New Nad Master Series... [Text View]

Alimentall

08-31-05, 04:37 AM

I wonder if the real high-end guys will take this stuff seriously - did you see the specs on the integrated? 130dB S/N ratio at full output w/.004% distortion. And the S/N ratio on the preamp/processor is one of the best out there too. Too bad about no upconversion to HDMI, but NAD's typical strategy is to wait for technology like that to drop from, say $150 cost to add it, to $30 to add in. Otherwise, they have to add too much to the retail. But heck, how many preamps above $5000 even *have* HDMI anything? A couple? Greg at NAD says that HDMI is such a PITA right now because it's such a moving target that they were just happy to be able to get anything in there. The 7-ch power amp weighs 96lbs. Yikes. I've known Greg for a long time and I actually had a lot of input on Masters (we started talking about developing this series 2.5 years ago) and I've never seen him actually *giddy* before. :

Regarding HDMI, I could write a book on the subject. To put it succinctly, what is promised by HDMI does not currently exist. It is moving very fast, and there are a lot of new HDMI chips being introduced that will open some of the features you are noting. It will be the big boys like Sony that will be first with the latest, since they can move a lot of silicon. The currently available chips are limited on the audio side to 2 channels at 48kHz. The next generation of chips (just being announced now) promise to improve this to 8 channels at 96kHz. As far as I know there is no agreement between HDMI and SACD. Since HDMI is a PCM format, I don't see how it could even work without throwing away the advantages of DSD.

There are other issues that still need more work, like sending HDMI over long distances, putting OSD on the HDMI signal, improving the connector to a locking type, improving compatibility between devices, etc. These will allbe solved in due time. Right now the technology is pretty good at sending a signal from a DVD player to an adjacent TV set. All the stuff that we want to be able to do is still in the infancy stage.

The M55 and M15 are '2nd' generation HDMI, so they have full HDCP support, but only 2 channel audio.

Ironically, it will be the low end products that benefit the most from HDMI by eliminating D/A and A/D conversions. High end products have such transparent D/A and A/D converters that you only gain a little by staying digital. In fact, with HDMI there is a lot less tweaking that can be done to the video signal - what you get is what you get, very few adjustments are possible- so the final picture may actually look better via component video.

The audio and video performance of the M15 is really spectacular - we have some interesting technology in the audio section that maximizes the resolution of the DACs based on how many post processes are running. It is called Dynamic Headroom Scaling, adjusting gain in both the digital and analog domains to optimize noise and distortion for every possible setting of bass management, surround mode, and gain setting.

HDMI is maturing, in stages, to the final spec that has been announced. The
bandwidth hog is HD video, especially 720p and 1080p. Firewire cannot
handle this. Now, except for broadcast TV, there are no sources with native
resolution this high, but we know it is coming with BluRay or DVD HD or
whatever it turns out to be. One of the problems with HD digital signal is
getting Hollywood to release property in hi-rez. This is where the HDCP
comes in; this very robust encryption keeps the signal secure. It also adds
a lot of complication and expense (yet another license).

Because HDMI is being driven by the video interests, video performance has
been focused on first. As you know, HDMI is based on the PC format of DVi
with encryption and audio added. This is pretty much the way it is rolling
out, with the first HDMI a DVi cable with a different connector and 2
channel audio, then HDCP was added, and now multi-channel audio is next.
There isn't any way to upgrade older versions; it is a 'sealed system' due
to HDCP. But it is the video that is the trick. We have other ways to
handle the audio that are very good, the advantage with HDMI is higher bit
rate PCM like DVD-A. The problem we have now is getting the consumer
excited about DVD-A. Right now compressed formats have far more interest
than hi-rez.

There are other system architectures that open up once we have a good robust
wide bandwidth 'pipe' like HDMI. So I think your digital preamp is a
possibility for the future. It will be a trade-off between cost and
performance. Right now, such a device would be expensive, so you'll see
someone like Meridian get there first.

Just keep in mind that HDMI is not just a new connector on the same old
wire. It is an incredibly complex interface that is operating at RF
bandwidth. It is extremely sensitive and difficult to engineer. Like all
things digital, everything has to be perfect or it won't work.

M3 uses analog filters. The M3 has a PURE ANALOG signal path under full digital control. We have digital things in the works, but the M3 is likely to stand as the all time benchmark for analog performance. The only product I know of that can match or exceed the M3 noise and distortion spec is the Halcro. There will be a market for analog for a long time to come, and we know of no digital amps that can meet this spec (yet). The M3 has 10 times less distortion than anything within twice its price point.

Well, when I say "giddy", for Greg, that *is* giddy. Any time I can get him to type more than a line or two, he's really excited :)

Alimentall

08-31-05, 04:51 AM

BTW, here's the money shot:

http://www.component.se/docs/products/nad_master_series_m3.jpg

TheDesolateOne

08-31-05, 05:09 AM

Thanks for the input, John. Who cares what the High end guys say, if its got the performance for the price, then I am sold...:)

Mark

schwaggy

08-31-05, 12:22 PM

I'm happy to see this thread moving! I have a few Silver Series components and was elated to see the Master Series coming to market. Can't say I'll be upgrading any time soon, but it's just very good to see NAD continuing the push to the high-end. Go NAD!
Now, if only the "upgrade" from the S170 to S170i would drop in price (currently approx. $700) I might bite and be happy for a few more years...

Landroval

08-31-05, 02:56 PM

the prices are:

M15/M25 - $2999 each
M3 - $2799
M55 - $1799
Europe street prices (available in October):

M15 - 2235€
M25 - 2365€
M55 - 1660€
M3 - 2110€

Dizzman

08-31-05, 03:46 PM

for long distance HDMI...

http://extron.com/product/product.asp?id=dvi201txrx
About 675$ list

b4z

09-12-05, 08:57 AM

Is there any more info on the Master Series?
I am trying to decide between NAD and Parasound Halo.

I bought my NAD 3020 in 1980 and still have it.
I am also a big fan of Parasound but do not like the blue lights which can't be dimmed.

