Review and Measurements of NAD T758 V3 AVR

[amirm]

Is the M17 you mentioned in the queue now?

Not yet. I am due to meet the owner this Saturday to get it.

 

[BDWoody]

I should have mentioned that their official line is to not comment on any outside reviews or measurements. At Amir's suggestion, I asked if they could provide their detailed measurements of the device.
Unrelated, but it gave me a laugh out loud moment.. a guy in the AVS T758 thread referred to Amir as a known online agitator. At first my response was that isn't fair... but the more I think about it, as poor as the measurements have been for NAD and Anthem, maybe the audio world needs a little agitation I kind of like it... Amir the Agitator. Has a nice ring to it!

Back to the ASR t-shirt/hat/coffe mug line...

Could be on a mug, Amir the Agitator...with him holding his Emmy...

 

[Hugo9000]

But they have no problem putting out press releases when reviewers said good things about their products
https://nadelectronics.com/nad-m17-v2-wins-2019-top-pick-award/

[Edit:] An even more relevant one.
https://nadelectronics.com/nad-elec...eiver-by-worlds-most-prestigious-hi-fi-press/

Interesting on the Sound & Vision review. If it had been done just a couple of months earlier, there would have been a "Test Bench" section with some measurements. Or perhaps NAD would never have sent one for review at all if S&V hadn't dropped measurements of gear.

Anyway, don't forget that this is just a "forum" while that's a "magazine." lol Never mind that the "magazine" just has subjective impressions which could be made up without any gear even being present. Whereas Amir has measurements and pics of the gear at his place. Measurements can be confirmed or disputed and checked by someone else using similar gear and methodology. We're supposed to believe in these zero content "reviews" that include a few pics provided by the manufacturers and accompanied by a simple regurgitation of the provided specs, with a few adjectives and mentions of music or movies that might have been used in an audition of the gear? Seems pretty worthless even if the writer is honest. In the 80s it was different, if you wanted to see pics of gear you could buy a magazine or write to the manufacturer to request a brochure. Now, we can just go to the manufacturer's website immediately if we want to see their photos and read their claims about the gear. Why have a "magazine" as a middleman if they aren't providing anything extra?

We do have at least one magazine writer here that I am familiar with, but he writes informative columns and he interacts with readers across several sites. He has also done investigative pieces on things like SACD back in the day. He knows his readers and knows to check for and report on issues that are of concern to them. That is adding value.

My criticisms are with these "reviews" that are essentially no different to those we find randomly throughout the internet, many of which look like paid shilling, to be honest. I could very easily write a "review" of some Zu speakers without ever hearing any, simply using a few pics off the 'net, blurbs from the manufacturer, and a quick search to see what a lot of owners praise or complain about. It could be a glowing review or a negative one, or anything in between, depending on the agenda of the site or writer. Having measurements or other additional content lends some credibility and value.

I honestly don't think that a certain rag's reviews have been 'real' in many years. On the plus side, if I'm right, they at least have reduced their carbon footprint by dispensing with shipping heavy gear to and fro. From time to time they might feel the need to accept a shipment of gear from a legit manufacturer simply because the item has so much buzz, they don't want to be the only ones not writing about it. But the rest of the time, no need to ship anything or set it up, just write what they're paid to write, and use the provided adjectives, specs, and photos from the paying customer. lol

 

[digicidal]

I'm afraid almost all of the AVRs now will be mediocre performers considering the number of different technologies requiring licensing and or volume limitations (as we've discussed already with HDMI). Basically every different logo or sticker seen on the box or front of the device - is money which was denied to the engineer actually selecting the components.

I can only imagine how frustrating that would be: "OK after we've licensed the room correction system, all the AV codecs/standards, paid for our certifications and the advertising... you've got exactly $25 left in the budget to actually build the thing. Good luck!" Pretty hard to make magic with those kinds of constraints.

 

[RichB]

I'm afraid almost all of the AVRs now will be mediocre performers considering the number of different technologies requiring licensing and or volume limitations (as we've discussed already with HDMI). Basically every different logo or sticker seen on the box or front of the device - is money which was denied to the engineer actually selecting the components.

I can only imagine how frustrating that would be: "OK after we've licensed the room correction system, all the AV codecs/standards, paid for our certifications and the advertising... you've got exactly $25 left in the budget to actually build the thing. Good luck!" Pretty hard to make magic with those kinds of constraints.

These products have gone largely unscrutinized. Amps in AVRs are not tested with the rigor of a standalone amp.

ASR is testing AVRs with the rigor of a DAC. This should not be controversial.

There are high end processors provide no or minimal performance specifications, sometime not even preamp out voltages. It’s disgraceful. I mention this point on many sites and these posts are ignored.

- Rich

 

[temujin44]

Why is SINAD below 90 dB? Based on the fast Fourier Transform plot above isn't SINAD above 100 dB? Thanks.

