NAD T 747 with Acoustic energy Aegis 3 speakers

[yossis]

Hello all,

I'm insteresting to purchase the NAD 767 however i'm a bit confused as i have currently 2 Acoustic energy speakers (Ageis 3) 8 ohm 150 Watt (tower speakers) and i do not know whether this receiver will be able to support them properly.

Currently i have the Onkyo DS484 that does not do the job at all. Following Are the Onkyo specs:
70Wx5ch (6 ohms, 1kHz, THD0.1%)
55Wx5ch (8 ohms, 20Hz - 20kHz, THD0.08%)

Do not want to make the same mistake twise.

Thanks in advance

 

[bikemig]

NAD is generally conservative in its power ratings. You might want to post a question on its website. I have found that the techs in the company are very good in answering questions like this. By the way, are you interested in the NAD T-747 or 767? The 747 does 60 watts into 5 channels, 110 into 2.

 

[markw]

Depending on exactly what your dissatisfaction with your sound is, replacing the receiver with one of about the same power ratings might not be the answer to your problem.

Even so, if you double the power available to the speakers, you will gain about a barely preceptable 3 decible increase in peaks. What you're proposing here is almost a purely lateral move.

FWIW, the speakers ability to safely absorb power is not a significant factor in what it sounds like.

Then again, maybe it's the speakers that don't suit you? Great reviews don't mean everyone likes the sound. What amps have you heard with thses speakers that made them sing in the first place?

 

[PENG]

I don't see the T767 on the NAD website. If you meant the T765, I would say it can drive your speakers reasonably well but it will still depend on your room size/configuration and you listening habits.

 

[yossis]

I don't see the T767 on the NAD website. If you meant the T765, I would say it can drive your speakers reasonably well but it will still depend on your room size/configuration and you listening habits.

Sorry, I mean T 747

Thanks,

Yossis

 

[yossis]

Depending on exactly what your dissatisfaction with your sound is, replacing the receiver with one of about the same power ratings might not be the answer to your problem.

Even so, if you double the power available to the speakers, you will gain about a barely preceptable 3 decible increase in peaks. What you're proposing here is almost a purely lateral move.

FWIW, the speakers ability to safely absorb power is not a significant factor in what it sounds like.

Then again, maybe it's the speakers that don't suit you? Great reviews don't mean everyone likes the sound. What amps have you heard with thses speakers that made them sing in the first place?

Sorry but i'm a bit conused.

My current old onkyo has Power output, 55W/CH to each of the 5 channels into 8 OHMS 20HZ - 20KHZ, 0.08%THD (North America modules FTC raiting)

The new NAD t 747 has "Power output, Stereo Mode 2 x 110W (ref. 0.08% THD, 8Ω)"

It seems to me (don't undertand realy) that the NAD is twise stronger then the Onkyo 484. Will that effect my sound quality qith my 150W 8Ohms AE speakers? will i be able to listen in low volume and hear better?

Thanks,

Yossi

 

[markw]

Apples to oranges.

Stereo mode # 5 channel mode.

My current old onkyo has Power output, 55W/CH to each of the 5 channels into 8 OHMS 20HZ - 20KHZ, 0.08%THD (North America modules FTC raiting)

What is is rated in the stereo mode?

The new NAD t 747 has "Power output, Stereo Mode 2 x 110W (ref. 0.08% THD, 8Ω)"

What is it rated in the five channel mode?

It seems to me (don't undertand realy) that the NAD is twise stronger then the Onkyo 484. Will that effect my sound quality qith my 150W 8Ohms AE speakers? will i be able to listen in low volume and hear better?

When you level the playing field and compare the with the same criteria (stereo to stereo, 5 channel to 5 channel), I doubt the NAD will still be "twise stronger".

Congratulations. You've just taken Specsmanship 101. Click here for more.

This is not to say I don't like NAD. I do, very much, but you've got to know how to read specs before blindly quoting power ratings. The can be very misleading to the uninitiated. Once you know that, you'll see that NAD actually is very honest, and conservative, in their ratings.

Here's a link to the NAD 747. You'll note that in all channels mode it's rated at an honest 70 wpc. While this is a small difference and most likely it's a better unit, it's not an earth-shattering difference in power output from what you already have.

 

[PENG]

Stereo mode # 5 channel mode.

What is is rated in the stereo mode?

What is it rated in the five channel mode?

When you level the playing field and compare the with the same criteria (stereo to stereo, 5 channel to 5 channel), I doubt the NAD will still be "twise stronger".

Congratulations. You've just taken Specsmanship 101. Click here for more.

