AVS Forum banner

The NAD T775/T785 AVRs w/ HDMI 1.3 Thread!

Tags
nad
793K views 5K replies 444 participants last post by  Miguel86 
#1 ·
See less See more
4
#28 ·
Ok I just came home from a listening test between NAD 765 and Denon 3808, both costing exactly the same in local currency.


Setup: Room approx 4x6 meters (monitor being on the short end)

TV: Samsung around 40" (didnt check exact specs as i was there for the sound), but one of their nicer ones


DVD player Denon 1940 which did the upscaling (nice player btw, the upscaler didnt seem to suffer from any bad things as one might think after reading these forums)


Speakers: 5.0 setup (i dont own a sub myself so we turned it off)

Front: B&W DM 684

Center: B&W HTM62

Back: B&W DM606/605 (i forgot which sorry)


Test material: Saving Private Ryan (Omaha beach scene) and some various music.


Usability: Regarding both, I wasnt really impressed at all I must admit. But heck you just have to set up the thing once, and I am not impressed by the audessy in these units (and im not the only one it seems :p). So really no pros or cons here, autodection of playmode seemed to work fine on both units.


Features: Since we let the DVD handle the scaling I cant really comment on that part, but its the same chip in the Denon DVD and Amp, and from what I could tell it was quite good. Also the Denon got a bit extra connectors and can scale analog sources to HDMI wich the 765 can't do (the 775 and 785 should however do this).

In the feature departmen I'd much rather have the Denon, because then you dont have to think about your source, it can be component or hdmi and 460i or 1080p it doesnt matter. But with the NAD you need to think. And I didnt even get to see the Denons network function.


And now to the important part surround-sound!

Denon first:

When you increase the volume when the soldiers exit their ships on the beach, it feels good. The voices are clearly heard, dynamics seemed good. All in all the scene was enjoyable, and it was clear that the surround was on. But I wern't blown away, I knew that i had turned off the sub so I might lack some punch. But I still didnt feel like I was listening to a surround system with a total value exeeding 4k$ (estimate).


So over to the NAD:

From the first granade landing it was very obvious that NAD spend their money where it counts, the punch! Suddenly the B&W's awoke from their slumber and played like they should! The bass turned from soft and silent, to snappy and loud, without increasing the volume of the rest, or sacrifice clarity.


The same thing was painfully obvious on stereo music, the Denon clearly lacked the power to drive the DM684 well.


And thus my conclusion is clear, if you got floor speakers that are a bit tough to drive (like the B&W's seems to be), stay well clear of the Denon, the extra bells and whistles really do not make up for the loss in audio quality. And if the video scaling is important the larger NAD's should feature this (with an increased cost ofcourse).


I got myself the NAD, and the Denon1940 to go with it (the NAD DVD player sucked value/$ wise), and will hopefully recieve them on friday



ps. I think the Denon would work great with smaller 2-way shelf speakers like maybe a Dali Concept 2/1 set and a sub.
 
#29 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ney /forum/post/11733450


if you got floor speakers that are a bit tough to drive (like the B&W's seems to be), stay well clear of the Denon, the extra bells and whistles really do not make up for the loss in audio quality. And if the video scaling is important the larger NAD's should feature this (with an increased cost ofcourse).

I think the Denon would work great with smaller 2-way shelf speakers like maybe a Dali Concept 2/1 set and a sub

very interesting, thanks for your input.


I guess the Denon, combined with a decent multi-channel amp should work well to drive [any] speakers, then you would have all the neat features as well (but at a bigger price).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ney /forum/post/11733450


I got myself the NAD, and the Denon1940 to go with it

cool! I use three NAD C272 amp's (150W X 2 each), combined with a Yamaha RX-V2700 receiver (as pre-pro), and a Denon DVD-3930CI player. It's a sweet sounding set-up. However I've pre-ordered the new T175 pre-pro. Can't wait to hear difference between NAD and Yamaha pre-amp.


I only wish the T175 had built-in etherNET/PC interface to be able to stream music from my WIN-MEDIA music archive.
 
#32 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ney /forum/post/11736569


Well a Preamp solution is a whole different league I'd say


But if the 765 is any indikation on the 175 performance I think you are in for a treat

yeah, I would think the sonic characteristics should be nearly similiar between the T175 and the other [new] family of NAD receivers, as they use similiar pre-amp construction/componentry (ie. Burr Brown DAC's, etc.,...).
 
