I’ve been using mine for the past few years for TV and music (spotify connect and then chromecast audio). Recently, I had a few RPi Zeros around and decided to give Volumio a go, not sure why I did not do this earlier! The RPi Zero W is powered by the USB Dock port and used with the USB DAC, might need to find sorter cables though. Wanted to ask if you think it would make any difference using it via the spdif coax input via a Pi Hat like the Allo DigiOne, the NAD is rated for 24/96 over USB DAC and 24/192 on spdif.
-
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!
Review and Measurements of NAD 7050 Streaming Amp
- Thread starter amirm
- Start date
Ended up using it as an USB DAC with a VIM3 sbc (maybe a bit overkill).
For those that have a D7050 look at the NAD tcp/ssh control features, there are a few scripts around in Python. I've configured mine so that Siri (iPhone) with voice commands can start the amp on the USB input, put volume to a gentle -35dB (unit LCD displayed) and also start Volumio. When I need to switch it on the Optical 1 for the TV, another command can stop Volumio, change the volume to -25dB and switch the input. Also when leaving the house can just shut down the amp and stop Volumio.
For those that have a D7050 look at the NAD tcp/ssh control features, there are a few scripts around in Python. I've configured mine so that Siri (iPhone) with voice commands can start the amp on the USB input, put volume to a gentle -35dB (unit LCD displayed) and also start Volumio. When I need to switch it on the Optical 1 for the TV, another command can stop Volumio, change the volume to -25dB and switch the input. Also when leaving the house can just shut down the amp and stop Volumio.
@amirm what bandwidth are you using in your measurements of THD+N vs power? I found that more measurements published on audio.com.pl are so much different than posted on ASR.They got much worse distortion figures, wonder what bandwidth they are using:
First of all - I applaud the effort that went into the original review.
That said, as a longtime audio aficionado, it baffles me.
I have owned Accuphase gear. I know that a big budget is in no way ever a guarantee for great, balanced music presentation though. Then I "downgraded" to a Benchmark DAC2HGC preamp+DAC and an Ncore-based NAD M22 poweramp. Then, out of curiosity, I got a NAD D7050 as I thought I could recommend it to a friend. I did extensive cross-listening with my reference tracks (jazz and classical flac files) between the separate combo and the NAD D7050. Speakers used were KEF Reference 1. Honestly there was barely a difference, the NAD D7050 sounded pretty sublime to me, so the distortion etc measurements are a bit strange - I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference between reference tracks as FLAC or as MP3 if that was the case, but I can do so quite reliably with the D7050.
That said, I can't recommend the NAD D7050 nor by the way the D3020v2. But it most certainly would not be for sound quality issues - they sound amazing. It's rather because I have witnessed several of them die, you can' turn them on anymore. The touch button power is a horrible idea, and perhaps the electronics are hyper-susceptible to be killed by transient power line issues (even though in at least one case they were behind Fuhrman powerblock protection).
Which makes me shy away from the NAD M10, which I see also didn't get a recommendation here - and while the measurements in his forum seemed OK and the major blow against the M10 was price-performance... I think the M10 sounds worse than the D7050 and possibly even the D3020. Stereo separation and stage on the M10 just wasn't as good as the D7050.
With electronics there's always a chance you get an "above spec" one - or below spec. But that's completely unacceptable with what NAD calls the master series.
That said, as a longtime audio aficionado, it baffles me.
I have owned Accuphase gear. I know that a big budget is in no way ever a guarantee for great, balanced music presentation though. Then I "downgraded" to a Benchmark DAC2HGC preamp+DAC and an Ncore-based NAD M22 poweramp. Then, out of curiosity, I got a NAD D7050 as I thought I could recommend it to a friend. I did extensive cross-listening with my reference tracks (jazz and classical flac files) between the separate combo and the NAD D7050. Speakers used were KEF Reference 1. Honestly there was barely a difference, the NAD D7050 sounded pretty sublime to me, so the distortion etc measurements are a bit strange - I don't think I'd be able to tell the difference between reference tracks as FLAC or as MP3 if that was the case, but I can do so quite reliably with the D7050.