This is not to say I don't like NAD. I do, very much, but you've got to know how to read specs before blindly quoting power ratings. The can be very misleading to the uninitiated. Once you know that, you'll see that NAD actually is very honest, and conservative, in their ratings.

Here's a link to the NAD 747. You'll note that in all channels mode it's rated at an honest 70 wpc. While this is a small difference and most likely it's a better unit, it's not an earth-shattering difference in power output from what you already have.

According to HTM:

"This graph shows that the T747’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 122.6 watts and 1 percent distortion at 150.4 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 137.4 watts and 1 percent distortion at 197.1 watts."

I agree in Stereo mode the NAD does not appear to have double the Onkyo's output but probably close. Without seeing any lab measurements of the Onkyo we are guessing.

 

[PENG]

Sorry but i'm a bit conused.

My current old onkyo has Power output, 55W/CH to each of the 5 channels into 8 OHMS 20HZ - 20KHZ, 0.08%THD (North America modules FTC raiting)

The new NAD t 747 has "Power output, Stereo Mode 2 x 110W (ref. 0.08% THD, 8Ω)"

It seems to me (don't undertand realy) that the NAD is twise stronger then the Onkyo 484. Will that effect my sound quality qith my 150W 8Ohms AE speakers? will i be able to listen in low volume and hear better?

Thanks,

Yossi

I can tell you this much about power vs sound qualtiy:

1. More power will do nothing for you if you don't need it or use it.
2. Yes it is possible that more power can improve sound quality even at low listening SPL but only if we mean low average SPL but high enough peaks that may over tax a lower power output unit.
3. More power than you need is always better but you can say that about a lot of things. I think I only need a million dollars income a year to live well but 10 million dollars income a year is still better even though I am sure I won't use any more than a million.

The bottom line, is your speakers are rated 150W maximum, not continuous, so you could pair it with a 150 to 300W per channel amp, but whether you will hear better SQ will depend on the SPL you need in your listening environment, the characteristics of your speakers, among other things. If you want to have more than enough power, get a lower cost AVR that has preouts and add a cheap high power 2 channel amp for the Ageis 3.

By the way, I checked the specs of the Agis NEO 3, they are likely not hard to drive. It is not an absolute certain thing, without seeing the impedance & phase angle vs frequency.

 

[markw]

But, i still ask the question...

According to HTM:

"This graph shows that the T747’s left channel, from CD input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 122.6 watts and 1 percent distortion at 150.4 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 137.4 watts and 1 percent distortion at 197.1 watts."

I agree in Stereo mode the NAD does not appear to have double the Onkyo's output but probably close. Without seeing any lab measurements of the Onkyo we are guessing.

This is all well and good when speaking of the NAD's two channels driven capabilities but, if you noticed in my previous post, I was replying to OP's compariaon of the NAD's stereo output to the Onko's five channels driven output. Unless I'm mistaken, it seems you are, too.

IOW, he thinks he's going from 55 watts per channel to over 100 watts per channel, which certainly ain't the case. The NAD states 70 watts. So, he's gaining about 15 wpc in the exchange, ain't that ain't a heckuva lot in terms of audiability.

Again, I still don't see a valid comparison between two-channel to two-channel and five (all) channel to five (all) channel specs between the two units, do you?

I do see where NAD states it's all channels power as 70 watts vs the Onk's 55 all channel watts, and that's a sonicaly insignificant 15 watts. To be fair, someone should list the Onk's two channels spec if you want a fair comparison.

But, all in all, I still think the NAD is a better unit but not for the reasons he thinks.

Ultimately, the question remains: What amplifier was in use when he found out he liked the sound of these speakers? A very valid question in this day of internet only speakers bought unheard purely on what is read.

 

[markw]

Correction:

Where I stated the NAD is good for 70 wpc in all channel mode, I mis-spoke. The correct number is 60. That makes the differences between the two units 5 wpc, not 15.

 

[yossis]

This is all well and good when speaking of the NAD's two channels driven capabilities but, if you noticed in my previous post, I was replying to OP's compariaon of the NAD's stereo output to the Onko's five channels driven output. Unless I'm mistaken, it seems you are, too.

IOW, he thinks he's going from 55 watts per channel to over 100 watts per channel, which certainly ain't the case. The NAD states 70 watts. So, he's gaining about 15 wpc in the exchange, ain't that ain't a heckuva lot in terms of audiability.

Again, I still don't see a valid comparison between two-channel to two-channel and five (all) channel to five (all) channel specs between the two units, do you?

I do see where NAD states it's all channels power as 70 watts vs the Onk's 55 all channel watts, and that's a sonicaly insignificant 15 watts. To be fair, someone should list the Onk's two channels spec if you want a fair comparison.

