Canuck Audio Mart Hifi and Audio ForumCanuck Audio Mart Hifi and Audio Forum
It is currently Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:10 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 5:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 7:46 pm
Posts: 2
Location: Kitchener, ON, CA
Welcome to my first post where I hope to find levelheaded contributions based on your experiences.

I recently switched from a stereo amp to a home theatre receiver in order to tidy the mess that was my A/V area. I had a NAD C320BEE that I had bought new and was always happy with it. Being as I liked what that amp had to offer, I found a NAD T747 with a very low asking price on another website and bought it. I hooked it up and was quite happy with the audio quality from my analog sources. I had experience with a Denon AVR3808ci because my dad has one, and I was looking at it through rose coloured glasses because it is a great home theatre amp, and MADE IN JAPAN, whereas my NAD was made in China.

I found an AVR3808 for a very reasonable price and bought it to replace the NAD. I hooked it up, and since I'm still listening mostly to analog audio sources, I was disappointed in the Denon when compared to the NAD. I thought for sure because it was MADE IN JAPAN and cost a lot more when new that it would sound better on all fronts. I ended up switching back to the NAD and sold the Denon to a friend who has a more serious home theatre setup than I do.

In conclusion, I found that the NAD was an outstanding value and was superior with regard to analog sources, whereas the Denon is a feature laden, high powered monster that didn't quite do what I wanted it for. Since Denon seems to be a Best Buy brand these days, I feel like they are grossly undervalued in the used market these days. While I ended up keeping the NAD, there has never been a better time to buy a used Denon if you're serious about your home theatre but don't have the budget for really high end gear.

Any thoughts on what I have expressed here? Any similar stories? Any suggestions? I love the NAD but I'm always looking for better sound!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2012 11:02 am
Posts: 166
Location: Milton, ON, CA
tannerboyle:

10 years ago I would have been considered a Denon Fan Boy. Now when I see their product offerings I'm saddened by what I see. I was first introduced to Denon when my Father needed to replace his vintage Luxman receiver and chose a Denon as his replacement. He's since replaced it with another Denon with more power output.

Recently I was dismayed when I wanted to have my first Denon receiver, an AVR-3300 (circa 1999) repaired and found that there were no parts available and it had to be scrapped.

I currently use a Denon AVR-4308 for surround sound which I really love and will have a terrible time trying to replace it if/when it dies.

Denon had some really great mid-fi components especially in the late 80's and 90's but now I wouldn't even consider purchasing any of their new products.

I have limited experience with NAD, I helped a friend setup a NAD receiver a few years ago. I know they had their own Audyssey setting optimized for music.

Audiois1st

_________________
Digital Front End > Stereo & Multi-Channel > Tubes > B&W & Cerwin Vega Speakers > Acoustically Treated A/V Cave

Check out My Components: http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/userprofile.php?user_id=39933


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2004 7:43 pm
Posts: 1375
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
You're not comparing Apples to Apples. The Nad is a Stereo Integrated Amplifier vs Denon HT Receiver.
Made in Japan doesn't guarantee excellent sound, neither does made in USA or any other country.

Having said that, the Denon is a good all round HT receiver and capable of occasionally doing music , but is mostly designed for HT duties.

If you're mostly into music then you should look at a good 2 channel amp.
There are a few Receivers out there capable of doing both such as the Anthem and Nad etc.

Also you have to carefully match all other equipment for synergy.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 10:25 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 11, 2017 10:09 am
Posts: 1
Location: New Jersey, NY
I use NAD T787 and it quite perfect!


Last edited by vasia on Sat Apr 29, 2017 4:25 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 10:58 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2005 7:41 am
Posts: 437
Location: SE Quebec, QC, CA
Your post doesn't surprise me. After years chasing better sound with Bryston, Quad etc. I downsized to a NAD 326BEE ( I've used numerous NAD products-all stereo components) and thought I would just start enjoying the music but fully expecting to upgrade the 326BEE.

