Review and Measurements of NAD T758 V3 AVR

[JoachimStrobel]

Trying to reproduce a sound field with two speakers is tough. Everything seems to impact the experience - the power chord, the color of the CD cover, spikes, every $ spent on esoteric equipment. Multichannel with high bit rates seems to be more forgiving. Three speakers for the stage, a simulated concert hall - or direct sound from each speaker. Eqed to the sweet spot. Could it be that different rules apply for a multichannel setup hence an AVR?

 

[audimus]

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

Any alteration in the localizable spectrum changes the soundstage. That does not imply it is necessarily making it worse.

With perfect speakers in perfect rooms with perfect equipment, you get to hear what is on the recording. Most don’t have that kind of set up.

Also, let us eliminate the other extreme of crappy equipment with considerable cross-talk, etc that destroys the sound stage.

Most (at least the ones that like it enough to visit audio forums) live in the middle where the sound stage is what their equipment/room combination displays which may or may not be related to the studio reproduction of that sound. For example, if the highs are rolled off and the low/mid frequency sounds are in the center stagewise, the stage will sound compressed for that recording. But when you apply an eq to provide more gain to higher frequencies to balance them as many of the room correction systems do, you notice the stage spread out. This is going towards more “transparency” not less. It can be a lot more subtle than that. For example, without eq, a dip in mid/high might reduce the higher audible harmonics of cymbals and reeds, which could result in a number of artifacts. It could move the instrument on the sound stage towards the center or the edges than actual recording but an EQ to make it flat in that region moves it the other way.

The above is obvious and audible to anyone doing experiments with target curves or EQ filters.

But the question of what is making it better and closer towards the recording and what is making it worse is not very obvious. We do not have a good known standard stage to compare it to with sufficient controls and proximity and we are also subject to the same biases as judging sound quality when we know whether EQ is being applied or not as to which one sounds better or has better sound stage.

So perception of soundstage is subject to same pitfalls as SQ evaluation between two configurations.

While there are strong (and often dogmatic) opinions on the field on full spectrum eq, the commercial eq systems have all gone into that and that is not necessarily bad. It helps overcome many of the deficiencies of the entire audio chain when done carefully. Room correction is just one part of it.

 

[digicidal]

Trying to reproduce a sound field with two speakers is tough. Everything seems to impact the experience - the power chord, the color of the CD cover, spikes, every $ spent on esoteric equipment. Multichannel with high bit rates seems to be more forgiving. Three speakers for the stage, a simulated concert hall - or direct sound from each speaker. Eqed to the sweet spot. Could it be that different rules apply for a multichannel setup hence an AVR?

I have no doubt that a well played power chord can make any system sound better - the power cord, on the other hand, not so much.

I highlighted the relevant bit there. There's no difference, outside (as you correctly pointed out) the fact that it's much easier to develop a convincing sense of immersion with multiple speakers throughout the room as opposed to two. Anything that actually affects sound reproduction (as opposed to your examples) still applies to surround sound as well. The difference is that the companies preying on people's insecurities and egos haven't had nearly as much time with the multi-channel markets. Look at streaming... it took a little while, but now we've got esoteric ethernet switches, usb cables, etc. I'd give it only a few years before someone markets a $15K blu-ray transport crafted of solid copper.

The other possibility is that multichannel customers are mostly just interested in watching movies - so there's less of a concern? Despite having higher quality audio in many cases, movie audio is much less a target for "boutique sound solutions" - perhaps because we connect on a more emotional (therefore also more irrational) level with music for the most part? Hard to say for sure. One final guess would be that due to the constant requirement for upgrades due to channels, features, codecs, etc. in AVRs - they know they'll get another $2-4K from you every couple years... so they don't need to work as hard to figure out how to convince you to blow $20K all at once.

 

[D700]

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

Do you have a test that measures the dynamic range reproduced of live music? I swear the 368 I had didn’t render full dynamic range of CD over optical. It sounded loud but somehow flat, like it was compressed. I used a handheld meter, compared a few other AMPs I had, set avg SPL same (@75db) but saw as much as 7 decibel higher peaks ( and lower lows but was hard to get accurate reading in my noisy room) in the other non NAD units. The NAD just didn’t play bass and drums with that wet thwack sound, compared to the others. I listened to a few other NADs and once I heard it, I couldn’t unhear it...I wrote it off to a bad unit and personal bias....but after your review, beginning to wonder if they’ve cheaped out somewhere.

