or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The "Official" NAD T 747 Owner's Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The "Official" NAD T 747 Owner's Thread - Page 8

post #211 of 1655
i just got PSB Image B6 + C5 + ( surrounds pending ) I had hear them with a T 747 at the demo shop. and the T 747 sounded excellent.

I had carried over my yamaha rx v450 to compare. It's 1/4 th in price and 6 yrs old. It sounded brighter and coarser at the same volumes but as lower volumes it was decent. and had good effects as compared to the T 747.

I'm keen on the 747 but since i've heard it with my PSB B6 + C5 combination and i liked it a lot but i'm a little hesitant after reading all these above issues that the 747 owners are having.

Could the owners write down a Pro vs. Cons list of the 747.....

Thanks
post #212 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by rana_kirti View Post

i just got PSB Image B6 + C5 + ( surrounds pending ) I had hear them with a T 747 at the demo shop. and the T 747 sounded excellent.

I had carried over my Yamaha RX v450 to compare. It's 1/4 the in price and 6 yrs old. It sounded brighter and coarser at the same volumes but as lower volumes it was decent. and had good effects as compared to the T 747.

I'm keen on the 747 but since I've heard it with my PSB B6 + C5 combination and i liked it a lot but I'm a little hesitant after reading all these above issues that the 747 owners are having.

Could the owners write down a Pro vs. Cons list of the 747.....

Thanks

rana_kirti

Pro/con lists are tough to put together for any product simply because what may be a pro (or con) for one person could be the opposite (or at least meaningless) to another.

Usually what I do is to decide on a rough budget ($), put together a list of must have features/capabilities and another one for would like to have features. After I get a few candidate products I start in on reviews, reliability data, user / forum comments, etc.

I think where most people make their biggest mistake is to start by comparing feature lists first. It's easy to say this one has more features or this one has the same features for less money without answering the important questions such as are those features important to me, what do I give up to get them, will I ever use them, etc. I also try and determine if I can get around them some other way by maybe changing out some other equipment or altering my setup and/or habits.

When I started looking, my must have list was very much sound oriented (real power, low distortion, headroom, quality DAC& DSP chips, warm & smooth tone, etc.). Quality build, reputation, and my past experience were equally important. I required full pre-outs and pre-inputs. On the video front I required 4 HDMI 1.3a inputs or better and that was about it.

Surprisingly, only 2-3 receivers made the cut within my budget. IF my list was video oriented (or number of features-oriented), I'm sure there would have been 7/8 on the list at least and the NAD would probably not even make the cut. It's all a roundabout way of saying that my pros are probably completely different than somebody else's pros. Did I give up a few things that would have been nice? You bet! Pure video pass-thru would have been nice but I can get around it if I have to. Mixing one HDMI's audio with another HDMI's video would have been great also. Oh well.

The cons discussed so far are the lack of pure video pass-thru, the auto 24/60Hz switching, and the above mentioned inability to combine one HDMI/digital audio with another HDMI video. For some, those are very real cons and they may be for you. There also could be a dozen more cons depending upon what's important to you. As for pros, what exactly are you looking for? On my list the pros win by a score of around 12 to 3. For someone else, it may be the exact opposite.

Marty
post #213 of 1655
Thread Starter 
Well said.

Dana
post #214 of 1655
Marty - really good response. One question for you - have you played music/movies with both EQ off and on? Which sounds better in your setup?
post #215 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by bommai View Post

Marty - really good response. One question for you - have you played music/movies with both EQ off and on? Which sounds better in your setup?

I prefer the EQ off for everything. I'm kinda "old school" in a lot of ways and have been buying & setting up this stuff since the early 70's (Oh the money I've spent). Anyway, I don't dislike Audyssey, MCACC and similar and can maybe see a benefit for complex setups, difficult rooms, etc. For my setup I find the trusty old Radio Shack SPL and my own ears do a pretty good job. I always try out the auto-EQ stuff but wind up turning it off. I think in a 7.1 or 9.1 setup it may have more benefits than in a 5.1 like mine. I can't imagine why anyone would use it for serious stereo listening.
post #216 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marty913 View Post

rana_kirti

Pro/con lists are tough to put together for any product simply because what may be a pro (or con) for one person could be the opposite (or at least meaningless) to another.