Here we are a few years later and I'm still using the NAD. Having $2000 PSB loudspeakers that seem to match well with it doesn't hurt but it still seems almost too good to be true. In integrateds under $2000 I'm not sure price is a sure fire indication of quality of sound. There are differences ( like more power or faster or whatever) but that is not the same as better.

I still might buy something better ( not just different ) but I fully expect to spend a considerable amount.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:41 am
Posts: 3799
Location: Ingersoll, ON, CA
I've owned a few NAD pieces over the years and found them to have better than average sound for the money. That was quite a few years ago so I'm not up to date on their newer stuff.
As for Denon, I owned a Direct Drive TT which I liked, I sold it to a friend who is still using it.
I owned one Denon AV receiver that was an older model without HDMI it worked like a charm.
That's the last kind word I have for Denon. Denon's new receivers are a nightmare when they work and utter crap when they don't.
Denon's customer service is non existent making their warranty useless. Without a doubt Denon's customer service is worse than Onkyo and that's saying something.
And Welcome to CAM. :D

_________________
He who is like the wind blowing from your pants.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Wed Apr 19, 2017 11:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2007 2:01 pm
Posts: 974
Location: Calgary, AB, CA
I would have to agree with you at some point that NAD is better soundwise. I used to own a Denon AVR 4310CI receiver that exceptionally served my HT needs and then some. However, once I listened to NAD T-765 HT receiver I was convinced that NAD has something more tangible to offer than the Denon soundwise. Bought the NAD and sold the Denon. Not to nitpick but the NAD T-765 HT receiver was more expensive than the Denon AVR 4310CI, perhaps this has something to do with its sound quality.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Apr 22, 2017 6:45 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 15, 2017 7:46 pm
Posts: 2
Location: Kitchener, ON, CA
tardis26 wrote:
You're not comparing Apples to Apples. The Nad is a Stereo Integrated Amplifier vs Denon HT Receiver.
Made in Japan doesn't guarantee excellent sound, neither does made in USA or any other country.

Having said that, the Denon is a good all round HT receiver and capable of occasionally doing music , but is mostly designed for HT duties.

If you're mostly into music then you should look at a good 2 channel amp.
There are a few Receivers out there capable of doing both such as the Anthem and Nad etc.

Also you have to carefully match all other equipment for synergy.


I think you largely misunderstood or missed completely some parts of my post. I was using a NAD C320BEE integrated amp, but switched to an AV receiver (NAD T747) when I moved recently so I could have a more tidy package with fewer cables running to the TV. So as far as I'm concerned, I am making a relevant comparison between the NAD T747 and the Denon 3808ci.

I think if I was using my stereo for mostly home theatre purposes I might have kept the Denon. Since I'm only running two speakers, the NAD, despite its place within its respective product line, as well as its country of origin, was the keeper.

Although I have not done a lot of gear exchanging to find my preferred setup within my budget, I seem to have found an unbeatable pairing of components within my budget in NAD amplification and Paradigm Studio series (yes, I know, discontinued) speakers.

I say this mostly as a joke, but comment disregarded due to the use of the word synergy. Business jargon automatically hurts credibility.

-- 22 Apr 2017 14:49 --

Does anyone have any experiences from other manufacturers that might offer similar value to NAD in terms of sound quality? I love that the T747 was not an inexpensive amp when new, but had relatively few features with regard to similarly priced models from other manufacturers. It seems obvious to me that the design intent with that amp was sound quality, not having a laundry list of digital features that someone with only two speakers will never use.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 1:12 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:39 am
Posts: 1411
Location: Copenhagen, , DK
tannerboyle wrote:
Any suggestions? I love the NAD but I'm always looking for better sound!

