AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/)
-   Receivers, Amps, and Processors (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/)
-   -   Marantz SR 7011 vs Nad T758 sound quality (https://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/3031062-marantz-sr-7011-vs-nad-t758-sound-quality.html)

nitkan 12-01-2018 11:19 PM

Marantz SR 7011 vs Nad T758 sound quality
 
Hi,

I do agree that speakers & room acoustics do play an important role in influencing sound. But all external factors remaining same how does the Marantz SR 7011 compare with the NAD T758 only pertaining to sound quality ignoring all the unnecessary bells & whistles. Marantz has audyssey XT 32 which is not as good as Dirac on the NAD for room correction as per user forums. Sound preference for music & movies would be 50:50. I prefer good smooth midrange. Thanks.

nodoubt 12-02-2018 12:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nitkan (Post 57201580)
Hi,

I do agree that speakers & room acoustics do play an important role in influencing sound. But all external factors remaining same how does the Marantz SR 7011 compare with the NAD T758 only pertaining to sound quality ignoring all the unnecessary bells & whistles. Marantz has audyssey XT 32 which is not as good as Dirac on the NAD for room correction as per user forums. Sound preference for music & movies would be 50:50. I prefer good smooth midrange. Thanks.

nad will mop the floor with marantz.
they have always had a good rep in the AUDIO world.
thats what they are known for.

nitkan 12-02-2018 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nodoubt (Post 57201672)
nad will mop the floor with marantz.
they have always had a good rep in the AUDIO world.
thats what they are known for.

Cool, thanks for your opinion.

torii 12-02-2018 01:46 AM

most products sound different...better can only be measured by your ears

nitkan 12-02-2018 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by torii (Post 57201816)
most products sound different...better can only be measured by your ears

Sure thanks Torii would agree with you, was curious about the general consensus pertaining to the sound . Had noticed in the forums that the newer Marantz have gone commercial & they are not as good as they use to be. I had a Marantz SR 8200 which I sold since it gave me some issues after 10 years. It sounded sweet to my ears & was built like a tank. Not sure about the newer ones from Vietnam even pertaining to the build quality.

Mickey Mouse 12-02-2018 10:22 AM

if you switch both to (pure) direct mode, you will not hear any differences (assumed it's a fair blind test).
NAD has never been anything special and is not today, same as Marantz.

as you mentioned yourself, the main difference is the room correction Audyssey vs. Dirac and Dirac.
though the plain room correction of Dirac is better than Audyssey XT32, Audyssey comes with some more functions wich are not available in Dirac.
Especially these are DynamicEQ and DynamicVolume and DynEQ is a must have if you don't listen with reference level all the time.

MUDCAT45 12-02-2018 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mickey Mouse (Post 57203548)
if you switch both to (pure) direct mode, you will not hear any differences (assumed it's a fair blind test).
NAD has never been anything special and is not today, same as Marantz.

as you mentioned yourself, the main difference is the room correction Audyssey vs. Dirac and Dirac.
though the plain room correction of Dirac is better than Audyssey XT32, Audyssey comes with some more functions wich are not available in Dirac.
Especially these are DynamicEQ and DynamicVolume and DynEQ is a must have if you don't listen with reference level all the time.

Who listens in pure direct?
IMO Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume destroy the sound. Too much distortion and bloat.

nitkan 12-02-2018 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mickey Mouse (Post 57203548)
if you switch both to (pure) direct mode, you will not hear any differences (assumed it's a fair blind test).
NAD has never been anything special and is not today, same as Marantz.

as you mentioned yourself, the main difference is the room correction Audyssey vs. Dirac and Dirac.
though the plain room correction of Dirac is better than Audyssey XT32, Audyssey comes with some more functions wich are not available in Dirac.
Especially these are DynamicEQ and DynamicVolume and DynEQ is a must have if you don't listen with reference level all the time.

