Review and Measurements of NAD T758 V3 AVR

[RichB]

I think we do agree most of the times except the audibility of differences between amps such as the ATI Hypex class D vs their class AB kind of stuff. Dr. Rich appears to be still working with hometheaterhifi.com, based on the linked posted by @jhaider yesterday. The article was dated Aug 28, 2019, still hot off the press. So I hope he's not retired yet, at least part time would be great. Imo there is a real shortage of qualified EE who are experts in audio/video and who participate on forums where guys like you and I frequent.

I offered a few folks and a couple of review sites the opportunity to borrow my AT522NC. So far, no takers...

- Rich

 

[audimus]

That points to you liking the sound of the distortion at first glance - just because you like it that doesn't equate to it being audible transparent, it just means you like its sonic signature. However, have you double blind, level matched, A/B tested it against your other amplifiers? Unless you've done that, we're not going to place much stock in your preference...

What we need is an unsighted, hogtied, hand-cuffed double-blind test for the objectivists using three amps that measure at different distortion and noise floor levels and one that is at the highest transparency to see if they can spot a difference between them and identify the ones without distortion from the transparent one. If they cannot, what stock can we place in their measurement claims?

 

[Sal1950]

Bottomline, don´t toss the T758 aside yet. Give it a try and take a personal informed decision

I get what your saying about Dirac and room correction
But that's no reason to applaud or recommend a product that fails so badly at the most basic of tasks.
Amir and ASR will continue to look for something better and to report the facts honestly.

 

[RichB]

What we need is an unsighted, hogtied, hand-cuffed double-blind test for the objectivists using three amps that measure at different distortion and noise floor levels and one that is at the highest transparency to see if they can spot a difference between them and identify the ones without distortion from the transparent one. If they cannot, what stock can we place in their measurement claims?

Consumers cannot be expected to double-blind components in their home. I have SBT's AVR amps and there have successfully identified the AT522NC versus the AT4000. These are very different designs and I would not say that for other amps. The AT522NC is the most distinguishable amp I have ever owned. So, we have amps that measure differently that, IMO sound differently. That is why I like to see AT522NC measured and see if something pops out.

Also, different does not indicate preference. I preferred the AT4000 over the AT522NC but I think many would prefer the AT522NC.

- Rich

 

[digicidal]

@GrimSurfer True, although one could argue that the previous 2 numbers games are still underway and largely unaffected by regulation (they just changed the way they skirt the rules a little).

I'd still rather see at least a few of them try to push the envelope a little bit. In all honesty, I like upgrading gear - shiny new stuff pleases me... but I don't do it very often, even when (and where) I can easily afford to. When all I'm getting is another 2 channels I won't use, and an extra sticker on the front... but the same performance, it's really hard to justify (both financially and environmentally).

 

[peng]

What we need is an unsighted, hogtied, hand-cuffed double-blind test for the objectivists using three amps that measure at different distortion and noise floor levels and one that is at the highest transparency to see if they can spot a difference between them and identify the ones without distortion from the transparent one. If they cannot, what stock can we place in their measurement claims?

I think the so called "objectivists" do focus much more on measurements and specs but not how they sound subjectively. Reason being that subjective impression of sound quality is just that, subjective.. So what sounds better to one could/may be different to another. If I tell someone my AVR-X4400H sounds better than the AV8801 it replaced, and as good as my separates, I don't expect it would be taken as facts that apply to everyone, because it won't be, it would be just my own preference/perception. On the other hand, measurements of either gear would be the same if the same instrument and methodology are used.

 

[peng]

I have owned several high end AVRs, including Denon´s 4520CI, Yamaha Aventage, Pioneer SC-75 (grrreat THX AVR) and SC-85. The NAD T758v3 is far better than any of them, with DIRAC making a huge difference. Sound is breathtaking and bass management is far superior. However, I use it in a small room and have never pushed it beyond -5 dB and have an Emotiva 5 channel amp taking care of atmos and center duties. Speakers are Kef LS50 for fronts and center and smaller Kefs surrounds for rest of 5.1.4 setup.