You will get even better sound, more headroom and more power if you add a two channel power amp or monoblocks to NAD T 747's "AUDIO PRE-OUT" L(left) and R(right) Front outputs, and let the power amp(s) drive your front speakers

http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649364118-nad-power-amplifier-c275bee/
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649365209-outlaw-2200-mono-amplifiers-pair-200-wpc/?utm_source=featured_ad&utm_medium=web&utm_content=front&utm_campaign=649365209
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/222569398803?clk_rvr_id=1258018790767&rmvSB=true
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/302363586745?clk_rvr_id=1258031084199&rmvSB=true
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/322579023891?clk_rvr_id=1258062970934&rmvSB=true
http://www.quebecaudio.com/occasions/index.php/annonces/ampli-rotel-rb-1090-thx/ , http://www.lespac.com/quebec/electronique-audio/ampli-rotel-rb-1090-thx-ultra_46223559D0.jsa
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649362206-primare-a342-in-black/
http://www.classdaudio.com/sds-series-amplifiers/sds-470c-class-d-audio-power-amplifier/

Click on the picture below to see closer view of NAD T 747's "AUDIO PRE-OUT" outputs on the back:
Attachment:
1470524-nad-t747-receiver[1].jpg
1470524-nad-t747-receiver[1].jpg [ 290.89 KiB | Viewed 1505 times ]


http://www.audioreview.com/cat/amplification/amplifiers/harman-kardon/signature-1-5/prd_115825_1583crx.aspx
Quote:
'garfan' says: >>After getting my harman/kardon Citation 1.5 power amp, the first thing I noticed( as with another reviewer here, my wife never notices when I change gear, but she did with this!) was the lack of any noise or distortion, it is so clear, the transformation is unbelievable, the bass is so much more extended and distortion free and this is at seriously loud volume levels, I'm lucky to live in a detached house with a fairly decent music room(27ft by 15.8ft) so I can get to explore the limits of this amp which I haven't even touched yet. The High's,Mids are perfect. I can't wait to get a pair of JBL 250ti's to really rock my house.<<

'vince' says: >>I would buy another one and run them bridged, at which point I've got 650 watts per stereo channel, but alas, the downturn and Harman's decision to leave the market for high-quality/value stereo separates to others makes this harman/kardon Citation 1.5 power amp model an endangered species. My second choice was the NAD 218THX, which DMC has for slightly more money, followed by the Rotel RB-1090, but that's more than I need or needed to spend.<<

http://www.audioreview.com/cat/amplification/amplifiers/harman-kardon/signature-2-1/prd_115826_1583crx.aspx
Quote:
'lefty11' says: >>Wow Wow Wow!!!!!!! Woke up a tired system. What a difference umm Clarity,dynamics volume to spare spare spare. Truly a quality product and built like a tank. Would take the breath away and command attention in any system 2 or 3 times its oridginal price. Legendary Harmon Kardon Musicality. Need I say more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!<<

http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=38746&start=15
Quote:
>>Ultimately I wanted another power amp for another set of speakers, and also wanted to complete my system upgrade, so decided to buy the C275BEE to use with the C165BEE. It's a nice sounding amp, but it was a bit of a disappointment for the price compared to a used Carver TFM-15. After a lot of comparison listening with my old Carver (which is worth no more than about $200 used), I've concluded the Carver TFM-15 is a more dynamic sounding power amp. The difference is subtle, but the NAD C275BEE makes me feel slightly more aware that I am listening to recorded music coming from a pair speakers, rather than live instruments. Given that the cost of the NAD C275BEE is 6 times what it would cost to buy another used Carver TFM-15, the NAD C275BEE was a bit of a disappointment for the price.<<, by 'Dan Madison'

http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27524
Quote:
'lovethesound' says: >>I have just added a perfect addition to my Nad T757. I purchased a Nad C 275BEE two channel power amp and now use it to power my main (front) speakers. The receiver only powers the center and the rear speakers. It has really opened up the soundstage and gives the receiver alot more room to breathe. I just ran some two channel music tests and was absolutely BLOWN AWAY. This NAD C275BEE power amp has power to burn. I now feel i have obtained the best of both worlds, two channel and multi-channel.<<


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 8:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 8:18 am
Posts: 6324
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
NAD equipment to my ears is very engaging and I too sold off some more expensive equipment and bought a 326 integrated. Fine tune with some isolation and decent wire and it is excellent for the money.

