• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

NAD M10 Streaming Amplifier Review

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
2,116
Likes
2,781
Wait until you set up Dirac. Life-changing if you're careful with the measurement process.
I have Dirac in my main system SHD with 2 channels from an NAD M27. I find it does a very good job. This system in the living room needs to play well with video sources in addition to Roon and just work. So far so good.
 

panther

Active Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
173
Likes
50
Anyone use the Bluetooth to pair with headphones? I tried that with the head d3045 and it was terrible for actually pairing even a foot away and there was lag when watching movies with the sound not being in synch with on screen. Just wondering if the newer standard of BT in the m10 is better. I guess it also depends on the headphones being used.
 

stren

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Messages
253
Likes
298
Any thoughts on the M32 - you can get them used for similar price to the M10 but I think you get the 400W ncore instead of the 250. Do you miss out on anything else?

Obviously shd + purifi/ncore would be measure better than the equivalent nad but there's certainly something nice to having one box.
 

Dj7675

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 12, 2019
Messages
2,116
Likes
2,781
Any thoughts on the M32 - you can get them used for similar price to the M10 but I think you get the 400W ncore instead of the 250. Do you miss out on anything else?

Obviously shd + purifi/ncore would be measure better than the equivalent nad but there's certainly something nice to having one box.
I don't think the M32 has Dirac like the M10 or M33 do. For a one box solution, room correction would be a must for me.
 

keith_h

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
38
Likes
40
What is reviewed here is how it measures. Nowhere do I see how it sounds or anything significant about the user experience.

Being a person who wanted specifically small form factor with the streaming capability, I acquired the M10 to work with PSB Imagine mini speakers and PSB sub. The M10 has plenty of power to light them up and sounds great. The only input is an ethernet cable and yet I have access to what must be most of the music ever made.

It resides in a cabinet with the door closed and the interface is not used as the M10 is not visible. The display is turned off as a result. It's driven entirely from a tablet or phone using the BluOS app from the listening position. It's a substantially better user experience than the Yamaha device and its MusicCast app that preceded it (RN602). And given its been slotted in behind the same speakers, the difference is not just noticeable but abundantly obvious without Dirac. Dirac elevates the listening experience further. Yes, huge price difference, but definitely worth it, it sounds great in the small space where its been installed.

We can only speculate on decisions taken on determining the underpinnings during development, however it seems to me that companies like NAD are becoming integrators, assembling suitable technologies from which to create their product rather than design and build from scratch. Part of the cost then will typically be licensing for technologies used. Elsewhere in this thread that's been touched on. When you take that into consideration, plus the time and pixie dust NAD invested in pulling the M10 together this is a product that makes good sense for someone like myself. It's at the top end of similar products pricewise, but its performance and user experience from the listening position justify the perceived premium, in my view anyway. Does anyone actually pay the MRRP?

Even unboxing is a top end experience compared the the brown box and styrofoam you get with Yamaha for example. Marketing? For sure. Additional cost compared to brown box packaging? Almost certainly. It's created a lasting impression though.

While not dismissing the measurements, in real life none of those measures are impacting the user experience. Those who condemn a device based on numbers alone may be missing the point.
 
Last edited:

keith_h

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
38
Likes
40
I am surprised no one has commented on the neat trick in this unit for removing the ESS IMD hump by creating a hump for almost the entire range. :)

Dirac provides a simple way to not just correct for room acoustics, but to tailor the sound to your liking. Tone controls are so yesterday. ;)
 

keith_h

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
38
Likes
40

Thanks for sharing the link, it was an interesting read. What was lacking was a indepth critical analysis of numbers which, turns out, probably would have made no difference to the outcome. There was just a comparison of the listening experience and a few other pertinent usability observations.

The reviewer indicates that in their view there is not much between them despite a broad spread in reported power output, but their choice was the Lyngdorf. I'm guessing it would be hard to go wrong with any of them, but the key differentiator would be an individual preference for the interaction via the preferred controller and how one felt about the sound.

I was surprised to see that the reviewer couldn't hear a difference from the M10 post Dirac. But this is life with reviews. You get the observations of a particular user based on their own experience.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
16
Likes
5
Does anyone know if the nad automatically digitizes the analog input or if it just passes it to the amp section as analog?
 

VintageFlanker

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
4,940
Likes
19,692
Location
Paris
What is reviewed here is how it measures. Nowhere do I see how it sounds or anything significant about the user experience.
While not dismissing the measurements, in real life, none of those measures are impacting the user experience .
Sure, THD+N Vs Power, (or just power for what matters) has absolutely no relevance for user experience. Really none.:facepalm:
Those who condemn a device based on numbers alone may be missing the point
Which point is this, exactly?
 

keith_h

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
38
Likes
40
Sure, THD+N Vs Power, (or just power for what matters) has absolutely no relevance for user experience. Really none.:facepalm:

Which point is this, exactly?

This is a site intended to to review technical performance based on measurements. From the testing, we can see that the technical performance is better than some, not as good as the very best, and with sufficient power to fill a small room with good quality sound at a decent volume. I think we can agree that its good to know and there are any number of devices fitting that technical assessment.

But this device is packaged for a modern user experience. Here, NAD are technology integrators, combining licensed amp modules, responsive touch screen interface wrapped in BluOS, Dirac embedded to thoroughly uplift the music reproduction (how do you measure that?), all packaged into a small box. It's possible to operate without it being physically touched at all. It doesn't even need to be on display. It makes a powerful compact system entirely feasible and is a very different user experience to a rack full of gear.

And while user experience is not a thing easily measured, its surely going to be as important to some if not more so than raw numbers which is just part of the story.

That's the point.
 

keith_h

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2021
Messages
38
Likes
40
Right, agreed I guess with respect to change in measured frequency response, but I was alluding to a more subjective assessment. Reviewers who have enabled Dirac tend to speak enthusiastically about the effect, but its situational being a room correction tool and of course needs the same speakers, speaker placement and so forth. Some have even said they noted no difference which I find a bit suss or didn't like the result which I can understand. Plus the curves can be modified to provide a sound that better suits a personal inclination more like a sophisticated tone control. There is no out of the box like for like comparison with Dirac.

Given there are so many variables with Dirac, including a users' environment and experience in configuring/calibrating, I doubt its possible to determine a test that is meaningful for devices so equipped. It might be possible to use the same curve/s I suppose, but there needs to also be a listening test using the same speakers and this is going to be entirely subjective. Lets assume the standard 6db Harmon curve is used as a reference using the same speakers in the same position in the same room, whose to say how its going to measure or sound on different systems? Only performing the test and the experience gathered will help understand if that's a suitable methodology.

My own Dirac experience is that I've had to tweak the curve to deal with what seems to be some sort of design oversight whereby the sub output level is insufficient to wake the sub at low volumes. I've boosted the curve 10db below 80Hz :oops: which provides a sufficient signal to wake the sub and then balanced the sub output with the sensitivity control. Nothing below 80 goes to the speakers so that approach isn't an issue for them. It's a brute force approach but works. John Darko has had the curve tweaked somehow to "warm" the sound which suits his listening preference. Lots of variables mean challenges in devising meaningful tests.

Again, potentially numbers not telling the whole story I suspect.
 
Top Bottom