The NAD has several issues, specially with ARC, but sound isn´t one of them. Check the thread at AVS and almost anyone will atest to that. I accept that maybe its DAC may be sub pared (NAD won´t even disclose the brand), but DIRAC makes it up for that. Room correction will always, always, always be more important for sound than a DAC, and if correctly implemented, DIRAC WILL provide a very pleasurable sound experience (at least for 95% of the people who have actually heard it). I really think the tested device must have some kind of flaw. And even if it doesn´t, consider that any distortion is only measurable (and hardly perceptible) at reference levels, so loud it will really be annoying to ears in a normal room.

I do have a separate 2 channel setup for music, so can´t give an opinion on that. However, my 5.1 music blu rays (Steven Wilson, Porcupine Tree, Rush, Roger Waters, Marillion, etc.) sound absolutely sublime with the NAD.

Bottomline, don´t toss the T758 aside yet. Give it a try and take a personal informed decision.

That's great, as I am about to test Dirac Live using my LS50, it will be in two channel stereo only. Regarding the DAC, put it this way, the higher end T777 has the very average PCM1690, so it may be reasonable to assume the T758 has the same. Even the ex flag ship model, the T787 has the PCM1690 onboard. That's a popular one because D+M's used it too until 2016 when they finally upgraded to much better (specs) AK4458, and the even better one AK4490 for their flag ship AVR-X8500H and AV8805. The fact is, NAD stayed behind with the LSI chip for the preamp and an average DAC chip for their AVRs, though if the reason is so they can spend the money on what matters most, i.e. Dirac Live, then it may be wise on their part, assuming Dirac Live is really that good in terms of making audible improvements.

 

[Sal1950]

I think the so called "objectivists" do focus much more on measurements and specs but not how they sound subjectively. Reason being that subjective impression of sound quality is just that, subjective.. So what sounds better to one could/may be different to another. If I tell someone my AVR-X4400H sounds better than the AV8801 it replaced, and as good as my separates, I don't expect it would be taken as facts that apply to everyone, because it won't be, it would be just my own preference/perception. On the other hand, measurements of either gear would be the same if the same instrument and methodology are used.

If the two were tested under DBT and determined to sound different, that would then become a objective result.
Claims over which of the two was "better" could then easily be determined by measurement.
You can't hear the difference in everything that can be measured.
But you can measure the difference in everything you can hear.

 

[audimus]

I think the so called "objectivists" do focus much more on measurements and specs but not how they sound subjectively. Reason being that subjective impression of sound quality is just that, subjective.. So what sounds better to one could/may be different to another. If I tell someone my AVR-X4400H sounds better than the AV8801 it replaced, and as good as my separates, I don't expect it would be taken as facts that apply to everyone, because it won't be, it would be just my own preference/perception. On the other hand, measurements of either gear would be the same if the same instrument and methodology are used.

This is totally missing the point of the parody.

Let us say a “subjectivist” likes a particular amp as personal preference and is not proselytizing nor claiming it to be the best. Nothing wrong with that. The “objectivist” says that this amp measures X in noise and distortion and not as good as another amp in measurements. The “subjectivist” says that those noise measurements don’t bother him because it is inaudible.

The answer to this from the objectivist should be to objectively establish the relationship between noise/distortion and audibility and show how and beyond what threshold they become audible and so one is better off buying a different amp with less distortion. Questioning the subjectivist’s subjectivity preference isn’t an objective argument. It is deflection.

 

[peng]

If the two were tested under DBT and determined to sound different, that would then become a objective result.
Claims over which of the two was "better" could then easily be determined by measurement.
You can't hear the difference in everything that can be measured.
But you can measure the difference in everything you can hear.

