Debating switching from Yamaha to NAD

[Pogre]

View attachment 30616
View attachment 30617
View attachment 30618

Yeah, maybe Audyssey or Dirac could fix those 2 dips around 100hz, and then my bass would be nicely linear. With manual PEQ I can't really fix it as the freqs are locked to 78hz, 99hz, 115hz. I tried tweaking it a lot already through the values REW generated (you can lock the frequency and just have it adjust gain and Q) but I just couldn't get it close enough to even out that dip (particularly on the right speaker it's huge).

Great job man. Those are looking pretty good.

 

[sakete]

I doubt that, XT32 could probably reduce those dips by a couple dB more at best. As you know, dips are tough to deal with. It does look like YPAO did a great job for you, you may be able to improve it further with some manual tweaking, but I really doubt you can do much better. Between 30 and 200 Hz, if you ignore the huge dips, you are within +/- 3.5 to 4 dB, that is really respectable for 1/48 smoothing.

Thanks. Well, at this point I'm leaning towards keeping the Yamaha. Turns out that for me in my room, YPAO is good enough, and I currently have the receiver set to YPAO Natural based on all the measurements I took (the high end is a bit smoother than YPAO Flat and thus less bright, rest is pretty similar).

It won't be worth spending more on a NAD for what will probably end up being a very minor improvement, if even. I'll maybe start thinking about some aesthetically pleasing bass traps for in the corner behind the right speaker (the main culprit behind those dips) to even out the bass response (maybe that'll help get rid of that dip).

It's actually nice to use measurements to find out if it's worth buying something or not and truth be told, I didn't really want to have to return the Yamaha, I'm otherwise quite happy with it and all the features it offers. With NAD I'd be getting less features for more money for most likely the exact same sound quality, and for probably lower reliability and more issues.

 

[Deckard71]

Thanks. Well, at this point I'm leaning towards keeping the Yamaha. Turns out that for me in my room, YPAO is good enough, and I currently have the receiver set to YPAO Natural based on all the measurements I took (the high end is a bit smoother than YPAO Flat and thus less bright, rest is pretty similar).

It won't be worth spending more on a NAD for what will probably end up being a very minor improvement, if even. I'll maybe start thinking about some aesthetically pleasing bass traps for in the corner behind the right speaker (the main culprit behind those dips) to even out the bass response (maybe that'll help get rid of that dip).

It's actually nice to use measurements to find out if it's worth buying something or not and truth be told, I didn't really want to have to return the Yamaha, I'm otherwise quite happy with it and all the features it offers. With NAD I'd be getting less features for more money for most likely the exact same sound quality, and for probably lower reliability and more issues.

I am on the same situation. I have been considering changing my combo of Yamaha A2070+Roksan for a NAD 758v3 or Anthem MRX 720. But I am starting to believe that improvement in SQ will be small, if any, and I will lose many features and have issues with multiple things not working

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Ok, I took a bunch of measurements. Below two graphs:

View attachment 30607
Left speaker
View attachment 30608
Right speaker

Overall conclusion, the way YPAO applies filters gives a pretty decently flat response. For the left speaker it removes a spike around 50hz, which gives an overall flatter response. For the right speaker, which is in a corner, it again removes the huge peak between 30hz and 60hz, and is able to flatten it a bit. The right speaker does have huge dip at 90hz, and that'll probably only be solvable with positioning and treatment. It can technically be EQed, but it would probably cause distortion/clipping as it would need to really up the gain around that frequency.

I generated some EQ filters in REW but none of those lined up with what I can set in the Yamaha. I had to manually enter Freq values and had REW optimize the Gain and Q. Results not that great, or at least, not any better than what YPAO did.

So overall, YPAO does a pretty decent job. Not sure if Dirac or Audyssey would improve on this much. Thoughts?

The response looks like +/- 2.5dB from 100Hz-20kHz, which is great. I doubt anything will do better.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Thanks. Well, at this point I'm leaning towards keeping the Yamaha. Turns out that for me in my room, YPAO is good enough, and I currently have the receiver set to YPAO Natural based on all the measurements I took (the high end is a bit smoother than YPAO Flat and thus less bright, rest is pretty similar).

It won't be worth spending more on a NAD for what will probably end up being a very minor improvement, if even. I'll maybe start thinking about some aesthetically pleasing bass traps for in the corner behind the right speaker (the main culprit behind those dips) to even out the bass response (maybe that'll help get rid of that dip).

It's actually nice to use measurements to find out if it's worth buying something or not and truth be told, I didn't really want to have to return the Yamaha, I'm otherwise quite happy with it and all the features it offers. With NAD I'd be getting less features for more money for most likely the exact same sound quality, and for probably lower reliability and more issues.

I think the next thing is to add a sub.

When it comes to bass, are you really looking for flat bass or bass that rocks.