Maybe the flagship ones of both the brands are good but the Nad is much higher pricewise. As of today I guess as you have mentioned room correction softwares play an important role. I do not play at reference levels. I prefer clear & powerful sound at low volume without causing listening fatigue. Thanks for your input.

nitkan 12-02-2018 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MUDCAT45 (Post 57203600)
Who listens in pure direct?
IMO Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume destroy the sound. Too much distortion and bloat.

Thanks for your response too Mudcat45. I never listen in Pure Direct mode . Just wanted to know which of the above two receivers sound smooth without listening fatigue. Here I guess even speakers would play a pivotal role but that would deviate from the main topic.

Cattledog 12-02-2018 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MUDCAT45 (Post 57203600)
Who listens in pure direct?
IMO Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume destroy the sound. Too much distortion and bloat.

I listen to 2 channel music in "Analog bypass" on my NAD.

Ngerstman 12-02-2018 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mickey Mouse (Post 57203548)
if you switch both to (pure) direct mode, you will not hear any differences (assumed it's a fair blind test).
NAD has never been anything special and is not today, same as Marantz.

as you mentioned yourself, the main difference is the room correction Audyssey vs. Dirac and Dirac.
though the plain room correction of Dirac is better than Audyssey XT32, Audyssey comes with some more functions wich are not available in Dirac.
Especially these are DynamicEQ and DynamicVolume and DynEQ is a must have if you don't listen with reference level all the time.

Are you really saying that all integrated amps sound the same? I don’t think so. There are an infinite amount of possibilities in designing electronic circuitry and a variety of power amplifier types and output devices. You add it all up and you have different sounding products, different degrees of bass performance, different levels of distortion levels, different levels of resolving power and transparency. Even when the measurements are similar let alone when they’re not. Add to that all the stuff in a/v receivers and how the well all the things are implemented and you can certainly hear major differences. Many of the commercial stuff from many of the manufacturers sound like mud, others open, transparent with better transients. Most people don’t have the time or energy or a place to get a fair apples to apples comparison to come to an educated decision, many don’t care enough, which mind you, is just fine, many are finely adequate. But to say they all sound the same is silly. Regards. Ned.

Ngerstman 12-02-2018 05:24 PM

I would further add that, yes, NAD does have a reputation of making better than average sounding products at the competitive price points, with conservative power ratings at lower distortion measurements. Other manufacturers often advertise higher power ratings but at much higher distortion levels, NAD advertises much more conservatively. I would take 60 NAD Watts per channel over others 100 wpc. Weight is often an indicator of better quality as a result of beefier power supplies and the 758 weighs in st over 30lb. Rotel integrated amps sound great as well, big power supplies, beefy sound but very transparent as well. Regards. Ned.

torii 12-02-2018 05:32 PM

I believe in synergy between products...so nad my be best for some and marantz best for others.

Ngerstman 12-02-2018 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by torii (Post 57205956)
I believe in synergy between products...so nad my be best for some and marantz best for others.

Certainly from a feature perspective, but I’ll always take good amplification over mediocre, cheaper less well made stuff rarely sounds better with anything. Lousy power supplies and output devices usually have problems with impedance dips in speakers while the better made stuff works well across impedances down a bit below 4 ohms, while cheap stuff craps out, loses response and spikes in distortion. But if a lesser sounding product has the feature set you absolutely must have at the price you can afford, that’s the way you often need to go. Trade offs. Regards. Ned.

nitkan 12-02-2018 07:55 PM

Thanks a lot everyone for the valuable advice. Really appreciate it.

Mickey Mouse 12-03-2018 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ngerstman (Post 57205838)
Are you really saying that all integrated amps sound the same? I don’t think so.

I (almost) do!

Quote:

Most people don’t have the time or energy or a place to get a fair apples to apples comparison to come to an educated decision, many don’t care enough, which mind you, is just fine, many are finely adequate.
exactly this is the point!

i have all the equipment necessary to perform such "apple to apple" tests. Decent Audio Physic speakers and many computer controlled switches (low and speaker level). I can run a comparison and nobody knows which amp is running at a specific time, the log file will give the answer.
many people gave me a visit to prove that their amp is something special and they can detect it clearly from others.
Nobody succeeded so far, except for the broken ones (usually wrong idle current).

