From Denon to Nad

[Illuminatti]

Hi, i am thinking of upgrading my denon 1604 by replacing it with a Nad T743 and i was just wondering if my plan will result to a better sounding HT and audio set-up.

The 1604 boasts of a 75 watt per channel output (for 6.1) while the T743 only commands a 50-watt output for 5.1.

My system is composed of Paradigm Minis for fronts, JM Lab Chorus for center and MA B2 for surrounds.

Your comments will be greatly appreciated

 

[bumblebee]

the NAD is the more powerful of the two. don't let the 50-wpc fool you. NADs are conservatively rated

 

[MarkH]

You will lose some of the bells and whistles that the Denon offers such as multiple DSP surround modes and the like, but the nAD will drive those speakers of yours a lot easier and will sound much more musical.

 

[Illuminatti]

MarkH

Because of your comments, i was compelled to look at T743's predecessor which is the T742. Based on the specs furnished by Nad's website, the T742 has a Crystal DAC which i believe is not present in the T743.

Correct me if im wrong, are you saying that the T742 is better than the T743?

 

[warpdrive]

The NAD will kick the Denon's butt

Seriously, every NAD component I've owned (owned a few, from cassette decks, amps, HT receivers) has been very musically satisfying. Denons are good (owned a couple too), but I've always felt the NAD delivered a step above in sound purity.

Don't let the watts specs fool you, the NAD is rated conservatively.

 

[anamorphic96]

Dont let the DAC fool you either. Even if they used a different manufacture does not mean its a bad DAC. But I still think its Crystal. NAD seems to use alot of their chips.

 

[Illuminatti]

Thanks for all your comments.

Is the T742 better than the T743 considering that it has a Crystal DAC and that all other specs are identical?

 

[anamorphic96]

This is probably not an issue. However if your concerned. Ask NAD.

 

[mtrycrafts]

MarkH

Because of your comments, i was compelled to look at T743's predecessor which is the T742. Based on the specs furnished by Nad's website, the T742 has a Crystal DAC which i believe is not present in the T743.

Correct me if im wrong, are you saying that the T742 is better than the T743?

It is absolute nonsense that that NAD will do better with that 50 watts than the Denon with 75. But, facts usually never gets in the way of some audiophiles

 

[bumblebee]

It is absolute nonsense that that NAD will do better with that 50 watts than the Denon with 75. But, facts usually never gets in the way of some audiophiles

that's 50 wpc, full bandwidth, all channels driven into 8/4 ohms. i don't think the denon is rated the same way.

 

[warpdrive]

It is absolute nonsense that that NAD will do better with that 50 watts than the Denon with 75. But, facts usually never gets in the way of some audiophiles

Well, the facts....

NAD T743
5 x 50W Simultaneous Minimum Continuous Power into 4 / 8 ohms
105W, 145W, 165W IHF Dynamic Power into 8, 4 and 2 ohms, respectively

Can the Denon can even drive a 4 ohm load continuously without frying itself? The Denon manual says

• When speaker systems A and B are use separately, speakers with an
impedance of 6 to 16 Ω/ohms can be connected for use as front speakers.
• Speakers with an impedance of 6 to 16 Ω/ohms can be connected for use
as center and surround and surround back speakers.
• The protector circuit may be activated if the set is played for long periods of time at high volumes when speakers with an impedance lower than the
specified impedance are connected.

Meanwhile, the NAD is capable of 50W continuous into 4 ohms, and can even handle 2 ohm loads.

NAD's own literature says

NAD PowerDrive™ Story

For more than twenty years, NAD amplifiers have been known for delivering effective power, with generous "headroom" that allows dynamic power far in excess of rated RMS power. NAD amplifiers "sound powerful" because they are indeed powerful. Unlike many of today's amps, especially those built into receivers, they handle complex, lower-impedance loudspeaker loads — not just the simple 8-ohm resistor used to calculate advertised power ratings. Now PowerDrive™ takes NAD power amplification circuitry to a new high of useful sophistication. Scanning continuously to sense speaker impedance, PowerDrive™ regulates power so that the RMS power into 8 ohms and 4 ohms is constant, while our famous headroom remains available to handle the complex sudden demands of music and movies. The new circuitry requires less cooling, while maintaining ability to handle complex impedance loads as low as 2 ohms. It should extend even further the NAD reputation for solid real-world performance.

Yeah, I'd take the 50W NAD over a 75W most anything else.

 

[av_phile]

Well, the facts....

NAD T743
5 x 50W Simultaneous Minimum Continuous Power into 4 / 8 ohms
105W, 145W, 165W IHF Dynamic Power into 8, 4 and 2 ohms, respectively

Can the Denon can even drive a 4 ohm load continuously without frying itself? The Denon manual says


Meanwhile, the NAD is capable of 50W continuous into 4 ohms, and can even handle 2 ohm loads.