Alimentall

09-12-05, 10:35 AM

How about this? That's all there is, folks.

http://www.adnm.com/pdfs/nad_masters.pdf

http://www.adnm.com/pdfs/nad_masters_tech.pdf

http://www.adnm.com/pdfs/nad_m15.pdf

http://www.adnm.com/pdfs/nad_m25.pdf

http://www.adnm.com/pdfs/nad_m55.pdf

http://www.adnm.com/pdfs/nad_m3.pdf

jmichaelf

09-12-05, 12:22 PM

Yep, that thing's bad.

jmichaelf

09-13-05, 08:57 AM

Would the M25 power all channels if listening in stereo, or will it only power the speakers the pre/pro is talking to?

Alimentall

09-13-05, 09:41 AM

No, it will power up everything, but the other channels will simply idle.

jmichaelf

09-13-05, 11:05 AM

Is that something to worry about?

So, that's the point of the M3; to power a two channel setup when needed?

Alimentall

09-13-05, 12:00 PM

Is that something to worry about?

No, that's totally normal.

So, that's the point of the M3; to power a two channel setup when needed?

Yes, it's for a no-compromise high-end stereo music system. The only integrated, of which I'm aware, that might be its equal in both quality and flexibility is the $6000 Mark Levenson integrated. The subwoofer crossover function is pretty sweet (it's on a completely separate circuit)

AnthemAVM

09-26-05, 11:52 PM

Has this stuff hit the US yet?

Alimentall

09-26-05, 11:53 PM

Nope, still November :)

CINERAMAX

09-27-05, 10:53 AM

I hear October for our store.

CrazyElmo

10-07-05, 12:19 AM

New to AVS forum - found it while looking for more info on Masters Series - thanks for the links and thoughts, Gang.

Anybody know if ithe M15 does analog base management for SACD, etc?

hifisponge

11-04-05, 04:26 PM

About the release date. . . . I just contacted a local HT installer, who contacted his NAD rep. The latest info is that the Master Series should be out late December or early January. Seeing that CES is in Jan, I'm thinking NAD will wait til after the show to release it.

efarstad

11-04-05, 04:34 PM

I can confirm, NAD will release following CES. :-D

Alimentall

11-04-05, 06:27 PM

Crap.

SimpleTheater

11-05-05, 10:17 AM

I can confirm, NAD will release following CES. :-D

Why would NAD wait to release the Master Series when they spent serious money advertising them in September/October issues in Home Theater magazines?

It is far more plausible that they've had either technical problems or manufacturing glitches that is causing the delay. I doubt they could be so mismanaged as to have the marketing department in the dark in terms of release dates - especially purposely missing the holiday season makes no sense at all.

windwaves

11-07-05, 02:56 PM

Alimentall

11-07-05, 04:35 PM

There you go, Gio. I guess we'll just wait to see how many people bust my butt for "selling" or "trying to make money off of AVS." I'll tell you in advance that it's a no-win situation, but we'll do it your way for awhile.

mrjb

11-08-05, 01:16 AM

John,
nothing personal here, but I must ask you a question at this point.

Why on earth don't you sign your name as a NAD, NHT and whatever else DEALER ???

I honestly find it unbelievable that you don't. It only tells me that you are concerned of your own true identity...it really tells me you just market without disclosing. Strange at best ?

The vast majority of dealers hanging out on this and other forums do not hide who they are.

ww

I am also a NAD dealer and a soon to be masters dealer. First the master series is scheduled to ship in Dec. Second a nad dealer, particularly a master series dealer would be an idiot to disclose who they were and try to sell them on any forum or internet site as they whould have their dealership stripped away. Nad Master series is very protected and there will only be about 100 dealers in the country.

Also, nad dealers cannot get master series. They are completly different. I have different reps. Most nad dealers will not be able to pick up the master series line.

hifisponge

11-24-05, 11:29 PM

Just checking to see if anyone has any news on the release date. Is it still sometime in December? The press releases I've read said that MS was supposed to be out in Nov, and there are ads for the product line in many of the current AV mags. I'm getting very impatient. :rolleyes:

Alimentall

11-25-05, 09:58 AM

I talked to Stephen at NAD and he said "last week of December" which really means early January. Still, considering that it was officially announced in September (leaked early), it's not really that far behind. Many companies announce things a year or more before they actually ship.

hifisponge

11-25-05, 03:44 PM

Thanks for the update Alimentall. I understand that products are announced often well before they are released, but in this case NAD is actively advertising in print and at the bottom of the ads it reads, "ask for an audition of the Master Series at your nearest NAD authorized custom retailer today."

Don't get me wrong, I'm not angry about the delay. Just anxious to get it.

CINERAMAX

11-28-05, 08:27 AM

I WAS TOLD SOME ITEMS WILL BE BUMPED INTO FIRST QUARTER. Maybe the pre and amp will come out in Dec. and the integrated amp and dvd later...

fg2bm

12-03-05, 12:49 PM

Hello everybody
I have just received word from nad customer support that due to some delays we will have to wait until January for the first shipping of the M series

Alimentall

12-03-05, 01:46 PM

That's pretty much what has been expected.

On a good note, I was speaking with Greg about the M3 and he indicated that it is software upgradeable. I was asking for a feature that is not in there right now and he indicated that it may well be possible to add this feature in software. This would make the M3 one of only a couple software driven integrateds on the market. The only one I can think of that is similar to the M3 is the top-end Mark Levinson model at more than double the price. Looking the the M-L, it's just amazing how similar they are, except that the NAD, while a bit lighter, is actually more powerful. Check out the similarities:

http://www.marklevinson.com/image_library/383OH_lo.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nad_m3inside.jpg
http://www.marklevinson.com/image_library/383RP_lo.jpg
http://www.adnm.com/images/nad_m3rear.jpg

bob53

12-04-05, 02:12 AM

John,

I just checked out your website and I'm impressed with your candor concerning a particular speaker brand - it's nice to see a dealer who is not afraid to tell it like it is :)

I have a few questions concerning the new universal disc player:

1. The info suggests it will play DVD's at 480i over HDMI - true?
2. Does it use the FLI-2310 series chip for upconversion?
3. Can it upconvert over component?
4. Will the unit be upgradeable? i.e. HDMI standards, etc.

Thanks

Alimentall

12-04-05, 09:35 AM

John,

I just checked out your website and I'm impressed with your candor concerning a particular speaker brand - it's nice to see a dealer who is not afraid to tell it like it is :)

I'm very candorous ;)

1. The info suggests it will play DVD's at 480i over HDMI - true?

I believe this is part of the HDMI standard that it has to do this. I think.

