NAD T778 Audio/Video Receiver (AVR) Review

[jomark911]

@amirm I have a question.
Just to clarify this, is the fan sucking air from the top grills and exhausting it out the back?
I ask this because the air filter is at the back right before or after the fan.
I believe the airflow must be from the back where the filter is to the front and leave the box from the top grills.
What do you say?

 

[doodlebro]

Jeeze, am I the only one who is excited for this to drop to $1500-2000 and go through a few software updates to work out kinks?

Of course nobody is buying this at $3000 for performance, but until D&M can work out a licencing deal with Dirac, I'm going to have a hard time going back.

 

[sunandmoon]

Gosh... this is miserable performance and at that price! SMH

 

[snackiac]

Jeeze, am I the only one who is excited for this to drop to $1500-2000 and go through a few software updates to work out kinks?

Based on my couple of years with the NAD T758, I highly doubt they work out the kinks. The ownership threads are constant parade of unacceptable bugs for a consumer product.

 

[Brian6751]

Uh huh.

No, seriously. It's not like I'm talking about cables or some kind of tweak. How are these deficiencies in the measurements audible when in use after Dirac calibration? What other AVR has the feature set of the T778? If you take the best measuring Denon with Audyssey VS. the T778 with Dirac, which one sounds better, regardless of amp and DAC measurements? Isn't that the real question someone looking at this should be asking?

For years, I had given up on having a AVR surround setup that also sounded great in two channel use. The nail in the coffin was the Marantz sr8012. The 8012 is a flagship AVR geared towards sound quality but I did not like how it sounded at all. Yet, I see a lot of people saying they are going with the 8012 over the T778.

I then tried a newer Denon, the x6500. This was a big improvement in sound quality. I could have actually been satisfied with it and would recommend it over the sister sr8012, 100%. Save the money.

But, having used Dirac in some other two channel setups (C658 & M10), I knew I wanted it in my surround setup as well. I also stream most of my music and use Roon. I wanted an AVR that gave me the performance of my M10 for two channel and thats what the 778 does.

NAD is doing some cool stuff with products like the M10 and the T778. I think they deserve some praise for offering customers something other manufacturers don't.

Denon and Marantz have basically been making the same AVR's for over a decade, just adding small new features. They should have the bugs out by now!

NAD comes out with something completely different that sounds better and they get tarred and feathered.

Two sayings come to mind for me. "Not seeing the forest for the trees" and "Perfection is the enemy of progress"

Is there room for improvement? Absolutely. Would I return it for any other AVR that has measured better here? Absolutely NOT.

 

[Dj7675]

Man....I have to jump in here one more time regarding one more product I own.

Guys, this is THE BEST sounding AVR that I have ever heard. That includes against the Denon x4500, x6500, and Marantz sr8012 to name a few.

It sounds every bit as good as my M10 upstairs. I haven't gotten to do a comparison with the same setup but I have absolutely no issue saying I bet I wont hear a difference.

There is no other AVR I would trade the T778 for.

@amirm you probably mentioned it somewhere but, why is there subjective analysis on the speakers tested but not anything else?

I like this site a lot. I think it brings a TON of value to the community but the way people react to these measurement drag races without using or hearing the products is really clouding my opinion of the reviews.

I understand people are going to say what they will say but there is no discourse to a lot of these threads and it really hurts thier value IMO

Many of these products, especially the AVR's, are "more than the sum of their parts" and grading them based souly on the measurements of a few of those parts without contrasting it against its overall realistic performance doesn't reflect upon then properly IMO.

Threads like this will influence some people to choose a Denon x3600 over the T778 thinking they will get a better sounding device and that is simply not true. I dont see how that helps people.