Big Japanese receivers are always cleaner and flatter sounding but also less engaging. Onkyo is closest to NAD in having a punchier presentation. Yamaha is big and lush and Denon is kind of clean and lean. I have owned products from all of these companies and remain loyal to Yamaha. I am a fan of old school Denon but getting parts and service was always easier with Yamaha products which are much better supported. I use Yamaha for both two channel and for my AVR.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 2:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:39 am
Posts: 1411
Location: Copenhagen, , DK
Smith wrote:
After years chasing better sound with Bryston, Quad etc. I downsized to a NAD 326BEE ( I've used numerous NAD products-all stereo components) and thought I would just start enjoying the music but fully expecting to upgrade the 326BEE. Here we are a few years later and I'm still using the NAD. Having $2000 PSB loudspeakers that seem to match well with it doesn't hurt but it still seems almost too good to be true. In integrateds under $2000 I'm not sure price is a sure fire indication of quality of sound. There are differences ( like more power or faster or whatever) but that is not the same as better. I still might buy something better ( not just different ) but I fully expect to spend a considerable amount.

The NAD C326BEE will sound even better if you use jumpers like AudioQuest RCA http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=46743&start=30

Further improvement: Interconnect cables the likes of Kimber Kables or DH Labs Silver Sonic Air Matrix for sources like CD players, and speaker cables the likes of Kimber Kables 8TC or DH Labs Silver Sonic Q10 Signature terminated with spade lugs or banana plugs http://www.audioreview.com/cat/cables/speaker-cables/dh-labs/q10/prd_124365_1584crx.aspx
Quote:
'al2098' says: >>The Q-10 made the NAD electronics sound much more high end.<<

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=87862.0
Quote:
'GaryArthur' says: >>Currently using DH Labs "Silver sonic Q10 Signature" on my Martin Logan CLX's. These are destined for my Los Angeles system but at $250 for a 2 meter pair I have been pleasantly surprised at their open sound as I test them on my main system in Las Vegas.<<


tardis26 wrote:
If you're mostly into music then you should look at a good 2 channel amp.
There are a few Receivers out there capable of doing both such as the Anthem and Nad etc.

Seems Anthem MRX 500 is better than NAD C326BEE and Marantz PM6005 in terms of two channel music performance !

http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27524
Quote:
'lovethesound' says: >>I have a Nad T757 and find it great for both movies and 2 channel music. I have heard the Anthem mrx series and they are very similar. Both are geared towards adding a good music sound as well as being great avr's. The T757 and the Anthem mrx 500 are basicaly the same power wise.<<

'lovethesound' says: >>Don't get me wrong, I myself am looking at the Anthem mrx700. That would be more than enough power for me.<<

http://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/153963/my-unbiased-review-of-anthem-vs-nad-in-terms-of-sound-quality
Quote:
'whitecamaross' says: >>I found a great deal on the Anthem MRX300 that i coudlnt pass up. I knew it didnt have the power i desired but i didnt care because i was looking just for a processor anyhow so the power was irrelavant since i had the NAD M25 to power things. The Anthem MRX 300 finally arrives last week and i decided to just give it a listen without using the NAD M25. What i heard was astonishing to say the least.... I had gone on a looooong journey looking and looking for the right blend of power, neutrality, non fatiguing sound and if there is anyone here looking for that type of sound, please consider anything Anthem. I have spent 5 days just watching movies, listening to music, cranking this little Anthem MRX 300 receiver and i simply cant get enough of it. I connected the NAD M25 last night and i must say, even though it hurts to admit it, i WISH i had not bought the NAD M25... The Anthem sound quality is THAT GOOD. I really thought the NAD M25 would take things to a whole new level when connected to the Anthem, but no guys. The NAD M25 simply amplified things and i felt it took away some of the detail the Anthem receiver had on its own and i havent even ran the room correction because it sounds THAT GOOD. Simply put, the Anthem sound is STILL ahead of anything else i have ever heard. I own NAD's best amplifier ever built by them and it STILL does not give me the clarity and soundstage that the tiny Anthem MRX 300 has.<<

