Will be this enough amp?

[rrpalma]

Hello,

I would like to augment my stereo hi-fi setup so that I can listen to multichannel music. Current stereo components are a McCormack DNA 250 amp with the LD2 pre-amp and two PSB Synchrony One speakers.

My budget is comparably lower to what it was when I bought the McCormack + PSB combo. I'm aiming at a 7.1 setup, and am currently considering a NAD T758 AV receiver to drive the other 5.1 channels when listening to multi channel music -- front left and right will still be handled by the McCormack and PSBs. For surround and center speakers I'm considering the Boston Acoustics A360. Is the NAD T758 providing enough power for those speakers working as surround and center when listening to multichannel music (mostly SACD)? Maybe I should just stick to the Boston's A26?

BTW, I'm a NAD and BA fan, and I get them at a good discount, so no, I'm not considering other brands.

Thanks for reading.

 

[PENG]

The preamp/amp is a good match for the Sync One for sure. The T758 should be fine for the surrounds and probably okay for the center depending on your room size and SPL you listen to. There are better value AVRs from D&M and Yamaha especially D&M models that offer Audyssey XT32 and Sub EQHT but if you are a NAD fan then I guess you won't consider those.

 

[rrpalma]

The preamp/amp is a good match for the Sync One for sure. The T758 should be fine for the surrounds and probably okay for the center depending on your room size and SPL you listen to. There are better value AVRs from D&M and Yamaha especially D&M models that offer Audyssey XT32 and Sub EQHT but if you are a NAD fan then I guess you won't consider those.

Thank you Peng for your comments. Another possibility I was considering was to use the T758 as surround processor, and drive the surrounds and center with a Marantz MM7055 7 ch amp. What do you think?

 

[PENG]

Thank you Peng for your comments. Another possibility I was considering was to use the T758 as surround processor, and drive the surrounds and center with a Marantz MM7055 7 ch amp. What do you think?

If you already have the high end stereo amp you should take advantage of it and let the T758 take cares of the rest. If you are concerned about not having enough power for the center then you can just add a mono block, such as a low cost Emotiva XPA-100 or Outlaw m2200. The MM7055 is not going to be much better than the T758.

 

[rrpalma]

The MM7055 is not going to be much better than the T758.

How so? I was under the impression that having a separate amp from the surround processor was generally better than having a single AVR. Thanks, BTW.

 

[markw]

How so? I was under the impression that having a separate amp from the surround processor was generally better than having a single AVR. Thanks, BTW.

In some cases it may be but not all cases. Keep in mind that there's a lot of mythology involved in this hobby.

Since the power is roughly equal between this receiver and that amp, and NAD is renowned for their fiine amplifiers, why do you feel the separate amp will be sonically superior?

 

[rrpalma]

Since the power is roughly equal between this receiver and that amp, and NAD is renowned for their fiine amplifiers, why do you feel the separate amp will be sonically superior?

Thanks Mark for your comment. I guess I'm perhaps playing devil's advocate here -- I'm a NAD fanboy, and all my hardware has almost always been NAD, save for the McCormack amp. However, from both manufacturers' web sites, the Marantz amp has 150W per ch, all channels, while the NAD has 60W.

 

[PENG]

How so? I was under the impression that having a separate amp from the surround processor was generally better than having a single AVR. Thanks, BTW.

I am familiar with the MM7055. It's power supply is on the small side for a multichannel power amp. The MM8003 is a better one and I use it for my surround channels. Even if you compare the 7055's 140 WPC to the T758's 110 WPC, that equates to a difference of only 1.048 dB in SPL (sound pressure level). Besides, if the 7 channel T758 is used to power the 5 center and surround channels, the power supply will have easier time and will close the gap further. Again, I agree a separate amp is generally better but the MM7055 is only marginally better than the T758's internal amp when used to power the center and surround channels, I highly doubt there will be any audible effect.

 

[markw]

Thanks Mark for your comment. I guess I'm perhaps playing devil's advocate here -- I'm a NAD fanboy, and all my hardware has almost always been NAD, save for the McCormack amp. However, from both manufacturers' web sites, the Marantz amp has 150W per ch, all channels, while the NAD has 60W.

I stand corrected. Whatever I looked at on the NAD site said something like 150 wpc. In any case, that Marantz will afford roughly 4db more headroom than the 60 internal amps in the NAD and, to be honest, 4db really isn't all that much when it hits your ears.

Again, NAD amps tend to be very conservatively rated while many others tend to inflate their numbers. And, checkout the blue link to see my systems.

 

[PENG]

Found the following lab measurements for you, both done by the same magazine.

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/nad-t-757-av-receiver-ht-labs-measures

NAD T 757 A/V Receiver HT Labs Measures

Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 75.2 watts
1% distortion at 91.2 watts

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/marantz-av7005-surround-processor-and-mm7055-amplifier-ht-labs-measures

Marantz MM7055 Amplifier

Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 107.8 watts
1% distortion at 117.8 watts

So from bench test figures the Marantz amp does open up a larger gap, now about 1.54 dB more than the NAD T757, still negligble. The amp section specs of the T757 and T758 looks identical. Also, both weighs 33.9 lbs.

 

[PENG]

I stand corrected. Whatever I looked at on the NAD site said something like 150 wpc. In any case, that Marantz will afford roughly 4db more headroom than the 60 internal amps in the NAD and, to be honest, 4db really isn't all that much when it hits your ears.