 

[amirm]

Why is SINAD below 90 dB? Based on the fast Fourier Transform plot above isn't SINAD above 100 dB? Thanks.

SINAD is the sum of all distortions+noise. In the above, you correctly observe that the distortion is better than -100 dB. So it can't be setting the SINAD. Hence, it is noise that is dominating.

I know, next you will ask how that can be the case if the noise floor is at -120 dB. Answer is that it is not. FFT transform has a benefit that it substantially reduces the visual noise level in those graphs. I think the FFT there is 32K points which translates to better then 42 dB of noise reduction.

In summary, SINAD = noise level here, not distortion.

 

[temujin44]

Thank you. Much appreciated.

 

[peng]

I should have mentioned that their official line is to not comment on any outside reviews or measurements. At Amir's suggestion, I asked if they could provide their detailed measurements of the device.
Unrelated, but it gave me a laugh out loud moment.. a guy in the AVS T758 thread referred to Amir as a known online agitator. At first my response was that isn't fair... but the more I think about it, as poor as the measurements have been for NAD and Anthem, maybe the audio world needs a little agitation I kind of like it... Amir the Agitator. Has a nice ring to it!

So far, we have the following facts related to manufacturer responses to outside reviews/measurements:

1) When Audioholics.com's Gene asked D&M for their internal measurements (power output in this case), he got it.
2) When I forwarded Amir's AV8805 measurements link to Marantz and asked them about that huge distortion spike resulted from the spike in the ultrasonic band, they did not dispute or doubt Amir's measurements and explained that it was by design, that they chose to use the slow roll off filter to ensure flat response in the audible band. Never even doubt, or question Amir's methodology or anything.
3) NAD, would not comment, period..

Below is what I would like to share, my only customer support contact with Anthem:

A few years ago, I contacted them to clarify the specs of their MCA amp such as the low cross talk, and block capacitance that seemed very low compared to amps at similar price point. Also asked if they would tell me the transformer VA rating as it looked smaller than the one in my 200 W Adcom amp. Got a response to say will call me, but never did. So I email the gentleman again, no response. I took it that may be their engineering wouldn't want to respond to such simple and fair questions, but even an acknowledgement would have been nice.

So surprisingly, those two more boutique (just relatively speaking) like brands don't seem to do better, in fact worse..when it comes to customer support. If others have better experience on trying to get answers/comments on the technical aspects (specs, measurements etc.), I would love to hear about them.

 

[peng]

I feel pretty sure that a speaker that varies far from optimum can be helped by fixing upper frequencies. I've heard it on several speakers (Dirac and others), and haven't run into the situation where it hurts. Some say it does end up being a negative, but I've not found that. Yet most speakers I've done it to aren't of the good controlled directivity kind (like ESL panels).

Did you follow their instructions related to including the > Room transition frequency to be EQ'ed? I read it last night as I want to try this weekend. I have to read it again more careful but my first impression is that it involves taking more measurements at different locations and some trial and error.

I've used and like Tact as have others I know, ditto for Dirac, and everyone I personally know are anywhere from iffy to not at all liking Audyssey. Not sure how their approach differs and it has gotten better. It too often ends up far too bright in my opinion and those I know.

I bet using the later models with the Editor App would help a great deal, as that's what I found. With the app, you can choose to EQ below a certain frequency, disable the mid range dip and change the target curve.

Regarding filter approach, this is what I know about the popular/cheap ones and I am sure you know too:

Audyssey - FIR (finite impulse response).
YPAO - PEQ/IIR? (infinite impulse response).
Anthem ARC - IIR
Dirac - Mixed phase, i.e. combination of FIR and IIR approach..

and I have the feeling that if you ask Dr. Kyriakakis, he will tell you why their FIR approach is the best, likewise, Dr. Mathias would say their mixed phase approach are the best, while Dr. Schuck will say their IIR approach is the best. In terms of the potential benefits, or harm of applying DRC to include > the Schroeder frequency, I don't see any consensus other than unless you know what you are doing blablabla..........it is better not to and it may do more harm then good it you do blablabla...........

 

[digicidal]

These products have gone largely unscrutinized. Amps in AVRs are not tested with the rigor of a standalone amp. ASR is testing AVRs with the rigor of a DAC. This should not be controversial. There are high end processors with no performance specifications, sometime not even preamp out voltages. It’s disgraceful. I mention this point on many sites and these posts are ignored.

My guess is partly due to shame, partly due to ignorance respectively. It's very, very rare for an engineer/company that truly believes they have created a superlative product in a given category to be silent on it's merits - that even seems to apply if it's total snake oil and they're going on and on about how great their new power cord is.