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/anthem-mrx-710-av-receiver
Quote:
'twm1988' says: >>Had a listen to Anthem MRX 310 and Marantz. Liked the Anthem more. Then I listened to NAD 748 and still liked the Anthem a bit more, but it was close...<<

https://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/c326bee-vs-marantz-6004?page=1
Quote:
'Anonymous' says: >>Ok, here are my first impressions of the marantz pm6004: the good: At first i seems to mis drive (maybe thats because i demoed the NAD C326BEE first), but the highs are very musical, much better than the nad 326bee. Also theres much more detail. bass is tight and wel defined. That are the good qualities of this Marantz PM6004 amp. midrange is expressive and upfront. The bad: Sibilance!!! all the records have this loud SSSS TTTT sounds. Especally Norah Jones, Katie Melua.<<

https://www.avforums.com/threads/anthem-mrx-510-with-music.1938502/
Quote:
'liamgdr' says: >>For what its worth, which may not be a lot, I recently swapped my budget 2 channel amp (Marantz pm6005) for a Anthem MRX 500! The first thing I noticed was how detailed the Anthem MRX 500 sounded in comparison to the Marantz two channel amp without loosing any warmth in the soundstage, the bass response was also better on the Anthem MRX 500 AV receiver than the Marantz pm6005 two channel amp! generally everything sounds clean and composed on MRX 500<<


Last edited by ELOS on Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:14 am, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 3:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:39 am
Posts: 1411
Location: Copenhagen, , DK
tannerboyle wrote:
I ended up switching back to the NAD and sold the Denon to a friend who has a more serious home theatre setup than I do.

Anthem and Marantz and NAD AV receivers sounds better with music than Yamaha / Denon AV receivers, however, I think Marantz or Anthem would be a better choice for movies than Denon, so maybe it could be a good idea for the friend to look for either a Anthem or Marantz AV receiver

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/152603935275?clk_rvr_id=1259916066741&rmvSB=true
https://www.avforums.com/threads/marantz-sr5010-sr6010-or-sr6009.1980588/

Quote:
'woogie59' says: >>I liked Marantz, and found it a great performer, but I was looking for something with more impact. Before I made my choice I did trial other brands, even trialing the Marantz Pre/Power against the MX710 (side by side test). Anthem was what I was looking for and I got a great deal and didn't pay much more than your budget.<<

https://www.avforums.com/threads/arcam-fmj450-anthem-mxr710-or-marantz-av8801.1832779/
Quote:
'MI55ION' says: >>Finally, for AVR, although I'm a fan of Pre/power setups I'm not too keen on the Marantz. If it were me, I would go with an Anthem MRX 310 (5.1 setup) or 510 (7.1 setup) then add a power amp or two if it seemed necessary later. ARC is a bit special. What I would suggest however, with any money saved definitely go for a higher end sub than BK (as good as it is for its range) because with movies and mc music it makes all the difference.<<




banerjba wrote:
I use Yamaha for both two channel and for my AVR.

http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649356460-anthem-mrx300-with-arc-setup-sys/
http://www.quebecaudio.com/occasions/index.php/annonces/ampli-cinema-maison-anthem-mrx-510/
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649332210-anthem-mrx-700-home-theatre-receiver/