#33 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ney /forum/post/11733450


Ok I just came home from a listening test between NAD 765 and Denon 3808, both costing exactly the same in local currency.


Setup: Room approx 4x6 meters (monitor being on the short end)

TV: Samsung around 40" (didnt check exact specs as i was there for the sound), but one of their nicer ones


DVD player Denon 1940 which did the upscaling (nice player btw, the upscaler didnt seem to suffer from any bad things as one might think after reading these forums)


Speakers: 5.0 setup (i dont own a sub myself so we turned it off)

Front: B&W DM 684

Center: B&W HTM62

Back: B&W DM606/605 (i forgot which sorry)


Test material: Saving Private Ryan (Omaha beach scene) and some various music.


Usability: Regarding both, I wasnt really impressed at all I must admit. But heck you just have to set up the thing once, and I am not impressed by the audessy in these units (and im not the only one it seems :p). So really no pros or cons here, autodection of playmode seemed to work fine on both units.


Features: Since we let the DVD handle the scaling I cant really comment on that part, but its the same chip in the Denon DVD and Amp, and from what I could tell it was quite good. Also the Denon got a bit extra connectors and can scale analog sources to HDMI wich the 765 can't do (the 775 and 785 should however do this).

In the feature departmen I'd much rather have the Denon, because then you dont have to think about your source, it can be component or hdmi and 460i or 1080p it doesnt matter. But with the NAD you need to think. And I didnt even get to see the Denons network function.


And now to the important part surround-sound!

Denon first:

When you increase the volume when the soldiers exit their ships on the beach, it feels good. The voices are clearly heard, dynamics seemed good. All in all the scene was enjoyable, and it was clear that the surround was on. But I wern't blown away, I knew that i had turned off the sub so I might lack some punch. But I still didnt feel like I was listening to a surround system with a total value exeeding 4k$ (estimate).


So over to the NAD:

From the first granade landing it was very obvious that NAD spend their money where it counts, the punch! Suddenly the B&W's awoke from their slumber and played like they should! The bass turned from soft and silent, to snappy and loud, without increasing the volume of the rest, or sacrifice clarity.


The same thing was painfully obvious on stereo music, the Denon clearly lacked the power to drive the DM684 well.


And thus my conclusion is clear, if you got floor speakers that are a bit tough to drive (like the B&W's seems to be), stay well clear of the Denon, the extra bells and whistles really do not make up for the loss in audio quality. And if the video scaling is important the larger NAD's should feature this (with an increased cost ofcourse).


I got myself the NAD, and the Denon1940 to go with it (the NAD DVD player sucked value/$ wise), and will hopefully recieve them on friday



ps. I think the Denon would work great with smaller 2-way shelf speakers like maybe a Dali Concept 2/1 set and a sub.

Thanks Ney,


Bodes well for the big T785 I have pre-ordered



The fact that you can also Bi - amp the front channels using the unused back surrounds should provide REAL MUSCLE for 2 channel listening..


Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Whitehead /forum/post/11736766


Latest from NAD:

T775 end of October

T785 end of November

Move aside Denon/Onkyo - the big boys are coming to town
 
#34 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Digital2004 /forum/post/11604817


None of the NAD include DD HD DTS HD decoders but there could be ugrade (hard or soft) next year though we know how upgrades come and go (cf the infamous ONKYO 5000 saga)

i think the NAD are overpriced compared to the ONKYO (well the ONKYO are a bit underpriced)

I can't believe at this price point they don't decode the advanced audio codecs. Really bursts the baloon of hooking up an HD DVD/BR player to one of these. Can this be right?
 
#35 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Ross /forum/post/11746827


I can't believe at this price point they don't decode the advanced audio codecs. Really bursts the baloon of hooking up an HD DVD/BR player to one of these. Can this be right?

Not at all. Receiver decoding while nice is not necessary to enjoy the new surround formats. They only one that can not be enjoyed to the fullest is DTS-MA because no players are able to decode it. You still have a DTS 1.5mbs core for these titles and there are very few anyway. I like the fact that these things can be added at a later time (if necessary) to the new NAD lineup.
 
#37 ·
Ken, no actually. The player can decode the advanced audio (DD+, TrueHD etc.) and send it as digital multi-channel PCM over the HDMI connection to the receiver. It is similar to the analog connection but it remains in the digital realm (and is the nifty one wire solution). If the receiver can do all the processing necessary to high bitrate digital PCM (Dolby PL IIx, speaker distance and bass management settings) then you are in good shape. Most HDMI audio capable receivers can do this but some like Rotel's RSX-1058 seems to be lacking this important feature.