At the same time, most consumers (without any means of measuring performance objectively) can only state that it sounds "good" or "bad" - and as such, can easily ignore criticism as noise in either case. If you didn't like the product/brand/etc. those posts are just "oh that must be why - but I've moved on so non-issue..." - and on the other side it's "well, I don't hear it, and I love it - so non-issue...".

I'm not sure there even is a solution to this dilemma. Whether we like it or not, the issues raised by the tests and reviews @amirm has done are clearly a non-issue for the vast majority of companies and consumers... because they've been acceptable for decades in some cases. Not that this isn't a reason to try to hold their feet to the fire and get more transparency (in both the disclosure and signal fidelity sense) - it definitely is. However, when a tiny minority of the market cries foul, while the rest of it dutifully pulls out their wallets in expectation (or immediately begins crafting glowing prose for the upcoming "review")... it's going to be a long process.

 

[maty]

Regarding filter approach, this is what I know about the popular/cheap ones and I am sure you know too:

Audyssey - FIR (finite impulse response).
YPAO - PEQ/IIR? (infinite impulse response).
Anthem ARC - IIR
Dirac - Mixed phase, i.e. combination of FIR and IIR approach..

and I have the feeling that if you ask Dr. Kyriakakis, he will tell you why their FIR approach is the best, likewise, Dr. Mathias would say their mixed phase approach are the best, while Dr. Schuck will say their IIR approach is the best. In terms of the potential benefits, or harm of applying DRC to include > the Schroeder frequency, I don't see any consensus other than unless you know what you are doing blablabla..........it is better not to and it may do more harm then good it you do blablabla...........

I was going to comment on this but if you are interested in the subject, open a thread and we will continue there. Or look if there is already one open about it.

 

[peng]

I'm afraid almost all of the AVRs now will be mediocre performers considering the number of different technologies requiring licensing and or volume limitations (as we've discussed already with HDMI). Basically every different logo or sticker seen on the box or front of the device - is money which was denied to the engineer actually selecting the components.

I can only imagine how frustrating that would be: "OK after we've licensed the room correction system, all the AV codecs/standards, paid for our certifications and the advertising... you've got exactly $25 left in the budget to actually build the thing. Good luck!" Pretty hard to make magic with those kinds of constraints.

Agreed in general, but there are some good offsets such as:

- Audio grade power transformers are getting better in terms of VA to weight and VA to $ ratio especially custom made one by mass producers such as Denon/Marant/Onkyo/Pioneer and Yamaha.
- Same with storage/block capacitors, they are getting much smaller for the same uf and rated voltage, and much cheaper.
- ICs, including the multiplexer switches, volume control, DACs and OPAs commonly found in AVRs/AVPs are also getting much better performance to price ratios all the time, though manufacturers seem slow to upgrade/update, likely due to inventory, and the fact that the old ones would sell for deep discounts, offsetting the advantage of the lower list prices of the newer ones.
- The use of thermal/OC control variable speeds fans allow for the use of fewer, lighter heat sinks.
- More generous use of cheaper plastic, and aluminium.
- More mass produced due to more consumer demands (not really sure about this one though, purely guessing..)

So I think in terms of power output, the older units may test better, but in terms of sound quality related measurements such as noise, distortions, cross talk, damping factor, slew rate, FR, I would say the new ones should be equal or better. On this point, one can get a good idea by referencing to the S&V, AH, HTHF, Audiosciencereview.com reviews/measurements.

 

[peng]

Dr. Toole's research and experience are well known and reasoning impeccable, to me anyway.
I think I heard a mic drop

- Rich

As I mentioned, I read a lot of his stuff, often multiple times, but in terms of being impeccable I am not too sure. To a point, yes.. To me, like others but may be less so, he is also opinionated on the audio related topics, albeit in a respectable way. Now that you pasted his comments on the EQ above Schroeder, so I really didn't remember wrong, as in terms of theory he is not categorically saying that it should not be done, rather, if it is to be done, it need to be under certain conditions, obviously including at least the ones he cited. Regarding the issues of resonances, not everyone has nice Revel speakers, so we shouldn't be surprised by user reports of how Dirac Live improved their audio hifi enjoyment, including those who did choose to EQ full range. I am not going to do a point by point, so suffice to make just one more point, that I see nothing wrong of using Dirac, AARC or Audyssey App, or YPAO+manual PEQ to use the target curve adjustments as "tone control". It is a lot easier, flexible and more accurate way than to use the old style knobs, sliders, or graphic/PEW settings etc. I tried REW with minidsp, still have the 2XHD, but I found it tedious to use and the minidsp cost me well over $200, not cheap anyway.

 

[maty]

From some years, the best idea is to wait for March and buy the Marantz / Denon / Yamaha from the previous year.