2. Does it use the FLI-2310 series chip for upconversion?

Probably, but not sure. I zoomed in on the chip, but couldn't read the lettering.

3. Can it upconvert over component?

Yes.

4. Will the unit be upgradeable? i.e. HDMI standards, etc.

No. Unless there's something I'm misunderstanding, HDMI is a completely closed, non-upgradeable system so that no one can reprogram the chips or bypass/hack any of the HDCP protections. The Masters is V1.1, which is to say the HDMI is good for 2-channel audio and video switching. You'd want to use the analog outputs to attach to a pre/pro. It's pretty infuriating to me that HDMI is not a software upgradeable technology.

I don't know if it could be upgraded with a board swap however. Hardware upgradeability hasn't been thing for them in the past, but who knows? I've been pressing them on this, but they might not even know. The video board is on its own card, so it is possible that an M55v2 would simply be the same machine with a video board swap and *possibly* that could be reto-fitted in the field. Maybe. Don't quote me on that. Hopefully, that's the idea.

efarstad

12-08-05, 12:02 AM

Come the first of the year, NAD will be shipping their T773 and T763 recievers with Video upconversion to component (a feature not presently available)...via a change of the video boards...so one could assume they could upgrade the boards in the M-series as well...as the future needs call for it.

Alimentall

12-08-05, 09:55 AM

That's interesting. I was told that upconversion required too many changes to the circuit boards, but this was awhile back and it would be implemented on T7x4 models. But it sounds like new receivers are mid to end 2006, that little feature will sure make those receivers more sellable.

SimpleTheater

12-08-05, 10:57 AM

Come the first of the year, NAD will be shipping their T773 and T763 recievers with Video upconversion to component .

Sorry to sound stupid, but isn't component video simply an input or an output? How is this 'upconversion'? Are they deinterlacing the component signal?

Thanks.

Alimentall

12-08-05, 11:33 AM

Meaning converting composite and S-video in to component out for wiring simplification. It's not really improving the signal, just converting it.

SimpleTheater

12-08-05, 01:13 PM

Meaning converting composite and S-video in to component out for wiring simplification. It's not really improving the signal, just converting it.

Thanks for the clarification.

Dizzman

12-08-05, 01:35 PM

proper term is transcoding

Morbius

12-08-05, 03:32 PM

proper term is transcoding
Dizzman,

Yes - if all one is doing is converting between one of the different formats; RGB, Component,
S-Video... without changing the resolution; that's "transcoding" as you point out.

"Up / down" are used when the resolution changes - i.e. the signal is being scaled as done in
a scaler.

Michael Grant

12-08-05, 04:39 PM

OK, I just have to say it. I chuckle every time I see "Nad Master".

Alimentall

12-08-05, 04:51 PM

Not to get picky, but it's Nad Masters, not Nad Master. Think of a group of mean women, not just one. :)

Morbius

12-08-05, 06:04 PM

"Up convert" remains more accurate because you're splitting the signal up into a very similar, but higher capacity format. In fact, it's really not even a different format, it's the same signal, but spit up.
John,

Dizzman Is CORRECT - and you are WRONG!!

Transcoders do EXACTLY what Dizzman states - convert one type of analog signal to another
type of the analog signal w/o changing the resolution. [There are also transcoders that operate
in the digital domain - so the use of the term "transcoder" doesn't imply analog or digital data]

Extron Electronics provides a definition:

http://www.extron.com/search.asp?search=transcoder

"Transcoder - An electronic device designed to convert one signal type to another, and
vice-versa. For example, the Extron YCS Transcoder both decodes composite video into
S-video, and encodes S-video into composite video."

For example Extron's YCS Transcoder can convert between S-Video and Composite:

http://www.extron.com/product/product.asp?id=ycstrans

The Extron TSC 100 Transcoder converts between PAL <--> NTSC:

http://www.extron.com/product/product.asp?id=tsc100

SyncBlaster's RGB2C Transcoder converts RGB to Component:

http://www.syncblaster.com/Syncblaster_RGB2C.html

RAM Electronics KD-VTCA3 Transcoder converts VGA[sic] to Component:

http://www.ramelectronics.net/html/kd-vtca2.htm

Also, "transcode" implies digital data formats ...
Note that the signals that are converted by these transcoders are analog - which
is contrary to your contention that use of a transcoder implies a digital data format.

There is no encoding or decoding, so there can't really be a transcoding.

Again, INCORRECT - the definition above from Extron's Glossary uses the terms
encoding and decoding to describe the process.

Learning to use the proper technical terms allows one to be more precise and accurate in
expressing technical content - and lessens the chances of misunderstandings.

Dizzman

12-08-05, 07:08 PM

Well, if John says so... then it must be correct.

Never mind the folks who wrote the book.

Trans---- means to go from format to format. it is independant of up or down scaling. Conversion can involve both, but trans by itself is only from one format to another.

There are all sorts of trans jokes running through my head... but i will be strong!

Morbius

12-08-05, 07:35 PM

Just because Extron pushes the definition of transcode beyond its normal boundaries for marketing purposes doesn't mean it's the best definition. Note that it's #4 on this list of definitions. Upconvert is still the most accepted term. Transcode is the marketing oriented term.
Composite, S-video and component video are basically the *same* format with different delivery
options. It's all NTSC with varying levels of filtration.
John,

Again you just can't admit that you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!!!

You fail to discern the contradiction in your own statement. You state above that the signal
types you enumerate above are all basically the "same" - but you want to use a term like
"up convert". What's "up" about converting signals that are the "same"?

Let me explain the terms that you throw around with abandon without understanding the
meaning. The most basic analog signal is RGBHV. There are five signal lines which carry
the Red, Green, Blue intensities plus the Horizontal and Vertical scanning signals. One can
multiplex the HV scanning signals on the color signal if desired [ usually the Green, if memory
serves], and you have RGB.

Component is just another form of RGB in which the signals are linear combinations of RGB.
The signals in component are Y, Pr, Pb where:
Y = R + G + B
Pr = R - Y
Pb = B - Y

By adding and subtracting the signals Y, Pr, Pb; one can get a different linear combination of
signals that is equal to the original RGB:
R = Pr + Y
B = Pb + Y
G = Y - R - B

There's no "up" or "down" in this conversion - it's simply another linear combination.
[ It basically a question of how many "soda straws" you want to funnel your data through -
the more bandwidth, the merrier].