Usually what I do is to decide on a rough budget ($), put together a list of must have features/capabilities and another one for would like to have features. After I get a few candidate products I start in on reviews, reliability data, user / forum comments, etc.

I think where most people make their biggest mistake is to start by comparing feature lists first. It's easy to say this one has more features or this one has the same features for less money without answering the important questions such as are those features important to me, what do I give up to get them, will I ever use them, etc. I also try and determine if I can get around them some other way by maybe changing out some other equipment or altering my setup and/or habits.

When I started looking, my must have list was very much sound oriented (real power, low distortion, headroom, quality DAC& DSP chips, warm & smooth tone, etc.). Quality build, reputation, and my past experience were equally important. I required full pre-outs and pre-inputs. On the video front I required 4 HDMI 1.3a inputs or better and that was about it.

Surprisingly, only 2-3 receivers made the cut within my budget. IF my list was video oriented (or number of features-oriented), I'm sure there would have been 7/8 on the list at least and the NAD would probably not even make the cut. It's all a roundabout way of saying that my pros are probably completely different than somebody else's pros. Did I give up a few things that would have been nice? You bet! Pure video pass-thru would have been nice but I can get around it if I have to. Mixing one HDMI's audio with another HDMI's video would have been great also. Oh well.

The cons discussed so far are the lack of pure video pass-thru, the auto 24/60Hz switching, and the above mentioned inability to combine one HDMI/digital audio with another HDMI video. For some, those are very real cons and they may be for you. There also could be a dozen more cons depending upon what's important to you. As for pros, what exactly are you looking for? On my list the pros win by a score of around 12 to 3. For someone else, it may be the exact opposite.

Marty

Thanks Marty... Your reply has given me a lot of clarity.

My preference is also sound first and I'm only going to use 1 input. And I don't really need networking, 3D etc.

1. Can you share which were your other 2 contenders when deciding your AVR purchase ?

2. Does lack of pure video pass-thru mean that when i connect my blu-ray player to T747 then it will process the video in some way ( maybe for worse ) before sending it out from its "hdmi out" to my projector....?

If my understanding is correct then... Whats the work around for lack of pure video pass-thru ?

Once again I must thank you for a very beautifully worded reply to my earlier query which made things much simpler in my mind....

Thanks
post #217 of 1655
I did another AB testing of NAD T747 vs HK AVR 745 and have decided to keep my HK AVR 745 and return the NAD T747 back to Audio Advisor.

There is just not enough of a difference sound quality wise to warrant this upgrade. In fact, this used to be the top line of HK and the NAD T747 is more toward the bottom of NAD. While it is an awesome receiver and I would have definitely kept it for its quality had I not already had the 745. Now my question is - is the HK AVR 7550HD enough of an upgrade from the 745. I think for me it might not because I don't use bitstream high def codecs, I don't do internet radio - my mac does that. I use a 4x2 HDMI switch. I have only a 5.1 system. I love the TC30 remote. My only reason to upgrade might be to sell off the 745 while it is still working well and upgrade to one that has a warranty. But, it is not chump change. I could rather buy something else!!
post #218 of 1655
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bommai View Post

I did another AB testing of NAD T747 vs HK AVR 745 and have decided to keep my HK AVR 745 and return the NAD T747 back to Audio Advisor.

There is just not enough of a difference sound quality wise to warrant this upgrade. In fact, this used to be the top line of HK and the NAD T747 is more toward the bottom of NAD. While it is an awesome receiver and I would have definitely kept it for its quality had I not already had the 745. Now my question is - is the HK AVR 7550HD enough of an upgrade from the 745. I think for me it might not because I don't use bitstream high def codecs, I don't do internet radio - my mac does that. I use a 4x2 HDMI switch. I have only a 5.1 system. I love the TC30 remote. My only reason to upgrade might be to sell off the 745 while it is still working well and upgrade to one that has a warranty. But, it is not chump change. I could rather buy something else!!

Thanks for the extensive testing you did on the T 747. Others will benefit from your findings.

Dana
post #219 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by rana_kirti View Post

Thanks Marty... Your reply has given me a lot of clarity.

My preference is also sound first and I'm only going to use 1 input. And I don't really need networking, 3D etc.

1. Can you share which were your other 2 contenders when deciding your AVR purchase ?

2. Does lack of pure video pass-thru mean that when i connect my blu-ray player to T747 then it will process the video in some way ( maybe for worse ) before sending it out from its "hdmi out" to my projector....?

