NAD T 747 A/V Receiver First Look

[admin]

The NAD T 747 A/V receiver exemplifies their principle of simplicity, form and function while also providing the raw power to sonically please its listeners and satisfy the speakers it powers. The T 747 is fully capable of decoding all of the latest HD formats such as Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD, while also supporting legacy connections and Faroudja DCDi processing and upscaling to full 1080p resolution. With 4 HDMI inputs and 3 Component video inputs, the T 747 should provide enough connectivity to all but the most sophisticated installations.

Discuss "NAD T 747 A/V Receiver First Look" here. Read the article.

 

[rnatalli]

I'm a fan of NAD and Cambridge Audio, but they need to get their prices down. For $1,299, one could get something like the Onkyo 707 combined with an EMO UPA-7 which is a better overall system IMO.

 

[Seth=L]

Hooray for NAD, for trying to curve their approach toward the future and without selling their soul like another company around here.

I'm a fan of NAD and Cambridge Audio, but they need to get their prices down. For $1,299, one could get something like the Onkyo 707 combined with an EMO UPA-7 which is a better overall system IMO.

I think that NAD relies on the fact that their receivers are considered to be above mass market and that their performance with complex loads on average is better than competing models from other manufacturers. This could be different on the T 747 as we haven't seen it on the bench yet. They, like many other manufacturers, may have sacrificed performance for features. What is what is hard to tell, we'll have to wait and see on this one.

 

[3db]

Hooray for NAD, for trying to curve their approach toward the future and without selling their soul like another company around here.



I think that NAD relies on the fact that their receivers are considered to be above mass market and that their performance with complex loads on average is better than competing models from other manufacturers. This could be different on the T 747 as we haven't seen it on the bench yet. They, like many other manufacturers, may have sacrificed performance for features. What is what is hard to tell, we'll have to wait and see on this one.

I'm keenly interested in the bench tests as well. I would hedge a bet that NAD will stick to its principles and deliver on the power. We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[diegs]

The spec sheet states the T747 chassis weighs 29lbs and the shipping weight is 36lbs. The article/executive summary states the chassis weighs 36lbs. Maybe a typo. If the chassis weighs 36lbs then I'd guess the amp section is very robust. However if the chassis weighs 29lbs its not more special than any other mid level receiver.

 

[Seth=L]

The spec sheet states the T747 chassis weighs 29lbs and the shipping weight is 36lbs. The article/executive summary states the chassis weighs 36lbs. Maybe a typo. If the chassis weighs 36lbs then I'd guess the amp section is very robust. However if the chassis weighs 29lbs its not more special than any other mid level receiver.

If it weighs 29 pounds that's a sharp decrease in weight for them.

 

[3db]

The spec sheet states the T747 chassis weighs 29lbs and the shipping weight is 36lbs. The article/executive summary states the chassis weighs 36lbs. Maybe a typo. If the chassis weighs 36lbs then I'd guess the amp section is very robust. However if the chassis weighs 29lbs its not more special than any other mid level receiver.

Consider that the Yamaha HTR6250 which is rated at 90x7 where as this NAD is rated at 60x7 is a full 10 lbs lighter than the NAD. The Denon 790 which also rated at 90x7 is still 6 pounds lighter than the NAD.

 

[Seth=L]

Consider that the Yamaha HTR6250 which is rated at 90x7 where as this NAD is rated at 60x7 is a full 10 lbs lighter than the NAD. The Denon 790 which also rated at 90x7 is still 6 pounds lighter than the NAD.

I'm comparing price fields, not comparitive wattage output scenarios. Neither of those receivers are anywhere close to $1299. Also, Yamaha and Denon are both known to use a different rating standard than NAD on their receivers. I'm also questioning the weight comparison to similar models from NAD that proceeded this model. Many manufacturers have shed pounds and power in favor of features, hopefully NAD found a way to shed weight, but not power.

 

[3db]

I'm comparing price fields, not comparitive wattage output scenarios. Neither of those receivers are anywhere close to $1299. Also, Yamaha and Denon are both known to use a different rating standard than NAD on their receivers. I'm also questioning the weight comparison to similar models from NAD that proceeded this model. Many manufacturers have shed pounds and power in favor of features, hopefully NAD found a way to shed weight, but not power.

Since I know NAD is always more expensive,, I try to rate by power . Anyway, like you,I've been waiting for Audiholcis to do some testing on Yamaha and now NAD but they'r back logged out to ying yang. Hey, maybe we could apply for the job as testers for Audioholcis and releive them of some backlog!!