Quote:

But to say they all sound the same is silly. Regards. Ned.
let me give you an example:
I can select between three different digital filters in the DAC of my pre-processor. If you play some specific music in a loop again and again and switch between them, you may hear a difference. Honestly, I can hardly distinguish between "minimal phase" and "sharp roll-off", "slow roll-off" is easier to recognize. Anyway, these differences are o very small, I would never notice if anybody would switch even from my favorite "minimal phase" to "slow roll-off" when I'm away and come back to listen music.
and the differences between "decent" amps are even smaller.

btw.: i bet I notice a distance difference between the two main speakers of less than 2 inch!

MUDCAT45 12-03-2018 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mickey Mouse (Post 57209128)
I (almost) do!


exactly this is the point!

i have all the equipment necessary to perform such "apple to apple" tests. Decent Audio Physic speakers and many computer controlled switches (low and speaker level). I can run a comparison and nobody knows which amp is running at a specific time, the log file will give the answer.
many people gave me a visit to prove that their amp is something special and they can detect it clearly from others.
Nobody succeeded so far, except for the broken ones (usually wrong idle current).


let me give you an example:
I can select between three different digital filters in the DAC of my pre-processor. If you play some specific music in a loop again and again and switch between them, you may hear a difference. Honestly, I can hardly distinguish between "minimal phase" and "sharp roll-off", "slow roll-off" is easier to recognize. Anyway, these differences are o very small, I would never notice if anybody would switch even from my favorite "minimal phase" to "slow roll-off" when I'm away and come back to listen music.
and the differences between "decent" amps are even smaller.

btw.: i bet I notice a distance difference between the two main speakers of less than 2 inch!

Are you comparing amps or processors?

I find it amazing that you can detect 2 inches distance yet can't hear a difference in AVR's.

dschlic1 12-04-2018 10:37 AM

One big difference for me is that the NAD does not have an FM receiver! So it really can't be called an Audio Visual Receiver.

bootster 12-04-2018 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dschlic1 (Post 57215920)
One big difference for me is that the NAD does not have an FM receiver! So it really can't be called an Audio Visual Receiver.


I think you meant to say "Audio Video Receiver". That being said, you cannot claim that "All audio components sound the same". That is just not true, and people who say that are probably not sufficiently blessed with an ear for sound in general. There are differences I can detect between different DAC chip set based devices. That is just the simple truth.

My NAD T 758 has an AM/FM radio frequency function built in to it, but it's not the version 3. That being said, there should have been a separation of the T 758 when they took the radio wave function out of it. I know of no one who has a version 2, and there are a lot of people on this forum discussing this AVR model. The Marantz of today is not your fathers Marantz component. In my view, the brand has cheapened over the years to a basic, competitive product that is right in line with Onkyo, Yamaha, Denon and the rest of those brands that are similar in build quality and sound signatures. They all don't sound the same, but they don't sound like NAD either. NAD has it's own, signature sound, and I believe it is heads and tails better than these modern day mainstream components. Of course that is my opinion, just like anything that anyone says about these components is their opinion as well, for the most part.

EDIT: I didn't mean to imply that you were saying that all components sound the same, just that it has been offered as a premise in response to your question here. Listening fatigue is a good premise of an audio components qualities, and the NAD, to my ears, are components that are mostly free of listener fatigue.

bootster 12-04-2018 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mickey Mouse (Post 57203548)
if you switch both to (pure) direct mode, you will not hear any differences (assumed it's a fair blind test).
NAD has never been anything special and is not today, same as Marantz.

as you mentioned yourself, the main difference is the room correction Audyssey vs. Dirac and Dirac.
though the plain room correction of Dirac is better than Audyssey XT32, Audyssey comes with some more functions wich are not available in Dirac.
Especially these are DynamicEQ and DynamicVolume and DynEQ is a must have if you don't listen with reference level all the time.