In S-Video, the luminance Y is on one signal lead, and the color information is multiplexed
onto another signal lead. That's why S-Video is frequently labelled Y/C [Luminance / Color ]

In composite, all the luminance and color information is composited into a single signal.

There's nothing "up/down" in this process which is why up convert is not the preference.

Also - "transcoder" is NOT a marketing term. Scientists and engineers use the term "transcoder"
ALL the time - it's not marketing hype.

I gave you examples of products from 3 manufacturers - so that you would see that the
terminology is not unique to Extron. If you "Google" the term "transcoder" - you will find many
more!!! [ You should get into the habit of using Google - you'd save yourself a lot of embarassment.]

John, you should take Dizzman's advice and go read some books on elementary electronics
and you can try to "correct" people when you are educated in the field.

Morbius

12-08-05, 08:21 PM

You're still the least scientific "scientist" I've ever run into in my life time, and I know a LOT of them.
John,

Unfortunately for you; just "knowIng" scientists doesn't confer on you any degree of expertise!!

You can know many, many scientists personally, and that doesn't confer on you any
credibility to know what "science" is, or what it is to be "scientific".

Credibility by association is NONSENSE!!!!

So as far as your credibility for assessing what is "scientific"; you have NONE, ZIP, BLOTTO!!

Go get yourself a degree in one of the sciences; then you can speak with some modicum of
authority.

Also, capitalizing the word "wrong" doesn't make it more accurate either.

For you - capitalization seems appropriate - there are different degrees to being wrong.
You're not "wrong" - you are WRONG!!!

In any case the *actual* question was answered a page ago, so see if you can save your little temper tantrums for another thread and not ruin this one.
You are the one that first jumped in to "correct" Dizzman with INCORRECT information.

Besides, I thought you were going to take your Non-Ultra High-End NHT Xd and hang out
someplace more "appropriate".

Morbius

12-08-05, 08:40 PM

Too bad audio and video is *my* specialty. And yours is something entirely different. You're on my turf. Don't ever forget it. Because I'll keep reminding you.
John,

HA!!! You think being a salesman confers some degree of expertise?

John, some pimply-faced teenager can be an audio/video salesman!
In fact, the teenage salesmen I've talked to at mid-fi "box stores" have more
expertise than you have in terms of technical moxie.

Do you remember General Norman Schwartzkopf's comment about the
military expertise of Saddam Hussein? Stormin' Norman stated,
"As far as Saddam Hussein being a great military strategist, he is neither a strategist,
nor is he schooled in the operational art, nor is he a tactician, nor is he a general,
nor is he a soldier. Other than that, he's a great military man."

John Ashman is not a scientist, nor an engineer. He doesn't have a Ph.D. in the sciences,
nor an M.S. in science, nor a B.S. in the sciences. He's hasn't completed advanced study
beyond high school in the sciences. He doesn't know physics, mathematics, chemistry,
material science, nor electronics and electrical engineering. He's not a speaker
designer nor audio engineer. He's not a reviewer like Kal Rubinson, nor an audio
magazine editor like John Atkinson... He's a salesman. He doesn't advance the
state of the audio / video art - he just sells what OTHERS have made.

Other than that - he's a great audio / video expert.

Yes - please do keep reminding me what your "specialty" is [ such as it is].

Dizzman

12-08-05, 09:16 PM

well, at the risk of keeping this going...

Composite to component, S to component, even RGB to component (and all the other variations that i care not to list) are all transcodes. THere is indeed encoding and decoding going on. But in most cases, no scaling (up or down)

John, your arguments as to why you are the expert are tremendously tiresome. Just because you say so? That is is why we need to accept you?

I have been a trainer in this industry for the last 10 years, i have taught at all the trade shows and am faculty in different associations. Only through those points and the knowledge to find other resources and point others to them do i consider myself any type of expert. And in all cases, it is merely my job to make a point, show some evidence that supports it and hope others agree with my point of view.

You have not done anything even approaching this in any of the threads that you have ruined. Do i think Greg is getting carried away... yes. Only because as a physicist and scientist he feels a need to help explain how things really work. So you are the wall he is banging his head against.

If anything... to me simply saying you have been in this industry for the last XX years is an indicator that you probably know very little other than whatever you have managed to piece together into an explanation that makes sense to your tiny little brain.

There are plenty of folks here who put forward logical reasoned arguments. And debates ensue. YOu just throw out the comment that greg is an idiot and then blindly take potshots. At a guy who does have the credentials and puts forward logical reasoned arguments. Do i think greg is wrong sometimes... Yes. Do i go after him... No. Why not, because i feel that if i cannot refute the logic, then maybe i need to go find out why i am right. then i can discuss things in a way that is logical. Just yelling... "IT'S FLAT I TELL YOU!" will never work.

Please do us all a favour and if you are so bloody smart, then LOGICALLY, INTELLIGENTLY try to take apart one of his arguments.

Other than that... **** off. most of us are tired of you.

dakkon

12-08-05, 09:19 PM

Morbius

12-08-05, 09:40 PM

Other than that... **** off. most of us are tired of you.
Dizzman,

Well said - I wish I was that eloquent.

Michael Grant

12-08-05, 09:51 PM

OK, first of all: Greg, for the love of God, please take a chill pill. I never see you sound so juvenile as when you're trying to correct John. Heck, I rarely see anyone that juvenile on this forum; and that's saying something, considering how juvenile I've been sometimes.

Having said that: John, you're off base here. The one thing you're correct about is how the term "transcoding" is applied to conversion between audio or video formats. That's a correct use of the term. However, your refusal to accept its use in other contexts is your problem, not necessarily anyone else's. You've quoted your defintion twice, fine. However, you've not shared with us where you obtained it; and why are we to believe it's definitive? Furthermore, nothing in that definition says that #4 is "frowned upon". That is apparently your addition, unless you actually provide authoritative source otherwise.

It's one thing for a term to be popularly misused, and another for it to be adopted. And that's what has indeed occurred in this case. It is indeed acceptable to refer to the transcoding of component signals to composite. If you really wish to be as pedantic as you claim, then you might be able to get away with saying that transcode only applies to digital signals. And that's fine: and yet, composite/s-video to component transcoding is quite often done in the digital domain, often as the first step in the deinterlacing and scaling process. But again, I think the bulk of the evidence goes against the limiting of "transcode" to digital signals.