That said, I can't recommend the NAD D7050 nor by the way the D3020v2. But it most certainly would not be for sound quality issues - they sound amazing. It's rather because I have witnessed several of them die, you can' turn them on anymore. The touch button power is a horrible idea, and perhaps the electronics are hyper-susceptible to be killed by transient power line issues (even though in at least one case they were behind Fuhrman powerblock protection).
Which makes me shy away from the NAD M10, which I see also didn't get a recommendation here - and while the measurements in his forum seemed OK and the major blow against the M10 was price-performance... I think the M10 sounds worse than the D7050 and possibly even the D3020. Stereo separation and stage on the M10 just wasn't as good as the D7050.
With electronics there's always a chance you get an "above spec" one - or below spec. But that's completely unacceptable with what NAD calls the master series.
Also should add: the only possible practical use for the pre-out, IMO, is to drive a sub. And for that the option to experiment with cut-off frequencies is a very neat feature, since it allows one to use good bookshelf speakers, drive them well (the measurements here show the amp section in the D7050 is very competent) and allows them to focus on what they do well, offloading the lower umph to the sub. It works extremely well.
The strength of this system is the "Direct Digital" path (there's a well-written NAD white paper infomercial for the M32 about that), so why anyone would break it up in the middle is a mystery to me...
The strength of this system is the "Direct Digital" path (there's a well-written NAD white paper infomercial for the M32 about that), so why anyone would break it up in the middle is a mystery to me...
The only reason why the pre out had so poor sinad is that it was driven to clipping. We never saw how good of a dac it is when driven below clipping. Yes, the dac hasvpoor output voltage, but when I used separated power amps on the pre out, I never had to run full volume to get hearing damage.
The big Q is whether the DAC is flawed (which I doubt) or the pre-out is a bit of an afterthought do drive a sub (which requires little subtlety across the entire spectrum, imo). Was the D7050 somewhat overpriced for its power output? Undoubtedly. However, IMO it great sounding 50W. Mostly, I think it a great component as a digital amplification hub for someone who -like me- experienced the tailend of the vinyl era and hated it - digital rocks.
The D7050 has long term reliability issues. I have an extra one in case mine dies. As I mentioned, I don't miss the Benchmark DAC2 and NAD M22 hypex combo I had before. I want to love the M10, but shall wait for v2. There are some aspects of it I'd like NAD to finetune.
If you own one and like it then the review is irrelevant really. One of the things I find slightly sad is when people read a negative review of something they own already and are perfectly happy with and suddenly decide it's rubbish and needs to be replaced.
Indeed. And there are reviews for every possible taste out there.
My audiophile history has seen me spend irrational amounts of money here and there. It's not a problem because I did tend to keep expensive gear for quit a while. But as I downsized my living quarters, the big equipment entirely lost their purpose.
The main thing is: I know my music. I know when I can immerse myself in it with full satisfaction, and I know when I nejoy it and it sounds pretty good but I am compromising - which these days is still amazing sound quality... compared to my Sony Walkman days. Now I can be in the gym or the plane with my Samsung smartphone and good bluetooth in-ear headphones. And at home, I hear everything I want to hear, can tell good from bad recordings, can do the silly exercise of telling the difference between FLAC and 320k MP# for my fav recordings that matter - what else do I need?
I am an engineer (not in audio, I am not pulling that card) and I know every design out there is always a compromise. That said, I think this is an amazing era to be an audiophile and we regularly obsess about irrelevant nuances.
The pre-out is dsp-controlled, it can be low-passed with a configurable crossover point and having the amp output high-passed at the same time. That's not really something to trivially add as an afterthought. Otherwise I agree with you.
The pre-out flexibility made this product fantastic for me. I would still recommend it for desktop speakers or modest sized floorstanders with optional subwoofer just because of the pre-out. I've tested the D 7050 with power hungry speakers (Revel, Amphion, Canton, a few DIY), it won't go into protection mode, it has the power to drive low impedances. But bass response drops by a few dB at 20 Hz compared to an NC400 (I measured, level matched, calibrated mic, same source, same speaker, same space-time), but I wouldn't choose this amp to drive speaker that can go flat to 20 Hz. That's why there is the pre-out.