 

[aarodynamics]

I am on the same situation. I have been considering changing my combo of Yamaha A2070+Roksan for a NAD 758v3 or Anthem MRX 720. But I am starting to believe that improvement in SQ will be small, if any, and I will lose many features and have issues with multiple things not working

I'd recommend purchasing one of the receivers you're considering from a place with an in-home trial or generous return policy and deciding for yourself in your own home. I think you'll be impressed with the results.

 

[Deckard71]

I'd recommend purchasing one of the receivers you're considering from a place with an in-home trial or generous return policy and deciding for yourself in your own home. I think you'll be impressed with the results.

But just because of Dirac?

 

[aarodynamics]

But just because of Dirac?

Yes to Dirac, ARC, and/or Audyssey.
But also because of any other features that the competing receivers possess that you're considering or have considered.
I know that the trending consensus on this thread is that if your results appear a certain way in REW that there isn't anything substantial that platforms like ARC or Dirac can contribute, but that hasn't been my experience.
And, one of the great things about the audio industry is that most places will let you trial/return gear so you can form your own opinions in your own room/home.
There's ultimately no right answer... there are a bunch of answers... a ton of different rooms... we all have different ears... ultimately, the only important thing is that you have fun with it and enjoy the results of whatever you put together.

 

[lovinthehd]

Is it really worth the time just trading out the electronics, tho? You're totally happy with the speakers for a very long time? For the time energy and eventually money, I'd just concentrate on the speakers.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

View attachment 30615

View attachment 30611

View attachment 30612

View attachment 30613

View attachment 30614

View attachment 30609

Looks like YPAO did very well.

I think any of these Auto Room EQ (YPAO, Audyssey, Dirac, ARC) can produce very good FR graphs.

 

[PENG]

Yes to Dirac, ARC, and/or Audyssey.
But also because of any other features that the competing receivers possess that you're considering or have considered.
I know that the trending consensus on this thread is that if your results appear a certain way in REW that there isn't anything substantial that platforms like ARC or Dirac can contribute, but that hasn't been my experience.
And, one of the great things about the audio industry is that most places will let you trial/return gear so you can form your own opinions in your own room/home.
There's ultimately no right answer... there are a bunch of answers... a ton of different rooms... we all have different ears... ultimately, the only important thing is that you have fun with it and enjoy the results of whatever you put together.

Haha now we are in agreement, not 100% but almost, for the first time so far!

 

[PENG]

Looks like YPAO did very well.

I think any of these Auto Room EQ (YPAO, Audyssey, Dirac, ARC) can produce very good FR graphs.

I can see that YPAO can do a great job, now that I have seen those graphs. For those who couldn't get it that good, it could be a really challenging room, or operator error, or a little of both, or a lot of both.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I can see that YPAO can do a great job, now that I have seen those graphs. For those who couldn't get it that good, it could be a really challenging room, or operator error, or a little of both, or a lot of both.

I think the salient thing is the actual speaker.

When we have accurate speakers, YPAO, Audyssey, Dirac, and ARC can produce accurate RF.

The room accoustics (hard floors without rugs and glass windows without drapes, etc.) can compound the problem, but it starts with the speakers.

 

[3db]

I doubt that, XT32 could probably reduce those dips by a couple dB more at best. As you know, dips are tough to deal with. It does look like YPAO did a great job for you, you may be able to improve it further with some manual tweaking, but I really doubt you can do much better. Between 30 and 200 Hz, if you ignore the huge dips, you are within +/- 3.5 to 4 dB, that is really respectable for 1/48 smoothing.

So does this make you a Yamaha convert?

 

[sakete]

I think the salient thing is the actual speaker.

When we have accurate speakers, YPAO, Audyssey, Dirac, and ARC can produce accurate RF.

The room accoustics (hard floors without rugs and glass windows without drapes, etc.) can compound the problem, but it starts with the speakers.

Makes sense, and I'm using Revel F206 speakers, which measure well (and flat).

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

the trending consensus on this thread

We can OBJECTIVELY see the YPAO and other RC REW graphs.

Beyond that is 100% subjective opinions.

But if you enjoy trying out other AVRs and it doesn't cost any money, then go for it.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Makes sense, and I'm using Revel F206 speakers, which measure well (and flat).

Exactly. Try Auto Room Correction on some speakers that measure +/-6dB to begin with.

The trending consensus on this thread is to buy accurate speakers.

Are you able to try the NAD/Dirac risk-free (no extra money)? If so, I think many of us would LOVE to see your comparisons.

How does it feel to be able to measure your own speakers?

 

[PENG]

Thanks. Well, at this point I'm leaning towards keeping the Yamaha. Turns out that for me in my room, YPAO is good enough, and I currently have the receiver set to YPAO Natural based on all the measurements I took (the high end is a bit smoother than YPAO Flat and thus less bright, rest is pretty similar).