NAD's own literature says



Yeah, I'd take the 50W NAD over a 75W most anything else.

I agree with those figures and your assessment. The NAD's power is conservatively rated, among the few commercial gears that are. Nothing to do with sound quality, but they take full disclosure on power quite seriously.

 

[Nick250]

After all is said and done, the receiver has so little to do with the sound you hear as to be a non factor. So no, the NAD will not make your system sound better. You want better sound look into speakers and room acoustics. If you are suffering from upgradeitis I understand. I suffer from it too. A NAD receiver would make a nice new toy, I understand. But it will not improve your sound.

 

[mtrycrafts]

that's 50 wpc, full bandwidth, all channels driven into 8/4 ohms. i don't think the denon is rated the same way.

And??? So what???
When do you need full power to all the channels at the exact same moment???
NEVER.
And that 4 ohm rating? It is not that hot as it delivers the same as into 8 ohms, in essence, half power that would be needed wityh 4 ohms.
Does he even need to worry about that 4 ohm rating???

 

[mtrycrafts]

Well, the facts....

NAD T743
5 x 50W Simultaneous Minimum Continuous Power into 4 / 8 ohms
105W, 145W, 165W IHF Dynamic Power into 8, 4 and 2 ohms, respectively

Can the Denon can even drive a 4 ohm load continuously without frying itself? The Denon manual says


Meanwhile, the NAD is capable of 50W continuous into 4 ohms, and can even handle 2 ohm loads.

NAD's own literature says



Yeah, I'd take the 50W NAD over a 75W most anything else.

Does he need a 4 ohm amp capability in the first place??? If so, how will 50 watts help him??? That is half power into a 4 ohm load.

Dynamic power is 2 millisecond duration. OK.

Be my guest, get that NAD.

 

[bumblebee]

And??? So what???
When do you need full power to all the channels at the exact same moment???
NEVER.
And that 4 ohm rating? It is not that hot as it delivers the same as into 8 ohms, in essence, half power that would be needed wityh 4 ohms.
Does he even need to worry about that 4 ohm rating???

take it easy dude i/we just described how NAD is different from the Denon. and fact is, it is more powerful as for sounding better, some people find the NAD to be more musical. but that is subjective and is not true for everybody.

 

[av_phile]

take it easy dude i/we just described how NAD is different from the Denon. and fact is, it is more powerful as for sounding better, some people find the NAD to be more musical. but that is subjective and is not true for everybody.

You've got nothing to worry. I share your experience. Don't take this dude seriously. He's got nothing to contribute to your listening pleasures. The NAD can sound as powerful as another brand touting a higher power rating on the same load with the same -10db volume setting. Listening with your ears is all you need to enjoy in this hobby. Not everyone is as blessed.

 

[Illuminatti]

Thanks for all your comments regarding the power output of NAD against Denon. Those comments were really helpful. Now my next question is this:

ASSUMING that NAD T743 is a good upgrade from my Denon 1604 and that i have already decided to get a NAD, is the T743 better than its predecessor (T742) considering that the latter has basically the same feature with the addition of the Crystal DAC?

And also, does the addition of a Crystal DAC in the T742 make it more musical than the T743?

 

[bumblebee]

Illuminatti,

i don't know much about the crystal DAC. but usually, the newer models are better. audition both, if you have time.

also, try pinoydvd.com for more feedbacks on the NAD

 

[warpdrive]

And??? So what???
When do you need full power to all the channels at the exact same moment???
NEVER.
And that 4 ohm rating? It is not that hot as it delivers the same as into 8 ohms, in essence, half power that would be needed wityh 4 ohms.
Does he even need to worry about that 4 ohm rating???

Listen dude. I explained why there is a difference between NAD and the Denon. The difference between NAD's 50W and Denon's 75W is that the NAD was rated with a real world loads. And can do much better if asked to.
Don't be so presumptuous and shortsighted. How do you know how many watts he needs anyway? You know, one day, maybe he's going to upgrade to something nice like a Totem Dreamcatcher system which dips down below 4 ohms. Then all the dynamic headroom is going to be useful. That Denon would choke and die whereas the NAD would still deliver a powerful punch. The fact is, the NAD will deliver its rated power into complex loads, the Denon doesn't, and in that way, it's better....now, and for his future needs. It's easy to design a power amp that delivers given power into a resistor. But designing an amp to handle complex loads is a much more difficult task requiring a design that provide higher current using beefier components kke larger transformers, output transistors. My bet is the the NAD would sound cleaner and play at lower distortion levels with real world music.

Take two cars. Would you rather buy a car rated 18 MPG that was observed in a worst case test inside the city on real roads, or would you rather buy a car that was rated 22MPG inside a lab while the car was running on rollers?

Take out your earplugs and actually try *listening* to the components for a change instead of gazing at the spec sheet.