver for review and let's hope for a friendly panther!
Really love dirac+bluOS+big display+class D Amp combo and I would prefer it over the 2 box solution with Denon

 

[3dbinCanada]

I wont touch NAD. Their build quality and reliability is absolute sh?te. I like their sound but their QC is dreadful

 

[Martin]

“Designed and engineered in Canada, custom manufactured to NAD specifications in China.”

Either their Canadian engineering is flawed, the NAD specs provided to the Chinese manufacturer are crap, and/or QC is non-existent.

Martin

 

[3dbinCanada]

“Designed and engineered in Canada, custom manufactured to NAD specifications in China.”

Either their Canadian engineering is flawed, the NAD specs provided to the Chinese manufacturer are crap, and/or QC is non-existent.

Martin

You wont see the same QC problems with Yamaha as they own their own manufacturing plants.

 

[starfly]

Any ETA on when @amirm might publish this review?

 

[NirreFirre]

Having a similar experience (long term) as well (Sweden, a 302 in ~1994) with NAD and Hifiklubben (monopoly NAD retailer) I would like to +1 this post. Being beta testers of non functional, overpriced and sketchy "engineered" boxes have to stop. We should all print hundreds of copies of Amir's graphs and conclusions when they arrive and secretly add them into every NAD retail stores at various seats, marketing material etc. Adding the T758v3 review for the track recordability and the brand's ability to learn and "improve"

On the 778, the old, low end, Hypex UcD102 was a bit popular for space constrained projects in the diyaudio world around 2011-12... The datasheet tells us this is no 85W amp, more like 40W@8Ohm (8 is where it's at, no?)

And power to THD@8Ohm (1 channel driven I suppose) is looking..bad by today's class D standard.

I like to use multiple ways but Rotel's way of speccing their amps (at least the ones I own), at 0.03% and 1kHz is imho a good balance so this "reference" AVR is starting to audible distort at pretty low levels, no where near adequate for reproduce the dynamics of an orchestra or live arena concert

FWIW, my two Anaview AMS1000 modules (datasheet) are around the nc400 and nc500 measurement-wise. Way better than this but also 5+ years old. We all know why NAD went for small, old and "ok"..don't we?

Another marketing run of the mill box, ridden with severe hard- and software bugs at release. As an engineer, I would be ashamed to see my work (probaby a few young systems engineer, not EE or trained in audio reproduction electronics but good at financially optimize commercial off the shelf lego parts in an "attractive" case)

Sorry for my first post here went on to be such a rant, for a product not even tested yet, I will donate now to make up for it

Stay Away - Very Important


My first experience with the NAD T778

Iv’e texted NAD concerning hardware issues as well as software issues.
My NAD T778 has now been returned to the dealer for service.

- Occasionally the front panel on the receiver won’t show on start-up.

- I’m losing picture through the HDMI-switch when playing PS4/XBOX ONE S.

- There’s also a software issue that’s been confirmed by NAD. Some of the saved pre-sets on DIRAC sometimes get lost.

- The receiver is highly sensitive after disconnection the main power-cord, even though I’ve shut the main power button on the back of the receiver first. After the receiver been without power for a day, (and not in standby) – It’s acting strange. Sometimes for security reasons, I’ve unplugged the receiver during a thunderstorm.

- When shifting movies with different formats, the receiver won’t switch between the different formats automatically.

- The receiver eventually shut down, and wouldn’t start up and went completely dead.

This is a receiver for about 3000 euro, and the build quality is really crap. The sound quality is some of the best I’ve ever heard. But the build quality is really disappointing. I’ve asked my local dealer to tell me where It’s manufactured (China, or other country in Asia) But he could not give me a sufficient answer) Please text the following critique to NAD. The build quality is really disappointing. Not ready for market at this price.

Please look at customers reviews on Cruchfield

Build quality put's it to shame

The thing is; NAD T777 was sold out in Sweden at the time I bought the NAD T778.

Like all new models from NAD; especially the receivers; they suffer from what we call in Swedish: “Barnsjukdomar”, translating: “The diseases affecting a newborns during their first year”.

