HELP....NAD vs. Integra vs. Marantz vs. Rotel

[Ry Ry]

A neophyte is deciding between Receivers and Speakers and needs some help. I expect to split my usage 50-50 between audio and video.

On the Receiver side I'm considering the Integra 7.4, NAD T163/T973 combo, Marantz SR8500 and Rotel RSX-1056. After listenting to them, I thought the NAD separates sounded the best, but also liked the Integra. Anyone want to chime in with their thoughts or experiences? Sound quality and reliability are probably 1 and 2 in importance. Let me know if I'm comparing apples to oranges.

On the Speaker side I'm considering Revel (F12, C12, S12, B12), Sonus Faber (Domus Fronts, Center and Rears), Definitive Tech (BP 7001, CLR 2300, Def Gem), and lastly ASW (Genius 400, 100) with Mirage Omnistat rears. I thought the Revels sounded great for the money. The ASW's and Definitives sounded good too, but a bit more expensive. I haven't seen too many reviews for these so I'm particularly curious what you audiophiles out there think.

Can't wait to get something set up.... the demo's get me pretty pumped. Thanks....

 

[Buckeyefan 1]

A neophyte is deciding between Receivers and Speakers and needs some help. I expect to split my usage 50-50 between audio and video.

On the Receiver side I'm considering the Integra 7.4, NAD T163/T973 combo, Marantz SR8500 and Rotel RSX-1056. After listenting to them, I thought the NAD separates sounded the best, but also liked the Integra. Anyone want to chime in with their thoughts or experiences? Sound quality and reliability are probably 1 and 2 in importance. Let me know if I'm comparing apples to oranges.

On the Speaker side I'm considering Revel (F12, C12, S12, B12), Sonus Faber (Domus Fronts, Center and Rears), Definitive Tech (BP 7001, CLR 2300, Def Gem), and lastly ASW (Genius 400, 100) with Mirage Omnistat rears. I thought the Revels sounded great for the money. The ASW's and Definitives sounded good too, but a bit more expensive. I haven't seen too many reviews for these so I'm particularly curious what you audiophiles out there think.

Can't wait to get something set up.... the demo's get me pretty pumped. Thanks....

Welcome to the forum.

Nice choices. Of the list you've provided, I'd say the NAD combo with either the Sonus Faber or Revels. The Marantz is a great unit, but IMO won't sound near as nice as the NAD or even the Rotel. I'd stay clear from Integra as far as reliability is concerned. I'm not a huge fan of Integra.

 

[jaxvon]

I dunno if you have any dealers in your area, but I think that Phase Technology (the PC9.1 Flagships) are hard to beat for the money ($2k/pr). Great speakers.

 

[Bevan]

I vote for NAD. I would also concider the 773 over seperates and put the saving into the front speakers or sub.

Also worth the wait and the stretch of budget might be the upcomming NAD Master series receiver. I'm betting its going to be something speacial.

Speaker wise, all I can say is that of all the speakers I've listened toopartnered with NAD(and I cant include most of your choices), the most synergistic partner has been Dynaudio. Neutral, dynamics and magical. Audition if you get a chance.

b

 

[jthornton]

I would also look at ARCAM

If you like the sound of NAD, I would also look at the ARCAM products in a similar bracket, e.g. AVR300 (receiver) or the AVP700/P1000 separates. These products are excellent at music and very good at home theater. I tested Rotel, NAD, and ARCAM products and chose the AVR300. You should note that these products do not have room correction and (I think) the only one with HDMI switching is the AVP700.

 

[j_garcia]

I'm a Marantz guy, but the NAD is going to sound better. The only concern is, the x73 series seems to have been plagued by some quality issues early on, and I'm not sure if they have been fixed.

I'll have to second the Arcam too. A buddy of mine just picked up an AVR300 when his previous Marantz receiver was damaged and it sounds great. I spent some time auditioning their integrateds too, VERY nice.

 

[newfmp3]

don't listen to us, go listen to the amps/receivers yourself. I have the NAD 773, and I'm about to get rid of it. I've had it for about 2 months now. Just waiting for the 4600 to get here. I had the NAd in house for about 10 mins before I knew it wasn't what I wanted sound wise.