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/90-receivers-amps-processors/1511891-can-you-really-hear-difference-between-nad-t758-likes-onkyo-818-marantz-6007-yamaha-1020-a.html
Quote:
'RKSKYDANCER' says: >>Yes there is a difference. At least in my experience. I have owned or use 4 different receivers in the last 2 years upgrading each time before finally trying out a new NAD receiver 3 weeks ago. I always preferred Yamaha receivers in the past. Yamaha RX-V595A, RX-V471, RX-V671 and the latest being the RX-V820 Aventage. Then I went to a local Hi-Fi shop and played around with a NAD 758 connected to Golden Ears Triton sevens, Aon 3's and a Forcefield 5 sub. ( I think it was the 5 ) and instantly liked what I was hearing. I always liked the NAD receivers because they are clean and simple looking without a lot of bells and whistles. No air play, No internet, etc etc. So I decided to buy one and give it a try in my home with my same set up I had with the Yamaha RX-V820. I had my eyes on the NAD T 758 but decided to give the NAD T 748v2 a try because it was $400.00 cheaper. Main difference between these two NAD AV receivers is power, 110 watts channel with 2 channels driven compared to 80 watts channel with 2 channels driven. The 748v2 uses NAD's speaker calibration, the 758 uses a very basic special version of Audyssey. The T 758 has the modular construction, the T 748v2 doesn't. So far I am very impressed with the T 748v2. Has more then enough power compared to the Yamaha RX-V820 Aventage which is rated at 110 watts a channel. I have a db meter and tested both receivers and I can reach higher levels with a much broader sound with the NAD. I ran both the YPAO and NAD's auto calibration to set my system up and surprisingly both calibration were very similar on speaker size, distances, levels and sub crossover point. I think where the main difference between the 2 brands of receivers is in the Listening modes selections. Yamaha has always had there signature sound that everyone talks about. NAD has a couple of there own. One called EAR'S. I really thought this sounded great thru out the room and house when playing DVD music or CD music. The other is called Enhanced Stereo which did a good job playing all 5 speakers at the same level. I also tested both receivers playing my PINK FLOYD / WISH YOU WERE HERE immersion box set DVD/CD set and LED ZEPPELIN - CELEBRATION DAY dvd DTS HD music and i was much happier with the NAD in how it performed. Don't get me wrong i liked how the Yamaha RX-V820 performed, but i just like the NAD better ! Especially during music payback.<<

'RKSKYDANCER' says: >>The NAD 758 is an excellent receiver and you should like it a lot. I played with one at a Hi-Fi store with Golden Ear speakers and the system sounded awesome. The Yamaha RX-V 820, NAD T748v2 and Marantz SR5008 are all good receivers and each have there strong points. But for me the Marantz SR5008 is a clear step up for my room set up. I can contribute this all to the Audyssey XT that comes in the Marantz SR5008 since I used the same speakers, same room, same auto calibration procedures with all 3 receivers. There just isn't any comparison between the basic room calibration that the NAD T748 offers and the Audyssey XT. The Yamaha YPAO system is better than the NAD but still far behind the Audyssey XT. The Audyssey pretty much improved every aspect of my 5.1 surround sound set up for movie's. It was like i bought a whole new speaker system ( which i didn't). Low volume listening, high volume listening, dynamics, blending of the satellites with the subwoofer, center channel performance were all greatly improved with the Marantz receiver. It was just more enjoyable to watch a movie with the SR5008 than the other receivers. I think the biggest improvement was what the Audyssey XT did with my Subwoofer and bass output. It is much louder, more detailed, more pronounced, ( not so muddy or boomy ). You don't hear the subwoofer as often but when you do hear it, it sure makes it's presents much more than with the NAD or Yamaha receiver.<<

