• 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 M17 V2 Pre/Pro

esm

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 9, 2018
Messages
182
Likes
327
Location
Berkeley, CA USA
for noobies like me, could you provide a little more detail on hookup. thanks!
Sure, it's not terribly complicated:
  • On the input side, I have a cheap UnnLink 7x1 4k@60Hz-capable HDMI switch from AliExpress plugged into the HDMI input on the UDP-205, which gives me source switching. There's also a Chromecast Audio connected via optical, and I occasionally connect something to the USB input.
  • I feed the primary HDMI output to my TV, and the audio HDMI output is unused.
  • The 7.1 analog outputs lead to a MiniDSP DDRC-88A for room eq, which then feeds into both an Apollon NCMP8350 8-channel amp for the main speakers, and a MiniDSP 2x4 Balanced for feeding the subs.
  • The stereo XLR output feeds my headphone amp.
There are obviously compromises all through this setup. Room eq (by definition) modifies the signal, but the MiniDSP devices I've seen tested so far haven't done great even as a baseline; sadly, there are so few good standalone options here (and the integrated AVRs have all tested so much worse that I'm not worrying about it). The HDMI switch is very rudimentary, and it was so cheap that I just assumed I'd be replacing it at some point (the remote control for this thing is so cheap it's actually hilarious), but it works better than it has any right to, and local (networked) media can play right on the Oppo, if I'm worried about the fidelity of the HDMI chain. I'm limited to 7.1 thanks to the Oppo, but as it turns out, that's all the speakers I have anyway (and the 2x4 takes care of multi-sub nicely). ;) I suppose I'm also limited to 4K as well, but 4K is still struggling with adoption among even major distributors right now, so I don't see 8K mattering at home for a very long time.

The nice thing about this setup is that I can replace each individual component as better options become available or as components fail, and I even have the separate HDMI audio output, should a more capable audio processor come along. Sadly, I'm pretty screwed if the Oppo dies; there really isn't a good replacement for it for this sort of configuration right now that I know of. But for me, right now, this is perfect.
 

temujin44

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2018
Messages
39
Likes
48
Sure, it's not terribly complicated:
  • On the input side, I have a cheap UnnLink 7x1 4k@60Hz-capable HDMI switch from AliExpress plugged into the HDMI input on the UDP-205, which gives me source switching. There's also a Chromecast Audio connected via optical, and I occasionally connect something to the USB input.
  • I feed the primary HDMI output to my TV, and the audio HDMI output is unused.
  • The 7.1 analog outputs lead to a MiniDSP DDRC-88A for room eq, which then feeds into both an Apollon NCMP8350 8-channel amp for the main speakers, and a MiniDSP 2x4 Balanced for feeding the subs.
  • The stereo XLR output feeds my headphone amp.
There are obviously compromises all through this setup. Room eq (by definition) modifies the signal, but the MiniDSP devices I've seen tested so far haven't done great even as a baseline; sadly, there are so few good standalone options here (and the integrated AVRs have all tested so much worse that I'm not worrying about it). The HDMI switch is very rudimentary, and it was so cheap that I just assumed I'd be replacing it at some point (the remote control for this thing is so cheap it's actually hilarious), but it works better than it has any right to, and local (networked) media can play right on the Oppo, if I'm worried about the fidelity of the HDMI chain. I'm limited to 7.1 thanks to the Oppo, but as it turns out, that's all the speakers I have anyway (and the 2x4 takes care of multi-sub nicely). ;) I suppose I'm also limited to 4K as well, but 4K is still struggling with adoption among even major distributors right now, so I don't see 8K mattering at home for a very long time.

The nice thing about this setup is that I can replace each individual component as better options become available or as components fail, and I even have the separate HDMI audio output, should a more capable audio processor come along. Sadly, I'm pretty screwed if the Oppo dies; there really isn't a good replacement for it for this sort of configuration right now that I know of. But for me, right now, this is perfect.