Furthermore, your attempt to analyze its definition using some hacked-up version of examining the roots "trans" and "code" suffers because of your inappropriately limited definition of the latter---in fact, you defined the word in terms of itself, which isn't particularly good form. Furthermore, a proper analysis of this sort requires that you go back to the source language, which in this case is Latin. When you do that, you find that "code" is taken from codex which means "book/tablet". Its adaptation for legal and scientific use came later. (The point being that its application need not be as limited as you're trying to make it.)

Incidentally, I must reject the use of the term "upconvert" to describe composite/component, composite/s-video, and s-video/component conversions, at least when they all remain at 480i. That's just an inappropriate use of the term. Upconvert implies a change in carrier frequency and/or sample rate, depending upon the context you're talking about (analog RF signal processing or digital signal processing, respectively). None of the aforementioned conversions qualify. Now, I know some people use it. But it seems to me that it has less "support" than transcoding in this context. And if you're being picky about "popular" usage versus "correct" usage, I think that should matter to you.

Alimentall

12-08-05, 09:54 PM

Not to interrupt the argument, but I recently bought a T163, and was wondering how much nicer the M15 was than the 163? So far I really like the 163 but now that I am reading about the m15 I am king of wondering what I am missing out on?

Is it worth the extra money, by a factor of 2?

Sorry Dakkon, I just needed to change a few diapers.

The M15 is a substantially better preamp/processor than the T163. It is much quieter, more upgradeable, has more advanced processing, more advanced DACs in a dual differential setup, it's got HDMI, "video upconversion" (the accepted term and a direct quote from the literature), dual component output, a nicer remote, DTS 24/96, THX (well, not a huge deal, but occasionally useful), and some other capability. Is it worth more? Sure. Double? I think so, but it depends on your pocket book and priorities. It has one of the best S/N ratios in the industry, which, while not a direct indicator of quality, it sure is an indicator of attention to detail. The build quality is also very impressive, which is a great feel good feature.

Michael Grant

12-08-05, 10:00 PM

"video upconversion" (the accepted term and a direct quote from the literature)Actually, here's what's funny. In NAD's press release for the M15, it says this:The M15 is also capable of transcoding, or ‘upconverting’ Composite and S-Video signals to Component Video output. Through the use of the highest quality components and digital comb filters, the video quality of Composite and S-Video is fully preserved. Note that it chooses to place 'upconverting' in quotes, but not transcoding---implying, therefore, that transcoding is the more basic and descriptive term.

Having said that, upconversion probably does apply, even by my standards, to the M15, because if I understand it's capabilties properly (and no, I'm not sure I do) it can do deinterlacing and scaling. Who knows, maybe it can upconvert 480i analog sources to 720p/1080i component, which would mean that 'upconvert' is applicable to the analog stage as well.

Michael Grant

12-08-05, 10:54 PM

Actually, I could pull quotes from many sites that show the same or similar definition.Well, yes, but again, the definition itself doesn't say anything about definition #4 being inappropriate. That is happens to be the least common usage is immaterial if it's still correct. You haven't provided for us an authoritative source to that effect.Transcode, in the narrower sense of the word means to convert between two different types of encoded data. It doesn't mean filter *or* combine.I agree with the first sentence, but the second is a bit ill-posed. First of all, filtering can indeed be a part of the transcoding process; indeed, it might even be necessary in certain instances. For example, the term is often used to describe the process of conversion between DSD and PCM; and in such case, filtering is a fundamental part of the process. Furthermore, I'm frankly not even sure what you mean by "combining" in this context. Are you simply referring to the combining of multiple independent signals (e.g. component video) into one (e.g., S-Video)? If so, I think this represents an unnecessary limited view of signal processing. After all, the three component signals are in fact part of a single cohesive whole, and people deal with multiple simultaneous signals in the mathematical side of things without much difficulty.In the digital domain, Transcode implies a much more sophisticated process between two more different types of information Taking an NTSC signal and converting it to HDTV would be a better use of the word transcode.Hmm, no, I'd say that's an "upconvert".Converting a PC program to MacIntosh via an algorithm would be a better use of the word transcode.I'd have to disagree. At the source code level, this is not transcoding, because in fact the format stays the same, it's the content that has to change. At the binary level, people talk about emulation or translation, but I've never heard of transcoding in this context. It's not my field of expertise by any means; they're the next building over :) If you can find even a single Google page from a competent source that uses the term in this way, I'd be genuinely interested to read it.Typically, a transcode changes data from one type of another encode and, as I understand it, without having to decode the data.Well, then you'd better be careful to define "decode". Because in fact, I don't think you'll find an audio transcoder (MP3->AAC, AAC->Ogg, FLAC->MP3, whatever) that doesn't involve decoding the source format before re-encoding to the destination format.It generally implies the use of an algorithm, not a filter set.You say this as if these are so easily distinguished... again, transcoding can often involve filtering.But, the genesis of the "up" is to denote whether the signal is being filtered or combined. If you are filtering, that is "upconversion". If you are combining, that is "downconversion".I do see the merit in this distinction, as it is similar to the way upconversion and downconversion is used in digital signal processing (though a bit different from its original usage in radio). So I'll back off my total rejection of "upconvert" to describe the conversion of, say, composite to component. However, I think that "transcode" is also justifiable in these contexts because the information content is preserved.

Michael Grant

12-08-05, 10:57 PM

Actually, Michael, I'm willing to take a "partial" wrong on this. I mean, I'm right as I (and the original person asking the question) used the term "upconversion", because when companies use the term "transcode" in A/V, they mean bi-directional capability. So, you *can* use transcode *if* the system both upconverts and downconverts. But upconversion does not equal transcoding. Upconversion PLUS downconversion equals transcoding, at least for the purposes of video format conversion. But when I see transcode elsewhere, I see it used as a conversion processes between different systems, and not necessarily bi-directional.Huh? I was all happy with your first sentence, especially since I conceded above on "upconversion". But the rest of this threw me. Bidirectionality has nothing to do with it. Heck, it's nowhere to be found in your very own definition of the term "transcoding".