In fact, I think it was this device that first pushed me in the way of fully active dsp-controlled speakers that I'm screwing together right now and saved me from pursuing fairy dust. The amp part of it is quite good, as the measurements show.
The pre-out flexibility made this product fantastic for me. I would still recommend it for desktop speakers or modest sized floorstanders with optional subwoofer just because of the pre-out. I've tested the D 7050 with power hungry speakers (Revel, Amphion, Canton, a few DIY), it won't go into protection mode, it has the power to drive low impedances. But bass response drops by a few dB at 20 Hz compared to an NC400 (I measured, level matched, calibrated mic, same source, same speaker, same space-time), but I wouldn't choose this amp to drive speaker that can go flat to 20 Hz. That's why there is the pre-out.
In fact, I think it was this device that first pushed me in the way of fully active dsp-controlled speakers that I'm screwing together right now and saved me from pursuing fairy dust. The amp part of it is quite good, as the measurements show.
Yes I drive everything under 80Hz to the sub. KEF LS50s really sing when you do that. That is my preferred setup right now.
There is no musical instrument other than some weird cathedral organ that goes to 20Hz, and I am neither into organ music nor am I into FX nor do I want to attract a female Blue Whale to mate, so I am really OK without that... I assume my neighbors would object anyhow (on all counts). :-D
I am using one of these as a desktop/computer amp when I'm docked with my MacBook... sorry if this is off-topic, but my biggest complaint would be with the material finish of the amp. It is covered in some kind of gummy plastic that has started to deteriorate with time. It's crazy how poorly it is ageing.
I don't know if anyone has experienced the same, or has managed to find any 3rd parties making replacement / bespoke cases? Long shot, I know, but the same case was used on a few other models AFAIK. So maybe it's a thing. It's really only the top and bottom plates that need changing.
I don't know if anyone has experienced the same, or has managed to find any 3rd parties making replacement / bespoke cases? Long shot, I know, but the same case was used on a few other models AFAIK. So maybe it's a thing. It's really only the top and bottom plates that need changing.
A lot of companies used the rubberised paint which deteriorates to a sticky goo.
The door handles on my old car and the whole dashboard are a black sticky mess.
I picked up one of these on Facebook Marketplace (before I found ASR) a while back and I think it sounds pretty good. It's not nearly as transparent as the gear listed in my signature, but it's absolutely satisfying and drives bookshelves very well. There's a nice richness and fullness (read: distortion) to the sound and the sub out is really solid. I would love an analog input to try a different DAC and see how it compares.
It seems to be pretty common in this site's reviews to run into issues with evaluating the "DAC output" aka preamp output in these new age integrated amps. It makes little sense to me, since to me these preamp outputs are clearly designed to drive a sub - and not any high def components. The NAD7050 also has the merit of making it easy to match a sub to your speakers. The KEF LS50 (which are not recommended here either, against the accolades received in many places, because of lack of low end extension) absolutely totally shine in smallish rooms when offloaded with a sub and cut off at 70Hz or so.
I love this site but sometimes the results are too one-dimensional. And it makes zero sense to evaluate the D7050 or similar units as a DAC only. That's not the way anyone with an IQ of over 70 would use them. Why pay for stuff you don't intend to use? It's also why I personally avoid any integrated amp with a built-in phono input. Added cost that compromises the rest if I never ever intend to use it. With the D7050, the whole point is to benefit from the Direct Digital amp approach. It's entirely designed for that singular purpose. It was clearly too early for its time and now with the vinyl renaissance it misses that nostalgia wave. And - many units suffered from massive reliability issues - but the surviving ones seem super solid and are a total bargain for highish end. Not the widest sound stage, but that clarity and resolution are amazing at the $.