 

[Sal1950]

This is my first post, after following this forum fairly closely for a number of months.

Welcome rodtor, enjoyed your post.
Your 368 looks to be a great stereo integrated which I'm sure provides excellent sound reproduction no matter how or if it may miss SOTA measurements in some slight manner. In the case of the 758 I also found it troubling that they didn't seem to take the problems seriously. We can only hope (and I do believe this to be the case) that dispite avoiding a public discussion they may be realizing that there is an undercurrent of objective audiophiles who are starting to pay attention and that improvements in these areas may be a good marketing approach.
Cheers

 

[Sal1950]

My experience with Dirac on the XMC-1

Rich, not to stray too far OT here but I'd like to ask you about your experience with the XMC.
It's been my impression that the Emo AV's seem to suffer from a lot of general bugs in the OS software.
I've read quite a few web posts from people that weren't too happy.
Have you had the kind of experience that would lead you to purchase their next AVP?
TIA, Sal

 

[GrimSurfer]

Re: Consumer level AVP performance

One final guess would be that due to the constant requirement for upgrades due to channels, features, codecs, etc. in AVRs - they know they'll get another $2-4K from you every couple years... so they don't need to work as hard to figure out how to convince you to blow $20K all at once.

This certainly sounds reasonable and would explain a lot.

 

[rodtor]

Welcome rodtor, enjoyed your post.
Your 368 looks to be a great stereo integrated which I'm sure provides excellent sound reproduction no matter how or if it may miss SOTA measurements in some slight manner.

Thanks, Sal1950, for your warm greeting. If the evidence presented on the Polish site that is often referred to here is anything to go by, the C 368 falls some distance short of reproducing the 96 db of CD-quality recordings. But reviews on that site, which cover many of the similarly-priced integrated amps now on the market, suggest that the NAD's performance may be competitive with most of them, better than some. I certainly can enjoy it. But Amir's measurements make it clear that there are now at least a few power amps out there that are not too expensive while having TDH & N at or below 95 db. The more people become aware of this, the more we might hope that companies will see this as something they have to concern themselves with.

 

[digicidal]

Thanks, Sal1950, for your warm greeting. If the evidence presented on the Polish site that is often referred to here is anything to go by, the C 368 falls some distance short of reproducing the 96 db of CD-quality recordings. But reviews on that site, which cover many of the similarly-priced integrated amps now on the market, suggest that the NAD's performance may be competitive with most of them, better than some. I certainly can enjoy it. But Amir's measurements make it clear that there are now at least a few power amps out there that are not too expensive while having TDH & N at or below 95 db. The more people become aware of this, the more we might hope that companies will see this as something they have to concern themselves with.

I wouldn't worry too much about it - almost no CD's come anywhere close to the theoretical DR limits... most recordings are mastered so far below it that FM radio has enough - let alone the CD, amp, or anything else. Couple that with the fact that your speakers are almost certainly worse, and the fact that even if you've turned your house into an anechoic chamber - you're unlikely to enjoy listening to a level that give you that much DR above the noise floor of the room.

All that being said - no reason why source components (especially digital ones) shouldn't have at least 16bits (capability) - it's obviously possible with very inexpensive components as Topping and others have demonstrated. I definitely agree that we should hope they take notice and improve their products - whether we can hear that difference or not. No one should strive to be the weakest link in the signal chain... but it seems some do.

 

[amirm]

FYI, I picked up the NAD M17 V2 processor this afternoon and just finished the measurements. Will post the review tomorrow....

 

[Sal1950]

FYI, I picked up the NAD M17 V2 processor this afternoon and just finished the measurements. Will post the review tomorrow....

wOOt
NAD's really on the hot seat now.
Thanks

 

[amirm]

They definitely are as the owner also loaned me the companion, M27, 7 channel amplifier.

 

[JoachimStrobel]

I have no doubt that a well played power
The other possibility is that multichannel customers are mostly just interested in watching movies - so there's less of a concern? Despite having higher quality audio in many cases, movie audio is much less a target for "boutique sound solutions" - perhaps because we connect on a more emotional (therefore also more irrational) level with music for the most part? Hard to say for sure. One final guess would be that due to the constant requirement for upgrades due to channels, features, codecs, etc. in AVRs - they know they'll get another $2-4K from you every couple years... so they don't need to work as hard to figure out how to convince you to blow $20K all at once.