Marantz was somewhat special back in the day. NAD is still special to this day with it's superior sound quality over the Marantz of today. To negate the hardware, and go right to equating components through software just doesn't work.

I don't use any room correction software, and even if I did, I still wouldn't say that you can claim that an AVR's sound signature is reliant on some software package that comes with it, and is totally optional to use. That just isn't the case, and it never will be. My NAD T758 and T777 v3 are totally better sounding components than comparable Marantz components of today, and that's just an opinion of mine, and of many members here. There are certain headroom qualities that the NAD's have, that I don't see in the Marantz components of comparable price points.

Again, this is an opinion, except the lack of reliance on software to make or break an AVR that is just fact. You do not need room correction software in all cases, and even if you did, the audio component would not be generic to that particular software in any case.

Ngerstman 12-04-2018 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bootster (Post 57216474)
Marantz was somewhat special back in the day. NAD is still special to this day with it's superior sound quality over the Marantz of today. To negate the hardware, and go right to equating components through software just doesn't work.

I don't use any room correction software, and even if I did, I still wouldn't say that you can claim that an AVR's sound signature is reliant on some software package that comes with it, and is totally optional to use. That just isn't the case, and it never will be. My NAD T758 and T777 v3 are totally better sounding components than comparable Marantz components of today, and that's just an opinion of mine, and of many members here. There are certain headroom qualities that the NAD's have, that I don't see in the Marantz components of comparable price points.

Again, this is an opinion, except the lack of reliance on software to make or break an AVR that is just fact. You do not need room correction software in all cases, and even if you did, the audio component would not be generic to that particular software in any case.

Having been a long time high end guy, I typically go for the amp with the bigger power supply and power. Right now planning to go with the 758 with ML Motion 40’s since I don’t need huge volume and since the NAD will high pass to the ML’s, figure the 758 will be more than sufficient. Other than power, what are your thoughts on the basic sound quality of the two pieces? Thanks. Regards. Ned.

bootster 12-04-2018 04:42 PM

I am partial to NAD as a rule. The T758 is a remarkable performer. I can't say that I've auditioned any Marantz components in a couple of years, but I haven't seen anyone indicate that they have done anything to make their AVR's any better during that time frame. In my view, NAD has not dropped their signature sound, and still has a formula that outshines those mass marketed units that are OK in their own right. The reason I stay with NAD is the ability to turn up the volume to a reasonable level, and then realize that it's pretty loud. In other words, it seems that you don't have to fear turning the volume up to get a real impact out of your speakers, and then realize that it gives you listener fatigue like some of those lesser units that are mass marketed. I am always impressed with the impact you get out of a program material that isn't raspy or irritating after listening at that level for a while. A lot of these amps today are simply built to price points and sales volumes. You can't turn them up without thinking that it's too LOUD. I never get that feeling of excessive volume with the T 758, and even less so with the T 777 v3.

The way I can describe it best is that a loud passage that comes through on a crescendo or a bomb explosion in an action movie is never leaving me wanting to turn the volume down. Some other modern AVR's will have you lunging for the remote to reduce the volume. I have a couple of FIIO music players that I listen to on the T 758, and it continues to impress me every time. The proof is in the pudding, and when you hook up a NAD AVR to a decent Hi Res music player, the sound is just incredible. The proof is in the fact that I can tell the difference as to what player I am listening to. That tells me that the amplification of the program material is sufficient to being true to form. I can't say that about some of these other brands. I'm going to be straight with you (of course) and let you know that I haven't had the opportunity to review one of these mass marketed brands for a while now, but I am confident that the NAD just sounded better every time for the last 35 plus years that I've been buying NAD components.