From what I have read, the rotel and nad have completely different sounds. One being warm ( the nad ) the other more bright. I have NO experience with Rotel and have no right to comment on it, but I will tell you that the main reason why I am selling the NAD is because of it's sound. It's not this amazing sound that everyone makes it out to be. It makes me wonder what experience these people have with other equipment when I hear it. It's lacking detail in the highs and strong bass. I have to eq it to get what I want out of it. Awesome power though, but is it the sound that "you" want?

I'm going to be comparing it directly to the Yamaha 4600 that I've been waiting for weeks for. Should have it by end of next week. I already know of one guy on the Axiom forum that has a 773, got the 4600 2 days ago for a buddy of his and tried it on his own system, Rockets ( 4/6 ohm) and today he just sold his 773 to get a 4600 himself....that's quick. I think that says something. He kept the thing blasting near 100db for like 5 hrs, and it handled the power fine. Granted, I have not heard this receiver yet myself so I might get it and think the nad sounds better yet, but I don't think it will given that it has a built in eq.

 

[Bevan]

I second the Arcam AVR300.

for music I havent heard better, very refined and a pleasure to listen to.

b

 

[ht_addict]

don't listen to us, go listen to the amps/receivers yourself. I have the NAD 773, and I'm about to get rid of it. I've had it for about 2 months now. Just waiting for the 4600 to get here. I had the NAd in house for about 10 mins before I knew it wasn't what I wanted sound wise.

From what I have read, the rotel and nad have completely different sounds. One being warm ( the nad ) the other more bright. I have NO experience with Rotel and have no right to comment on it, but I will tell you that the main reason why I am selling the NAD is because of it's sound. It's not this amazing sound that everyone makes it out to be. It makes me wonder what experience these people have with other equipment when I hear it. It's lacking detail in the highs and strong bass. I have to eq it to get what I want out of it. Awesome power though, but is it the sound that "you" want?

I'm going to be comparing it directly to the Yamaha 4600 that I've been waiting for weeks for. Should have it by end of next week. I already know of one guy on the Axiom forum that has a 773, got the 4600 2 days ago for a buddy of his and tried it on his own system, Rockets ( 4/6 ohm) and today he just sold his 773 to get a 4600 himself....that's quick. I think that says something. He kept the thing blasting near 100db for like 5 hrs, and it handled the power fine. Granted, I have not heard this receiver yet myself so I might get it and think the nad sounds better yet, but I don't think it will given that it has a built in eq.

I second newfmp3 about going out and demoing the units yourself. It is your ears that have to listen too it in the end.

On another note, I don't agree with newfmp3 on the way the T773 sounds. With my Paradigm Studio(v3) 40/ADP470/CC570 setup it has plenty of detail in the highs and tons of strong bass. It maybe that with his Axiom's a bright sounding receiver /amp is needed to get the most off them. Here's a link to a review of the Axiom M80ti(http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_9_3/axiom-m80ti-speakers-9-2002.html)

Here' the reviewers conclusion.

Conclusions

I found that the overall sound quality of the Axiom M80ti(s) was very good, but only after careful orientation and positioning within the room. They have excellent dynamics and power handling, and should serve anyone well for either music or HT purposes. I do recommend, however, that you try them before purchase, and see if you like the sound of the Axioms in your environment. They can be a bit bright. Do try several placements and orientation, and chances are, you will find one that works very well.

 

[brian32672]

I'd stay clear from Integra as far as reliability is concerned. I'm not a huge fan of Integra.

So your not into a glorified Onkyo???

 

[newfmp3]

On another note, I don't agree with newfmp3 on the way the T773 sounds. With my Paradigm Studio(v3) 40/ADP470/CC570 setup it has plenty of detail in the highs and tons of strong bass. It maybe that with his Axiom's a bright sounding receiver /amp is needed to get the most off them. Here's a link to a review of the Axiom M80ti(http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/volume_9_3/axiom-m80ti-speakers-9-2002.html)

I have heard the axiom's on a few amps now. They are not "bright" speakers. Detailed, accurate maybe. Klipsch is bright imho. My problem with the NAd is that it is not bright enough, almost but not quite. And the bass is a serious issue. Anyone trying m80's on a Nad will have NO idea what kind of bass their capable of.

