WANTED: NAD sound with more high-end detail
|
Silver Member Username: SmittyCanada Post Number: 225 Registered: Dec-03 | So I swapped out my NAD T742 breifly for a NAD T752 and then a CA 540R in the spring mainly for a bit more power and more detail in the high end, particularly for HT. While the CA 540R is great for HT, I find it's missing something with music. I've convinced myself it's a lack of mid-bass. I could probably sell off the 540R and pick up a refurb T752 or for a bit more cash a T762 but I'm reluctant since I find the NAD seems to be missing some high-end detail which is particularly noticable with HT. I agree with this reviewer's comments on NAD sound:
NAD 218TX review Anyhow, I'd appreciate any suggestions on other receivers to try, preferably in the under US$800 range that has the magic NAD sound with just a bit bit more detail in the highs. Thanks, Smitty |
|
Silver Member Username: Devils_advocatePost Number: 400 Registered: Jul-05 | I would say the HK AVR-635 from www.jr.com for 699 might be up your alley. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 1969 Registered: Mar-05 | Smitty, why not gamble $15 for return shipping to Amazon.com and do an in-home audition of the Panny xr55 (see other thread) which just might shock the hell out of you, like it did me. Not enough "high-end detail" is something that could never be said about this $230 marvel. Jan is trying to nudge me towards rediscovering an affinity for my NAD separates for music listening, but I doubt seriously that the Panny's HT performance could be signficantly topped by any receiver under $2000. It's my experience that while music listening can be argued on any number of very subjective criteria (soundstaging, "naturalness," "warmth," etc.), HT all boils down to two simple things: adequate power for all channels, and adequate detail. I will respect those who've heard the Panny and dislike its presentation of music based on those aforementioned criteria, but in these two counts the Panny is IMHO impeccable for HT. The two quotes you posted I would never have agreed with just two weeks ago. Now however, after several days of getting used to the Panny's flawless detail at all frequencies and SPLs, I have to agree with the reviewer. What I'd do in your shoes is try out the Panny, if you like it for HT (I'm fairly certain you will based on what you've written) then sell off the 540R. If you dislike the Panny for music, by all means pick up another NAD but keep the Panny for HT. There is some chance you might like the Panny for both apps, in which case you walk away with quite a bit more money in your pocket. And if you absolutely detest the Panny, you're just $15 poorer...nickels and dimes. |
|
New member Username: AllenPost Number: 1 Registered: Sep-05 | That is why I chose my panny s55 dvd player over marantz, pioneer and nad. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1678 Registered: Feb-05 | As Chris Martens (The Perfect Vision) says of the Yamaha RX-V657 AVR ($550)"Hang on to your hats" "Yamaha's RX-V657 is, by a wide margin, the best sounding affordable AVR I've ever heard, and I think it will leave many card carrying audiophiles shaking their heads in disbelief." September/October 2005 Issue #63 "The Perfect Vision". |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 1975 Registered: Mar-05 | That Yammie is in Pioneer 1015 territory, at just under $400 on Pricegrabber. I have to say, Yamaha has nice cosmetics for the most part. |
|
Silver Member Username: DakulisSpokane, Washington United States Post Number: 512 Registered: May-05 | Sorry Smitty for hijacking your thread, Are you thinking about pulling the trigger on the Yamaha, Art? This could be scary, you and Paul tooting the same horn, THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING. LOL |
|
Silver Member Username: SmittyCanada Post Number: 226 Registered: Dec-03 | Wow, the night-shift was a busy one ;) Thanks for the suggestions. Edster, actually it wouldn't even cost me $15 for a try out since I can pick one up at a local big-box store and return it within 30 days for a full refund...if I had gobs of spare time I'd probably do this just for the hell of it. As well, the lack of a digitial output is kind of a deal breaker for me and buying two receivers isn't really an option. My guess is the music reproduction would be similar to the CA 540R at best. I don't supposed you've compared any Waylon Jennings between you NAD separates and the Panasonic? I find his music was particuarly good on the NAD but the CA is more orientied towards the Willy Nelson sound. BTW - country isn't the only thing I listen to ;), it's just that the receiver differences are quite apparent with these two artists. Art, have you heard the RX-V657 yourself? I breifly listened to an RX-V1400 