If my understanding is correct then... Whats the work around for lack of pure video pass-thru ?

Once again I must thank you for a very beautifully worded reply to my earlier query which made things much simpler in my mind....

Thanks

I don't want to start any product wars so these are just my opinions only. It's risky to generalize but I'll do it anyway.

I think most receivers below $1500 are just that - general purpose. They look nice (gotta love those lights), have a ton of features (mostly video oriented), and are relatively cheap (for a reason). There are reasons why the Yamaha RX3000 is rated at 140watts & delivers 66 into 5 channels and the Pioneer 1120 (110 watts) delivers 47 watts. Most mid-line receivers are engineered for video and lack the heavy-duty transformers, capacitors, etc. required for quality sound. For most home theater users, that's an acceptable trade-off. It does seem to be getting better however.

Good sound costs more than good video and I did have a tight budget for this purchase. I looked at NAD, Sherwood Newcastle, Marantz, Anthem, Outlaw, and Rotel (used). The Anthem was too expensive (for now), the new Sherwood 972 wasn't available yet, Outlaw had decided to re-brand the new Marantz line, and Rotel didn't offer anything over NAD. I settled in on the NAD T775 (used) and the Marantz 6005 or 7005. Then the almost half-price drop came along on the T747 and it wound up against the Marantz 6005. I planned on continuing to use my Carver THX 5-channel amp for power so I was really looking more for a processor & HDMI switcher. Anyway, the NAD won and I'm happy with the way it turned out. In all honesty, I think the Marantz would have been a good choice also. I still may use my external amp but for now the 747 is driving everything.

As for your 2nd question, the 747 will "touch" the video even in bypass. I think the various tests by bommai confirm that. In my case, the video quality is excellent but I'm 1080p in on all sources except for satellite (1080i mostly) and am content with 60Hz. I can't see any evidence the NAD is affecting the signal. For the most part it appears to "touch" only resolution (1080i to 1080p in my case) or frame rate (24 to 60).

As for a workarounds if you do have issues, you could do as bommai has done & use a one in - two out HDMI splitter. If you plan on purchasing a new BR player in the future you could look at ones with dual HDMI output (Oppo 93).

Thanks for the kind words. I hope all this helps in some way. My thanks to bommai for his contribution.

Marty
post #220 of 1655
Marty - totally agree with you. If I did not have the HK 745, I would have kept the 747. It was that good and the video was not a big issue actually. But since I already have the 745, the upgrade just did not buy me enough even at the clearance price.
post #221 of 1655
I’ve been thinking about some of my comments regarding “general purpose” mid-line receivers and feel I might have implied that they were less worthy for some reason. That was not my intention at all. My point was about valid trade-offs that manufacturers make regarding their products, not that the trade-offs were bad (or good). Look at it this way:

Two manufacturers have a receiver price point of $1,000. Design engineering, parts/features, labor,, and marketing all go into the product. What’s left is profit. Assuming most manufactures have roughly the same quality of engineering, same labor costs, marketing, and profit margin; it quickly boils down to parts & features.

It is entirely valid for a Company-A to decide that a feature costing $100 (maybe a top of the line video chip) is what its target market wants. It is equally as valid for Company-B to decide that the $100 would be better spent on a larger power supply or better DACS for their target market. Absolutely nothing wrong with either receiver based on those two different decisions. If you think about how the parts pie could be divided up then the combination's are almost endless.

What is wrong or naive is for the customer (that would be us) to believe that you can always have both; or that the two receivers above should have both because they cost the same. That is the danger in shopping by feature lists. You will rarely if ever find the gauge of aluminum or copper wire, size or brand of the capacitors & resistors, or the overall parts layout philosophy in a feature list but each of those items can impact both audio & video quality.

My point was simply that valid and honest trade-offs have been made by most manufacturers and we have to sort through those trade-offs, understand them, and decide to what extent they affect us personally. It’s a lot easier if you are the “always go for the shiny lights” type guy but pretty difficult for the rest of us.

Just one other comment: There’s also a Company-C that decides the $100 should be profit and so you don’t get the good video chip or the great DACS. Hopefully hanging out in places like this (AVS Forums) will help us avoid that one.