But, all in all, I still think the NAD is a better unit but not for the reasons he thinks.

Ultimately, the question remains: What amplifier was in use when he found out he liked the sound of these speakers? A very valid question in this day of internet only speakers bought unheard purely on what is read.

Thanks for your relpy.

Your question is fair, When i bought the receiver i bought it with two small (Shelf speakers) AE. The Onkyo 484 with these speakers sounds very good. After a year i had an option to buy 2 large AE speakers (tower). I bought them and connected them to the onkyo 484, then my dissatisfaction starts. I had to turn the volume up in order to listen to music.

If you think that the NAD is not the ideal product for me, coudl you please recomand what is. My room size is Length: 19.3 foot. Width 14.7 foot.

Thanks,

Yossi

 

[markw]

Thanks for your relpy.

Your question is fair, When i bought the receiver i bought it with two small (Shelf speakers) AE. The Onkyo 484 with these speakers sounds very good. After a year i had an option to buy 2 large AE speakers (tower). I bought them and connected them to the onkyo 484, then my dissatisfaction starts. I had to turn the volume up in order to listen to music.

If you think that the NAD is not the ideal product for me, coudl you please recomand what is. My room size is Length: 19.3 foot. Width 14.7 foot.

Thanks,

Yossi

I think NAD puts out a fine product but with a room that size, ou would certainly benefit from significantly more power, at least twice as much. I also think your current receiver is not the main cause of your dissatisfaction.

 

[PENG]

Thanks for your relpy.

Your question is fair, When i bought the receiver i bought it with two small (Shelf speakers) AE. The Onkyo 484 with these speakers sounds very good. After a year i had an option to buy 2 large AE speakers (tower). I bought them and connected them to the onkyo 484, then my dissatisfaction starts. I had to turn the volume up in order to listen to music.

That is often the case even if the small and the large speakers have the same sensitivity. The smaller ones tend to be weaker in midbass and bass so you tend to have the volume down lower because it would naturally sound bright. The big towers typically sound warmer so you don't feel it as loud or ear piercing and you tend up to turn the volume up higher. That's just my 2 cents, YMMV.

 

[yossis]

I think NAD puts out a fine product but with a room that size, ou would certainly benefit from significantly more power, at least twice as much. I also think your current receiver is not the main cause of your dissatisfaction.

Thanks for your answer, this is realy helping.

Would you kindly recommend on a stronger receiver that has more audio quality then home theater but still got them both? Or maybe up to date home theater receiver with external amplifier attched? my budget is ~$1200.

Thanks again,

Y

 

[markw]

That receiver seems to have satisfied you with your smaller AE speakers but now, with larger and more efficient speakers from the same manufacturer, it has problems? That's odd.

What, exactly, is your complaint about the receiver?

Is it just the volume issue you hint at? When you turn it to the same volume level (not number on the display) as you did with your old speakers, does it sound the same? If anything, larger speakers should be a bit "louder" than smaller speakers since they should be a bit more efficient.

Does your receiver have preamp outs?

I'm still not convinced it's an amplifier problem, but it's your money...

 

[yossis]

That receiver seems to have satisfied you with your smaller AE speakers but now, with larger and more efficient speakers from the same manufacturer, it has problems? That's odd.

What, exactly, is your complaint about the receiver?

Is it just the volume issue you hint at? When you turn it to the same volume level (not number on the display) as you did with your old speakers, does it sound the same? If anything, larger speakers should be a bit "louder" than smaller speakers since they should be a bit more efficient.

Does your receiver have preamp outs?

I'm still not convinced it's an amplifier problem, but it's your money...

My complaint is sound quality in low volume. i do not have any more the samll old AE speakers to know the diffarence.

I do not have a Pre-out in my Onkyo receiver.

Thanks,

Y

 

[markw]

If you think you can get a receiver with better "sound quality", then you are setting yourself up for a big disappointment. "sound quality" of receivers is a highly touted misconception. If an amp is not driven into clipping, it will sound pretty much like another amp of the same power ratings.

If volume is the issue, if you double your power (watts) to the speakers, you'll get about a three decibel difference, which is barely audiable. If you want to double your apparant loudness, then you nee about ten times your current power.

In such case, simply get as powerful a receiver as you can find in your price range, but I suggest you learn how to read specs first.

Here's if you want a better explanation of watts and loudness. This might be a little more direct. It's only one table.

So, exactly how much louder do you want it?

I find it that simply changing your speakers destroyed the sound quality of the receiver since it sounded fine before, particularly since you've NEVER heard these speakers sound their best with another amplifier.