Very cool and thank you for your time. I realized that I wouldn't be able to afford an Oppo due to price hike. It seems that 7.1 analog output is not a common feature in 4K players. I came across Panasonic DP-UB9000 or UB820 but they do not have HDMI input :(
of course, who knows how well it measures.
I may not need HDMI input for so Panasonic may suffice if it is competent. i have not been able to find any posted measurements yet.
Thanks again!
 

Frank Dernie

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
6,445
Likes
15,780
Location
Oxfordshire
I had an Oppo 105 with the analogue outputs connected to a Parasound P7 preamp and its outputs connected to active Meridian rears and a straight through input on my main amp for the front speakers.
The 105 often skipped or wouldn't play which was a nuisance, I thought it was the discs but the company who sold me a Sony projector threw in a Sony blu-ray player which never skipped a beat. For a while I had the Sony HDMI output into the Oppo and used that as the audio DAC and HDMI switcher.
It was a pita for the little I use video and I bought a Marantz processor and mothballed the Oppo and Parasound.
Much more convenient and fine for films for me, I am no connoisseur of film sound. And now I have room compensation for video sound too.
 

peng

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 12, 2019
Messages
5,615
Likes
5,167
Amir, you said it's cross talk was good, but how did it compare to the AV8805, the Pioneer and other AVR, or the Yamha WX-A streamer's you also measured?

Also, did the AV8805's analog input do better than the M17? I couldn't find the analog input measurements for it. Thanks.
 
OP
amirm

amirm

Founder/Admin
Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Joined
Feb 13, 2016
Messages
44,368
Likes
234,386
Location
Seattle Area
Amir, you said it's cross talk was good, but how did it compare to the AV8805, the Pioneer and other AVR, or the Yamha WX-A streamer's you also measured?

Also, did the AV8805's analog input do better than the M17? I couldn't find the analog input measurements for it. Thanks.
I don't have any more data on AV8805 than what I post. As I test more products in a category, I refine what I examine so earlier products tend to not have as comprehensive of tests.

The Marantz is long gone. The Pioneer is in our living room so don't want to yank it out. :) I will test other AVRs I am getting though.
 

raif71

Major Contributor
Joined
Sep 7, 2019
Messages
2,333
Likes
2,535
Well, as far as having simple volume control and 8ch preamp outputs... they both do. As far as features there are almost no differences, as far as components and measured quality - the 205 has the obvious edge (the question is whether that's worth the extra ~$1500 or not at current prices). So either one can drive a 7 channel amp and a subwoofer. They even have limited DSP capabilities where you can choose between fullrange or small speaker settings, set a crossover point for the sub, and provide coarse level trims and distances to the speakers to correct delay issues and level matching.

However, they do not do this automatically - they just play a test tone so you can use an SPL meter to adjust trims and you have to enter distances manually as well as specifiy downmix options if you're not running a full setup. I'd say (admittedly completely subjective assessment on my part) that even the worst room correction in a cheaper AVR will likely produce slightly better results - and much better if it has bass managment and is at least attempting to deal with room modes.
Thanks digicidal...yeah I was expecting the same outcome. Back to my original plan then :). Although I see many avr measurements here failed, I still believe that audibly they will sound decent, at least to me. I'm not new to avr purchases, having had onkyo, pioneer and yamaha.
 

GrimSurfer

Major Contributor
Joined
May 25, 2019
Messages
1,238
Likes
1,484
Another great review, @amirm . It takes courage to reveal the mediocrity that prevails in the AV world.

It's difficult to imagine being too cynical in a world where $6k will deliver barely adequate performance.
 

digicidal

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
1,981
Likes
4,838
Location
Sin City, NV
Thanks digicidal...yeah I was expecting the same outcome. Back to my original plan then :). Although I see many avr measurements here failed, I still believe that audibly they will sound decent, at least to me. I'm not new to avr purchases, having had onkyo, pioneer and yamaha.