If you could get to a place that has some auditions available, that would be the best case scenario, of course. But the fact that I have upgraded my T 758 to the T 777 v3 ( I got a great deal on the factory refurbished T777 v3) tells you that I am invested in NAD for the most obvious reason. That would be the sound signature of the NAD components. I also have a T 752 from 2003 that has a faulty display (an easy fix) that has the ability to use it's amplifiers to be used as outboard amps for later expansion (it's rated at 2 ohm usage as well) for the other NAD's I have. There was nothing at all that I could complain about with the T 758, so I put in in my MB sound system and splurged on the T 777 v3 for the video capabilities in the living room. I don't have a home theater, but I wanted to go to 4K in the future, and the T 777 v3 does that better than the T 758. I couldn't be happier. I can only make you one promise. I can promise you that you will like the sound of the T 758 v3 to the point of putting a smile on your face every time you get a chance to audition a well known song or a particular passage that you are familiar with. The T 777 v3 is simply phenomenal.

The real kicker for me is the modular upgrade ability of the NAD components. Here's the drawback though. The T 758 v3 will have upgraded cards in the future, but the price is very high on them. The pain of purchasing the upgraded cards will be less severe on the T 777 v3, as the price of the upgraded cards as a percentage will be more of an incentive to be able to hang on to the unit. A $500 card that's needed to upgrade both units will have less of a monetary hit on a $2,500 unit than a $1,300 one. It seems like a no brainer to upgrade the card on the T 777 v3 because it's 20% of the initial cost, vs the almost one third of the initial outlay for the T 758 v3. That's not a complete deal breaker though, as $500 is cheaper than $1,300 to upgrade. The T 777 v3 can be had for $1,700 as a factory refurbished unit vs $1,300 for the retail T 758 v3. A factory refurbished T 758 can be had for $1,000 (then the upgrade is a whopping 50% of initial outlay. The savings from the $2,500 retail on the T 777 v3 was substantial enough for me that I couldn't turn it down. I understand that not all folks can drop $1,800 on an AVR, and it was a lot more than I had wanted to spend, but in the end I was glad I took the plunge. The only difference is a one year vs a two year warranty.

There is just something unique about the way the NAD AVR's sound. They are capable of a a lot less listener fatigue than comparable brands. I hope I didn't hurt your hopes by introducing the option of the T 777 v3 here, but I simply had to put it out there as a somewhat viable option. I must say that the T 777 v3 is a real premium AVR that I never thought I would be able to own. You absolutely don't need it though, as the T 758 v3 is an awesome piece of kit (I'm not an Englishman, but I've always wanted to say that). Good luck in your endeavors.

spyboy 12-04-2018 04:48 PM

I find it interesting that the NAD T758 is made in VietNam, while the T777 is made in China...

M Code 12-04-2018 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyboy (Post 57218256)
I find it interesting that the NAD T758 is made in VietNam, while the T777 is made in China...

The T758 is assembled in the Vietnam factory that previously built mainly for Marantz and Harman/Kardon.
The T777 is assembled in Nanjing, China, that factory builds most of the NAD products and wireless stuff plus Cambridge/Azur components.

Just my $0.02... ;)

spyboy 12-04-2018 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M Code (Post 57218366)
The T758 is assembled in the Vietnam factory that previously built mainly for Marantz and Harman/Kardon.
The T777 is assembled in Nanjing, China, that factory builds most of the NAD products and wireless stuff plus Cambridge/Azur components.

Just my $0.02... ;)

What do you think that says about the quality of the Marantz products that were made in the factory in Vietnam?

I wonder how the NAD T777 compares with the Denon flagship X8500h?

bootster 12-05-2018 07:29 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Quote:

Originally Posted by spyboy (Post 57218386)
What do you think that says about the quality of the Marantz products that were made in the factory in Vietnam?

I wonder how the NAD T777 compares with the Denon flagship X8500h?

Quote:

Originally Posted by M Code (Post 57218366)
The T758 is assembled in the Vietnam factory that previously built mainly for Marantz and Harman/Kardon.
The T777 is assembled in Nanjing, China, that factory builds most of the NAD products and wireless stuff plus Cambridge/Azur components.