Anyway, just wanted to clear that up so people don’t think I’m bashing their brand choice or trying to claim that audio is more important than video.
post #222 of 1655
I reported the following, earlier this week:

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtbell View Post

The T747 does affect video passing through it from the DVR via HDMI, even with the DVR and the T747 set to the same output mode (1080i), which supposedly prevents any video processing. Dark tones are crushed somewhat towards black, compared to when I was using an HDMI switch to pass the video. I think I've been able to compensate for this by tweaking the picture adjustments on the TV. After I've watched a wider range of material for a while I'll know for sure. (I do this by eye, not with a calibration disc.)

I've now changed my mind about this, after switching back and forth among
  • DVR connected directly to TV
  • DVR connected to TV via my old HDMI switch
  • DVR connected to TV via the T747

and watching the same material which I recorded earlier tonight. They all look the same or very nearly the same. I compared both bright areas (white shirt with creases) and dark areas (dark gray suit against a black background).

My earlier impression that the picture through the T747 was darker probably came from a combination of (a) doing the initial setup in late afternoon, when light coming in through the windows affects the perceived brightness and contrast of the picture, and (b) not waiting long enough for the TV to warm up completely. I didn't do any back-and-forth switching during the initial setup. Later in the evening, as I was fussing with the picture settings on the TV, I probably ended up very close to my starting point. I should have written down the settings before making the switch, then I'd know for sure.

I'm going to edit my original post to reflect this, but I'm leaving evidence here to serve as a general warning not to be too hasty in one's conclusions in making comparisons like this.
post #223 of 1655
marty ... thanks i'm pretty much set on gettin the T747.

jtbell.... so are you concluding that the T474 does indeed have pure video pass-thru ?
post #224 of 1655
As far as I can tell by eye, the T747 does not affect HDMI video enough for me to tell the difference, when the signal has the same resolution going in and out, and the Video Mode is set to "Normal" instead of "Custom."

This is with a 5 1/2 year old 32" LCD TV which is "calibrated" only by eye. I've adjusted it to get what I think are natural-looking levels of color saturation, brightness (black level) and contrast, with usable detail at brightness levels as low as I think that set is capable of reaching. A plasma or more modern LCD might reveal differences at the lower levels if they exist.
post #225 of 1655
I've been looking at universal remotes. One of the main goals is to simplify things for my girlfriend who is not terribly AV savvy, so if the remote's not pretty straightforward and easy to operate, it's of no use. I'd be operating 4 devices- no current plans for a 5th but who knows down the line. I don't really want to spend much more than $100 right now. I am seriously considering the Harmony 700. Does anyone else have experience using this remote with the T747 (or Oppo BDP-83)?
post #226 of 1655
I use a Harmony remote with the T747. The T747 is in the Harmony database, but the MENU button didn't work, for accessing the T747's on-screen menus. I had to use the remote that came with the T747 to "teach" my Harmony configuration the proper code for the MENU button, which is a simple process. (I've had to do this sort of thing for several other components, by the way.)

The remote that comes with the T747 is designed to control other NAD components in combination with the T747 (e.g. CD or Blu-ray player) but I don't use any of those commands.

My Harmony also works well with my Oppo BDP-80, so I'd expect it to work with the BDP-83 as well.

I should note that in general, the Harmony remotes usually work fairly well using the default configurations for individual components downloaded from the Harmony database, but some individual buttons from the original remotes are sometimes missing so you have to "teach" your configurations those buttons yourself.
post #227 of 1655
When researching AVR's late 2009 into spring 2010, I wish this thread had existed. Thanks for all the effort and insights, particularly Dana and Marty since it appears they are also of the audio first mentality.

Years ago I vowed that if my old Carver stereo receiver ever died I would finally go 5.1 and pick up an AVR. I narrowed my choices to Pioneer Elite, Integra, Cambridge Audio, Rotel and NAD. I wanted to keep the budget under 2k, way under if possible. I ended up home auditioning a Cambridge Audio Azur 650A (mostly to get a sense of the CA sound because I was interested in the 650R) vs. the T747. If the general notion is that amps are always better than an AVR then the results may be surprising. To me they both sounded identical, that is they both generated musical bliss.