Yeah, the reality is that they will all sound decent - possibly even great - especially if you don't do an ABX comparison to anything else! :p Our ears and brains are amazingly adaptive in that area. We can even quickly get accustomed to absolutely horrible sound and still enjoy it (like almost all concerts I've ever attended for example). I haven't ever heard "problems" with my 8801A's in either setup - I just know they don't measure all that well. So I'd love to purchase a processor with exceptional measurements - if such a thing even exists at this point - but I'm definitely not losing sleep over the "just decent setup" I've got now.
 

Blumlein 88

Grand Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Feb 23, 2016
Messages
20,523
Likes
37,054
Sure, it's not terribly complicated:
  • On the input side, I have a cheap UnnLink 7x1 4k@60Hz-capable HDMI switch from AliExpress plugged into the HDMI input on the UDP-205, which gives me source switching. There's also a Chromecast Audio connected via optical, and I occasionally connect something to the USB input.
  • I feed the primary HDMI output to my TV, and the audio HDMI output is unused.
  • The 7.1 analog outputs lead to a MiniDSP DDRC-88A for room eq, which then feeds into both an Apollon NCMP8350 8-channel amp for the main speakers, and a MiniDSP 2x4 Balanced for feeding the subs.
  • The stereo XLR output feeds my headphone amp.
There are obviously compromises all through this setup. Room eq (by definition) modifies the signal, but the MiniDSP devices I've seen tested so far haven't done great even as a baseline; sadly, there are so few good standalone options here (and the integrated AVRs have all tested so much worse that I'm not worrying about it). The HDMI switch is very rudimentary, and it was so cheap that I just assumed I'd be replacing it at some point (the remote control for this thing is so cheap it's actually hilarious), but it works better than it has any right to, and local (networked) media can play right on the Oppo, if I'm worried about the fidelity of the HDMI chain. I'm limited to 7.1 thanks to the Oppo, but as it turns out, that's all the speakers I have anyway (and the 2x4 takes care of multi-sub nicely). ;) I suppose I'm also limited to 4K as well, but 4K is still struggling with adoption among even major distributors right now, so I don't see 8K mattering at home for a very long time.

The nice thing about this setup is that I can replace each individual component as better options become available or as components fail, and I even have the separate HDMI audio output, should a more capable audio processor come along. Sadly, I'm pretty screwed if the Oppo dies; there really isn't a good replacement for it for this sort of configuration right now that I know of. But for me, right now, this is perfect.

You might want to look at tests of a cheap HDMI switcher I posted here:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ewhd-prosumer-ultrahd-hdmi-3x1-switcher.1560/

Now yours might better, but this result made me leery of using one for any serious sound. Having said that I used it for about year just to get sound I needed for an old AVR that had preamp outs, but no HDMI. The first post was of analog outputs, and the last post is with digital stripped out of the device sent to another good DAC.
 

somebodyelse

Major Contributor
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
3,682
Likes
2,961
You might want to look at tests of a cheap HDMI switcher I posted here:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ewhd-prosumer-ultrahd-hdmi-3x1-switcher.1560/

Now yours might better, but this result made me leery of using one for any serious sound. Having said that I used it for about year just to get sound I needed for an old AVR that had preamp outs, but no HDMI. The first post was of analog outputs, and the last post is with digital stripped out of the device sent to another good DAC.
Unless I've misunderstood @esm isn't using the HDMI switch only for HDMI switching, not for audio extraction, which your test concludes the cheap one is good for.
 

RichB

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
1,946
Likes
2,611
Location
Massachusetts
Well, as far as having simple volume control and 8ch preamp outputs... they both do. As far as features there are almost no differences, as far as components and measured quality - the 205 has the obvious edge (the question is whether that's worth the extra ~$1500 or not at current prices). So either one can drive a 7 channel amp and a subwoofer. They even have limited DSP capabilities where you can choose between fullrange or small speaker settings, set a crossover point for the sub, and provide coarse level trims and distances to the speakers to correct delay issues and level matching.

