Pre/Pro Comparison Notes (10 Units including NAD, Marantz, Outlaw, Emotiva) - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 3 Old 02-13-2014, 09:43 AM - Thread Starter
deerplow's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
The following is a completely subjective A/B comparison focusing strictly on perceived audio quality of 2 channel music reproduction via digital inputs. Many of the units compared are not equals of technology or price, but only a result of what I had access to and my own curiosity.


My Rotel 1068 burned out and my backup Marantz AV9000 was on the decline. I wanted a new pre/pro and picked up a B&K Reference 30 off ebay for cheap… Disappointed by the lack of detail compared to the Marantz (nevermind the very detailed Rotel), I began an exhausting pre/pro shoot out. All comparisons were done in my own home with the same equipment setup. Only Preamp outputs were used on receiver models.


Marantz AV9000
B&K Reference 30
Denon 2805
Outlaw 975
Emotiva UMC-200
NAD T748
NAD T175
Pioneer 1523
Marantz SR5008
Marantz AV7701


Focal 826v powered by a Carver AV705x amplifier. All music playback served up by JRiver Media Center, WASAPI Output, via Optical or HDMI where available. All lossless and HDTracks were used.


Marantz AV9000
As my own starting point, the AV9000 has vocal reproduction that is hard to beat. It just sounds very natural. The treble was slightly harsher than the Outlaw, and the bass detail lacking in comparison. The width, instrument separation, and detail was also reduced compared to the Outlaw, 5008, 7701, Emotiva, and T175.*

B&K Reference 30
Very dark, mushy sound. Things just blend together, resolving much less detail. Less natural vocals than the AV9000. Bass detail and control was surprisingly great.*

Denon 2805
Dark, confused sound. Very little feeling of width or layers. Probably the worst of the bunch in every way. Bad mid range resonance (blending buzz of midrange sound).*

Outlaw 975
Wonderfully detailed, smooth sound. Excellent imaging and width, with layers of detail and instrumental separation. Vocals a tad less natural than the AV9000, but much more fun and less fatiguing to listen to.*

Emotiva UMC-200
Great detail and separation. Very bright, forward sound that was just too harsh for my setup. The Outlaw resolved just as much detail, but with more natural vocals and without the fatiguing sharpness.*

NAD T748
Lacking separation and detail. Voices sound less natural, and highs like snare drums sound harsh and flat. Bass has authority, but lacks detail in comparison.*

NAD T175
Very smooth and controlled, very detailed, great space and separation. More natural sounding than the Outlaw, and vocals on par or better than the AV9000. Slightly brighter than the Outlaw, but never harsh. Space and separation are amazing. Treble is “airy” and wonderfully natural. Bass is less prominent, but very detailed.*

Pioneer 1523
Pioneer cannot resolve as much detail, slightly harsher treble, less warmth…. Less width than T175 and Outlaw. Not bad, not great.*

Marantz SR5008
Very natural vocals. Not as much separation in instruments. Rougher treble. Best receiver I have heard (better imagining than Pioneer). Most hiss at high volume.
slight mid range resonance.*

Marantz AV7701
Great detail and width. Marantz is much brighter than the T175, but has less control of the treble and bass. Makes the T175 sound slightly dark, though I did not hear any more detail in the Marantz. High volumes were harsh compared to the Outlaw or T175, which were more fun to listen to.*


For me, in my setup, the Outlaw 975 was the keeper until I heard the NAD T175. It simply plays the best I have ever heard with my equipment and my ears.

The biggest disappointment was the AV7701. I was shocked how much smoother and natural the T175 was in comparison. It was night and day. It is unfortunately because the feature set and operation is far superior to the T175.

I was very impressed by the SR5008, as it was the best receiver of the bunch and sounded nearly as good as the AV7701. I regret not bypassing my amp and seeing how it performed under its own amplification. If I had purchased it instead of the B&K that fueled this madness, my search probably would’ve stopped there. But once you hear something better…

I wish I could compare to the Rotel 1068 that I enjoyed after the AV9000, but also suspect that the T175 would ruin my fond memories with ease.

rboster likes this.
deerplow is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #2 of 3 Old 02-13-2014, 09:49 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
KidHorn's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Derwood, Maryland
Posts: 5,442
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1862 Post(s)
Liked: 1287
NAD makes some good stuff. Not surprised you like you liked them.

Of course, you do realize that all amps sound exactly the same according to many on this forum.
KidHorn is offline  
post #3 of 3 Old 02-13-2014, 02:47 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
rboster's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: USA
Posts: 25,132
Mentioned: 63 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1637 Post(s)
Liked: 2261
OP: You've been a member for over 6 years and this is your first post eek.gifwink.gif Please be a stranger to posting... this is a great comparison post, I'm sure many will benefit from. Thanks for sharing..
rboster is offline  
Sponsored Links
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Marantz Av7701 Audio Video Preamp Processor , Marantz Sr5008 , Pioneer Sc 1523 K 9 2 Channel Av Receiver , Emotiva Umc 200 7 1 Home Theater Preamp Surround Processor , Denon Avr 2805 A V Home Theater Receiver

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page

Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off