Before reviewing what new things incorporate. This year, the Alexa and other company spies. Luckily the devices do not have a microphone embedded, for now.

https://www.zkelectronics.com/compare/marantz-sr6014/usa/marantz-sr6013/usa/ and Dolby Atmos Height Virtualization

https://www.zkelectronics.com/compare/denon-avr-x4500h/usa/marantz-sr7013/usa/

 

[RichB]

As I mentioned, I read a lot of his stuff, often multiple times, but in terms of being impeccable I am not too sure. To a point, yes.. To me, like others but may be less so, he is also opinionated on the audio related topics, albeit in a respectable way. Now that you pasted his comments on the EQ above Schroeder, so I really didn't remember wrong, as in terms of theory he is not categorically saying that it should not be done, rather, if it is to be done, it need to be under certain conditions, obviously including at least the ones he cited. Regarding the issues of resonances, not everyone has nice Revel speakers, so we shouldn't be surprised by user reports of how Dirac Live improved their audio hifi enjoyment, including those who did choose to EQ full range. I am not going to do a point by point, so suffice to make just one more point, that I see nothing wrong of using Dirac, AARC or Audyssey App, or YPAO+manual PEQ to use the target curve adjustments as "tone control". It is a lot easier, flexible and more accurate way than to use the old style knobs, sliders, or graphic/PEW settings etc. I tried REW with minidsp, still have the 2XHD, but I found it tedious to use and the minidsp cost me well over $200, not cheap anyway.

My experience with Dirac on the XMC-1 is that engaged there is some processing or the DSP path that alters the sound stage. This was much less noticeable with PEQ below 150 Hz. Not sure what to make of that but I prefer that all corrections begin with transparency.
As a result, I use the Oppo UPD-205 -> Benchmark LA4 -> Benchmark HPA2's for 2 channel.

- Rich

 

[Dj7675]

So far, we have the following facts related to manufacturer responses to outside reviews/measurements:

1) When Audioholics.com's Gene asked D&M for their internal measurements (power output in this case), he got it.
2) When I forwarded Amir's AV8805 measurements link to Marantz and asked them about that huge distortion spike resulted from the spike in the ultrasonic band, they did not dispute or doubt Amir's measurements and explained that it was by design, that they chose to use the slow roll off filter to ensure flat response in the audible band. Never even doubt, or question Amir's methodology or anything.
3) NAD, would not comment, period..

Below is what I would like to share, my only customer support contact with Anthem:

A few years ago, I contacted them to clarify the specs of their MCA amp such as the low cross talk, and block capacitance that seemed very low compared to amps at similar price point. Also asked if they would tell me the transformer VA rating as it looked smaller than the one in my 200 W Adcom amp. Got a response to say will call me, but never did. So I email the gentleman again, no response. I took it that may be their engineering wouldn't want to respond to such simple and fair questions, but even an acknowledgement would have been nice.

So surprisingly, those two more boutique (just relatively speaking) like brands don't seem to do better, in fact worse..when it comes to customer support. If others have better experience on trying to get answers/comments on the technical aspects (specs, measurements etc.), I would love to hear about them.

Thank you for posting you experience. The lacking of detailed measured specs by NAD on their products, with their “no comment” policy probably tells us all that is needed to know. Also there were really no measurements on this unit despite quite a lot of “reviews” showing the product, talking about features such as Dirac.
The lesson is to make sure something is measured and you should really trust a brand or product until a product has been tested. I guess the only caveat might be a company like Benchmark or some others that actually test their products and post those results as part of their product description. This will be the last time purchasing a product without such measurements.

 

[peng]

Also there were really no measurements on this unit despite quite a lot of “reviews” showing the product, talking about features such as Dirac.

Agreed, but the T758 V3, if that's what you are referring to, was in fact measured by S&V, just no IMD, FFT/harmonic contents, and SINAD, not as detailed as Amir's.

 

[RichB]

Thank you for posting you experience. The lacking of detailed measured specs by NAD on their products, with their “no comment” policy probably tells us all that is needed to know. Also there were really no measurements on this unit despite quite a lot of “reviews” showing the product, talking about features such as Dirac.
The lesson is to make sure something is measured and you should really trust a brand or product until a product has been tested. I guess the only caveat might be a company like Benchmark or some others that actually test their products and post those results as part of their product description. This will be the last time purchasing a product without such measurements.

Measurements are best but I am inclined to trust manufactures that publish comprehensive specifications.

- RIch

 

[rodtor]

This is my first post, after following this forum fairly closely for a number of months. It has been a wonderful learning experience. As other newcomers have done, I want to thank Amir for his reviews and his leadership here. I have also learned extensively from the many other technically proficient participants in ASR threads.

I own an NAD C 368 amplifier. It seems satisfactory to me, but this review of another NAD product and, in particular, NAD's failure to respond to it in a satisfactory way, have been very disappointing. When I begin to look for a new amp in the future, I will know where to look for reliable data about products are worth considering. NAD isn't likely to be in the running next time.