I should also say I am sick of people demanding 150W+ per channel. Audio is not a $ per W proposition, even though stuff like Hypex Ncore and Purify Eigentakt have made it common to provide super high and clean Megwatts output per $. A clean 50W will drive stuff for even a large-ish room, especially if combined with a sub and an amp that cuts off the load (and this distortion) or the speakers below 80Hz or so. I personally have zero need for 100W+. And I have lived in place with large-ish listening rooms.
Last edited:
Like most other things in the audiophile world, the reasoning behind high wattage 'requirements' is more of a heuristic then demonstrative.
In traditional 2 channel formats you don't just have to think about the tweeter and woofer power requirements, you also have to think about the subwoofer requirements. To get acceptably low frequencies at acceptable decibels you have to dedicate a pretty heft chunk of power. Then run this through the historical prevalence of low sensitivity speakers/2-4 ohm impedance, etc. Also people love the idea of a reference system which I totally get, but often goes as an implicit/unstated context when discussing minimal required power. Since decibels are a logarithmic system going from 'acceptably loud volume' of 80db to 'reference' of 105db requires a lot more power.
And this doesn't even touch industry standards where good parts (i.e. sufficiently large caps for peak swings) were often tied into 'big number' power amps so the only way outside of DIY was to purchase much more expensive (and powerful) amps.
Now when you have easy crossover solutions, 350W+ powered subwoofers, and high quality amplification for significantly less the heuristic is less accurate. But it will take time and the gradual reduction in vintage gear for a new baseline to be widely agreed upon.
Unfortunately in German, but attached measurements from German Audio.de magazine. Overall they are super impressed with its performance, the salient criticisms being so-so streaming support (esp. true after they discontinued Spotify) and just "good" overall finish & design.
On the measurement front, the box at the bottom states: "Up to 10kHz the stuff is very stable/linear, only above that there is minimal dependency on speaker impedance. The SNR is fantastic at 108dB (?) and jitter over coax is minimal at 169ps. Power is 49W ... Distortion is remarkably flat with some irregularities at ultrasonic frequencies".
On the measurement front, the box at the bottom states: "Up to 10kHz the stuff is very stable/linear, only above that there is minimal dependency on speaker impedance. The SNR is fantastic at 108dB (?) and jitter over coax is minimal at 169ps. Power is 49W ... Distortion is remarkably flat with some irregularities at ultrasonic frequencies".
Attachments
How is it possible to bypass the internal DAC? This since all inputs are digital?This is a review and detailed measurements of the NAD 7050 integrated DAC, amplifier and streaming playback. It is on kind loan from a member. It appears the product was announced in 2014 and since discontinued as I can't find it on sale anywhere. The cost was USD $999 from what I can gather.
The unit can be used both horizontally and vertically. A rotational sensor changes the display orientation conveniently. Here is its upright position which I consider better for sound since the electrons can naturally free fall into the speaker terminals:
The outside has what appears to be some sort of rubber glued to it. It is soft to touch but picks up dirt very easily and is impossible to clean due to sticky nature of it.
The large knobs imply great feel which they don't have. They wobble as you rotate them. The larger knob is the volume control which had an odd delay in updating the display as you rotated it. Overall, a good effort has been made to create an unusual design but didn't quite get there in feel and functionality.
The back panel shows off the inputs and speaker output:
For my testing, I focused on USB input as I suspect that is the most common interface for consumers. Alas, the USB interface is class one so only goes up to 96 kHz. To get the advertised 192 kHz you need to use the other inputs. I downloaded the NAD drivers which nicely gave me ASIO interface for testing.
There is an app to control it and I downloaded it from Android play store. It is a simple remote control but allowed me to change the audio-out to be full range so I could use it for DAC testing. Otherwise it is filtered for subwoofer out. Despite its simplicity the app crashed on me once.
There is no analog input so I had do all of my testing with USB digital interface.
As expected from a brand name company, the NAD 7050 comes with full set of safety and emissions regulatory certifications.
