Yamaha RX-V3900 or NAD T785 (Refurb)

[Seth=L]

What facts seth, I saw no posts where you've listed URLs showing the difference in power measurements prooving your points. Just dribble as you put it.

Oh gee, did I throw you for another loop? Seems that not very difficult to do with you? My not supporting Lenbrooke based is based OP's needs. Did I not make the qualifications "CLEAR" enough? *shakes my head"

BTW, the latest offerings from NAD does offer the latest audio codec decoding plus "Audessy" room correction built in.

The only loop you are throwing me through is the one where I have no clue where you are getting the idea I didn't already show you plenty information "URLs" to support facts. I'm not going to do it again because it's a waste of time, or maybe your memory is just in shambles.

I am aware that NAD's latest offerings support HD audio codecs, but the unit in question in this thread does not support them. I don't see how this information has any affect on which receiver the OP should choose.

 

[Seth=L]

You still haven't answered the question as to how my post was "dribble"...

Linear amplifiers are easy to design and manufacter. Anyone that says they aren't is borderline insane because amplifiers aren't mysterious complicated things, it's pretty much an exact science. You said that two amplifiers/receivers, both most certainly linear, sounded different. Countless others have piped this nonsense until it was shown to them in a level matched DBT. There is no way to discredit a level matched DBT I suggest you try doing it with a friend or two switching between both receivers for a few hours and see what you come up with. Hopefully you will come up with results that can save you countless dollars in the future.

 

[mouettus]

I own a NAD amp and the Yammie 1800 and can tell you that with the same speakers, the NAD will sound better. Just has this quality feel to it. You really can hear the difference!

And you guys stop complaining about HD codecs. I have them on my yammie and I don't even use them personnaly cuz my PS3 sends a PCM signal to the receiver. And for the upscaling part, well I think that anyone's TV has a better upscaling performance than the V1800's chip. I chose video passthrough in the menu.

 

[bandphan]

Linear amplifiers are easy to design and manufacter. Anyone that says they aren't is borderline insane because amplifiers aren't mysterious complicated things, it's pretty much an exact science. You said that two amplifiers/receivers, both most certainly linear, sounded different. Countless others have piped this nonsense until it was shown to them in a level matched DBT. There is no way to discredit a level matched DBT I suggest you try doing it with a friend or two switching between both receivers for a few hours and see what you come up with. Hopefully you will come up with results that can save you countless dollars in the future.

So true, there isnt much to a good amp. Thats exactly why i dont understand why some manufactures dont offer longer "peace of mind warranties" cause there isnt much to go wrong.

 

[jostenmeat]

I am happy with my NAD amplifier, but my previous pre/pro (that I no longer have; traded it towards new HT mains) could not matrix 2ch analog sources. I had zero need for this feature to work, but found out when my brother wanted to bring his xbox over.

Regardless, if these two were my only choices available, I'd still go with the NAD for the Audyssey XT. I assume this model will come with additional curves as designed by Paul Barton of PSB, but I don't assume it would have Pro capability (something to find out).

Now, if I were allowed to add other candidates, I'd personally look elsewhere altogether.

Does anyone know if the Denon 4308 has Pro capability? I'm pretty sure the 5308 does.

 

[strube]

Does anyone know if the Denon 4308 has Pro capability? I'm pretty sure the 5308 does.

Actually, this was a surprise to me, but according to their often mistaken spec sheets, the 4308 and the 3808 are pro-capable...

That said, the spec sheet for my new 3808 doesn't have a little green check by MutiEQ XT, neither does the 4308 or the 5308, so who knows about those spec sheet things...

http://www.usa.denon.com/ProductDetails/3510.asp

 

[greggp2]

Linear amplifiers are easy to design and manufacter. Anyone that says they aren't is borderline insane because amplifiers aren't mysterious complicated things, it's pretty much an exact science. You said that two amplifiers/receivers, both most certainly linear, sounded different. Countless others have piped this nonsense until it was shown to them in a level matched DBT. There is no way to discredit a level matched DBT I suggest you try doing it with a friend or two switching between both receivers for a few hours and see what you come up with. Hopefully you will come up with results that can save you countless dollars in the future.