However, they do not do this automatically - they just play a test tone so you can use an SPL meter to adjust trims and you have to enter distances manually as well as specifiy downmix options if you're not running a full setup. I'd say (admittedly completely subjective assessment on my part) that even the worst room correction in a cheaper AVR will likely produce slightly better results - and much better if it has bass managment and is at least attempting to deal with room modes.

I guess I would temper this in that room modes are real but AVRs are a mixed bag. I can say that I MUCH prefer the Oppo 205 direct to an AHB2 driving the Revel M20's than anything I could achieve with the Yamaha RX-A820. Engaging the DSPs was a clear degradation over straight mode and the amps were lack luster. I suspect that the goal was to never have a failure so the protection logic and limiting was strangling it.

The M20's dip to 3.7 Ohms at 79Hz and are 84.5 dB at one watt. Dr. Toole writes that 30% of the satisfaction comes from a speaker bass. That means 70% comes from the rest :p

If you use an Oppo player direct there is an issue with the bass management. Crossovers, if used, should be left at 80Hz. So, if you raise it to say, 100Hz, the attenuated bass between 100 and 80hz is lost and not redirected to the sub.

I have two friends using Oppo's to amps and even without REQ they sound great.

- Rich
 

digicidal

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
1,981
Likes
4,838
Location
Sin City, NV
I guess I would temper this in that room modes are real but AVRs are a mixed bag. I can say that I MUCH prefer the Oppo 205 direct to an AHB2 driving the Revel M20's than anything I could achieve with the Yamaha RX-A820. Engaging the DSPs was a clear degradation over straight mode and the amps were lack luster. I suspect that the goal was to never have a failure so the protection logic and limiting was strangling it.

The M20's dip to 3.7 Ohms at 79Hz and are 84.5 dB at one watt. Dr. Toole writes that 30% of the satisfaction comes from a speaker bass. That means 70% comes from the rest :p

If you use an Oppo player direct there is an issue with the bass management. Crossovers, if used, should be left at 80Hz. So, if you raise it to say, 100Hz, the attenuated bass between 100 and 80hz is lost and not redirected to the sub.

I have two friends using Oppo's to amps and even without REQ they sound great.

- Rich

Naturally. As the testing here shows the combination of 205+AHB2 should be about as transparent to the source as possible. In any halfway decent space this shouldn't result in anything horrible - certainly less than an AVR that's older technology, underpowered, and costs less than 1/3 what your amp alone costs. ;) After all, for ~95% of the time humans have been listening to recorded music DSP hasn't even existed - and it's not like everyone felt all of those simple signal+gain systems were horrible. I would however argue that even in your setup, a good EQ would likely make it sound even better... like going from a 94 to a 99 though - not night and day or anything like that.

In my experience at least, the room becomes much more of an issue (or sound improves more with DSP - depending on how you want to look at it) in multichannel setups. You've got more chances for cancellations, more timing issues, reinforcement, etc. If 2ch audio was all that was being hoped for, then I'd definitely say go with dedicated - although I'd still probably throw in a DSP as well just for bass management and at least 2 subs.

I'm pretty sure Dr. Toole was speaking of averages.... I'm positive I get more than 30% from bass. :p
 

esm

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 9, 2018
Messages
182
Likes
327
Location
Berkeley, CA USA
Unless I've misunderstood @esm isn't using the HDMI switch only for HDMI switching, not for audio extraction, which your test concludes the cheap one is good for.
No, it's being for audio transport for anything it's switching, but in my case that's generally okay; anything I really care about the fidelity of ends up playing streamed to a chomecast audio hanging off the oppo directly, or is played on the oppo itself (most of the HDMI sources I'm using are streamers or gaming platforms, so a small loss of fidelity isn't the end of the world; everything there favors convenience over performance).

It seems like the unit that @Blumlein 88 tested is considerably more featureful than what I have; mine is strictly an HDMI switcher, no audio filtering or alternate input capabilities at all, and from the perspective of the connected devices, it's a hard disconnect when switching between devices. (Not that I think that means it will test any better; in fact, I'd be amazed if any of these were significantly different architectures inside the box.)