a while ago and didn't like the musical reproduction, any idea if it sounds different from that model? No offence, but I don't put a lot of faith in magazine reviews - an AB by a NAD owner (such as yourself  would mean much more to me. Devil's Advocate, I was considering the AVR635 or even the AVR435. As far as I know the only feature difference is bass management on the 7.1 inputs. I may keep my eye out for a deal on one when the newer AVR640 and AVR440s come out. I'm wondering now if an external amplifier would make much difference in the sound or is it really the pre-amp that determines this quality. Or maybe part of my problem is that the subwoofer isn't properly calibrated? Any tips on the best way to do that? I basically have all my speakers set to small(the fronts are rated down to 35dB), the CA 540R crossover is fixed at 80Hz. I've played around with the settings a bit and didn't notice much difference though. Comments? |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1681 Registered: Feb-05 | No David I'm not going to buy the Yammie. If for some reason I came up with some bucks I might buy it for my second system but I'm satisfied with my NAD. Remember the review says it's the best budget AVR Chris has ever heard. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5756 Registered: May-04 | And, we have no idea how many Chris has ever heard. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1682 Registered: Feb-05 | I'm sorry Smitty I didn't answer your question. I have not heard that Yamaha receiver yet myself. I understand your reluctance to trust the article. Everything I've heard from Yamaha hasn't worked for me. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 1977 Registered: Mar-05 | Smitty, too bad about the digital output being a deal-killer, I really think that Panny might surprise you. I have no idea about Waylon Jennings, the closest to country music I ever get is Neil Young. If your speakers go down to 35Hz and your HPF is fixed at 80Hz that sounds like you could be getting a lot more from them than you are right now. Does your sub have high level inputs? If yes that's what I do, run the L/R speaker signal through the sub using the sub's own filter. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 1978 Registered: Mar-05 | PS. Make sure the next receiver you get has an HPF that goes down to 60 or preferably 40Hz. Or you can get this: http://www.hsustore.com/high-pass.html |
|
Bronze Member Username: SteelhrdPost Number: 24 Registered: Jul-05 | The funny thing about the yamaha 2500 is with the peq imposed it actually sounds good with music. without it the highs are harsh and themids are thin but this is correctable once it is setup properly. you cannot judge it by its out of the box sound. You have to take the time to tweek it. |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2452 Registered: Jan-05 | The best thing to do is stay away from NAD. The unit will probably soon break anyway, so you should avoid the agrivation. Eddie, people dont drink their own urine because they know it will taste awful. For the same reasons, nobody wants to demo the $200 Panny. Im sure it will sound better than you NAD, but that isnt saying much. |
|
Anonymous | ignore this redneck airhead Paul, people...he can never get enough attention with all his idiotic remarks, cause his wife despises him (much like we all do on this forum) and he has cobwebs between his legs to match the cobwebs between his ears! |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 1986 Registered: Mar-05 | ouch...you're not very nice today, Anon! |
|
Anonymous | Guess I don't suffer fools gladly, let alone STARK NAKED RAVING ****MORONS****!!! |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5757 Registered: May-04 | p - P.I.S.S. - 50 |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5758 Registered: May-04 | I'm not even sure what P.I.S.S. scale we're working with any longer. I had thought 1 thru 10 would cover it. It's so disappointing when you so underestimate ignorance. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1684 Registered: Feb-05 | Jan, I was talking about Chris Martens (The Perfect Vision) who has listened to quite a few budget AVR's. Sorry I wasn't clear about that. |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5760 Registered: May-04 | Well. Okey dokey then. |
|
