NAD T778 Audio/Video Receiver (AVR) Review

[voodooless]

Any nad owners upgraded to full dirac licence ie 20 -20khz,any advantage ?

You're saying that for that amount of money you don't even get the full Dirac package ?

 

[Chromatischism]

I have had the Denon 8500 marantz 8012 and av7705 with lexicon gx7 power amp, Anthem 720, lexicon rv9 arcam 850. Now I have the nad T778 and it sounds better than all of them for music and films. So the measurements don't mean anything to me.

How about without Dirac?

 

[Matyam]

You're saying that for that amount of money you don't even get the full Dirac package ?

Whats another $99 when you're in this far.

 

[Nucky]

How about without Dirac?

Without Dirac it sounded better and with it it was better again.

 

[Vasr]

So your "shade of black" comment was meant to be insulting. Thanks for clarifying.

Why would pointing out irony be necessarily insulting?

I was highlighting how vacuous the following declaration is

Absolutely. If there was a better box with Dirac for $3k or less, I would be all over it. Reality is, theres not.

Since no two AVRs are exactly alike, there would never be a "better box" for someone already vested in one. If the situation was reversed, a Lexicon fanboy would have said that the NAD is a joke for $1k more with no overlay display, no remote other than a phone or whatever was different about it and excusing any shortfall in its measurements by saying there is nothing with Dirac at $2k level.

You are not alone in this. Every time, there is a less than stellar measurement for a brand with a brand-identity following, people descend here with the same type of devotional fervor. Cute, actually.

As someone who has owned NAD in the past, this new NAD is a big disappointment. While they were not perfect, NAD used to stand for good audio engineering without having to pay a ransom. Now, it is just the opposite.

Is there anything in this unit that you can point to and honestly say "ah, that is good engineering"? Are they building anything that a company like Sonos couldn't have put together if they had the inclination? It is now "ah, that is poor engineering.. but what about Dirac?"

 

[Matyam]

Take a look at my M10 review in AudioXpress for details.

Very very interesting, totally agree even with my sub par avr great to listen to music new lease of life.

 

[Vasr]

You're saying that for that amount of money you don't even get the full Dirac package ?

That is a Dirac business model. It is like software makers that bundle a lite version with a PC to get the upsell/upgrade and subscriber relationship they can monetize later. That is factored into their licensing costs to hardware manufacturers.

 

[Matyam]

Why would pointing out irony be necessarily insulting?

I was highlighting how vacuous the following declaration is

Since no two AVRs are exactly alike, there would never be a "better box" for someone already vested in one. If the situation was reversed, a Lexicon fanboy would have said that the NAD is a joke for $1k more with no overlay display, no remote other than a phone or whatever was different about it and excusing any shortfall in its measurements by saying there is nothing with Dirac at $2k level.

You are not alone in this. Every time, there is a less than stellar measurement for a brand with a brand-identity following, people descend here with the same type of devotional fervor. Cute, actually.

As someone who has owned NAD in the past, this new NAD is a big disappointment. While they were not perfect, NAD used to stand for good audio engineering without having to pay a ransom. Now, it is just the opposite.

Is there anything in this unit that you can point to and honestly say "ah, that is good engineering"? Are they building anything that a company like Sonos couldn't have put together if they had the inclination? It is now "ah, that is poor engineering.. but what about Dirac?"

And when did you listen to one in your room ?

 

[Matyam]

There's nowt as deaf as those who won't hear.

 

[Brian6751]

Why would pointing out irony be necessarily insulting?

I was highlighting how vacuous the following declaration is

Since no two AVRs are exactly alike, there would never be a "better box" for someone already vested in one. If the situation was reversed, a Lexicon fanboy would have said that the NAD is a joke for $1k more with no overlay display, no remote other than a phone or whatever was different about it and excusing any shortfall in its measurements by saying there is nothing with Dirac at $2k level.

You are not alone in this. Every time, there is a less than stellar measurement for a brand with a brand-identity following, people descend here with the same type of devotional fervor. Cute, actually.

As someone who has owned NAD in the past, this new NAD is a big disappointment. While they were not perfect, NAD used to stand for good audio engineering without having to pay a ransom. Now, it is just the opposite.

Is there anything in this unit that you can point to and honestly say "ah, that is good engineering"? Are they building anything that a company like Sonos couldn't have put together if they had the inclination? It is now "ah, that is poor engineering.. but what about Dirac?"

More insults. Bye

 

[amirm]

No It can't but in the real world away from a lab the nad amplification is good enough when you take into account dirac can correct for imperfect rooms imperfect speakers ,ears that are not 21 anymore,we don't live in a perfect environment, it may not measure brilliantly and fair play you can hold manufacturers to account spot on.

Most of the tests are at 1 kHz so age has nothing to do with issues there.

 

[Thomas savage]

Can we remain civil please, there's no need to throw mud at each other.

 

[tparm]

Amir, many thanks for this review. Also thanks to @Lonestar1027 for supplying the T778 - without both of them this wouldn’t be possible and we were all stuck with worthless reviews. I will make a donation soon.