I think if I was expecting ultimate fidelity from this part of the chain, I'd be in for disappointment; when I was originally searching for products in this particular niche, even the "high-end" models looked like AliExpress products in prettier injection molded cases. But, bringing this back to the original topic: just look at all of Amir's AVR tests. I'm not hopeful there are any multi-source HDMI products on the market today that give performance an audiophile would be happy with (but I'd love someone to prove me wrong). :(
 

laurelkurt

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 7, 2019
Messages
130
Likes
59
Location
Rochester, NY
This is a review and measurements of the NAD M17 V2 Home Theater Surround Sound 11.1 channel preamplifier and processor ("pre/pro"). It is kindly loaned to me by one of our members. The M17 V2 is a high-end unit, costing US $6,600.

Unlike a lot of AVRs and processors I have tested, the M17 V2 oozes audio luxury with a very attractive enclosure and gorgeous display:


As much as I love and appreciate the work that went into the aesthetics of the unit, it reminds me of a review of BMW 7 series. It said, "this drives so well it is a shame that the owner will likely sit in the back and let someone else drive it." By the same token, in a home theater application you want a dark room and likely will hide this beautiful piece of audio machinery hidden some place.

The display is not only beautiful and large, it is also very informative. I very much appreciated the constant indication of audio and video resolution and format. The former allowed me to catch a very strange anomaly in the way my PC was sending audio to it which I fixed. This information is always available inside these processor and AVRs. It is a shame they don't always display it.

The screen is touch sensitive although I mostly used the remote control for control. The remote is super heavy and long. I know they wanted to give the feeling of quality but I take a more ergonomic plastic one over this. There are sharp corners and I would worry about dropping it and denting a wood floor, or breaking a glass table. Minor complaint.

Here is the back panel:

View attachment 33448

In my opinion balanced XLRs are mandatory in any audio product that claims to be high performance and there are here of course. That is what I used for my testing. For inputs, I focused on Audio 1 analog input and HDMI. The processor happily synced with my computer and passed through its "4K" resolution through without affecting its frame rate. Researching online though, I saw some complaints about HDMI compatibility. Such things are unfortunately a fact of life with HDMI, more so on some products than others.

Processor DAC Audio Measurements
It was with much anticipation that I powered on the unit and ran my dashboard tone of 1 kHz/24-bit through it:
View attachment 33451

For balanced XLR outputs, stand-alone DAC usually output 4 volts or more. This is half as much so I boosted the volume to +6 dB to get that:

View attachment 33452

That got me the 4 volt I needed and gave a boost to the performance of the M17 V2. It increased its SINAD (signal over noise and distortion) to 96 dB. This is all dominated by high second harmonic distortion and just a bit of noise. Can't imagine the DAC they are using has this much harmonic distortion so likely this is the amplifier buffer/gain stage or analog switcher that is causing it. That is my guess at least until NAD chooses to communicate with us and explain why an audio product costing over $6000 can't outperform a $9 apple phone dongle. As it is, the M17 V2 does well relative to other tested AVRs and processors:
View attachment 33453

In the larger context of all DACs of different types tested so far, the overall ranking is underwhelming:

View attachment 33455

I hope one day we see one breaking into green bucket. Not holding my breath on blue (top class).

Jitter and spurious noise performance shows poor hygiene when it comes to the design:
View attachment 33457

The larger picture is the first measurement which clearly shows some symmetrical components which usually indicate jitter. Later, I happen to run this test again (inset) and notice how the spikes to the left have completely changed! This shows that internal activity in the unit is bleeding into the output of the DAC. This could be HDMI picture related content, microprocessor servicing front panel or other sources. Either way, I would be unhappy if a $100 DAC did this let alone such an expensive processor. Fortunately the levels are below -110 dB so not an audible concern. It is like a hanging nail. You are not going to die from it but it sure is annoying to see.