Again, NAD amps tend to be very conservatively rated while many others tend to inflate their numbers. And, checkout the blue link to see my systems.

Mark, check your numbers again, the Marantz is rated only 140W, the NAD 110W both at 0.08% THD.

 

[PENG]

In case there is outside chance that the OP may be open minded to non NAD models, even the low cost AVR-3312 offers more bench tested power output.

http://www.soundandvision.com/content/denon-avr-3312ci-av-receiver-ht-labs-measures

Denon AVR-3312CI A/V Receiver HT Labs Measures

HT Labs Measures
Two channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 122.9 watts
1% distortion at 143.3 watts

Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 82.9 watts
1% distortion at 103.0 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 79.5 watts
1% distortion at 96.8 watts

In fact, the AVR-4520 has gone for as low as $999 recently, about the same price as the T758 and it offers significantly more power. One has to be a real die hard fanboy to stick with NAD AVRs when there are better values elsewhere.

 

[markw]

Mark, check your numbers again, the Marantz is rated only 140W, the NAD 110W both at 0.08% THD.

If those numbers are comparable (same distortion, all channels driven, etc, etc...) then the audible difference will be virtually inaudible.

But, the data sheet, available under "manuals and downloads here: http://nadelectronics.com/products/av-receivers/T-758-A/V-Surround-Sound-Receiver#heading-downloads, shows 60 wpc all channels driven. Still not an earth shaking audible difference.

 

[rrpalma]

Thank you both Mark and Peng for your help and insightful comments. You have both saved me some good money. I was under the (apparently false) impression that I needed comparable power to what my McCormack was providing to power the center and surround channels for multichannel music. It is also obvious from the info you provided that there's not much difference in the end result between the T758 and the Marantz. Yes, I'm a NAD fanboy I really like how my other NADs sounded.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

I would suggest you re-consider your choice of loudspeaker. The Boston A360 is a lower than typical sensitivity, meaning higher power than typical would be required.

" ... The A360 Audioholics rated sensitivity is abysmally low at 82.7dB because there is a significant dip in frequency response from 300Hz to 3kHz for the A360 ..."
-Audioholics review

Any reason why you want floorstanders for your center and surround speakers?

Were it me, I would be looking at some more traditional centre and surround speakers (eg Axiom, Energy, Paradigm, PSB, which should voice close to your PSB Synchrony One's), or reconsider and choose the Boston A26's (89dB sensitivity 2.83v/1m)

If your budget is tight, you could consider a 5.1 system over a 7.1. The difference in my opinion would not be great enough to justify compromising on loudspeaker quality.

 

[rrpalma]

I would suggest you re-consider your choice of loudspeaker. The Boston A360 is a lower than typical sensitivity, meaning higher power than typical would be required.

" ... The A360 Audioholics rated sensitivity is abysmally low at 82.7dB because there is a significant dip in frequency response from 300Hz to 3kHz for the A360 ..."
-Audioholics review

Any reason why you want floorstanders for your center and surround speakers?

Were it me, I would be looking at some more traditional centre and surround speakers (eg Axiom, Energy, Paradigm, PSB, which should voice close to your PSB Synchrony One's), or reconsider and choose the Boston A26's (89dB sensitivity 2.83v/1m)

If your budget is tight, you could consider a 5.1 system over a 7.1. The difference in my opinion would not be great enough to justify compromising on loudspeaker quality.

Thank you Johnny for the advice. Thing is that the dealer I work with has special prices for the A360 s and the A26 s. My budget is tight this time around, so I have to choose between those two. From what I have read, and from my own listening, the A360 s provide slightly fuller sound than the A26 s, but yes, the lower sensitivity of the A 360 s has me concerned, hence my initially considering the Marantz MM7055.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

I don't think you will miss the "slightly fuller sound" from the center and side / rear channels. The primary source of Sound Quality is far more dependent on your L/R fronts, which you seem to have covered quite nicely.

 

[rrpalma]

I don't think you will miss the "slightly fuller sound" from the center and side / rear channels. The primary source of Sound Quality is far more dependent on your L/R fronts, which you seem to have covered quite nicely.

Thank you again Johnny. Please keep in mind that this setup is for multichannel music, not home theater. However, I'm a total neophyte with regard to multichannel music listening. You suggest I go then with the A 26 s instead?

 

[PENG]

If mainly for multi channel music such as SACD, DVDA then you may want to consider using all PSB Synchrony speakers if you can still get them. I understand you are being offered special prices for the A360s but you probably can get excellent deals for the discontinued Synchrony line speakers also.

Do you still plan on somehow using the LD2 that you currently have for the L/R channels?

 

[rrpalma]

Hi Peng,

Thanks for your reply. Yes, I will still use the LD2. That's my main Preamp when listening to stereo, analog sources. It works on home theater mode (unity gain) when I connect to it the multichannel AVR. To be honest, this new purchase was not planned. The reason why I'm trying to set this up is because my friend, who owns a local dealership, can sell to me either the A26 s or the A360 s at a very, very steep discount. He also has a discounted (not as heavily) MM7055, and a regularly priced T758. So unforunately, buying from him more PSBs or someting more expensive is, atm, not possible.