Just a couple of thoughts..
-The word Audibility comes to mind when reading your comments about the sound quality. The DAC measures at a SINAD of 93 and the amps at 80 (Via HDMI). For practical purposes we may be getting into territory where in use things are getting difficult to tell apart under regular use. My preference would be to remove as much noise and distortion from the content I play, but am I certain I could pick out a DAC measuring 93 vs 103 and an amp that measures at 80 vs one measuring 90. Nope I can’t. But maybe I could in some circumstances so I try to shoot for higher all things being equal.
-In regards to the 778 sounding better than a Denon x3600. There are a lot of reasons I think this could be the case.. but expectation bias is certainly something we are all susceptible to. The casework and screen are truly great in my opinion.
-Do I believe there is any way the 778 sounds better than an x3600 with Dirac/Audyssey off? I don’t. Could it sound the same to most people? Yes. I have heard this before, even on the T758 which I had and measures very poorly-and people claim it sounds better even without dirac turned on and this is where you have to start taking anyone’s subjective opinion with a huge grain of salt...
-This takes me to the last big difference between the x3600 and T778 which is Dirac. This is where the biggest difference could be possible for some people. In particular if you prefer to eq full range I think Dirac will do a better job. The default curve makes sense in Dirac and the 2 default curves in Audyssey do not. If you use the Audyssey app you can do pretty well but I still think Dirac would do better doing EQ full range. Lastly, if you limit your EQ to below 300hz, don’t think you could tell them apart if using a similar curve.
-I think the bench test value besides looking at the quality of the DAC and Amps is finding other errors in the design which should not be there in a device of this price point (or any for that matter).
-One thing that I don’t think has been pointed out enough is just how much better this unit measures than the T758. The difference is quite noteworthy but still is falling short of Denon performance.
-While @ $3k many want better it actually is a big step in the right direction. And while this unit has some issues, I don’t think there is any reason to think it shouldn’t sound good to you, in particular with Dirac enabled.

 

[Billy Budapest]

Man....I have to jump in here one more time regarding one more product I own.

Guys, this is THE BEST sounding AVR that I have ever heard. That includes against the Denon x4500, x6500, and Marantz sr8012 to name a few.

It sounds every bit as good as my M10 upstairs. I haven't gotten to do a comparison with the same setup but I have absolutely no issue saying I bet I wont hear a difference.

There is no other AVR I would trade the T778 for.

@amirm you probably mentioned it somewhere but, why is there subjective analysis on the speakers tested but not anything else?

I like this site a lot. I think it brings a TON of value to the community but the way people react to these measurement drag races without using or hearing the products is really clouding my opinion of the reviews.

I understand people are going to say what they will say but there is no discourse to a lot of these threads and it really hurts thier value IMO

Many of these products, especially the AVR's, are "more than the sum of their parts" and grading them based souly on the measurements of a few of those parts without contrasting it against its overall realistic performance doesn't reflect upon then properly IMO.

Threads like this will influence some people to choose a Denon x3600 over the T778 thinking they will get a better sounding device and that is simply not true. I dont see how that helps people.

I think you are in the wrong forum.

 

[starfly]

Even if you absolutely need Dirac, there are a plethora of cheap devices which will do Dirac (MiniDSP comes to mind) that are independent of an AVR, yet can be used with one.

Yeah, though if you want the utmost fidelity, adding a minidsp to the chain will compromise that.

What I plan on doing eventually is build a mini PC, and get Dirac studio which runs as a vst plugin, and then pass any audio through that and send that to a multichannel dac such as the Okto, and then to a separate amp such as Purifi.

And all of that will be cheaper than a NAD AVR (though admittedly less convenient).

 

[Billy Budapest]

No, seriously. It's not like I'm talking about cables or some kind of tweak. How are these deficiencies in the measurements audible when in use after Dirac calibration? What other AVR has the feature set of the T778? If you take the best measuring Denon with Audyssey VS. the T778 with Dirac, which one sounds better, regardless of amp and DAC measurements? Isn't that the real question someone looking at this should be asking?

For years, I had given up on having a AVR surround setup that also sounded great in two channel use. The nail in the coffin was the Marantz sr8012. The 8012 is a flagship AVR geared towards sound quality but I did not like how it sounded at all. Yet, I see a lot of people saying they are going with the 8012 over the T778.

I then tried a newer Denon, the x6500. This was a big improvement in sound quality. I could have actually been satisfied with it and would recommend it over the sister sr8012, 100%. Save the money.

But, having used Dirac in some other two channel setups (C658 & M10), I knew I wanted it in my surround setup as well. I also stream most of my music and use Roon. I wanted an AVR that gave me the performance of my M10 for two channel and thats what the 778 does.

NAD is doing some cool stuff with products like the M10 and the T778. I think they deserve some praise for offering customers something other manufacturers don't.

Denon and Marantz have basically been making the same AVR's for over a decade, just adding small new features. They should have the bugs out by now!

