Denon2807 Vs. NAD T744

[Seth=L]

Never said that it didn't have preouts, Just that if you remove the jumpers the amplifier is disconnected from the preamp. Most receivers just have preouts.

 

[Paul Spencer]

I quoted you, I didn't say what you are saying that I said that you didn't! Confused?

I see what you are saying now, however, it was unclear the first time. I don't see how this could possibly be a downside for the NAD. Normally, when you use a pre-out, you forfeit the power amplifier associated with the preout. With the NAD, you can still use the power amplifier as it gives you an input it. Of course, this means removing the jumper, then it's simply a matter of connecting up a preamp level signal to the power amp. This allows you to insert an active crossover for example, then use the power amp for the tweeter, and add in a power amp for the midbass. With just about any other amp, to go active you would have to get two extra power amps, instead of one.

Am I missing a disadvantage here?

 

[Seth=L]

I quoted you, I didn't say what you are saying that I said that you didn't! Confused?

I see what you are saying now, however, it was unclear the first time. I don't see how this could possibly be a downside for the NAD. Normally, when you use a pre-out, you forfeit the power amplifier associated with the preout. With the NAD, you can still use the power amplifier as it gives you an input it. Of course, this means removing the jumper, then it's simply a matter of connecting up a preamp level signal to the power amp. This allows you to insert an active crossover for example, then use the power amp for the tweeter, and add in a power amp for the midbass. With just about any other amp, to go active you would have to get two extra power amps, instead of one.

Am I missing a disadvantage here?

I suppose you have a valid point, I was looking at it from a different perspective, like biamping.

 

[Paul Spencer]

Bi-amping - now this is one that I find strange, as when they refer to bi-amping, they mean (from what I can tell) using two amp channels per speaker with the same signal going to it. This means no active crossover, but the signal must still go through passive crossovers. So it's really passive bi-amping, where all you really achieve is little more than effectively more power. Am I right in saying this is what they usually mean when they say the amp allows bi-amping?

 

[Seth=L]

Bi-amping - now this is one that I find strange, as when they refer to bi-amping, they mean (from what I can tell) using two amp channels per speaker with the same signal going to it. This means no active crossover, but the signal must still go through passive crossovers. So it's really passive bi-amping, where all you really achieve is little more than effectively more power. Am I right in saying this is what they usually mean when they say the amp allows bi-amping?

You can't put an active x-over in there somehow?

Sorry, it's late and I am not on top of "thinking" at the moment.

 

[Paul Spencer]

If you have a pre out you can hook up an active crossover, but if you don't have amplifier inputs as the NAD does, then how are you going to use the power amp included in the receiver?

 

[PENG]

I find some of the comments here very interesting. At the price/quality levels of the NADT744 and the Denon AVR2807, some of us would think that their SQ may not be too noticeable when level matched and listened in pure direct mode. If you think you can notice the difference that the NAD would sound better, or warmer to you, then may be you should not worry about this active crossover thing but get yourself a separate system instead. It is also hard to imagine someone who is willing to spend the money and effort on an active crossover system would actually want to feed the signals back into the T744's internal amps.

If I would go to the extent of replacing the crossovers inside my speakers with external ones, I am not going to let that little T744 stand in my way. With all due respect, NAD makes nice amps but the T744 is still an entry level receiver, one that they built with budget in mind.

I think people still tend to focus a lot on electronics mainly because they have buttons to play with, lights and meters to watch and tons of numbers (specs) to compare with whether those numbers mean anything to our limited hearing ability or not. It is so easy to say this is warmer, that is sweeter, others are organic or clinical etc., after we paid for those electronics and are highly conscious of all those dollars, watts, Hz, %THD differences in our mind. In most cases speakers make the most difference in SQ but once you get to the $1,000 a pair range it is not a easy process (compared to electronics) to upgrade from there to say a $1,500 a pair ones. You can even do worse if you are not careful and not putting enough time in the process.

 

[Seth=L]

If you have a pre out you can hook up an active crossover, but if you don't have amplifier inputs as the NAD does, then how are you going to use the power amp included in the receiver?

I understand this now, last night I was way to tired.

 

[Paul Spencer]

Peng, I consider the NAD to be capable enough as an amplifier to have power amps that are worth retaining. I've found amplifier differences to be noticeable but subtle, speakers being much more significant. It will be some time before I'm likely to chase after the small improvement from using better power amps.

I have DIY speakers. Different story.

The NAD seems that it will do what I want, putting money where it counts most.

I doubt it would be standing in the way SQ wise.

 

[PENG]

Peng, I consider the NAD to be capable enough as an amplifier to have power amps that are worth retaining. I've found amplifier differences to be noticeable but subtle, speakers being much more significant. It will be some time before I'm likely to chase after the small improvement from using better power amps.

I have DIY speakers. Different story.

The NAD seems that it will do what I want, putting money where it counts most.

I doubt it would be standing in the way SQ wise.

I should have guessed. Of course it is a different story if you already have DIY speakers. Thanks for clearing that up for me.