NAD T 757 Surround Sound Receiver Preview

[admin]

Future-proof. This is the dream of nearly all AV enthusiasts. NAD Electronics is taking the next stab at the modular design with their recent receivers. The least expensive is the T 757, a $1599 receiver. This new receiver sports many of the newest features including 3D/ARC support, video upconversion to HDMI, and an on-screen interface over HDMI. But NAD has always been more about the audio side of things than video. NAD rates this receiver at 60 Watts per channel. If the T 757 was measured like other receiver offerings, it would put out 120 watts per channel. We're most interested to see how well NAD supports their modular design as companies like Onkyo and Integra couldn't get them to work for very long.

Discuss "NAD T 757 Surround Sound Receiver Preview" here. Read the article.

 

[3db]

I want to address a few comments made in this review:

1. NAD has been doing modular design for the last 5 years at least. This is nothing new to them. Its probably working for them unlike Onkyo/Integra because of their much better customer support. Lets face it, Onkyo/Integra are near the bottom for customer support.

2. Not everyone wants an ipod dock nor do they want to listen to a compressed music format. I can totally understand why they leave off tripe like that. Video upscaling isn't really necessary as its done now by the displays and the DVD players. Its becomming a redundant feature and is only useful with older legacy equipement. MOst users need more than 4 HDMI? I only use two out of my 4 HDMI inputs on the Yamaha? Where did you come up with this benchmark?

I can understand NADs philosophy unlike most receiver manufactureres who are cramming features in by the truck load at the expense of cheaper power supply/amplifier circuits and reliability. From this review, its very apparant that you did not like this unit from the onset and you made it quite clear in your "biased" preview of this unit.

 

[smurphy522]

I do agree that NAD is sought after by those seeking a pure design; lacking of bells and whistles - stated in other ways throughout the review. However as 3db pointed out how many users need more than 4 HDMI inputs? A cable box, a BR/DVD player and 2 game consoles (or 1 game console and separate DVD and BR players). Do typical users (even pwr users) require more HDMI inputs? I would gladly settle for 3 inputs just to get 2 outputs - much more usable IMHO. I suspect that Most users paying North of $1500 for a receiver these days either have or will have a projector and that crowd benefits the most with 2 HDMI outputs. Sadly, not currently offered in any NAD product.

Yes the Onkyo/Integra modular design failed likely to the lack of support and what was offered was not considered by the owners to be affordable - as I recall.

One thing is obvious though from the statement that Mr. Stidsen made: "Rather than over-complicating the AV Receiver by cramming every possible feature and buzz word into the box, NAD carefully evaluates how customers actually use our products and only includes the features that are essential for great audio and video performance" NAD is not looking to lure those from the Onkyo/Yamaha/Denon, Etc. crowd to their products. the important note is the wording "how customers actually use OUR products" They are obviously satisfied with their current clientele - which is very important when developing products.

 

[Sugarbear]

...

From this review, its very apparant that you did not like this unit from the onset and you made it quite clear in your "biased" preview of this unit.

I think we know enough about Tom to know that he probably wouldn't buy this NAD receiver with his own cash, but I think it was far from a "biased preview".

No amount of modularity will overcome some of the basic shortcomings of the NAD T 757. But that's not why people buy NAD. They buy NAD because their are fans of the NAD sound. They Buy NAD because they are worried about All Channels Driven power. They buy NAD because many of the latest features are interesting to them. If NAD releases modules to keep up with the latest HDMI releases (at least the latest ones that make major changes), their consumers should be happy.

How is any of that not in agreement with what the NAD rep himself had to say? For many of us, the missing items are indeed basic requirements and, if that's the case, NAD's not targeting us anyhow... which is all good.

Previews include opinions, and there's room for disagreement before we start calling each other "biased".

 

[3db]

I think we know enough about Tom to know that he probably wouldn't buy this NAD receiver with his own cash, but I think it was far from a "biased preview".



How is any of that not in agreement with what the NAD rep himself had to say? For many of us, the missing items are indeed basic requirements and, if that's the case, NAD's not targeting us anyhow... which is all good.

Previews include opinions, and there's room for disagreement before we start calling each other "biased".