My mid range setup: NAD T747, Monitor Audio 303 fronts & Monitor Audio M3 surrounds (both late 90's floor standers), Monitor Audio RX Centre, Velodyne sub, Marantz tape deck (really need to get rid of my cassettes!), Rega turntable, Xbox 360, PS3, Samsung LN52A650 and a newly acquired Oppo BDP-95.

The Bad: While the remote could be better, it is the GUI that is not particularly intuitive to me. Pressing left or right to pick a selection instead of enter is strange. Still easy to work through.

I have had my T747 since late April 2010 and one glitch/annoyance that has occurred regularly is the NAD losing the audio and more infrequently the video after a movie or show has played. It seems particularly pronounced when using the PS3 so I am inclined to place the blame on Sony's shoulders since I have had numerous issues with the Playstation brand since the original. Also after playing blu rays on the PS3 and occasionally after a game a strange hiss then "woomf" sound will keep repeating until I change to another source then switch back to the PS3. Since it is so easily correctable I have not made much of a fuss about it. Any advice would be appreciated since I am definitely not a tech head. I have had the BDP-95 since Friday and have not had the "woomf" issue even once. I don't plan on using the PS3 for blu ray playback ever again.

The Good: The sound. As stated earlier audio comes first for me. I was a big fan of my Carver so going multi channel meant that I had to have a receiver that matched or surpassed it sonically. During my research it seemed that NAD kept coming up as a well respected brand that was reasonably priced. One quote, "NAD is the low end of high end". Still that glorious sound, both in home theater and, most important to me, with music. For me the T747 is an excellent match with my old MA speakers as well as the RX Centre (first put into service the same day as the T747).

I have had zero issues with video playback quality. In fact when first putting the T747 into service with a new Tributaries HDMI cable I noticed a big improvement, the colors became more vibrant.

Really my only minor regret is that I wish I had picked my T747 up at the price audio advisor and others are asking for it now. Still I have been able to enjoy it all these months, nearing a year now, and still look forward to turning it on every day.

Eddie
post #228 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrkWhtGuy View Post
When researching AVR's late 2009 into spring 2010, I wish this thread had existed. Thanks for all the effort and insights, particularly Dana and Marty since it appears they are also of the audio first mentality.

Years ago I vowed that if my old Carver stereo receiver ever died I would finally go 5.1 and pick up an AVR. I narrowed my choices to Pioneer Elite, Integra, Cambridge Audio, Rotel and NAD. I wanted to keep the budget under 2k, way under if possible. I ended up home auditioning a Cambridge Audio Azur 650A (mostly to get a sense of the CA sound because I was interested in the 650R) vs. the T747. If the general notion is that amps are always better than an AVR then the results may be surprising. To me they both sounded identical, that is they both generated musical bliss.

My mid range setup: NAD T747, Monitor Audio 303 fronts & Monitor Audio M3 surrounds (both late 90's floor standers), Monitor Audio RX Centre, Velodyne sub, Marantz tape deck (really need to get rid of my cassettes!), Rega turntable, Xbox 360, PS3, Samsung LN52A650 and a newly acquired Oppo BDP-95.

The Bad: While the remote could be better, it is the GUI that is not particularly intuitive to me. Pressing left or right to pick a selection instead of enter is strange. Still easy to work through.

I have had my T747 since late April 2010 and one glitch/annoyance that has occurred regularly is the NAD losing the audio and more infrequently the video after a movie or show has played. It seems particularly pronounced when using the PS3 so I am inclined to place the blame on Sony's shoulders since I have had numerous issues with the Playstation brand since the original. Also after playing blu rays on the PS3 and occasionally after a game a strange hiss then "woomf" sound will keep repeating until I change to another source then switch back to the PS3. Since it is so easily correctable I have not made much of a fuss about it. Any advice would be appreciated since I am definitely not a tech head. I have had the BDP-95 since Friday and have not had the "woomf" issue even once. I don't plan on using the PS3 for blu ray playback ever again.

The Good: The sound. As stated earlier audio comes first for me. I was a big fan of my Carver so going multi channel meant that I had to have a receiver that matched or surpassed it sonically. During my research it seemed that NAD kept coming up as a well respected brand that was reasonably priced. One quote, "NAD is the low end of high end". Still that glorious sound, both in home theater and, most important to me, with music. For me the T747 is an excellent match with my old MA speakers as well as the RX Centre (first put into service the same day as the T747).