Silver Member Username: SmittyCanada Post Number: 227 Registered: Dec-03 | Edster, I've gotten used to having a digital out to record music from the satellite dish and radio on my computer --- it wouldn't be the end of the world if I had to switch to analog outputs but it would be another one of those 'missing features' that would gnaw away at me. I looked at the specs for the XR70 and it has a digital output, but the HPF settings are 100, 150 and 200Hz --- a bit too hight for me. Oddly enough, the XR55 is fixed at 80Hz. Also strange is the 1 HDMI input/1 HDMI output, seems like it would be a lot more useful if there were 2 HDMI inputs. Thanks for you bass management opinions. I do have speaker-level inputs on my sub (Paradigm PS-1000) but I thought they were mainly intended as a fallback for receivers that didn't have a sub-out. It never occured to me to try to use them to better manage bass. I suppose I would set my fronts to 'Large', the center and rear to 'Small' and sub off. But in 5.1 direct mode, I think I'd run into problems unless I patched my DVD-A/SACD sub out directly into the sub, this may cause problems if I also have the speaker-level inputs. Another issue I have is my DVD-A/SACD player has a fixed HPF of 120Hz so I set all speakers to large. I'm not sure how that will work...definately something to play around with though. Say, do you have any SACD or DVD-A disks? If so, how do you find the performance with the XR55? Smitty |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 1994 Registered: Mar-05 | Smitty--- Yeah, the trouble with using the line level inputs on your sub or an external HPF is that it'd only work during 2-channel listening, you'd lose a lot of LFE from 5.1 DVDs. Actually the xr55's HPF is not fixed at 80, it can go up to 100, 150 and 200. I wished it went down to at least 60 though, my Ascends go down to 50. On the other hand I don't really care for thunderous bass during HT usage since most of the movies I like don't even have much LFE to begin with. I think some of the better disk players do have an independent LFE pre-out don't they? Check into the Pioneer 563 or 578. I'm not crazy about their music repro at all but I think they should be fine for movies and if they have that independent sub pre-out it'd be a lot cheaper than buying a new receiver. No I haven't gone near SACD or DVD-A...already have too many expensive habits! lol |
|
Gold Member Username: Paul_ohstbucksPost Number: 2456 Registered: Jan-05 | Your Panny crossover only goes down to 80hz? LOL |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2003 Registered: Mar-05 | yep, and it'd STILL run circles around your Yammie clunker, big boy! LOL |
|
Silver Member Username: JimvmLouisiana U.S.A. Post Number: 210 Registered: Apr-05 | Let me get this straight. Paul is the proud owner of CV's, which have the reputation of being good only for college frat parties and raves; and he is the proud owner of Bose speakers which have the reputation of . . well. . and he has balls to laugh at others' equipment. HAHAHAHAHAHA. |
|
Gold Member Username: Edster922Abubala, Ababala The Occupation Post Number: 2022 Registered: Mar-05 | ahem, I think the proper description of what Paul has in ever-appalling abundance is not so much "balls" as it is GALL. It certainly is not "brains," that's for sure! |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5774 Registered: May-04 | Balls for brains? Or have I missed by a few inches? |
|
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 357 Registered: Mar-04 | NAD treble sucks. i DESPISE my NAD reciever. LOL i bought an onkyo 55wpc 5 channel home theater reciever because once of it's tech claims is HF extension to 100KHz. i'll say this much... once i made the switch to the onkyo, my NHT superzeros sprung to life for once. it was like lifting the wet sleeping bag that NAD had placed over my tweeters. suddendly, everything sounded faster, more detailed and images snapped into focus. i really get annoyed with people who automatically dismiss japanese gear. i'll take my onkyo over NAD any day, every time. NAD is more for the hard of hearing who can't hear past 15KHz anymore or who just like a warm sound in general. i can't compare onkyo bass with NAD's, but i think NAD probably wins THAT battle being a high current design and all. my little 20-25wpc NAD can rattle my walls when used as a sub amp for my 12". i'm a bass hatin' treble freak, so onkyo works for me. denon is generally a little better for the $$$, but i chose my reciever to match the DVD player i already owned, and because i like onkyo's simpler lines better. the "big secret" in recievers these days is the Panasonic SA-XR70S. it's been getting alot of buzz in the audio underground. why? because it's one of the very first class-d recievers (other than something from $$$$+ manufacturers). class d gear is going to be big soon. the amplifier that has often been called "the best in the world" halcros, are class-d $20,000 units, but at the opposite end of the spectrum, alot of SET tube amp fans are really liking the $30 (that's right... $30) 15wpc/battery powered a/c adaptable sonic impact class-t and at least one manufacturer is selling a $450 hot rod version of it. the panasonic just so