I'm taking excpetion to the conclusion which was biased. Before the conclusion, it read like every other review. Just sayin.

 

[nickboros]

Modular design is a nice idea in the hopes of future-proofing, but not knowing what needs to fit in those modules makes it a nearly impossible task.

A much better approach would be a reasonably priced pre-amp. Onkyo receivers can stuff nearly all of the latest features into a $600 receiver, which has amplifiers as well. The only problem with the budget receivers is that you may not be able to drive your speakers if you have a mid to large sized room, or if your speakers are harder to drive that the average speaker. If Onkyo released a pre-amp for around $600 to $800 with all of the latest features (the very best version of audyssey, the very best video scaling, 11.2 preouts with audyssey dsx, networking, etc.) as well as balanced outputs, then people wouldn't mind upgrading their preamp, when some new cool feature comes out that they just have to have. However, in the current state of things, the most economical way of getting all of the latest features (the ability of doing height and width channels simultaneously, the very best audyssey, etc.) is to spend nearly $2000 on an receiver. If I spend $2000 on a receiver, I am sure as heck not going to upgrade it every couple of years. I had better get 10 to 15 years out of the thing.

 

[3db]

Modular design is a nice idea in the hopes of future-proofing, but not knowing what needs to fit in those modules makes it a nearly impossible task.

A much better approach would be a reasonably priced pre-amp. Onkyo receivers can stuff nearly all of the latest features into a $600 receiver, which has amplifiers as well. The only problem with the budget receivers is that you may not be able to drive your speakers if you have a mid to large sized room, or if your speakers are harder to drive that the average speaker. If Onkyo released a pre-amp for around $600 to $800 with all of the latest features (the very best version of audyssey, the very best video scaling, 11.2 preouts with audyssey dsx, networking, etc.) as well as balanced outputs, then people wouldn't mind upgrading their preamp, when some new cool feature comes out that they just have to have. However, in the current state of things, the most economical way of getting all of the latest features (the ability of doing height and width channels simultaneously, the very best audyssey, etc.) is to spend nearly $2000 on an receiver. If I spend $2000 on a receiver, I am sure as heck not going to upgrade it every couple of years. I had better get 10 to 15 years out of the thing.

Modular design makes perfect sense as one can pick out the module that best fits ones needs. I know we are talking about NAD here and many of the things we would like to see may not be available becuase NAD deems it not important enough to add in. However, they have the basics covered with the latest audio codecs, 3D, room correction, etc. So the ugrade fom hdmi1.3 to 1.4a would be a board upgrade verses the whole chassis, the caveat being is the price of these modules. It may be cheaper to buy an inexpensive pre-pro with all the bells & whistles then a module.

 

[Sugarbear]

Can anybody give any idea about how much these modules cost? Ballpark?

 

[smurphy522]

Can anybody give any idea about how much these modules cost? Ballpark?

Based on past offerings from them the modules may be priced in the $400-$950 range. Hopefully less due to lower overall cost as the T757 is lower in the line-up for NAD then the mentioned units below, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

**Prices for the modules, which are available from authorized NAD dealers and custom installers, range from $400 to $950. According to the NAD press release, “Current owners of NAD’s flagship Theater Series components — the T 175 Preamp-Tuner-Processor and T 785, T 775 and T 765 AV Receivers — can have their units upgraded through their dealers, while upgraded versions of each are also available.”

 

[Sugarbear]

Based on past offerings from them the modules may be priced in the $400-$950 range. Hopefully less due to lower overall cost as the T757 is lower in the line-up for NAD then the mentioned units below, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

**Prices for the modules, which are available from authorized NAD dealers and custom installers, range from $400 to $950. According to the NAD press release, “Current owners of NAD’s flagship Theater Series components — the T 175 Preamp-Tuner-Processor and T 785, T 775 and T 765 AV Receivers — can have their units upgraded through their dealers, while upgraded versions of each are also available.”

Thanks, smurphy.

Seems like a lot to me. I'm not in that $1600-$2000 AVR market anyhow, so I dunno.

This reviewer obviously did this review without actually having a unit.

Firebook - it's a Preview, not a review. Hence the ifs, maybes and speculation.

However, your points about info available either in the press release or data sheet are well taken.