'RKSKYDANCER' says: >>1. The difference in Sound signature only comes into play when playing music in 5.1.( At least for me anyways ). That is because NAD and Marantz have there own Listening modes that they use. NAD receivers have what is called EARS mode and ENHANCED STEREO mode. Marantz has what is called VIRTUAL SPEAKER mode and MULTI CHANNEL STEREO mode. I used these when listening to music with a 5.1 channel speaker set up. I preferred the NAD listening modes over the Marantz SR5008. Would be hard to tell you the difference in writing .This is something you would need to hear for yourself to determine the difference. The separation of the music just sounded better with the NAD. Even different recordings or sources made a difference in what mode I chose to use but overall I preferred the EARS mode on the NAD.<<

http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=27524
Quote:
'Rafl' says: >>That being said, in practice, my Anthem MRX300 seems to be a lot more powerful than the 140 watt Yamaha RXV-3800 that it replaced, with greater headroom and greater operational limits.<<

http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=27524&start=15
Quote:
'Rafl' says: >>I certainly have no regrets. The main improvements I have noticed are in soundstage, clarity, and bass integration. And although I enjoyed the Yamaha, the MRX is definitely a giant step up.<<


Last edited by ELOS on Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:01 am, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 7:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:39 am
Posts: 1411
Location: Copenhagen, , DK
tannerboyle wrote:
Any suggestions? I love the NAD but I'm always looking for better sound!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Anthem-MRX-500-MRX500-A-V-Home-Theater-Receiver/253046166809
http://www.quebecaudio.com/occasions/index.php/annonces/ampli-cinema-maison-anthem-mrx-510/
http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/details/649332210-anthem-mrx-700-home-theatre-receiver/ ---> http://img.canuckaudiomart.com/uploads/large/765963-brand_new_anthem_mrx700.jpg

https://www.whathifi.com/forum/av-receivers/receiver-upgrade-pioneer-sc-lx87-anthem-mrx710-or-marantz-sr7008
Quote:
'mobachi' says: >>What I like is fast and tight low and always use the sub together with the mrx8 in stereo. I have read (if I am correct) that it’s not possible to use the sub with the Anthem in stereo but I am not sure? But maybe it’s not necessary with the Anthem I now have a NAD T773 which I find not sounding warm enough for my taste.<<

'mobachi' says: >>Made the decision it will be the Anthem MRX710. Did a hearing session yesterday. It will not sound so good at home as at the session but heard what the receiver is capable of. The setup at the dealer was in a conditioned room with a speaker set(Revel) that is 2 -3 times the price of my MA RX set. But the voices and details were so crystal clear that I was convinced. I thought there was playing a much bigger receiver at the session.<<

https://www.whathifi.com/forum/av-receivers/receiver-upgrade-pioneer-sc-lx87-anthem-mrx710-or-marantz-sr7008?page=1
Quote:
'mobachi' says: >>Hereby my experience with my new Anthem MRX 710 receiver. I was looking for an upgrade to my NAD T773. Like to listen to music and love to watch movies. The NAD gives 140 Watt in stereo (8 ohm) and weights weight 24 KG. The Anthem is 14 KG and 120W in 2 channel stereo. For me replacing the NAD by the Anthem is indeed an upgrade.<<

http://www.soundstagexperience.com/index.php/wesworld-menu/feature-articles-reviews-menu/520-anthem-performance-mrx-710-a-v-receiver-king-of-the-sonic-frontiers
Quote:
Wes Marshall wrote: >>Over the last two years, we’ve tried several of the finest AVRs: the Marantz 7008 ($1999), the Onkyo NR5010 ($2999), and the NAD T 787 ($3999). While each offered its own take on room correction, none impressed me as much as did Anthem’s ARC 1M. If sound quality is your primary purchasing criterion, then the Performance MRX 710 should be at the top of your list. Even if you have an MRX 700, the MRX 710’s “1M” improvements in ARC and the Advanced Load Monitoring are enough reasons to upgrade.<<

Attachment:
File comment: Anthem MRX 710 - inside view
mrx710_open_top[1].jpg
mrx710_open_top[1].jpg [ 527.72 KiB | Viewed 1222 times ]


