|
Ian | I just auditioned candidates for the position of "My New Receiver". I threw out the Onkyo 601/701 and Denon 3803 as soon as I listened to a NAD T761. The sound was beautiful. The only other model to come close was the Marantz 7300. However, the T761 does not have the more advanced surround features of the others. So my question is, should I take the Marantz now, or wait until the NAD T762 arrives in Hong Kong? Any advice much appreciated. |
|
| The "advanced surround features" are nonsense. DTS is best, Dolby Digital next. Prologic is good for VHS tapes. Stereo is best for real music, though watch out for DVD-Audio. I would get the NAD, if will do all those to the highest standard. I have the T 760 and it is just great. |
|
| I have just purchased a T762 and I love it. It is sensational in all respects. |
|
Hawk | The NAD 742 (NAD's cheapest receiver) is a better receiver than the Marantz 7300. The 762 is so much better that it isn't even close. I like the Marantz a lot and I understand why you would like it, but in many ways it is just another nearly identical receiver made by the Japanese Audio Cartel. They want to sell you on the features and tell you that the NAD doesn't have this or that, but the fact is that after you try out these features to see what they do, you won't use them. Additionally, the NAD's power supply is better than many separate amps, so I would get the 762 and not think twice about it. The only thing that matters is the sound. That is why we get a receiver--to give us great sound. NAD is the only audio company that seems to understand this (note that the pre/pro section of the 742, the 752, and the 762 are the same-- they don't cheapen the product in order to make a price point). NAD sounds like quality separates, not a receiver. |
|
TWN | I am totally agree with Hawk, I got the NAD T742 myself as I don't need that much power for my room. Before I decided to go for the NAD. I tried Denon and Integra receiver from a local showroom. Although they have some better floorstanding speakers than my bookshelf pair, the sound is not "normal" for Denon and Integra (I think Onkyo may sound even worse than Integra?). I admit that I didn't audit any NAD before I got the NAD T742, I get this totally based on the confidence of all the reviews and the brand name. However, it turns out that NAD is the best receiver I ever heard before. No matter it is SONY, Denon or Integra. We should spend our money on what we really want like sound quality and "actual" power per channel. I don't think all those fancy functions will make the sound better, in some dramatic effect may be, but in revealing real actual sound, who needs all these "functions"? When you are listening to Beethoven piano sonata, do you want some extra heavy unreal bass or echo from a chunch or concert hall or whatever? For Ian: If I were you, I will get the NAD receiver, though I am not quite sure how big is your place and how much power you really need (do you really need T762 or just T742 will fit your needs?)? As far as I know most houses/apartments in Hong Kong are pretty small. If you can save some money in the receiver, than you can get some decent cables or some other equiments for this extra money. |
|
TWN | For the review of NAD T762, check this out: http://www.theperfectvision.com/newsletter/tpv49/nad_t762.html |
|
| Just Auditioned a Nad T762 Myself. This review is mainly concentrated on the T762 in two Channel , Analogue source mode. I have had it for 3 Days now. The Beast was delivered to my doorstep, still wrapped and Un-opened by our Local HiFi specialist. I have to say my first impressions of the T762 was nothing but bitter dissapointment. Comparing from my Pre-Main Audio system originally a Nad 3225PE feeding a NAD 214, driving a Pair of Lambert Minstrel Floorstanders Via straight Wire Stage Wiring. I found the T762 to be very Lacking in Bottom end or bass responce. It was and still is somewhat very Flat. Originally the system was configured using the T762s onboard amplification. A perfect example is the Eagles Hell Freezes over Concert Laser Disc. The First track where the opening involves a pair of Bongo drums, gave a really Dull quite flat sound. Not what i was used to. I have since pulled the Pin on the internal Pre outs for the mains and are now feeding my original NAD 214. Bass responce has changed maybe very slightly. One thing i have noticed as the days go on the NAD seems to be warming on the Bottom End Bass reproduction. But not Rapidly. Maybe the T762 needs a good run in period?. DTS Sources, i have no quarms with. Quite impressive. I have found that on all Analogue sources, be it Satellite Audio, CD are very soft on Bass responce. Top end to Midrange is very Clear and not overly done. It feels like my Lamberts are no longer capable of reproducing any nice Warm soothing bass..Which is very Frustrating when i know what they are capable of. Yes.. All Bass Management is inhibited. Keen to hear other expreiences.. Thanks Ren(NZ) |
|
Anonymous | Do Nad receivers require "break-in" period like my speakers did? I don't get this break-in fad at all. Back when Nak's were King, right out of the box they sounded supreme! Are these manufacturers not doing the required "break-in" at their factories in order to save production costs? It seems so. |
|
Anonymous | "I found the T762 to be very Lacking in Bottom end or bass responce". Are you using subwoofer ? My simple guess is that you set subwoofer-out to "Yes" but have not connected the subwoofer or have not properly used test tone to adjust the subwoofer output level. Otherwise, Nad is like you said... |
|
Hawk | I had the opportunity to try out a new 762 which the local dealer just pulled out of its box and put into his board for the first time. Without any tweaking, it sounded crisp and very musical. I loved it (and I am saving my pennies for one). I think the previous poster may be correct that Ren has something set incorrectly (that is something very easy to do given the complexity of these things). So, Ren, I would suggest that you play around with the different settings. It shouldn't sound that different from your NAD integrated amp. If you don't find the problem in the settings, you may need to return it for another one. |
|
Anthony Law | Hi I'm just curious if it still matters where a receiver is made these days. I like the NADs alot & am leaning towards buying a T742/T752 for it's sound over SR7300's features. The only big turnoff I noticed is the NADs are made in China, whereas the SR7300 is made in Japan! I am not racist, just biased in believing Japanese factories may have better workmanship & QA control. Although China has improved significantly in the last decade. On a separate note, the HK525 I briefly considered is also made in China. |
|
Anonymous | Anthony Law: It won't be long before all Marantz are made outside Japan! They have to stay competitive. |