Just my $0.02... ;)

I wonder how my T 758 compares to the T 758 v3 or my T 777 v3 since it was made in China as well?

nitkan 12-06-2018 10:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bootster (Post 57218224)
I am partial to NAD as a rule. The T758 is a remarkable performer. I can't say that I've auditioned any Marantz components in a couple of years, but I haven't seen anyone indicate that they have done anything to make their AVR's any better during that time frame. In my view, NAD has not dropped their signature sound, and still has a formula that outshines those mass marketed units that are OK in their own right. The reason I stay with NAD is the ability to turn up the volume to a reasonable level, and then realize that it's pretty loud. In other words, it seems that you don't have to fear turning the volume up to get a real impact out of your speakers, and then realize that it gives you listener fatigue like some of those lesser units that are mass marketed. I am always impressed with the impact you get out of a program material that isn't raspy or irritating after listening at that level for a while. A lot of these amps today are simply built to price points and sales volumes. You can't turn them up without thinking that it's too LOUD. I never get that feeling of excessive volume with the T 758, and even less so with the T 777 v3.

The way I can describe it best is that a loud passage that comes through on a crescendo or a bomb explosion in an action movie is never leaving me wanting to turn the volume down. Some other modern AVR's will have you lunging for the remote to reduce the volume. I have a couple of FIIO music players that I listen to on the T 758, and it continues to impress me every time. The proof is in the pudding, and when you hook up a NAD AVR to a decent Hi Res music player, the sound is just incredible. The proof is in the fact that I can tell the difference as to what player I am listening to. That tells me that the amplification of the program material is sufficient to being true to form. I can't say that about some of these other brands. I'm going to be straight with you (of course) and let you know that I haven't had the opportunity to review one of these mass marketed brands for a while now, but I am confident that the NAD just sounded better every time for the last 35 plus years that I've been buying NAD components.

If you could get to a place that has some auditions available, that would be the best case scenario, of course. But the fact that I have upgraded my T 758 to the T 777 v3 ( I got a great deal on the factory refurbished T777 v3) tells you that I am invested in NAD for the most obvious reason. That would be the sound signature of the NAD components. I also have a T 752 from 2003 that has a faulty display (an easy fix) that has the ability to use it's amplifiers to be used as outboard amps for later expansion (it's rated at 2 ohm usage as well) for the other NAD's I have. There was nothing at all that I could complain about with the T 758, so I put in in my MB sound system and splurged on the T 777 v3 for the video capabilities in the living room. I don't have a home theater, but I wanted to go to 4K in the future, and the T 777 v3 does that better than the T 758. I couldn't be happier. I can only make you one promise. I can promise you that you will like the sound of the T 758 v3 to the point of putting a smile on your face every time you get a chance to audition a well known song or a particular passage that you are familiar with. The T 777 v3 is simply phenomenal.

The real kicker for me is the modular upgrade ability of the NAD components. Here's the drawback though. The T 758 v3 will have upgraded cards in the future, but the price is very high on them. The pain of purchasing the upgraded cards will be less severe on the T 777 v3, as the price of the upgraded cards as a percentage will be more of an incentive to be able to hang on to the unit. A $500 card that's needed to upgrade both units will have less of a monetary hit on a $2,500 unit than a $1,300 one. It seems like a no brainer to upgrade the card on the T 777 v3 because it's 20% of the initial cost, vs the almost one third of the initial outlay for the T 758 v3. That's not a complete deal breaker though, as $500 is cheaper than $1,300 to upgrade. The T 777 v3 can be had for $1,700 as a factory refurbished unit vs $1,300 for the retail T 758 v3. A factory refurbished T 758 can be had for $1,000 (then the upgrade is a whopping 50% of initial outlay. The savings from the $2,500 retail on the T 777 v3 was substantial enough for me that I couldn't turn it down. I understand that not all folks can drop $1,800 on an AVR, and it was a lot more than I had wanted to spend, but in the end I was glad I took the plunge. The only difference is a one year vs a two year warranty.