happens to share this same technology as many highly respected manufacturers who aren't going out of their way to spill the beans that they're using it too: Toccata Industry: TacT Millennium Bel Canto Design: Tripath Millennium Jeff Rowland PS Audio: HCA 2 eVo among a few others. i'm honestly considering the panny myself as it's the FIRST affordable reciever ($300 street) that can handle the 4 ohm loads that maggies require and ISN'T a dark sounding, unreliable NAD. $300 for a 100wpc X6 reciever that i've heard rumors of people selling their $1000 units for is at least something to keep your eye open for. who knows... maybe a few more "mid-fi" makers might be releasing class-d units next season too. samsung has already claimed "the most powerful reciever in the world" title with a class-d amp. class-d (aka ice power & digital switching) is nearly twice as efficient as standard A/B amplifiers. (90% vs. 50%) keep your ears open for this technology. i've yet to read a single professional review for a class-d amp that wasn't at least very good all the way up to a no hold barred rave. for class-d... panasonic is the cheapest game in town for the minute. i'm REALLY debating making the switch myself and selling BOTH of my current recievers or waiting to see what the next brands to offer it are. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1692 Registered: Feb-05 | "i'll take my onkyo over NAD any day, every time." LOL!!! I owned NHT's with an Onkyo reciver, the onkyo couldn't even adequately drive them. That even account for haow bad the Onkyo sounded. "i'm a bass hatin' treble freak, so onkyo works for me. denon is generally a little better for the $$$, but i chose my reciever to match the DVD player i already owned, and because i like onkyo's simpler lines better." Nuff said! |
|
Silver Member Username: DanmanQUEBEC CANADA Post Number: 530 Registered: Apr-04 | I agree Art, I listened to an Onkyo receiver last year in Montreal on my exact same speakers and it was okay but not much more. I felt it exagerated parts of the music that I felt was not natural. However, those are my ears and I'm keepin' them! |
|
Gold Member Username: Jan_b_vigneDallas, TX Post Number: 5779 Registered: May-04 | For someone who much prefers a super bright treble response and finds most amplifiers dull with excessive bass quantity, I would suggest you go back and read what the typical effect of pairing a four Ohm load with a digital amp might get you. Unless the Panasonic is designed to work into a four Ohm load (which is doubtful), you will end up will rolled off high frequencies. I would investigate the actual impedance load of the Magnepans and the loading preference of the receiver before spending your money. I would also suggest you totally ignore what reviewers say about any amplifier since you have made it clear in the past, whatever most people consider natural and musical, you "despise" because of your predilection toward excessively bright sound. And, please, do not mistake several companies using the same solitary part as a whitewash of that part's quality. It is, of course, how that part is implemented within the total circuit which is important. Not the part itself. |
|
Silver Member Username: SmittyCanada Post Number: 228 Registered: Dec-03 | Hokay...at this point I think I'll just stick with the CA 540R until I have an actual need that requires changing receivers, likey one of HDMI/DVI switching or Lip Sync delay if I ever end up splurging for an HDTV. My conclusion is a Panasonic Digital receiver could potentially be fine soundwise, but it lacks a few features I would prefer such as digital output, crossover settings below 80Hz and pre-amp outs. I've also seen no indication from anyone that other models of NAD receivers that I haven't tried, such as the T7x3 series and T762 might have a bit more detail in the highs. So, while I think I would generally prefer the NAD sound for music over the CA, I don't want to trade off the HT quality that the CA has for this. Thanks everyone for you input. Smitty |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 1695 Registered: Feb-05 | Excuse my early morning typing. "That even account for haow bad the Onkyo sounded." I meant to say; That doesn't even account for how bad the Onkyo sounded. To each his own right! |
Main Forums
Today's Posts- Home Audio Forum
- A/V Receivers Forum
- Amps Forum
- Cassette Forum
- CD Players Forum
- CD Recorders Forum
- DAC & Transports Forum
- DVD-Audio & SACD Forum
- Equalizers Forum
- Integrated Amps Forum
- iPod Docks Forum
- MiniDisc Forum
- Mini Systems Forum
- Digital Music Systems Forum
- Phono Forum
- Preamps Forum
- Speakers Forum
- Subwoofers Forum
- Tuners Forum
- Home Video Forum
- Home Theater Forum
- Car Audio Forum
- Accessories Forum
- All Forum Topics