The amplification in NAD 7050 apparently is a scaled down version of what is in NAD M2. Here is what NAD says about it:
View attachment 23134
My read is that it is a power DAC similar to Lyngdorf TDAI-3400 I reviewed recently. Measurements will confirm if so.
DAC Measurements
As usual, where possible I try to isolate the performance of the subsystems, in this case the DAC. Here is our dashboard view using USB input/Line Out. I hope you are sitting down if you owan the 7050 and use it as a DAC:
View attachment 23135
What the heck is going on here? Even at 0 dB the unit doesn't get to 2 volts yet it severely clips resulting all of those harmonic distortions. Dialing down to -2 dBFS improved performance but just to 83 dB. By then the output voltage was even lower, making it not so useful as a DAC anyway. My thinking is that this is a split off output from the power amplifier as opposed to a traditional DAC output. I guess for the assumed subwoofer duty it may be OK.
Naturally, with the SINAD as measured falls at the bottom of the graph of DACs tested:
View attachment 23138
After the first bad impression, the 7050 almost nails the rest of the measurements such as linearity:
View attachment 23136
And jitter:
View attachment 23137
Since USB doesn't support 192 kHz, I had to run a different multi-tone test at 44.1 kHz:
View attachment 23140
Amplifier Measurements
As usual, the dashboard view is at 5 watts of power into 4 ohm:
View attachment 23139
As power amplifier measurements go, this is not too bad actually and almost matches the vaguely stated 90 dB spec by NAD.
Power versus distortion+noise is also pretty decent:
View attachment 23141
The downward part of the curve is always dominate by noise as the output level is low. Here, that part of the curve is flatter than I am used to seeing which is good as far as level of noise. Likewise, distortion is kept under complete control until onset of sudden and massive clipping at 54 watts. This too is good (sans the clipping). Stated rating is 50 watts at 4 ohm and we beating that a bit which is nice. Then again, 50 watts is not that much power in grand scheme of things.
THD+N versus frequency using my default 45 kHz bandwidth shows pretty awful results (in red):
View attachment 23142
Suspecting ultrasonic noise at play, I re-ran the test with 22.4 kHz (as with the dashboard) in blue which shows that effect quite conclusively. One channel is worse than the other though which is strange. Note that the drop above a few Khz is due to bandwidth of the test being too low to capture all the harmonics (and hence the reason I like to use 45 kHz bandwidth normally).
Broadband FFT shows of 1 kHz tone shows us what is going on:
View attachment 23143
This is without my Audio Precision high-frequency filter (AUX-0040). All the other tests used that filter.
On the extreme left we see our 1 kHz tone as a spike rising to 0 dB or so. We have a single and large spike at 850 kHz. That seems to indicate to me that 850 kHz may be the switching frequency. Given its high frequency, the power DAC is running likely with as a single bit converter which would create a lot of quantization noise. Noise shaping is used to push that above 30 kHz or so with the peak at about 80 kHz. This is the drawback of power DACs as we have seen in the Lyngdorf and SONOS Amp versus class D amplification which doesn't need noise shaping. You can see the effect of high frequency noise in the thickened sine wave of the same signal in the inset.
Conclusions
Usually, by the time I get to the end of testing, I have a good idea of if I like or don't like a device. Here, I am not quite sure. Let's agree that no one should be using the NAD 7050 as a DAC with external amplification as NAD suggests in the manual. You will be listening to a heap of distortion products with anemic output to boot.
The amplifier seems to have some good tricks under its sleeves with lower than normal noise and very controlled distortion until a very hard limit. My issue there is the 50 watt rating for a $1000 device. That is just not enough power for a product in this category.
Seeing how the NAD 7050 is discontinued, maybe it doesn't need my recommendation or lack thereof anyway. So I will leave it at that.
------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.
Money was donated for gas to go and get some good fish chips in town. Need a few more coins to pay for the meal itself though. Please consider donating funds using:
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/audiosciencereview), or
upgrading your membership here though Paypal (https://audiosciencereview.com/foru...eview-and-measurements.2164/page-3#post-59054).
Similar threads
- Poll