There is just something unique about the way the NAD AVR's sound. They are capable of a a lot less listener fatigue than comparable brands. I hope I didn't hurt your hopes by introducing the option of the T 777 v3 here, but I simply had to put it out there as a somewhat viable option. I must say that the T 777 v3 is a real premium AVR that I never thought I would be able to own. You absolutely don't need it though, as the T 758 v3 is an awesome piece of kit (I'm not an Englishman, but I've always wanted to say that). Good luck in your endeavors.

Thanks to all of you'll for your wonderful advice. But the Nad T758 was quite expensive compared to Marantz 7011 which I was getting at a much cheaper rate since I am on a tight budget. Though I wanted to go for the NAD ended up buying the Marantz. Next step is to buy the Dali Zensor 1 speakers. Fully agree with you'll that the Nad is more conservative while specifying their ratings & less gimmicky.

bootster 12-06-2018 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nitkan (Post 57228238)
Thanks to all of you'll for your wonderful advice. But the Nad T758 was quite expensive compared to Marantz 7011 which I was getting at a much cheaper rate since I am on a tight budget. Though I wanted to go for the NAD ended up buying the Marantz. Next step is to buy the Dali Zensor 1 speakers. Fully agree with you'll that the Nad is more conservative while specifying their ratings & less gimmicky.

I noticed that the Marantz you just bought is already been discontinued by the manufacturer. Crutchfield has the upgraded model for the exact same price right now, according to them anyway. Just hope that they don't adopt a new multimedia connection standard anytime soon. I am still not quite sure if it makes much sense to have to shell out that large of a chunk of change to upgrade the card(s) in the T 758 v3. On the other hand, NAD has to make profits, so to lower the price to the point where they are selling these units with not a lot of future profits down the road would be a bad business decision. I am still thinking that the T 777 v3 hits the "Sweet spot" when it comes to a NAD AVR for the reasons I have elaborated on earlier. Having said that, $2,500 clams is a lot of coin to spend on an AVR. Most folks who are beginning to appreciate a good sounding AVR are hitting their limit at that price IMO. Until you experience the added bennies that comes with that unit, you won't even realize what you are missing out on.

The Marantaz replacement for the 7011, the 7012, has a DAC that is going as high as "32-bit/768kHz AKM (Asahi Kasei Microdevices) ultra-premium digital-to-analog converter". That's bleeding edge technology right there. I don't know anything about the company that makes the DAC, but it sounds like a nice device as far as the specs are concerned. I would check into the new model, or at least try to get a discount on the 7011.

Good luck.

Robert Guilmette 12-06-2018 06:00 PM

I would only add that statements like "nad will mop the floor with marantz" is indeed an opinion. Marantz is and has always been known for their exceptional sound qualities long before nad came to be.


A widely cited example of this is when people are trying to decide on receivers. It is commonly said if all you want to use your receiver for is HTR duties brand XXXX will suffice. But if music playback is important to you, the Marantz will rise above do to their excellent sound qualities.


Trust your own ears and demo both of them. Buy whichever sounds best to you.

nitkan 12-06-2018 09:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Guilmette (Post 57230770)
I would only add that statements like "nad will mop the floor with marantz" is indeed an opinion. Marantz is and has always been known for their exceptional sound qualities long before nad came to be.


A widely cited example of this is when people are trying to decide on receivers. It is commonly said if all you want to use your receiver for is HTR duties brand XXXX will suffice. But if music playback is important to you, the Marantz will rise above do to their excellent sound qualities.


Trust your own ears and demo both of them. Buy whichever sounds best to you.

Thanks Robert, have already purchased the Marantz sr 7011 since I got a good bargain on that. The Nad T758 V2 was offered at a much higher price considering the V3 is out. I did have the older Marantz SR 8200 which was a very sweet sounding receiver & built like a tank but later had few issues after 10 years hence sold it. Was hence narrowing my choice on Marantz & Nad. Anthem was much more expensive than both.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:55 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.