Michael Grant

12-08-05, 11:55 PM

Well hey, if we're now accepting Extron's definition of transcoding...

Dizzman

12-09-05, 03:32 AM

i could have (and did) clarify extrons definition. I am pretty familiar with their stuff :)

Alimentall

12-09-05, 08:26 PM

Note my unilateral sanitizing of this thread for the good of NAD fans everywhere ;)

hifisponge

12-10-05, 01:46 AM

Guys -

Is it really necessary to spend this much time bickering about transcoding vs upconverting in what is supposed to be a thread about the Master Series? Yes, the debate stemmed from the NAD literature, but cummon. Please use the PM system if you're not done.

- Tim

sc10000

12-10-05, 10:36 PM

The masters series has HDMI switching, yes, but I am happy with the T773 and can always add a geffen hdmi switch if the bluray player needs it, and it prob will; for a whole heck of alot less $.

Alimentall

12-11-05, 09:34 AM

Sherwood has a new HDMI switcher that looks very promising. The real reason to get an M15 is sonic performance, really, the HDMI is just there because it needs to be.

However, instead of building HDMI capability into their advanced A/V receivers, Sherwood designed a free-standing unit. When asked why, Hipps responded, “HDMI is a moving target. With the HDMI 1.3 standard probably 2 years away, any of today’s HDMI devices risk obsolescence. Rather than have a $4,000 audio receiver be viewed as obsolete because it can’t support HDMI 1.3, we’d prefer to offer a low cost option. Our HDMI-Link™ is only $299.95.”

While Sherwood’s HDMI-Link does provide remote (or RS-232) switching for 2 HDMI source units, what really makes it useful is its ability to convert any component video input into an HDCP compliant HDMI output. According to Hipps, “We already have two generations of receivers from Sherwood and other manufacturers that convert composite video and S-Video inputs into a component video output. Simply adding our HDMI-Link™ to the output chain will complete the conversion of those legacy video formats to HDMI.”

KeithR

12-12-05, 11:01 AM

No, that's totally normal.

Yes, it's for a no-compromise high-end stereo music system. The only integrated, of which I'm aware, that might be its equal in both quality and flexibility is the $6000 Mark Levenson integrated. The subwoofer crossover function is pretty sweet (it's on a completely separate circuit).

I hope its better than the ML. That integrated is not competitive with much out there these days. It isn't very powerful as an ML should be, and sonics definitely suffer compared to others. It looks nice though :)

Alimentall

12-12-05, 11:16 AM

KeithR

12-12-05, 07:39 PM

Good point. I meant basically build quality/design combined with all the cool features. You don't see that many 50lb + dual transformer integrateds with RS-232, 12V DC triggers, etc. I was more commenting on the physical similarities as I've not heard either yet. One of my customers has the ML, though, running a pair of 801s. Maybe I'll have to loan him the M3 and see what he thinks once I get one.

I always wondered why they put those things on an integrated amp, since 99% of integrateds i would gander only have 2 ch. systems and are doing it for "simplicity" or as a second system (ala bedroom).

btw, your customer is dreadfully underpowering those 801s. 801s need tons and tons of current. 436 monos *might* suffice.

Alimentall

12-12-05, 08:24 PM

Well, the great thing about the Masters is that a) the RS-232 allows software feature upgrades (I've already got one on "special order"), b) the 12V DC trigger can turn on other amps, CD player, etc, c) the sub crossover w/remote allows for turning a sub on/off at will for those who can't make up their mind if a sub is a good addition d) the A/B allows for bi-wiring. I think those features make it *very* sellable!

As for the B&Ws, nah, they're unbelievably easy to drive. That's one of my "biggest myths in audio". I have a customer that runs his off a Denon receiver that maybe has 35W/ch in surround mode. It can run the 801s all day. When I upgraded him to NHT T6s, even with their self-powered subs, the Denon would shut down at anything higher than -10dB with an action movie. B&Ws are amazingly easy to drive. Thiel, Apogee, NHT, those are hard to drive speakers. The reason people think they're hard to drive is that Kevlar has a very similar sound to an overdriven amp when played at higher volumes. The amp may be loafing along at <5W, but the Kevlar makes it sound like the amp is straining when it is actually enjoying life. Of course, the other reason is that the 801 woofer is terribly under damped, so good current may help control it a *bit*, but even the most iron-fisted amps can't make the woofer perform like a well damped woofer. IOW, they're not hard to drive at all, but have characteristics that make them seem as though they need high voltage/high current.

fg2bm

01-03-06, 01:24 AM

Well
I know that I may be a wee late but I would like to wish a Happy new year 2006 to all AVS members.
Best regards from The Flowers Island,
fg2bm
Tartane
Martinique FWI

t69

01-03-06, 04:24 AM

hello,

is the m15 now out, any review ?

:-) thx T69

Alimentall

01-07-06, 11:37 AM

Anyone know WHERE NAD is at CES? They're not listed and I know they're here!!! And, of course, everybody is closed, so I can't even call anyone at NAD.

hifisponge

01-07-06, 02:26 PM

Anyone know WHERE NAD is at CES? They're not listed and I know they're here!!! And, of course, everybody is closed, so I can't even call anyone at NAD.

They're probably off-site with all of the high-end audio stuff. Try one of the help desks for information. We're counting on you. :D

Alimentall

01-08-06, 12:37 AM

I think I found them - Hark Rock. They're here, just not a part of CES. Going first thing tomorrow!

BTW, the M15 was actively in use at the Audyssey suite. Just as a preamp, but the mind wanders.........

hifisponge

01-08-06, 03:22 AM

Alimentall -

If you make it to the NAD booth, ask them about the HDMI inputs. Are they version 1.1? The reason I ask is that I'm wondering how I'm going to get multichannel audio out of both my current DVDA / SACD player *and* an HDDVD player when they are released later this year? It's not a deal breaker for me, but I really wish the M15 prepro either had another set of 7.1 analog inputs, a firewire connection or some other means of supporting another multichannel device. At this point with the M15, it looks like I'll have to choose one to connect to the only 7.1 input.

hifisponge

01-08-06, 08:53 PM

Alimentall -

Any CES news to share?

Alimentall

01-09-06, 02:55 AM

Well I MISSED them! Apparently, they only ran the demo until Saturday.