 

[Seth=L]

Since I know NAD is always more expensive,, I try to rate by power . Anyway, like you,I've been waiting for Audiholcis to do some testing on Yamaha and now NAD but they'r back logged out to ying yang. Hey, maybe we could apply for the job as testers for Audioholcis and releive them of some backlog!!

You can't compare the NAD to other receivers based on published power figures because they don't use the same method to arrive at the ratings.

 

[gene]

I sent 2 email requests into NAD for a review sample but haven't heard back yet. We don't have any formal reviews of NAD AVR's so it would be nice to get this one on the bench.

 

[bandphan]

Just buy power amps separate

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I sent 2 email requests into NAD for a review sample but haven't heard back yet. We don't have any formal reviews of NAD AVR's so it would be nice to get this one on the bench.

Maybe they are thinking like Def Tech and are afraid of being compared to the likes of Emotiva & Outlaw.

This might be slightly off topic, but I just glanced at a Home Theater Mag review of the Onlyo 807. On the All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD, it was only 30 Watts!!!
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/onkyo_tx-nr807_av_receiver/index4.html

$5,000 Arcam Receiver producing 83 watts All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/arcam_avr600_av_receiver/index3.html

$5,500 Audio Control Receiver producing 81 watts All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/audiocontrol_concert_avr-1_av_receiver/index3.html

Rotel $2,600 Receiver producing only 86 watts All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/rotel_rsx-1560_av_receiver/index4.html

Denon $1,600 Receiver producing only 114 watts All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/708denon3808/index2.html

$2,000 Denon Receiver producing 105 watts All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/denon_avr-4310ci_av_receiver/index4.html

$5,500 Denon Receiver producing 141 watts All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/808denr/index3.html

$5,500 Yammaha Receiver producing 139 watts All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/808yam11/index2.html

$7,500 Denon POA Amplifier producing 169 watts All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD:
http://hometheatermag.com/preampprocessors/denon_avp-a1hdci_surround_processor_and_poa-a1hdci_amplifier/index4.html

 

[bandphan]

Maybe they are thinking like Def Tech and are afraid of being compared to the likes of Emotiva & Outlaw.

This might be slightly off topic, but I just glanced at a Home Theater Mag review of the Onlyo 807. On the All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 1% THD, it was only 30 Watts!!!

Thats a huge difference from the 806

 

[gene]

This might be slightly off topic, but I just glanced at a Home Theater Mag review of the Onlyo 807. On the All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD, it was only 30 Watts!!!

http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/...er/index4.html

$5,000 Arcam Receiver producing only 83 watts All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/...er/index3.html

$5,500 Audio Control Receiver producing only 81 watts All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD:
http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/...er/index3.html

Sounds like their current limiting circuit is set to go off under that type of test scenario. Someone at Onkyo got a little too UL friendly IMO.

Read this to understand why:
http://www.audioholics.com/education/amplifier-technology/the-all-channels-driven-acd-amplifier-test

 

[Seth=L]

This might be slightly off topic, but I just glanced at a Home Theater Mag review of the Onlyo 807. On the All-7-Channels Driven spec @ 0.1% THD, it was only 30 Watts!!!

http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/onkyo_tx-nr807_av_receiver/index4.html

Who cares? How about everybody look at the entire TX-807 benchtest and tell us how significant that is?

 

[anamorphic96]

But 5 channels at 105 watts is pretty respectable. Most people only use 5 in the first place.

Its not the 805 but still a very good bargain at its going price. Besides the 805 is back and its called the 1007. The only thing missing on the 1007.

 

[Seth=L]

But 5 channels at 105 watts is pretty respectable. Most people only use 5 in the first place.

Its not the 805 but still a very good bargain at its going price. Besides the 805 is back and its called the 1007. The only thing missing on the 1007.

It's got network capability too.

 

[anamorphic96]

Good point.

I just noticed as well that I forgot to mention in my previous post that the 1007 is missing MutEQ XT which isn't a huge drawback.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

Who cares? How about everybody look at the entire TX-807 benchtest and tell us how significant that is?

But 5 channels at 105 watts is pretty respectable. Most people only use 5 in the first place.

I only care about 3-Channels driven @ 1% THD myself (Front 3).

But I just saw that "30W" and immediately thought, "What the heck?"

And what do you guys think about the 2 "high-end" Arcam & Audio Control $5K+ receivers producing less power than the $1,600 Denon?