I just purchased a NAD T752...


$700 includes shipping from saturdayaudio.com

Mark (another guy who's post I caught on the forums here) got his for $649 and I was told that was a mistake on a salesman part... So you got lucky mark... ;)

He went ahead and sold it to me for $649 but charged alot more for shipping to make up for his intial quote of $699 aka $51 to be exact...

Anyways thanks to hawk for helping me with questions and hopefully making a good decision considering my future plan is to eventually use the NAD T752 for a pre/pro only with the exception of allowing it to power the rears in my ht setup...



Yeah, I called earlier this week for the tracking number and he told me I was misquoted but they decided to honor the $649. It should be $699.

After having realized that I was misquoted, I felt bad for having posted the error in a forum full of people looking to buy the same receiver:)

I was told by the salesman on Monday that all of their stock contains the updated firmware, which was the only thing I was concerned about.

I just received mine in the mail today, I can't wait to hook it up!!

Does anyone reccomend bi-wiring? I have the wire to do it.
I'm only going to be using it as a stereo receiver for a while. Is there any way I can biamp with the unused channels?

Only if you have 16 gauge and want to increase the effective gauge by bi-wiring. It also eliminates those cheap jumpers that come with most bi-wireble speakers.

I'm pretty sure 16 gauge bi-wired gives you 13 gauge effective. Someone, feel free to correct me if need be :)

Even fairly sophisticated audiophiles fall for this hocus-pocus. What's more, loudspeaker manufacturers often participate in the sham when they tell you that those two pairs of terminals on the back of the speaker are for bi-wiring as well as bi-amping. Some very highly respected manufacturers (who know better) are guilty of genuflecting to the BS in tweako audio magazines. As such, these speaker manufacturers have surrendered to the "realities" (cough, cough) of the market.

If you move one pair of speaker wires to the same terminals where the other pair is connected, absolutely nothing changes electrically. But wire manufacturers sell more wire and A/V retailers sell high mark-up wire. In physics there is a law called "The Superposition Principle". In terms of electronics, the superposition theorem states that any number of voltages applied simultaneously to a linear network will result in a current that is the exact sum of the currents that would result if the voltages were applied "INDIVIDUALLY".

The audiophile, reviewer of Stereophile, or wire retailer who can prove the contrary will be an instant candidate for many scientific prizes and academic honors.

Of course, bi-wiring does no harm. It just doesn't do anything. It is like putting magnets in your shoes.

Bi-amping can make sense in certain cases. I would revert to the receivers owners manual if the amp section is capable of bi-amping. If it is a single torroidal amp servicing all channels--NADA, unless you go through some difficult (and warranty voiding) procedures. Only if there are discrete separate amps in the receiver is bi-amping feasible and even then I would look at the manual and/or contact the manufacturer of the receiver.

I have always wondered about this bi-wiring stuff. I have seen a lot of talk about it in some british publications and my Mission speakers have two sets of terminals on the back for wiring the tweeter and the mid/woofer separately. Are you saying that even when you have two sets of terminals on the speaker, there is no benefit to bi-wiring? I have never done it, but I am curious.

John A.
G-man, Thanks. I have been reading about bi-wiring speakers and never understood the term. I think I do, now. "Snake-oil" is the phrase I like.

The only reservation I can see is connecting the tweeter and bass/midrange independently, as anonymous says. Perhaps if Mission amps have a Mission speaker crossover built-in it might work, but it still seems a crazy idea, and what would be the benefit compared with having the crossover in the speaker? They would still have to have that if their speakers are going to work with any other amp. Also, they would be stuck forever with one solution to matching the drivers. The crossover unit in a good speaker is built with its particular drivers in mind.

Some manufacturers (and Mission would be low on my list of suspects) seem to want to capture customers by telling them one component is the best, then they just have to buy the compatible one from them, to go with it. There is some sense in compatibility, but not when you are paying for features you don't need whose only effect is to restrict your choice of other components.

When the same guys make audio systems AND the discs you play on them (I think SACD) we are all in danger of being taken by the short and curlies. Buy separates from specialist manufacturers, every time. It goes for discs, too.

Anonymous, you bought a great receiver!

"Are you saying that even when you have two sets of terminals on the speaker, there is no benefit to bi-wiring? I have never done it, but I am curious. "

Unless you have paper thin wire there is absolutely no benefit. Fifty cent or a dollar a foot Radio Shack or Monster Cable carry all the electrons that $1,000 a foot wire does. Heck, a straightened coat hanger would deliver the same amount of electrons, but might pick up some RF interference due to lack of coating to prevent that from occuring.

Another waste of money is line conditioners. What isn't a waste is a good surge protector to prevent surges from possibly destroying your equipment. In the US all electricity is delivered by AC. All our equipment converts that AC power to DC. Hence any conditioning done to AC power is totally pointless as your amps, receivers, CD players, and everything else convert it to DC "in house". Any piece of equipment that would benefit by line conditioning would have to be manufactured so poorly as to bugger description.

Bryston, which has one of the great electrical engineers in the business, even states in their brochures that their equipment doesn't require or benefit from the use of any line conditioners. This hasn't gotten them any friends in the audio salon field and the Stereophile-type magazines. These magazines and dealers make a lot of money selling ad space and the retailers make $1K and more on Tice and Richard Gray conditioners.

My advice--save your money and buy better speakers. That is where the rubber really meets the road.

All these magazines that have audiophile dentists, drs., and state department officials writing reviews is really distressing. None of them have any electrical or other audio engineers writing for them. A notable exception is Sound and Vision. Ranada, Nouissaine, and others that write for them are all degree'd engineers.

About the only thing I trust in the tweako magazines are subjective speaker reviews (and only with a grain of salt) and the ease of using some equipment.

Boy are you ever right about Stereophile Magazine. What a bunch of pretentious jerks.I have read S&V and of course Stereo Review before the switch for over 25 years. I miss Julian Hirsch. Ranada really knows what he's talking about. I like Home Theater alot also. I also read Perfect Vision but will drop it.


What is so sad about Stereophile is that they have the money and the measuring equipment to hire good acoustic and electrical engineers, but they rather hire "fancy" writers who know squat and follow the company line, or they hire audiophiles that never knew what they were talking about and just ape the party line of the so-called "cognescenti".

I used to subscribe to Stereophile years ago because I enjoyed the writing. Then I befriended 2 electrical and acoustic engineers (who by the way didn't know each other)and they really opened my eyes, both with what they said and what they demonstrated to me with equipment use. It changed me forever.

Both separately told me that all the members of AES (Audio Engineering Society)glaze over whenever Stereophile, Perfect Vision, etc. are mentioned. These people are the best audio/electrical engineers in the world and have spent their lives studying and measuring all matters acoustical and electrical.

They actually feel terribly that the average consumer and reader is fed so much false information and led down the garden path of believing and paying for non-science and non-performance. It is easy to tell people falsehoods in areas they aren't expert in and get them to believe things that seem to make sense but have no basis in scientific and measurable fact. It is supringly easy to tell people that X sounds better than Y and get them to take that on faith to the point where they "think" they hear it. That's the business.

Again, it is like magnets in your shoes, "green" marker ink on your CD's to improve sound, bricks on top of your CD player or receiver, tubes are better than solid state, LP's are better than CD's, etc. ---ugghh.

John A.
There used to be a hi-fi magazine in UK that regularly carried verdicts from panels doing blind subjective reviews of cables and interconnects. They would say things like wine tasters. Sparkling but with a hint of fizz. Solid but can be inclinded to muddiness in the lower mid-range. No one used words like electrons. Good on you, G-Man!
« Previous Thread Next Thread »

Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us