However, I ran into the head of sales Sunday afternoon and he gave me the full download:

1. Masters series M5 (I knew about this one previously) - $1800 CD player with SACD capability, dual differential balanced out, gain stage modules from the M3, no video or anything.
2. A Theater series version of the M55 Universal player will be available for $1200.
3. A $1300 Theater 5-channel amplifier

The Masters looks like it will be a hit, but they're going to proceed with caution til they know how well it will sell. Steve said that the M3 trounces the earlier S300 amplifier and I can see it from his enthusiasm that he means it. And he's *very* excited by the M3 as a music player. The M55, as good as it is, has *some* compromise in it. The M5 removes those compromises by eliminating the video capabilities and putting in the best analog output they know how to build.

Personally, I'm pushing for

1. A Masters stereo amp based on the M3
2. A Masters stereo preamp with DSP capability
3. A Masters tuner with headphone amp and a few other unique features
4. A Masters surround sound receiver
5. A Masters stereo receiver

We'll see how far they take this over time. I did get some interesting general tidbits about what other things are coming from NAD, but suffice it to say, I can't repeat it, BUT, it's going to be a *very* interesting year for NAD and they're just getting started. I very much like where they're going and I was told that a lot of my product ideas are being incorporated and that is very cool because some of them are pretty unique. :)

BTW, one of my customers forwarded this link with pics of the M5:

http://www.shows.soundstagelive.com/shows/ces2006/showstoppers1.shtml

hifisponge

01-09-06, 02:34 PM

Alimentall

01-09-06, 08:57 PM

Thanks for the info Alimentall. It's great that NAD is planning to expand the Master Series line-up, but all I want to know is just how future proof the M15 is. More specifically, will I be able to connect both my existing DVDA / SACD player and a new HDDVD player to it? Since they are both multichannel devices and the M15 has only one set of multichannel inputs, I'm wondering how that can be done.

Well, in theory, that would be tough. You can realistically only do one Universal/HD-DVD/Blu-Ray player.

In a related matter, I'd still like to know if the HDMI inputs on the M15 support the HDMI 1.1 spec and if they process audio (rather than just acting as an HDMI video switcher).

I've been told that it's just stereo audio. It would take v1.2 or v1.3, I believe, to do what you need.

I'd also like to know just when exactly the M15 and M25 units are supposed to hit retail. I've been told they will ship in Jan, but when?

Here's what I believe after speaking with NAD -
~1 week to ship M3s
~2 weeks to ship M25s
~3 weeks to ship M55s
~4 weeks to ship M15s.

I think these are the likely dates, though the M55/M15s could move forward or back.

hifisponge

01-09-06, 10:04 PM

Thanks for the reply John. I'm a little confused about the HDMI spec on the M15. Based on my readings in this forum and that of other manufactures, the HDMI 1.1 spec supports 5.1 DVDA audio and that the 1.1 spec would also be able to process the multichannel PCM bitstream from an HDDVD player. So are you saying that NAD has chosen to only process two channel over HDMI even though the 1.1 spec is capable of 5.1 PCM? Or does the M15 only support the HDMI 1.0 spec? I'm hoping that this is just a misunderstanding.

Here's an exeprt from a review of the Denon 5910 DVD player that talks about the HDMI 1.1 spec.

"The HDMI output of the 5910 is compliant with the new HDMI 1.1 spec. This allows for the standard two-channel PCM found on CDs, Dolby Digital, and DTS soundtracks from DVDs and now high resolution 5.1 PCM tracks that are found on DVD-Audio discs."

Alimentall

01-10-06, 12:18 AM

I could be misunderstanding them, but this is what Greg told me in August.

Regarding HDMI, I could write a book on the subject. To put it succinctly,
what is promised by HDMI does not currently exist. It is moving very fast,
and there are a lot of new HDMI chips being introduced that will open some
of the features you are noting. It will be the big boys like Sony that will
be first with the latest, since they can move a lot of silicon. The
currently available chips are limited on the audio side to 2 channels at
48kHz. The next generation of chips (just being announced now) promise to
improve this to 8 channels at 96kHz. As far as I know there is no agreement
between HDMI and SACD. Since HDMI is a PCM format, I don't see how it could
even work without throwing away the advantages of DSD.

I don't know if this has changed, but I'll try to find out. NHT just announced their preamp with v1.1 HDMI and say that it will do DD/DTS. However, if both send and receive can't do DVD-A at the very least, there's NO reason to carry audio at all as one additional cable can easily handle PCM/DD/DTS. I'm as confused as most customers, right up until I get the product and can decipher things for myself.

hifisponge

01-10-06, 01:07 AM

However, if both send and receive can't do DVD-A at the very least, there's NO reason to carry audio at all as one additional cable can easily handle PCM/DD/DTS.

True, you could easily use the HDMI input for video and SPDIF for PCM/DD/DTS audio, but HDMI 1.1 will transmit 6 channel 96Khz PCM, which is the bare minimum needed to playback a DD+ signal from the upcoming HDDVD players (other than using the analog multichannel inputs).

I've got a question in with NAD's online support system about this matter, but it can take a few days to get a response. If you can find out if the M15 can process a 5.1 DVDA (aka 96Khz PCM) signal over HDMI, that would be great.

hifisponge

01-10-06, 01:46 AM

Did a little more digging on HDMI 1.1 and came across a January 2004 press release from Silicon Image. According to that press release the chip sets they released that month are capable of sending / receiving 5.1 DVDA.

"The new SiI 9031 (HDMI) receiver offers all the same features as the SiI 9021 receiver and adds DVD-Audio support through 4 I2S outputs. It supports 8-channel audio up to 96kHz and 2-channel audio up to 192kHz."

http://www.siliconimage.com/news/press/detailpressrelease.aspx?id=217

Here's another press release that announces the release of the first products to include DVDA playback through SI's 2nd gen HDMI chip sets. This announcement was made in Sept. 2004.

http://www.siliconimage.com/news/press/detailpressrelease.aspx?id=246

So it seems odd that your contact at NAD would tell you in August of 2005 that HDMI chips capable of hi-rez multichannel audio were only just then being released. It also seems that he has his facts mixed up when he says that the M15 uses "2nd generation HDMI chips" but claims that the M15 is limited to 2ch 48Khz audio over HDMI. 2ch 48Khz is 1st generation only.

hifisponge

01-12-06, 02:44 AM

Alimentall -

Have you discovered anything further about the HDMI specs of the M15? I'm going on day five waiting for a response from NAD online help.