NAD comes out with something completely different that sounds better and they get tarred and feathered.

Two sayings come to mind for me. "Not seeing the forest for the trees" and "Perfection is the enemy of progress"

Is there room for improvement? Absolutely. Would I return it for any other AVR that has measured better here? Absolutely NOT.

This forum is not primarily focused on features, it is focused on performance and as an effect of that, holding manufacturers to their performance claims. In this case, the NAD offers pretty lousy measured performance at a considerable price. If you love it, great. Other potential buyers have been forewarned, and NAD is being held accountable.

 

[Brian6751]

Just a couple of thoughts..
-The word Audibility comes to mind when reading your comments about the sound quality. The DAC measures at a SINAD of 93 and the amps at 80 (Via HDMI). For practical purposes we may be getting into territory where in use things are getting difficult to tell apart under regular use. My preference would be to remove as much noise and distortion from the content I play, but am I certain I could pick out a DAC measuring 93 vs 103 and an amp that measures at 80 vs one measuring 90. Nope I can’t. But maybe I could in some circumstances so I try to shoot for higher all things being equal.
-In regards to the 778 sounding better than a Denon x3600. There are a lot of reasons I think this could be the case.. but expectation bias is certainly something we are all susceptible to. The casework and screen are truly great in my opinion.
-Do I believe there is any way the 778 sounds better than an x3600 with Dirac/Audyssey off? I don’t. Could it sound the same to most people? Yes. I have heard this before, even on the T758 which I had and measures very poorly-and people claim it sounds better even without dirac turned on and this is where you have to start taking anyone’s subjective opinion with a huge grain of salt...
-This takes me to the last big difference between the x3600 and T778 which is Dirac. This is where the biggest difference could be possible for some people. In particular if you prefer to eq full range I think Dirac will do a better job. The default curve makes sense in Dirac and the 2 default curves in Audyssey do not. If you use the Audyssey app you can do pretty well but I still think Dirac would do better doing EQ full range. Lastly, if you limit your EQ to below 300hz, don’t think you could tell them apart if using a similar curve.
-I think the bench test value besides looking at the quality of the DAC and Amps is finding other errors in the design which should not be there in a device of this price point (or any for that matter).
-One thing that I don’t think has been pointed out enough is just how much better this unit measures than the T758. The difference is quite noteworthy but still is falling short of Denon performance.
-While @ $3k many want better it actually is a big step in the right direction. And while this unit has some issues, I don’t think there is any reason to think it shouldn’t sound good to you, in particular with Dirac enabled.

Agree 100%. I think you hit on all the main points.

Dirac and being a Roon endpoint are the two biggest factors for me. I do prefer Dirac full frequency whereas I would always lower Audyssey to around Schroeder frequency range and below. Usually 200-250Hz

I definitely try to avoid expectation bias and the looks are nice but my 778 is in a rack away from the listening area.

Once you get to a certain level of performance, any gains become smaller and smaller. We are not talking huge differences here, just enough to change ones preference. Would the x3600 sound like garbage vs. the 778? Of course not, but the small impact of Dirac and Roon are enough for me. Wether thats enough for someone else to pay the difference will be up to them

 

[Vasr]

What I plan on doing eventually is build a mini PC, and get Dirac studio which runs as a vst plugin, and then pass any audio through that and send that to a multichannel dac such as the Okto, and then to a separate amp such as Purifi.

And all of that will be cheaper than a NAD AVR (though admittedly less convenient).

Been there, done that.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ring-a-pc-as-a-8-ch-pre-pro-experiment.14785/
There are serious limitations on what you can do with it (multiple source inputs, more than 7.1, DRM content, etc), not just lack of convenience.

 

[Brian6751]

I think you are in the wrong forum.

This forum is not primarily focused on features, it is focused on performance and as an effect of that, holding manufacturers to their performance claims. In this case, the NAD offers pretty lousy measured performance at a considerable price. If you love it, great. Other potential buyers have been forewarned, and NAD is being held accountable.

I understand the greatest value Amir's work has is holding manufacturers accountable and pushing them to make better performing products. I appreciate that.

Sometimes the measured performance does not equate to what someone would prefer in use.

I think this context is important but often gets lost here.

 

[Vasr]

-I think the bench test value besides looking at the quality of the DAC and Amps is finding other errors in the design which should not be there in a device of this price point (or any for that matter).