Agreed, but "better" in that case would be reference to "original", that means more accurate I guess. As an example, assuming Dirac Live levels the bass response between 20 Hz to 200 Hz, you can confirm that with measurements, but it would be hard to confirm the "better" part because apparently lots of people prefer a few big bumps in that range, as evidence by many who don't prefer any sort of REQ applied to their systems.

 

[peng]

This is totally missing the point of the parody.

Let us say a “subjectivist” likes a particular amp as personal preference and is not proselytizing nor claiming it to be the best. Nothing wrong with that. The “objectivist” says that this amp measures X in noise and distortion and not as good as another amp in measurements. The “subjectivist” says that those noise measurements don’t bother him because it is inaudible.

The answer to this from the objectivist should be to objectively establish the relationship between noise/distortion and audibility and show how and beyond what threshold they become audible and so one is better off buying a different amp with less distortion. Questioning the subjectivist’s subjectivity preference isn’t an objective argument. It is deflection.

I don't know if I missed any point or we simply have different view points. To me, if an "objectivist" says an amp that measured with X in noise and distortion is not as good as another amp, then it would be because it was a fact that "X" is higher when measured the same way and it would be "better" only under the conditions it was measured and only in terms of the measurements. An that "objectivist" would not likely say the amp would "sound" better as that wouldn't sound too objective.. So I guess we have different understanding of what an objectivists is, and if so, that shouldn't surprise anyone either.

 

[speedy]

I have owned several high end AVRs, including Denon´s 4520CI, Yamaha Aventage, Pioneer SC-75 (grrreat THX AVR) and SC-85. The NAD T758v3 is far better than any of them, with DIRAC making a huge difference. Sound is breathtaking and bass management is far superior.

Bottomline, don´t toss the T758 aside yet. Give it a try and take a personal informed decision.

This has been my experience as well and I'm mentioning this from a place of curiosity... I'd like to learn how the NAD T758 has A/B'd so well against other receivers/processors that I've compared it against while having such awful test results. Maybe I just have broken ears

 

[audimus]

I don't know if I missed any point or we simply have different view points. To me, if an "objectivist" says an amp that measured with X in noise and distortion is not as good as another amp, then it would be because it was a fact that "X" is higher when measured the same way and it would be "better" only under the conditions it was measured and only in terms of the measurements. An that "objectivist" would not likely say the amp would "sound" better as that wouldn't sound too objective.. So I guess we have different understanding of what an objectivists is, and if so, that shouldn't surprise anyone either.

The different viewpoints come into conflict when an objectivist talks (down) to a subjectivist as evidenced earlier which prompted my parody.

Further, it brings up the relevance of a measurement. Just because, something is objectively measured and you can establish a pecking order between them does not necessarily mean there is any real world relevance to those measurements.

Imagine a site that keeps measuring the 0-60 timings and CoD numbers for cars and ranking them accordingly. A subjectivist says, I like driving X to work even though it measures low on that totem pole. The members of that site pounce on him and say, unless you can show that in an unsighted driving test, you can actually distinguish between X and something else, we cannot place any stock in what you say, what you are saying is very subjective and what you like may not be what someone else prefers.

The subjectivist looks at them like creatures from another planet that are just living in some irrelevant bubble.

This is the problem. Audio science that is totally divorced from experience (subjective or not) is like math - dealing with symbols that may or may not have real world interpretations. If so, then it is just a bunch of grown men playing marbles of their own choosing.

There should be a disclaimer on the site that what is ranked here may not have any bearing on what it sounds like to you. But that isn’t really the implication, is it?

So, rather than using this subjectivist/objectivist banners like using Yankee or Sox pennants to jeer at the other and feel good about themselves, we should be trying to address what the objective implications of those numbers are, not just live in theoretical hierarchies.

 

[amirm]

If I tell someone my AVR-X4400H sounds better than the AV8801 it replaced, and as good as my separates, I don't expect it would be taken as facts that apply to everyone, because it won't be, it would be just my own preference/perception.