This is no excuse. The company sells NAD T778 at a hefty price: 3000 euro, and refer to it “Their reference avr”. I’m having a hard time figuring out what’s so special about it?

The specs are there, as well as the sound quality, but mine has broken down after only two months.

I grew up during the 80-ties, with my dad buying “The Monitor Series”. At the time NAD was a brand to be reckon with! There’s been no problem with this power-amp, expected from a faulty left channel after 30 years, and which can be expected, as well as forgiven.

f you read about the NAD T747 you’ll probably see that it was actually Philips receiver disguised in a NAD box. The same goes for NAD Silverline S300, and where customers eventually found out that it was a Gryphon.

NAD today is still selling their established concept “Music First” but they’ve been sloppy ever since the early 2000.

My father bought the NAD T754, and had to return it due to a bad subwoofer output. The subwoofer was making terrible noises even though not receiving a signal.personally owned the NAD T753v2, and was experiencing hum in several speakers.

The dealer later discovered how internal cables was moving freely inside several of these receivers delivered from the factory; and how the cables unfortunately got in contact with sensitive components inside the avr. So as a result of this: NAD decided to put all their sensitive components on separate circuit boards instead. I had to return this unit for a brand new one, and this was 2005 I think?

I got in contact with another customer with a different problem: The NAD T787. The owner told med about this unforgiving hum due to two oversized trafos, which was too big to function properly inside the smaller box. The customed sent the unit back to NAD several times, but never got it performing the way it should.

So why am I still buying in to the company’s concept? I guess it’s due to the nostalgia.

As a kid I grew up with their “no nonsense philosophy”. My first integrated amp was the NAD 3020, a great sounding receiver for a 16 year old getting his first hifi-gear ever.

NAD today is just another sloppy brand, which has been compromised – buing low level components from other manufactures. I guess this what happens after hifi-brand’s been around for a couple of decades.

I don’t think I’ll settle for a new unit, and with great sadness leaving NAD for Denon instead.

 

[starfly]

Having a similar experience (long term) as well (Sweden, a 302 in ~1994) with NAD and Hifiklubben (monopoly NAD retailer) I would like to +1 this post. Being beta testers of non functional, overpriced and sketchy "engineered" boxes have to stop. We should all print hundreds of copies of Amir's graphs and conclusions when they arrive and secretly add them into every NAD retail stores at various seats, marketing material etc. Adding the T758v3 review for the track recordability and the brand's ability to learn and "improve"

On the 778, the old, low end, Hypex UcD102 was a bit popular for space constrained projects in the diyaudio world around 2011-12... The datasheet tells us this is no 85W amp, more like 40W@8Ohm (8 is where it's at, no?)
View attachment 78910
And power to THD@8Ohm (1 channel driven I suppose) is looking..bad by today's class D standard.
View attachment 78911
I like to use multiple ways but Rotel's way of speccing their amps (at least the ones I own), at 0.03% and 1kHz is imho a good balance so this "reference" AVR is starting to audible distort at pretty low levels, no where near adequate for reproduce the dynamics of an orchestra or live arena concert

FWIW, my two Anaview AMS1000 modules (datasheet) are around the nc400 and nc500 measurement-wise. Way better than this but also 5+ years old. We all know why NAD went for small, old and "ok"..don't we?

Another marketing run of the mill box, ridden with severe hard- and software bugs at release. As an engineer, I would be ashamed to see my work (probaby a few young systems engineer, not EE or trained in audio reproduction electronics but good at financially optimize commercial off the shelf lego parts in an "attractive" case)

Sorry for my first post here went on to be such a rant, for a product not even tested yet, I will donate now to make up for it

Yeah, it's a real shame that so many companies in the audio world peddle sub-par products based on brand recognition alone. The subjectivist approach to hifi has made this relatively easy to do for decades, but I truly think that what @amirm is doing here is a true service to audiophiles as it provides hard evidence for how a product performs and can hold all these manufacturers accountable.

Take for example Schitt. For years marketed as excellent audio gear, especially for the price, but once amir started measuring them that whole story fell apart. But, they eventually went back to the drawing board and re-engineered their products and now they truly do perform great.