I think it’s still strange to see a 3000 dollar device struggle with basic audio stuff. Is it the amount of built in amplifiers? Is multi-channel so hard to do right? Cutting costs at the wrong point? Bad engineering?

If what @voodooless claims is right:



...then this is a real shame at this price-point!

So what I was afraid of, happened: a dissapointing review.

That said, I’m still not sure what to do:
- buy this T778 and think of it as “good enough”. Maybe dirac and an average sound quality will still be satisfying.
- buy a Denon X4700H, save 1500 bucks and forget about dirac and BluOS.

Oh boy.

I own the X4700 and love it. If you want BluOS (and can use Ethernet) you can find a Bluesound Node 2 (not 2i) for less than $400. I bought an Audiolab 6000N and run it analog as it sounds better to me than HEOS or the Node. For what its worth....

I owned the infamous T758 V3 and found the NAD to be super quirky and less than reliable. I am surprised more folks aren't commenting on the coax input not even functioning..... that's a problem.

 

[Urgo]

Really, I see you very defensive and you don't have to feel threatened by independent measurements like Amirm's.
Do not take too much into account some comments on this forum, they are personal impressions as in any other audio forum.

It is intended that we know the real performance of our receivers, and that these results are public so that brands can care more about improving their products in this world of marketing.
Let them not continue to sell us heaven for earth, and I am not saying this at all for this specific model.

Knowing the true specifications is a very valuable help for consumers, which is all of us. With this objective information, which we did not have before, our purchase will be more selective, thus demanding that they improve performance, if this is the problem.
I think this is a great contribution and the value of measurements.

Do not forget that many of the users of this forum have seen how our models have equally poor measurements.

 

[Billy Budapest]

Again, same principle applies. If the signal is below the noise floor that you cant hear, then you wont be able to hear the signal either. Nothing gets obliterated.

Sure, it gets obliterated—it is masked, laid over, superimposed, whatever you want to call it. Your point is that if the music signal is at, say, -80dB, you are not going to hear it so it doesn’t matter if it is drowned out by noise. That’s true, it won’t matter to some people. But the noise still does obliterate the signal. Some people are interested in achieving the highest fidelity possible to the source, and they are the ones reaching for technical perfection. Other people just want something to sound good but aren’t interested in fidelity. That’s fine, too, but I imagine it’s not what most readers of ASR are after.

 

[Dmitri]

Not arguing the QC with you as we both agree. My disagreement with your statement is that Dirac is used to fix poor measurements of the AVR which it doesnt. Dirac is a room correction facility to try and solve some speaker placement room interaction anomalies. Its not designed to overcome poor frequency response of the AVR. I agree with you that poor frequency response of the AVR would hamper Dirac's ability to correct. Poor AVR frequency response would also hamper any other room correction facility. They are still mutually exclusive. Room EQ is used to fix room anomalies, not poor frequency response of the AVR itself.

Of course Dirac is not supposed to fix poor frequency response in the amp section. That’s exactly what I’m saying. Dirac is for room equalization only. I’m well aware of that, and am not confusing it’s purpose. But Dirac works by interpreting audio sweeps, which would be affected by an amps poor frequency response. So, in the process of mitigating the room effects, it is also correcting equalization deficiencies in the amp. Dirac does not know the difference. That’s not what it’s meant to do, but ultimately it ends up doing it anyway. If I’m wrong, am not understanding how Dirac interprets the sweeps and somehow can see through an amps inability to m/n a flat response between 20Hz to 20kHz in the course of doing so then correct me. Otherwise, Dirac is inadvertently correcting the amp’s frequency response at the same time it is adjusting eq for the the room. Not what it’s for, but that’s what will happen. By definition, room eq and an amps frequency response are mutually exclusive. In practice, variations in an amps frequency response will be corrected by the room eq’s algorithms along with the room’s deficiencies as it is dependent on the signal sweeps from an imperfect source.

All this learning stuff makes for an interesting journey, no? ; )

 

[peng]

In regular use, the fan is incredibly quiet and I couldn't even tell it was on until I put my hand back there. Although it has a mesh grill, I believe that is just meant to keep fingers and wires out. The fan is used for exhaust and you can feel the hotter air coming from the grill.

The unit Amir tested was mine and it's definitely been interesting seeing all of the measurements and subsequent comments. Although the results are not quite what I hoped for, I have no intention of returning the unit. The screen is slick, DIRAC sounds great, and there is nothing else out there right now with all of these features without jumping up to the HTP-1 and a set of amps.

Thank you very much.

 

[Dmitri]

Do not forget that many of the users of this forum have seen how our models have equally poor measurements.

Yeah, ain’t that the truth. ; )

 

[Chromatischism]

If I’m wrong

I don't think you are. Dirac will work based off a target, and the frequency response of the amps will be part of what it measures and thus makes correction filters for.

 

[Matyam]

I have both the t778 and the pe2200, but unlike yourselves I actually listen to music through both of them and all your convoluting doesn't alter the fact that the 778 sounds better in THE REAL WORLD, cute gosh thanks.