Problem is, we don't even know it applies to you! Unless your tests are controlled, whatever outcome you report will be unreliable unfortunately.

 

[SmackDaddies]

Problem is, we don't even know it applies to you! Unless your tests are controlled, whatever outcome you report will be unreliable unfortunately.

pfft. My opinion is infallible. They rest of you yahoos....

 

[Thomas savage]

It's black , what more do you want.

 

[xhattan]

So here's what you're saying @xhattan:

You have a 758 but much of the amplification is being handled by your Emotiva. Filling a small room at less than reference levels.

You acknowledge that the DAC is sub-par but DIRAC will take care of that. Please explain how audio correction solves SINAD, THD etc.

Now explain on what logical basis, following an independent measurement by an extremely competent source that says that the 758 has serious performance shortcomings, we should buy and try.

1. Fronts, center and surrounds are handled by the T758v3. That´s about 80 or 85% of the load in a 5.1.4 setup. And it does so in a very efficient way, providing amazing dynamics (well, my monitors are amazing too, but still) and image.

2. DIRAC doesn´t solve the DAC problem (if there is in fact a DAC problem - I said I could MAYBE accept that) but even so, I will take a sub par DAC with DIRAC instead of a state of the art DAC with Audyssey or YPAO any day of the week. Including holidays. And even at reference levels.

How many of you will be able to notice such distortion (assuming there is one) and will even play music or movies at such loud volume? Amir - correct me if I´m wrong - said that the distortion happens at extremely loud levels. But you WILL definitely HEAR the difference in room correction, at any level.

3. Hey, for $1400 american dollars, get the Denon x4500, or the Yamaha 2080, or a Marantz (would never recommend Onkyo). I don´t give a damn. Blow your ears at reference levels with a 0.05 THD and 125 wpc from any of those, get the Audyssey Pro for better calibration. But you won´t get the sound coming from the T758v3. All I suggested was to give a try. That is, if you can live without ARC and only 3 HDMI inputs (it annoys me, but I can).

 

[xhattan]

That's great, as I am about to test Dirac Live using my LS50, it will be in two channel stereo only. Regarding the DAC, put it this way, the higher end T777 has the very average PCM1690, so it may be reasonable to assume the T758 has the same. Even the ex flag ship model, the T787 has the PCM1690 onboard. That's a popular one because D+M's used it too until 2016 when they finally upgraded to much better (specs) AK4458, and the even better one AK4490 for their flag ship AVR-X8500H and AV8805. The fact is, NAD stayed behind with the LSI chip for the preamp and an average DAC chip for their AVRs, though if the reason is so they can spend the money on what matters most, i.e. Dirac Live, then it may be wise on their part, assuming Dirac Live is really that good in terms of making audible improvements.

If 2 channel is your thing, then you should just get an integrated amp. DIRAC LIVE will enhance your stereo experience a bit, but not make a huge difference as it does with multichannel. I have a 2 channel setup comprising an old, yet very capable AVR, Aventage Yamaha 1020 (2012 model), and I don´t feel I´m missing anything from the T758, after a head to head comparison, with same equipment (OPPO 103, Debut Carbon turntable, tube Pro-ject phono preamp).

Just my 2 cents.

 

[peng]

Problem is, we don't even know it applies to you! Unless your tests are controlled, whatever outcome you report will be unreliable unfortunately.

Exactly my point.

 

[xhattan]

This has been my experience as well and I'm mentioning this from a place of curiosity... I'd like to learn how the NAD T758 has A/B'd so well against other receivers/processors that I've compared it against while having such awful test results. Maybe I just have broken ears

My guess is Amir got a lemon, or DIRAC wasn´t implemented correctly or implemented at all. NAD is now aware of this measurements (some guy at AVS sent it to them), so let´s wait for their response.