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 12:20 pm
Posts: 2223
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
If you want an AVR and can live w/o HDMI plus no latest audio CODECs try to find a Pioneer ELITE VSX-59TXi. This AVR sounds very engaging w/ its MOSFET power amp. section. This (and its sister lower end models) is the last great ELITE AVR with a well-built MOSFET amp section. Actually the whole thing is very well-built. I sold mine and regret my decision (too bad I don't have room to keep it). The fellow I sold this ELITE to didn't believe me when I told him how great it is until he hooked it up to his system. I have had a couple of Denons and Yamahas and sadly none compare to this flagship ELITE. My current Integra pre-pro for HT is fine with digital sources (both COAX and HDMI) but sounds absolutely terrible with all its analog inputs unlike this Pioneer ELITE. Luckily I don't have to live with this Integra for LPs, etc.

As for NAD my first integrated amp. was a NAD 302 and it was awesome. Together w/ a pair of Mission 760i bookshelves I have had great time listening to musics for years until I traded up. May be think about moving back to a NAD?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 10:07 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2013 2:39 am
Posts: 1411
Location: Copenhagen, , DK
https://www.whathifi.com/forum/home-cinema/anthem-mrx-710-or-pioneer-sc-lx88-receiver-51-system
Quote:
'Miles' says: >>A friend of mine has five KEF LS50's and an SVS SB2000 5.1 system, with Analysis Plus Oval 9 cables. Everything has been used for about 6 months now, so well 'worn in'. He is now demo'ing both an Anthem MRX 710 and Pioneer SC-LX88 receiver at his place. Both receivers have had their room correction software run. The Anthem sounds detailed but sounds quite harsh compared to the Pioneer for all types of music. Just wanted to know if anyone else found that about the Anthem? We are a bit suprised and confused because of all the praise the Anthem has for musicality and being the best sounding AVR and closest to separates for music etc etc. The Pioneer is smoother but is still detailed and much easier to listen to music at all volumes and for much longer duration too. We tried music with room correction on, and then off. But in all cases, the Pioneer was the preferred.<<

'bigboss' says: >>Personally, I found the Anthem to be brilliant with music with no harshness, and Pioneer to be clinical and bright.<<

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/threads/how-does-nad-stand-vs-marantz-or-pioneer-elite.64931/
Quote:
'j_garcia' says: >>I also wouldn't really put Pioneer Elite in the same category as Marantz either. I've listened to Pioneer Elite's TOP models and was less than impressed.<<

http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/threads/how-does-nad-stand-vs-marantz-or-pioneer-elite.64931/page-2
Quote:
'3db' says: >>And as far as being able to handle difficult loads, NAD walks over the Pioneer Elite and Marantz offerings and stands behind their warranty.<<

'stl1cjg' says: >>I don't know anything about NAD. I purchased a Marantz SR6003 (now discontinued) about a year ago. It powers my Studio 60's v5 effortlessly. I will be adding an XPA-3 when the funds present themselves, but for now I am extremely happy with the purchase I made.... so much so that my listening preferences have changed to more 2 channel than HT. I will still complete my HT but there is no urge to do it as quickly as before. IMO go with Marantz.<<

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/nad-t-747-vs-marantz-sr6005
Quote:
'meiwan' says: >>I've owned the NAD T747 and heard the Marantz SR6005. Both good choices. I'd give the edge to the NAD T747 personally.<<

'bonger' says: >>Having owned previous generations of BOTH NAD "74x" & "75x" series, Marantz "500x" & "600x"...I give the nod to Marantz. You will be pleased with sound quality of both receivers. However, NAD T747 is more comparable to Marantz 5005. Marantz 6005 compares to NAD 755. Marantz arguably has better reliability more relevant HT features dollar for dollar. For price of Marantz 5005, I can add an external 2 channel power amp performance that will BLOW away both NAD T747 & Marantz 6005...something to think about.<<


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group