I have had zero issues with video playback quality. In fact when first putting the T747 into service with a new Tributaries HDMI cable I noticed a big improvement, the colors became more vibrant.

Really my only minor regret is that I wish I had picked my T747 up at the price audio advisor and others are asking for it now. Still I have been able to enjoy it all these months, nearing a year now, and still look forward to turning it on every day.

Eddie
eddie... thanks for sharing your experiences... i'm pretty close to ordering the 747.

can u expand more on the "NAD losing the audio and more infrequently the video after a movie or show has played."

1. so u watching a movie and the picture and sound keeps going away ?

2. what does "after a movie or show had played" mean ? Does it drop picture and sound during the next video...?

i find your comment a little confusing.... kindly go ahead and offer some clearance on the above comments....

Cheers
post #229 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by rana_kirti View Post

eddie... thanks for sharing your experiences... i'm pretty close to ordering the 747.

can u expand more on the "NAD losing the audio and more infrequently the video after a movie or show has played."

1. so u watching a movie and the picture and sound keeps going away ?

2. what does "after a movie or show had played" mean ? Does it drop picture and sound during the next video...?

i find your comment a little confusing.... kindly go ahead and offer some clearance on the above comments....

Cheers

Hello rana,

First I would say that I didn't word it correctly. This issue occurs sporadically, once or twice a month and it is very difficult for me to place the blame on the T747. I have had no issues with my previous cd player, tape deck or older game systems for example a super nintendo.

When it occurs the audio will just drop out while the video continues. Maybe three times it was in reverse, that is the video disappeared while the audio continued. Again it is easily correctable by switching to another source then switching back to the PS3. I am inclined to blame my issues on the PS3 and to a much minor extent the Xbox 360. I have had both for a few years and both are connected to my NAD with relatively inexpensive hdmi cables. I had to send my PS3 in to repair the disc drive about 14 months into ownership when it simply stopped playing all video. This July it will be 3 years old and I and my guests have definitely put a lot of mileage on it.

I have had no issues with my new Oppo BDP 95 after 7 days of use. I've learned from these forums that one's system is only as good as the weakest link/s. For me that's my PS3 and possibly the 360. Right now I am considering upgrading their hdmi cables. I have NO interest in replacing my T747.

Best,
Eddie
post #230 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrkWhtGuy View Post

I have had no issues with my new Oppo BDP 95 after 7 days of use. I've learned from these forums that one's system is only as good as the weakest link/s. For me that's my PS3 and possibly the 360. Right now I am considering upgrading their hdmi cables. I have NO interest in replacing my T747.

Best,
Eddie

I bet you haven't had issues with the BDP 95. That thing looks like a samurai. I am jealous.

When I was thoroughly researching AVRs, it seemed like the PS3 was always the weakest link in HT setups. Like 9 time out of 10 any serious issue could be traced to the PS3 or a Comcast cable box. I'm pretty happy to not have either one.
post #231 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by menocu View Post

I bet you haven't had issues with the BDP 95. That thing looks like a samurai. I am jealous.

When I was thoroughly researching AVRs, it seemed like the PS3 was always the weakest link in HT setups. Like 9 time out of 10 any serious issue could be traced to the PS3 or a Comcast cable box. I'm pretty happy to not have either one.

In ebony I'd say its more like a ninja... Still no issues with the BDP 95. Today it made a Netflix DVD, Get Low, look and sound great. I've read quite a bit of good stuff about the BDP 83. I was pretty close to getting it or the 83se for a little bit but somehow my old cd player kept chugging along.

On Friday my PS3 was back to its antics once again. Finishing a game it went right into its old routine, the "woomf" issue again. Sigh... I am happy I am only 1 for 2 though. No Comcast in my setup either.
post #232 of 1655
Anyone have an ideal setting for mono recordings on a 5.1 system? Just basic stereo? Enhanced stereo? EARS?
post #233 of 1655
Enhanced stereo or EARS probably. Maybe PLIIx music. Wish I had some mono music to experiment with.
post #234 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by menocu View Post

Anyone have an ideal setting for mono recordings on a 5.1 system? Just basic stereo? Enhanced stereo? EARS?

Depending upon the center you have (well timbre matched?) EARS can sound excellent, but I think just plain stereo sounds much better.

Mono is really fun to listen to - the sound has an elusive quality to it I quite enjoy.