Here is what the background noise level looks like with no signal driving it:
View attachment 33458

Shouldn't be seeing power supply related noise. The spike at 1 kHz should not be there either. The curve up is fine and is part of the noise shaping in the DAC to push noise into inaudible range. There is however a spike all the way to the right that should not be there. Its level is -76 dB or so. As such, any measurement that includes that much bandwidth will show that, instead of true distortion. Such is the case when we run our THD+N versus frequency with bandwidth of 90 kHz:

View attachment 33459

Lowering measurement bandwidth to 45 kHz (green) eliminates that factor. But noise shaping still increases the overall THD+N. And whatever other distortion may be there. Overall, it is a poor showing with respect to controlling ultrasonic content and distortion.

Dynamic range is "decent" clearing 16 bit content:

View attachment 33461

Frequency Response is flat to in audible band and extends quite a bit indicating lack of resampling when all effects are turned off:
View attachment 33462

Here is the filter response for each sample rate supported over HDMI:
View attachment 33463

Yet again we see levels are reduced the higher the sample rate becomes. Why? 192 kHz is some 7 to 8 dB lower in volume.

Multitone test (32 tone signal) replicates what we already know as far as distortion:
View attachment 33466

Linearity is poor relative to what even $100 DACs can produce:
View attachment 33468

Investigating that at 1 kHz, the level would constant go up and down. Even averaging it didn't help. So it is both noise and deterministic error.

Intermodulation distortion versus level was reasonably good:

View attachment 33473

Since I ran this test at +6 dB, most optimal volume control level is around -2 dB although the penalty is quite light in going beyond that to 6 dB.

Analog Input Audio Measurements
In case you are tempted to use an external DAC and feed it to the M17 V2, I performed a few measurements of that. The M17 is nice in that it gives you a choice of sampling rate so I set it to 192 kHz (highest rate) and here is what we get:

View attachment 33469

I was surprised how low the output level was at 0 dB volume. I am feeding it 2 volts, how come I am not getting 2 volts out? I had to boost the level to nearly max of 25.5 dB to get to 4 volts out:

View attachment 33470

Overall performance does not change though, producing a very disappointing 73 dB SINAD. This is a throw-away input suitable for perhaps an old game console or your VHS player. I jest of course but come on. How can you have so much harmonic distortion here? We are taking a 23 dB hit by feeding the unit analog instead of digital signal. Noise I could understand going up but distortion?

Needless to say, intermodulation distortion versus level was quite horrible:

View attachment 33472

To cover all bases, I also tested with volume control set to 0 dB and there, the very low output level reduces performance (green).

Frequency response test confirmed high sampling rate was indeed used:
View attachment 33474

One bright spot was crosstlak versus frequency:
View attachment 33475

Conclusions
The good looks of the NAD M17 V2 is undeniable. Proper homework and investment in tooling and case was made to produce a truly gorgeous product. No doubt this compelled me to go easier on the measurement result, giving it the "good" pink panther moniker. But really, in the context of producing a clean, 12 channel DAC with processing NAD fails with M17 V2. No wonder they provide no specifications whatsoever on performance of the DAC. Either they don't measure it or measured it and know it doesn't make for good marketing. We are talking DAC performance that barely matches the Pioneer VSX-LX504 AVR. A processor is designed to give better performance than an integrated AVR.

Once again as I have noted in the past, the DIrac Room EQ is a major plus here and should in practice produce excellent sound. Just don't go around bragging to your friends that you have a best design audio/video processor. So much low-hanging fruit was left in the design of M17 V2.

These companies need to hire an anal audio performance czar to review the product and have veto power over its release. Only then are they going to make progress toward making excellently engineered products. There can be strong competitive advantage for the first home theater company that gets there.

FYI I also have the companion power amplifier to test.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

The owner wants this back very soon so I have to drive it to him. Roundtrip this is nearly 200 miles. I need gas money folks! So donate generously using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
"These companies need to hire an anal audio performance czar to review the product and have veto power over its release. Only then are they going to make progress toward making excellently engineered products. There can be strong competitive advantage for the first home theater company that gets there."