I'm hoping we'll start to see more and more of this. I was always told NAD makes excellent audio equipment, but the measurements say otherwise.

Especially for gear such as DACs and amps, subjectivity has absolutely no place.

 

[peng]

Having a similar experience (long term) as well (Sweden, a 302 in ~1994) with NAD and Hifiklubben (monopoly NAD retailer) I would like to +1 this post. Being beta testers of non functional, overpriced and sketchy "engineered" boxes have to stop. We should all print hundreds of copies of Amir's graphs and conclusions when they arrive and secretly add them into every NAD retail stores at various seats, marketing material etc. Adding the T758v3 review for the track recordability and the brand's ability to learn and "improve"

On the 778, the old, low end, Hypex UcD102 was a bit popular for space constrained projects in the diyaudio world around 2011-12... The datasheet tells us this is no 85W amp, more like 40W@8Ohm (8 is where it's at, no?)
View attachment 78910
And power to THD@8Ohm (1 channel driven I suppose) is looking..bad by today's class D standard.
View attachment 78911

Good information, thanks, but are you sure the NAD T778 uses the Hypex UcD102, and your source is?

 

[NirreFirre]

Yes, see PCB (2019-08-24 date) and details here: https://www.avsforum.com/threads/the-official-nad-t-778-thread.3123286/post-59956138
Color, closed instead of open coils seems to be the difference in the version opened in the linked Taiwanese thread.

Good information, thanks, but are you sure the NAD T778 uses the Hypex UcD102, and your source is?

 

[Martin]

Yes, see PCB (2019-08-24 date) and details here: https://www.avsforum.com/threads/the-official-nad-t-778-thread.3123286/post-59956138
Color, closed instead of open coils seems to be the difference in the version opened in the linked Taiwanese thread.

So there are 10 channels of amplification in the NAD and only 9 being utilized. It would be nice to have the 10th available.

Martin

 

[Phorze]

Yes, see PCB (2019-08-24 date) and details here: https://www.avsforum.com/threads/the-official-nad-t-778-thread.3123286/post-59956138
Color, closed instead of open coils seems to be the difference in the version opened in the linked Taiwanese thread.

Also in the taiwanese review:

Observed from the circuit board, the words UcD102 V1 are printed on it, but I checked the relevant information on the Hypex official website and found that the power of T 778 is much larger than that of the "normal version" UcD102, and the capacitors and inductors used for low-pass filtering of the output section are different. So I'm pretty sure it is a "special edition" made by Hypex in accordance with NAD's T 778 performance requirements. Hypex UcD originally reserved room for audio manufacturers to play freely. Not only can they be customized according to requirements, but designers can also develop their own balanced buffer amplifier circuits for the "head section" of the power amplifier circuit. Here, five NADs are used with low noise and low noise. Distortion characteristics, FET input TI OPA1654 (4 OPA chip) is used as the input buffer amplification of the rear stage of this machine.

So it seems your earlier comment about the UcD102 might be jumping to conclusions a bit. Honestly i hope you're wrong and these measure differently (better). As i have already purchased this unit last week, but i also do not have enough time to listen to it, i am awaiting amirm's review to decide if i keep it or not.. (got a newborn since last week, no time to listen)

 

[Dj7675]

I'll be very interested to see the review.

Interestingly, I have a T758 v3 in my bedroom system driving some excellent BG Radia in-walls. I can't correrlate how good the system sounds to how terribly the T758 measures, maybe because Dirac is so good? Hopefully this one has been competently engineered, fingers crossed.

On the 758 V3.. The SINAD is horrible at 2V. In the review thread, it was found if the volume was under -6 I believe, it was better. I think in the high 80s. So if you don’t listen to it too loudly it probably does sound good. I had one in our theater and then moved to our living room and at moderate volumes I found it to sound good.

 

[3dbinCanada]

How is NAD for customer service and warranty?

 

[Doodski]

How is NAD for customer service and warranty?

In one word. E X C E L L E N T! I sold and serviced NAD and from both of those ends NAD (Lenbrook Group) was a pleasure to deal with.