Agree. If you wanted to use Dirac (which appears to be its main and almost the only selling point for "good sound") on an analog input, I would say it is actually crippled with its analog input handling. This is not something you would expect in 2020.

To me, there is no need for that kind of sloppy engineering. Why would that give you confidence that similar engineering sloppiness (or marketing compromises) wouldn't result in operational problems later on with this unit that Dirac can't fix - broken relays, deteriorating capacitors, firmware issues in codecs, buzzing chassis/boards, etc., etc not covered in the testing.

To me, my confidence in NAD as a good engineering company (not that all units were perfect) from the past has been shaken by their approach to pushing out sloppy products in recent history. By licensing Dirac, I don't think they are pushing the boundaries so much that they can be forgiven as teething problems as a pioneer. There is no ground-breaking progress here. Just a different product packaging.

I would much rather buy ATI made product(s) at a higher cost than encourage this push out beta products approach.

 

[Billy Budapest]

Agree 100%. I think you hit on all the main points.

Dirac and being a Roon endpoint are the two biggest factors for me. I do prefer Dirac full frequency whereas I would always lower Audyssey to around Schroeder frequency range and below. Usually 200-250Hz

I definitely try to avoid expectation bias and the looks are nice but my 778 is in a rack away from the listening area.

Once you get to a certain level of performance, any gains become smaller and smaller. We are not talking huge differences here, just enough to change ones preference. Would the x3600 sound like garbage vs. the 778? Of course not, but the small impact of Dirac and Roon are enough for me. Wether thats enough for someone else to pay the difference will be up to them

Gear with poor noise performance is easy to hear. Stick your ear up to a tweeter without any music playing. That’s the high frequency component of the noise floor that all your music has to play through. If I am paying $3000 for a component, it had better pass that “ear test.”

 

[Brian6751]

Gear with poor noise performance is easy to hear. Stick your ear up to a tweeter without any music playing. That’s the high frequency component of the noise floor that all your music has to play through. If I am paying $3000 for a component, it had better pass that “ear test.”

Yeah but you don't normally listen to a system with your ear up to the tweeter and when you are sitting in your seat the room and reflections will have a much greater effect on your experience than any inaudble hiss

 

[starfly]

Been there, done that.
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ring-a-pc-as-a-8-ch-pre-pro-experiment.14785/
There are serious limitations on what you can do with it (multiple source inputs, more than 7.1, DRM content, etc), not just lack of convenience.

My main goal will eventually be to use a PC with Dirac > DAC > Amp for 2.2 music listening (stereo + 2 subs) and then use a Yamaha/Denon AVR for video as I don't care as much about the best fidelity when watching movies.

Multi channel via a PC with all the DRM stuff sounds like a pain to deal with.

 

[North_Sky]

I think you are in the wrong forum.

That's not very nice.

 

[Theriverlethe]

I could live with the performance but how did they manage to screw up the remote? It’s safe to say NAD just doesn’t have the technical chops to compete in the digital era.

 

[Billy Budapest]

Yeah but you don't normally listen to a system with your ear up to the tweeter and when you are sitting in your seat the room and reflections will have a much greater effect on your experience than any inaudble hiss

I don’t disagree. My point is that although harmonic distortion in most gear is basically inaudible—the harmonics are at such a low level and at such few frequencies that they can be visualized on test gear but not heard by humans—noise is a different beast entirely, because it overlays the entire frequency spectrum. Can you pick it out if your ear isn’t next to the tweeter? Probably not unless the noise is extremely high in level. However, all musical content under the noise floor is obliterated by it. If I am paying a decent amount of money for a piece of gear, I want it to perform better than a $15 phone dongle—and a lot of expensive gear does not.

 

[Billy Budapest]

I could live with the performance but how did they manage to screw up the remote? It’s safe to say NAD just doesn’t have the technical chops to compete in the digital era.

They have the technical chops. They have good engineers. However, they might be under pressure from non-engineers to hit a budget and a timetable. Maybe the thought was the remote was “good enough” to meet the product launch date and that its problems would be fixed later? The remote, too, could be based on an existing reference design and not enough time was spent adapting it. The remote could also have been contracted out to a third party to design and manufacture and they didn’t quite deliver what was ordered.