Have sent in your resume? ;-)
 

digicidal

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
1,981
Likes
4,838
Location
Sin City, NV
"These companies need to hire an anal audio performance czar to review the product and have veto power over its release. Only then are they going to make progress toward making excellently engineered products. There can be strong competitive advantage for the first home theater company that gets there."

Have sent in your resume? ;-)
I think in many cases - certainly with NAD, Marantz, PS Audio, etc. they have the equipment (and likely competent people to use it as well)... the problem is in SKU "tiering" mostly and the lack of consumer awareness. At least that's my guess. Although in cases like this where it's a flagship component... perhaps not. You see similar results in many companies with significant product lines... if it's relatively the same cost to manufacture nearly perfect products - how do you create the "need to upgrade" in your customer base from the less expensive SKUs to the higher margin ones?

Whether it's built-in obsolescence in consumer appliances, options catalogs and de-tuning in automobiles, etc. it all serves the same purposes. It's a delicate balancing act: make something bad enough that complete satisfaction is unattainable... while keeping it good enough that you don't lose the customer entirely. Sure it may be simple incompetence, bad QC, or something else... but I think most of it is a well-orchestrated manipulation of their respective markets and customer base.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,072
Likes
16,605
Location
Central Fl
I think in many cases - certainly with NAD, Marantz, PS Audio, etc. they have the equipment (and likely competent people to use it as well)... the problem is in SKU "tiering" mostly and the lack of consumer awareness. At least that's my guess. Although in cases like this where it's a flagship component... perhaps not. You see similar results in many companies with significant product lines... if it's relatively the same cost to manufacture nearly perfect products - how do you create the "need to upgrade" in your customer base from the less expensive SKUs to the higher margin ones?
You are completely correct, only none of these companies use "newer and better specs" to drive upgrade buying.
It's all done with marketing BS, magic dust claims, etc.
Marantz's published specs haven't changed for their AV pre/pro's for many years.
See 2012's 7701 VS todays TOTL 8805

AV7701
7701.png



AV8805

8805.png
 

RichB

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
1,946
Likes
2,611
Location
Massachusetts
You are completely correct, only none of these companies use "newer and better specs" to drive upgrade buying.
It's all done with marketing BS, magic dust claims, etc.
Marantz's published specs haven't changed for their AV pre/pro's for many years.
See 2012's 7701 VS todays TOTL 8805

AV7701
View attachment 43005


AV8805
View attachment 43006

If they wanted to keep busy, they could make DSP modes maintain the same S/N and distortion levels and in their spare time implement a proper digital filter.

- Rich
 
Last edited:

digicidal

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 6, 2019
Messages
1,981
Likes
4,838
Location
Sin City, NV
To be fair... they did put almost one dollar worth of copper in the 8800's chassis - so that, along with Japanese assembly labor = ~$2000 worth. ;)
Honestly with most of these brands, the case and the amount spent on marketing are usually the only differences between many SKUs... plus artificial restriction of channels in the lower bracket units. The boards and components are usually identical, so not surprising that the performance is as well.

I know I can hear all that copper when I'm using 2.2 channels of the 11.2 in mine (you can be damn sure of that). :facepalm::p
 

CharliePitt

New Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2020
Messages
1
Likes
0
It is a term we use in US for someone who is very picky and will not compromise. From the dictionary:

View attachment 33483

I usually try to user terms in my reviews that translate well into other languages but I can see I may have failed here. :)
One thing you should do is have a listening test as part of your conclusion
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,072
Likes
16,605
Location
Central Fl
One thing you should do is have a listening test as part of your conclusion
For the most part we don't do "sounds like" reports here, that stuff is left to the lamestream audiophool media.
If something is amiss in the sound of modern electronic gear, it is easily attributable to something in the measurements.
Speakers are another thing but most usually reflect the same result.
 
Top Bottom