- Tim

hifisponge

01-12-06, 12:51 PM

I finally got a response back from NAD tech support regarding the HDMI inputs on the Master Series M15 processor, and as I suspected, HDMI is purely switching only with no audio processing.

This is somewhat disappointing, considering that the HDMI 1.1 spec was released in January 2004, but again, I suspected as much. HDMI specs are changing so regularly that I understand why NAD would chose to wait it out. I just hope that when NAD releases future Master Series processors that they retain the same case design so I can just sell off the old and replace it with a new one that still matches the amp. Or even better, hopefully they will have the ability to perform a hardware upgrade.

Cheers,

- Tim

Alimentall

01-12-06, 02:11 PM

hifisponge

01-12-06, 03:25 PM

I did send an e-mail out, but yes, I was understanding that the chipset could send/receive stereo audio, but that's it. HDMI has me confused, I see all kinds of claims about what is possible with different versions and it's conflicting. But NAD put a LOT of time into the development of this piece and I'm sure they can't redesign it moment to moment or they'd never get it out. Greg said it was best to think of the HDMI as a video switching function and that it was best to use coax for most signals and the 7.1 input for DVD-A, SACD, BD or HD-DVD.

You have to realize too, they care far more how it sounds and performs than how "now" it is or how the connections work. I wish they could pull off both, but maybe once they get this platform done, it can be a long term product with production line updates over time.

I was confused about HDMI too, until I went to the Silicon Image web site. (They supply the majority of manufactures, if not all, with HDMI chip sets.) Read through their press releases (the links are in one of my previous posts) and you will see exactly when they released each version of the HDMI chips and what they are capable of. As I said in a previous post, because HDMI 1.1 was released in January 2004, I was a bit surprised that NAD wasn't able to squeeze the 1.1 chips into the M15. Then again, I also understand that if the M15 has been in development for some time, that it could have been a major rework to inlcude audio processing through HDMI.

hifisponge

01-27-06, 02:00 PM

Release date update: I spoke with my NAD dealer and with NAD customer service and unless you pre-ordered (which I have), you won't see the Masters Series until March. Pre-orders will be delivered mid to late February.

Alimentall

03-19-06, 07:10 PM

BTW, I actually have and am playing with the M55, M15 and M3. Great stuff! The M3 is the most quiet and transparent amplifier I have *ever* experienced in my life. I thought I had a buggy M15, then I found out I should actually try reading the manual :)

bob53

04-01-06, 03:45 AM

Does the M55 pass 480i over HDMI?

cpu8088

08-14-06, 09:56 AM

any recent review?

Alimentall

08-16-06, 06:55 PM

Does the M55 pass 480i over HDMI?

Yes, it does. In fact they often recommend that you send it that way to let the TV do the scaling/deinterlacing (unless it's weak in this area)

Alimentall

08-16-06, 06:55 PM

any recent review?

I hear there's a new review of the HT system coming, but I forget from whom.

Luís Miguel

11-04-06, 04:31 PM

Please, there is anybody who may give me some orientation about my previous message? my doubts are between the new high end sound system (best choice in EISA awards 2006) Nad Master Series (M15, M25 and M55) and the already knowned awarded sound systems, Arcam (DV29, P7 and AV8) or Primare (DVD30, SP31 and A30.5). Between these 3 different systems, which one would you recommend me? Any one knows these?

Alimentall

11-04-06, 06:06 PM

Well, look, I don't think there are but a couple of multi-channel amps that could match the M25 in power quantity/quality, the M55 is a universal player with HDMI and Faroudja circuitry, the preamp is just gorgeous sounding with HDMI switching. To me, it's a no brainer. I certainly don't have people wondering about other gear when they hear it/see it.

WSLam

12-28-06, 03:42 AM

Just bought a NAD M15 to replace my old and broken Proceed

cpu8088

12-28-06, 09:32 AM

wslam

is your ht system separate from your 2 channel magico mini speaker system?

your opinion on the m15?

WSLam

12-28-06, 02:31 PM

hi cpu8088
i have a separate HT setup (120in screen, HD projector etc etc), but the M15 will be used along with the magico mini in my 'music' room. i actually use my magico to watch TV =)
it will arrive tomorrow. will report. cheers, ws

VTGOLFER

12-31-06, 10:15 AM

WSLam, how do you or how are you using the M15 in your system? What are your sources? How would you compare the sound vs. your old Proceed and finally what other pieces did you consider when purchasing the M15? Thanks for your responce.

VTGOLFER

12-31-06, 10:27 AM

Alimentall, how would you rate the M15 compared to other pre/pros on the market. I just bought the McIntosh MX119 about six weeks ago along with the MC 207 amp. I love the sound of both pieces and especially the ease of use. The only problem I have with the pre/pro is I need more connections. Since my purchase I have gotten into HD DVD and Blu-Ray. It would be nice if NAD or any other high end pre/pro manufacturer would come out with two sets of 5.1 or 7.1 external inputs to handle to new audio codecs found in HD and BD players.

WSLam

01-02-07, 04:26 AM

Hi guys. A quick report.
1) I paid USD2300 for mine
2) It's well packed. The unit is well built, and is clearly (not even trying to hide) that it is made in china. I live in HK, so it's not my place to be biased. =)
3) Build quality is very good, but not perfect. For example, the vol knob could be 'pull out'. No big deal, you just need to stick it back in. But the 'feel' of the knob is excellent.
4) Setup the M15 in about 10 mins (including hooking up various cables) without consulting the manual at all.
5) Fine Tuning is easy. Just used a sound meter and was up and running in no time.
6) Sound is pretty good. My HT setup is 'just there' for me to watch movies, nothing serious as this is primarily a 2 channel setup
7) Remote control can be setup by hooking it up to a computer via USB. It immediately told me to upgrade the firmware and remote codes. Macros were easily setup. But I need more time to fine tune the macros.
8) Sound wise, is definitely on par with my ancient Proceed AVP. I also have the AVP2 downstairs, but being in two different systems, I could not side by side compare.

What I wish for:
1) ability to turn off the display
2) fonts on the display to be bigger

otherwise, as good as advertised.