You have some very nice and serious speakers. But, are 8 ohms instead of my 4. I would imagine your studio's would indeed sound different on the nad vs my 80's. With the nad I desperately need to have the sub on for music. With my carvers, they m80's do fine without a sub. Huge difference.

And this is where the fun begins on the net......just go listen to them. What we say doesn't matter. Drive 3 hours if you have to. Don't get stuck with a $2000-$3000 amp that you won't like.


cheers

 

[hopeforcash]

I have not really heard the NAD or Integra. I have the ROTEL RSX1065 and heard the Arcam AVR200 (the one with 75W per channel) as they were in similar price range. The Arvam had a little smoother sound then the ROTEL, but I have my HT in a large open area with little walls and 20 ft ceiling and opted for the ROTEL.

I have to say the ROTEL was a much improvement over my old HK, but in "my" environment, I tend to say it still lacked the low end. I am using B&W CDM7NTs as the fronts.

What I'm trying to say is look at your room size and environment. As my HK with the B&Ws sounded great in my old house where the room was the standard family room with 9ft ceilings.

 

[ht_addict]

I have heard the axiom's on a few amps now. They are not "bright" speakers. Detailed, accurate maybe. Klipsch is bright imho. My problem with the NAd is that it is not bright enough, almost but not quite. And the bass is a serious issue. Anyone trying m80's on a Nad will have NO idea what kind of bass their capable of.

You have some very nice and serious speakers. But, are 8 ohms instead of my 4. I would imagine your studio's would indeed sound different on the nad vs my 80's. With the nad I desperately need to have the sub on for music. With my carvers, they m80's do fine without a sub. Huge difference.

And this is where the fun begins on the net......just go listen to them. What we say doesn't matter. Drive 3 hours if you have to. Don't get stuck with a $2000-$3000 amp that you won't like.


cheers

Some would have say that bright and detailed are two off the same. One reason why you may end up liking the Yamaha over the NAD. Though I wouldn't expect the Yamaha to drive your 4ohm speakers to the level your looking for. Here's a quote from Audioholics on the 4/8ohmn selector on the back off the unit.

I recommend the "Minimum 8-ohms" setting even for 4-ohm speakers of moderate efficiency (>89dB SPL). Yamaha includes a" 6-ohm" setting to satisfy UL heat dissipation requirements when driving 4-ohm loads, as well as easing consumer concerns about driving low impedance loads. These switches step down voltage feed to the power sections which can limit dynamics and overall fidelity. My advice is to keep the switch set to "Minimum 8-ohms" regardless of the impedance of your speakers and ensure proper ventilation of the Receiver. To illustrate this point further, I have tabulated my measured differences between the 8-ohm and 6-ohm setting for driving 8-ohm and 4-ohm loads.

As far as Paradigms being 8ohm, Sound and Vision measured the Studio's at 5.3ohm on their benchmark while reviewing them. Certainly not an easy load. One question about your T773, do you have the latest software installed? Mine comes with V2.05

 

[newfmp3]

Yes, I have the latest version.I made sure before buying it.

the yamaha should be here tuesday or Wed.

We have a member on the Axiom board who had bought a 773 about 2 months before I did. He brought a 4600 to his home to try for a friend before handing it to him, and ended up selling his 773 that day after hearing the 4600. He's on 4/6 ohm Rockets. And this guy is no noob. He's owned many MANY amps and owns several systems and is someone that seems to have a new receiver/speakers almost everytime I talk to him. He says it does get a bit warmer vs the NAD, but it can definitely hold it's own. He left it running all day to test it, even at 100db's in a 22x22 room for 5 hrs straight and was still impressed. He doesn't cross me as someone that has ever been impressed with Yamaha before until now.

I'm not someone that ever sees 100db's in my home. Quiet neighborhood. Well, until i got the HSU anyways I am more concerned with quality of sound. I will take my time comparing the NAD to the 4600 and decide. I'll post my opinions here. Don't get me wrong. The NAd is a nice receiver. Great remote, looks great, power is awesome, and it's so simple to use, and if the Yamaha sucks....and the Nad is the "worse" I can do I think I'll be quite happy. I'll just keep my music eq'd. I don't have the option at this point to swap the NAD for anything else....long story so it's either one or the other.