Or marketing does the maths: 3k$ for a speaker or 2ch amp might go, but that times 3 for basic multichannel? I guess that killed Quadro in the 70’s.
I was about to let it go but then you hit a nerve: Movies and sound.
Listening to music without seeing the artist is a real problem. Listening in solitude to two speakers trying to recreate the soundstage and the musician will one day probably be looked at as an archaic experience.
After I saw and heard the first concerts with a projector from a Laserdisc, the first medium for that, I knew what I was missing from stereo. Hearing with the eye makes audio equipment secondary. And the better the video the better the sound, the eye seems to translate sharp pictures into good sound. I sadly have not seen a 4K concert yet..

 

[Sal1950]

They definitely as the owner also loaned me the companion, M27, 7 channel amplifier.

That'll be interesting, a nCore Hypex based amp that has some measured competition here..

 

[Julf]

Trying to reproduce a sound field with two speakers is tough. Everything seems to impact the experience - the power chord, the color of the CD cover, spikes, every $ spent on esoteric equipment.

Key phrase is "seems to".

 

[RichB]

Rich, not to stray too far OT here but I'd like to ask you about your experience with the XMC.
It's been my impression that the Emo AV's seem to suffer from a lot of general bugs in the OS software.
I've read quite a few web posts from people that weren't too happy.
Have you had the kind of experience that would lead you to purchase their next AVP?
TIA, Sal

It's a fair question. The short answer is yes. I am looking for SOTA performance on the mains and surrounds, HDMI 2.0b switching upgradable to HDMI 2.1, and DSP processing that does noticeably impact the performance.

There is a very generous trade-in program where the top of the line RMC-1 is under $3K and XMC-2 is $700 and the RMC-1L is under $2K.
This is very attractive to any XMC-1 owner. Even with the older video board the upgrade is about $1K. There is a value in maintaining current.

The XMC-1 V3 video board is also used in the RMC-1(L) and XMC-2 and there are still some switching issues. It will never be as fast as the Marantz AV8805 but is close to as reliable. My LG C9 (HDMI 2.1) still takes about 3 seconds to switching but is better than the C7 with the same board. That is no big deal to me. However, there are still gremlins that I (and others) experience with loss of center channel with up-mixed 2.0 sources. This requires toggling the surround mode to correct.

The RMC-1 and XMC-2 do not yet have Dirac support so they are incomplete. I do expect Dirac should arrive by Christmas.
It is also fair the say that Emotiva has a tendency to announce products with working prototypes which seem to take 2+ years to come to fruition.
They have frustrated many, even loyalists.

There are new processors on the horizon including the fully balanced Monoprice HTP-1 ($4K) and quasi balanced JBL SDP-55 ($6k).
The DSP processing rate is not yet published from Emotiva, the HTP-1 is 48kHz and not published by the SDP-55.

I am a bit annoyed that new processors that cost $4K+provide do not support more than 48 kHz. Five years-ago there were processors capable of 96kHz.

- Rich

 

[Thomas savage]

Yes I am so pitiful I reply to my own posts.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627312007635

Here is an article showing that blind people use built in brain filters for vision when reading via braille. So kind of interesting.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0896627312007635

This one is about how the brain processes a single sound anomaly vs how it responds to several successive anomalies in audible sounds.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0085791

This one is behind a pay wall. It shows that existing brain filtering is improved by the acquisition of literacy. The visual processing is enhanced, and related processing areas are altered to take over different tasks. Visual processing of letters becomes more localized in a visual center of the left brain and as a result pattern matching for human faces becomes more localized in the right hemisphere. Interesting stuff at least to me.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrn3924

Iv bought a couple of his books off the back of your recommendations, indeed this is not the first time iv done this and you've not let me down so far. All have been brilliant reads.

Thank you Dennis !

 

[Thomas savage]

They definitely as the owner also loaned me the companion, M27, 7 channel amplifier.

It's great to hear you have a pair of NAD's and are intent on taking them in hand and documenting their performance.

 

[amirm]

M17 V2 review is out: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-and-measurements-of-nad-m17-v2-pre-pro.8998/

 

[amirm]

That'll be interesting, a nCore Hypex based amp that has some measured competition here..

Ah, didn't realize they were ncore based.