Edit: It seems I had some bad information about the Rotel RSX 1058. Reports now are that it does add bass management and speaker distances to multi channel LPCM. It is unsure if it is able to add 7.1 matrixing to ALL multi channel LPCM though. Information is still a a little hazy even though the unit has been out for a couple months.
 
#40 ·
I posted this info from NAD somewhat tangentially in another thread, so thought l'd also put it in the dedicated NAD threads:


************************************************************ ******

There are some differences with the Audyssey imbedded in NAD gear:


1) A unique NAD "target curve". This is the final EQ curve after

calibration of the room, and is the "sound" of the system. Ours is less bright and more natural sounding - in our opinion. There are 2 brighter settings, Audyssey EQ and Flat.


2) An improved microphone. Since the EQ is based on the measurement of the microphone, this is a critical factor for getting good results. The Audyssey microphone we use is on a stalk that places it in the correct position and distance from the ground plane boundary.


3) We too were not satisfied with the amount of correction in the bass. At our insistence Audyssey has developed a filter with twice the resolution in the bass region. This has been released as MultEQ Pro and is the same filter built into our AVR's. Filters in the bass region eat up a lot of MIPS (processing power) and there is a limit based on cost. Please note that other room correction systems (even Audyssey's own outboard box)cost almost as much as the entire NAD AVR! We have achieved a remarkable result based on cost alone.

************************************************************ ************


They also said that the T175/775/785 have the same Audyssey s/w.
 
#41 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by noah katz /forum/post/11750016


Ney,


Thanks for the nice review.


"But I wern't blown away, I knew that i had turned off the sub so I might lack some punch."


Do you mean it sounded like the sub was off?

The sub WAS off (both with the NAD and the Denon, I dont own a sub, and I wont get one before I move out of this appartment, so I did not want it to cloud my judgement).


The reason I thought that was because I was dissapointed in the bass, but my inital thought was "Oh well, it is probably because there is no sub". But then we changed to the NAD, and my thought was "Woaw, no reason to get a sub at all, just get a proper amp". My B&W DM604S3 are quite capable of putting up some punch, so I was really surprised at the amount (or lack thereof) of sound the Denon was able to output.


But I have heard roumers that Denon and B&W has never been really good friends setup wise, so I'd still say go listen to the Denon, especially if you got a 2-way setup. Because feature wise it still blows the NAD away.
 
#44 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyV /forum/post/11754961


I would like to see a picture of ANY recent NAD receiver in silver. I have searched and can not find any.

Nad have told me that they have no pictures available as yet, in regards to the Titanium finish (T775/785)


My previous Nad T163 was in the classic graphite - don't know whether to stick to graphite or Titanium for the T785


decisions, decisions...
 
#45 ·
Ney,


I see; thanks.


I was surprised that the NAD didn't rate higher in user friendliness, especially as NAD makes a big deal about that aspect.


Also, did you delve into the setup memories at all? I'm particularly interested in what tone control adjustments are available.


Thanks
 
#46 ·
Ok NAD T765 and Denon 1940 now on table, been cabled and been there for a maximum of three minutes.

Now first the dissapointments :\\


The NAD doesnt feature On Screen Display via HDMI, and apparently cannot accept audio via HDMI =O. My TV recieves the video (which looks great so far in 1080p from the denon), AND audio, but I can't seem to get the NAD to accep audio via HDMI
Now have to look for a composite cable to try and see if i can change that with the OSD and look for a optical cable or something to test the audio.


If any of you can think of something i missed please speak up. When i got the setup right I will ofcourse happily answer all the questions I can.



Edit: I have tried all the combinations in the OSD and yes, the NAD does not feature sound cia HDMI, sucks I had so hoped to make do with one less cable (right now since i only use one source I got a hdmi cable from the DVD to the amp that I don'´t really need as the amp just act as bypass *sigh*)
 
#47 ·
From Nad : T765/T775/t785/T175


All four models route incoming HDMI signals in their original resolution, up to and including 1080p, and of course accept digital-audio via HDMI



Ken
 
#50 ·

Quote:
Originally Posted by TommyV /forum/post/11762518


The T765 DOES NOT accept audio via the HDMI inputs and hence why I did not include them in the title and original post. It is just HDMI switching.

Thats weird - are you sure



I'm taking info from their website - The T 765 provides straightforward HDMI switching (video-only) but will accept digital-audio via HDMI
 
Top