I wasn't sure what the studio's ohmage was...thanks. Regardless, they are gorgeous speakers and were my first choice before hearing the Axioms.

 

[PENG]

I find it hard to believe you have to use EQ's to make the T773 sound good. As a receiver, the T773 is supposed to be among the few that does well with music. I thought one would use "pure direct" for music, and that means no EQ. Something doesn't add up.

 

[newfmp3]

Honestly, at first, I really wanted to believe that what I Was hearing was worth the $2000 I paid for it. Afterall, that is what you are supposed to be paying a premium for with this amp isn't it? Good musical sound. I've spent all my life around live music to some degree, and I really like to recreate that sound in-house. For 2grand for a amp with no options on it, it better darn well sound amazing.

But, doing a A/B comparison to my old setup on the Carvers, it's just no contest. The Carvers without an eq almost sound better then the NAD with the EQ. I don't think There's anything wrong with the NAD I have, but without another next to it to compare you never know. But, talking to others that have been through this and I know their ears are like mine.....my feelings are not alone.

Is it better then the Kenwoods, JVC's, Sony's etc I have had home? Darn straight it is. It'll blow them away. IS it better to what I am used to hearing? Not a fricken chance, and not even close. Will it blow the windows out of my house while driving 4 ohm speakers and not even get warm.....yup, not a problem. But it's not that clean clear and bassy Live sound I'm looking for. Don't even get me started on the Pure Direct nonsense. Sound is a preference thing. And I knew what I liked long before I started reading any threads anywhere so I don't let the net influence my decisions. If I don't like it, I don't like it. It's not going to change.

It's funny, because I think Peng was one of the few that suggested that I get a 2500 and some external amps. I got the NAd instead. Now, I'm trying to get the 4600, and get some amps next year. Talk about irony.

Anyways, 2-3 more days, and I'll have the 4600, and the final decision will be made. And If I am smart, I'll never return to these forums and just be happy with what I got instead of reading about the next new thing....

But that'll never happen

 

[PENG]

But that'll never happen

Okay then, be back soon and tell us about the 4600. Don't send it back even if you don't like it, not until you try hooking it up to a 2 channel amp. By the way, if you have been around live music often enough, and would like to recreate it in your own room, then I can understand why those so call "warm" sound may not appeal to you. To me, live music is not warm sounding at all.

 

[newfmp3]

Couldn't agree more. There is nothing about the Live sound that remotely comes close to "warm"

Bass from a drum or bass guitar will be strong enough to feel it in your belly. Cymbals will make your ears ring at a live concert. On a warm stereo, you barely notice them. That is the one thing I probably don't like about live music ( loud cymbals), but you get the point. There are defintely details missing from an overly warm stereo.

I like clear and detailed ( not bright ). I want to hear the singers breath between words, the clicking of the pick as it hits the strings. To me, the Nad sounds like it has a blanket over my m80's, and the bass is always on flat or zero when it isn't. It's almost good enough, but needs that little extra ooomph. To me Bright is when your ears are ringing after 30 mins and you are reaching for the volume control to turn it down because it hurts. I would not describe the Axiom's as bright, and I would not call the Nad bright. The Nad is warm, and the axioms detailed. But the two together just doesn't work for me.

 

[Nick250]

But it's not that clean clear and bassy Live sound I'm looking for. Don't even get me started on the Pure Direct nonsense. Sound is a preference thing. And I knew what I liked long before I started reading any threads anywhere so I don't let the net influence my decisions. If I don't like it, I don't like it. It's not going to change.

It ain't your amps, it's your speakers. You already have plenty of horse power in your amps. As long as your speakers are not clipping what you hear is speakers and room acoustics not amps. If you are willing to accept this then you are that much closer to really getting that sound you are looking for. If not, well the amp/receiver companies will be happy to take your money.

 

[PENG]

Nick, the same speakers sound good without EQ using his old Carver amp.