It won't be worth spending more on a NAD for what will probably end up being a very minor improvement, if even. I'll maybe start thinking about some aesthetically pleasing bass traps for in the corner behind the right speaker (the main culprit behind those dips) to even out the bass response (maybe that'll help get rid of that dip).

It's actually nice to use measurements to find out if it's worth buying something or not and truth be told, I didn't really want to have to return the Yamaha, I'm otherwise quite happy with it and all the features it offers. With NAD I'd be getting less features for more money for most likely the exact same sound quality, and for probably lower reliability and more issues.

If you go with the subjective crowds (I am sure some are objective too, but their reviews are still subjective right, except the REW like graphs?) though, the T758 V3 is a clear winner.

On the objective side, the NAD is not going to "sound" better than your 2070 as I see no evidence to support such outcome.

I could not find the service manual of the 758 but based on the 787, 777, 755 and 747's, I can see a common theme:

- NAD AVRs tend to use lower end DACs, such as the PCM 1690 in the T787.
- The vol IC used is likely the same R2S15205FP found in the T787 and T755.

In addition, based on available measurements for some predecssors of/related to the RX-A2070, it would be reasonable to assume your Yamaha has superior XT and SNR. So to assume the T758 Vs would sound "better" without any DSP involved would not be logical.

So the RX-A2070 has much better DAC and likely a little better vol IC specs (or comparable at least) as they seemed to have upgraded the IC to the newer BD34703KS, two factors that were weighted heavily by Dr. Rich, who hometheaterhifi.com seemed to trust in the past. Below is what he said about the vol IC, that I posted a few time on AH before. It is in the conclusion of the article linked below:

https://hometheaterhifi.com/technical/technical-reviews/options-by-supplier-and-price/
A key takeaway: circuit quality in the direct mode (stereo or 7.1) is almost always invariant to AVR prices in the range of $400 to $2,000. As examples, the $250 Yamaha RX-V367 and Marantz AV8801 ($3000) use the same Renesas LSI chip (R2A15220FP). With the LSI analog chip in these products, the sound of the direct mode is relatively constant, although a more robust power supplies, addition a quality output buffer and enhanced DC blocking capacitor quality can make small differences.

I thought I should post again as it may influence your decision.

Again, logically speaking it is believable that Arrodynamics is right about the sound stage and other superiority the T758 V3 has over D&M's, if Dirac Live is really that good and if the full version is used to EQ FBW. It is only in pure direct mode that I do not believe the reviewers claims, and would attribute what they perceived to other influencing factors.

 

[PENG]

So does this make you a Yamaha convert?

I am getting there, please don't help.. FYI, I would likely wait until they upgrade that LSI vol IC like D&M has already. Not that I believe it would make a difference, but to me, wants are as important as needs.

 

[Deckard71]

If you go with the subjective crowds (I am sure some are objective too, but their reviews are still subjective right, except the REW like graphs?) though, the T758 V3 is a clear winner.

On the objective side, the NAD is not going to "sound" better than your 2070 as I see no evidence to support such outcome.

I could not find the service manual of the 758 but based on the 787, 777, 755 and 747's, I can see a common theme:

- NAD AVRs tend to use lower end DACs, such as the PCM 1690 in the T787.
- The vol IC used is likely the same R2S15205FP found in the T787 and T755.

In addition, based on available measurements for some predecssors of/related to the RX-A2070, it would be reasonable to assume your Yamaha has superior XT and SNR. So to assume the T758 Vs would sound "better" without any DSP involved would not be logical.

So the RX-A2070 has much better DAC and likely a little better vol IC specs (or comparable at least) as they seemed to have upgraded the IC to the newer BD34703KS, two factors that were weighted heavily by Dr. Rich, who hometheaterhifi.com seemed to trust in the past. Below is what he said about the vol IC, that I posted a few time on AH before. It is in the conclusion of the article linked below:

https://hometheaterhifi.com/technical/technical-reviews/options-by-supplier-and-price/
A key takeaway: circuit quality in the direct mode (stereo or 7.1) is almost always invariant to AVR prices in the range of $400 to $2,000. As examples, the $250 Yamaha RX-V367 and Marantz AV8801 ($3000) use the same Renesas LSI chip (R2A15220FP). With the LSI analog chip in these products, the sound of the direct mode is relatively constant, although a more robust power supplies, addition a quality output buffer and enhanced DC blocking capacitor quality can make small differences.

I thought I should post again as it may influence your decision.

Again, logically speaking it is believable that Arrodynamics is right about the sound stage and other superiority the T758 Vs has if Dirac Live is really that good and if the full version is used to EQ FBW. It is only in pure direct mode that I do believe the reviewers claims and would attribute what they perceived to other influencing factors.

Thanks. I will keep my Yamaha then