Try _Tacos, Echiladas, and Cheese_ by Doris Day if you can find it.

-Paul
post #235 of 1655
Thanks for your input Paul. I am especially ignorant about a lot of audio (and video) topics. Now I have to seek out some mono recordings.

Eddie
post #236 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrkWhtGuy View Post

Thanks for your input Paul. I am especially ignorant about a lot of audio (and video) topics. Now I have to seek out some mono recordings.

Eddie

Your welcome. This is interesting, if a tad expensive. I have not listened the whole way through yet, and there are some albums I prefer even in the early 60's version of stereo - but what I have listened to is pretty fantastic.

-Paul
(MMM- haven't posted enough here to be allowed to post URLs, so hit Amazon and search for the Beatles Mono Box Set. ($155) It's worth a look! )
post #237 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by paul.raulerson View Post

(MMM- haven't posted enough here to be allowed to post URLs, so hit Amazon and search for the Beatles Mono Box Set. ($155) It's worth a look! )

The Beatles in mono box was specifically what I was inquiring about. I've also occasionally come across older movies on DVD with mono tracks. The Beatles set is a must-own, by the way. It's almost worth the purchase for the packaging alone (exact replicas of the original LPs), but of course they also happen to sound stupendous. For Beatle-maniacs, there are all kinds of subtle and not-so-subtle differences in the mixes. For the record, I found any surround mode (EARS, 5 channel stereo, NEO) to sound a little off-kilter. I think stereo generally sounded the best.
post #238 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by menocu View Post

The Beatles in mono box was specifically what I was inquiring about. I've also occasionally come across older movies on DVD with mono tracks. ...

Oh yes, not a moment of buyer's remorse on that purchase!

Depending upon the DVD and the movie, I will sometimes just use the center channel speaker all by itself, though usually stereo works very well. And like you, I prefer unprocessed 2-channel listening over EARS or NEO, etc.

Besides, the extra power just makes the fronts sound better and better.

We use a spanking new set of Magnepan MMG's for the fronts, and a Martin Logan Motion-8 for the center. I would rather have a Maggie center, but there are physical limitations that make the Martin Logan better. And it is about as close to a timbre match with the Maggies as one can get with a speaker that is mounted on a small shelf directly under the television.

-Paul
post #239 of 1655
1. is it true that if a bluray has a mix of 60 hz , 50hz and 24p materials as in some scenes in between a 24p bluray that have 60hz/50hz content then the picture has judder...?

2. What are these handshake issues people keep talking about ?

i'm very keen on the T 747 but i need to get the above answers before i can take the plunge...
post #240 of 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by rana_kirti View Post

1. is it true that if a bluray has a mix of 60 hz , 50hz and 24p materials as in some scenes in between a 24p bluray that have 60hz/50hz content then the picture has judder...?

No. If it plays at 24fps, it plays at 24fps.

That is not to say the trailers and lead in menu are going to look great at 24fps - some discs just don't. But there will be no "mix" in the main program material.

Your TV will report to the T747 that it is capable of 24fps display, and the T747 will pass that information on to your Blu-ray player. If the disc you want to watch supports it, then you can watch it at 24fps, which for cinema releases, is really sweet. 24fps is not for television shows, unless those shows were shot to film, which is very rare indeed these days.

Quote:
2. What are these handshake issues people keep talking about ?

i'm very keen on the T 747 but i need to get the above answers before i can take the plunge...

HDMI is an incredibly complex protocol- sending HD video, uncompressed sound, signal information, and even ethernet connections over one little tiny cable.

The Handshaking involved with HDMI is just how the components all introduce themselves to each other, tell each other what they can do, and in general, keep things in sync. It is very complex indeed, and different components can
and do have problems talking to each other.

The T747 is very reliable in this regard, and has very few problems. Not immune to issues - I have an old Sanyo TV that had issues to my blu-ray player when the player was at the menu. I wound up just replacing it, rather than trying to adjust the refresh rate on all my kit to 59hz vice 60hz.

You have to choose what you want for yourself of course, but the T747 is an order of magnitude or more above the $600 Pioneer systems out there in terms of sound and power handling. And if you like that NAD sound, it has it in full measure.

It is NOT the latest and greatest technology, but it is solid solid solid.
And it sounds magnificent.

-Paul
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › The "Official" NAD T 747 Owner's Thread