Seth, I said that the Yamaha receiver sounded bright on my B&W speakers and lacked the sound depth compared to my Rotel. That however has nothing to do with the Amps. And Amplifiers are different, as I'm sure you know in terms of their ability to deliver clean power. Just because Yamaha claims to have 140watts per channel of power, I think we both know that is misleading, as it isn't with all channels driven.

The Nad unit is also much heavier and has a different power supply and transformer supplying current and circuitry to its Amps.

To say that 2 receivers sound identical is ridiculous though. Companies use different DACs and electronics that affect sound quality. If that were the case, no one would buy a high end receiver over another. Why buy a Yamaha Z7 over the 3900 then? The specs are identical....

I accept your apology for the insult. I'm more than open to a healthy debate, but would appreciate it if you would wait to reply if you don't have time to post a response other than a short retort that can easily be misinterpreted.

 

[Seth=L]

So true, there isnt much to a good amp. Thats exactly why i dont understand why some manufactures dont offer longer "peace of mind warranties" cause there isnt much to go wrong.

Because amplifiers are still subject to user stress, not everyone can be so nice to their amplifiers. We can only hope that as more efficient topologies improve the heat will take less toll on longevity.

 

[Seth=L]

Seth, I said that the Yamaha receiver sounded bright on my B&W speakers and lacked the sound depth compared to my Rotel. That however has nothing to do with the Amps. And Amplifiers are different, as I'm sure you know in terms of their ability to deliver clean power. Just because Yamaha claims to have 140watts per channel of power, I think we both know that is misleading, as it isn't with all channels driven.

The Nad unit is also much heavier and has a different power supply and transformer supplying current and circuitry to its Amps.

To say that 2 receivers sound identical is ridiculous though. Companies use different DACs and electronics that affect sound quality. If that were the case, no one would buy a high end receiver over another. Why buy a Yamaha Z7 over the 3900 then? The specs are identical....

I accept your apology for the insult. I'm more than open to a healthy debate, but would appreciate it if you would wait to reply if you don't have time to post a response other than a short retort that can easily be misinterpreted.

As I mentioned already, ACD is pointless.

 

[greggp2]

As I mentioned already, ACD is pointless.

Yes, but again Seth, ACD has to do with rating the Amps. That is only a small component to the SQ that comes out of the speakers. The Amps only deliver power. What about the Digitial to Analog conversion? What about the internal circuitry, what about the ability for the units to produce no noise when idle in between signals? All of these factors effect sound.

The Amp is a mute point. I'm not trying to have an Amp argument. There is a reason why some electronics produce a better sound field than others. There are reasons why some receivers provide better clarity and depth than others... I can promise you that I am by no means imagining the differences. I don't need to do a blind A/B test. It is so obvious, that my girlfriend can notice the difference and she knows nothing about Audio...

You won't get an argument from me that Amps don't make that big a difference if they produce the same power. The NAD however has a more powerful true Amplifier rating than the Yamaha. I am willing to bet that if you put both back to back, the NAD is more powerful. But forget about that. Let's say it's the same. And let's forget about the HD Audio codecs too, since the poster is most concerned with Stereo listening. The circuitry, the Dacs, and the electronics are just better for stereo reproduction with the NAD. And this is what the poster is going to use the unit for 70% of the time..

For him, with his speakers, the NAD is a better unit. Most of the posters here seem to agree and they either have NADS or I myself had the Yamaha coupled with B&W.

I think it's time to just realize that you might be incorrect on this one Seth. It's ok, we still will read your future posts...

 

[greggp2]

Do you hear that? I think it is KC and the Sunshine band...

Let's listen...

Na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na
Seth give it up
Give it up
Seth give it up
Na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na, na
Seth give it up
Give it up
Seth give it up



"A Baited Post is Baited"

 

[nitin_mehra20]

hey Guys,

Thanks for your comments.

So basically what I am hearing is that NAD may or may not have quality issues (Just depends on the pick of the lot). The dealer is giving a 1 year warranty on parts and labor which seems quite less to me when considering other receiver brands.

The Yamaha looks like a good choice but as gregg pointed out that they sounded a bit too bright on his B&Ws.

I am essentially looking for music, but the same time don't want to end up with a receiver which does not have the latest codec support and all.

Does this mean that even though NAD is good music wise I may end up paying a lot of cash for a receiver which might become obsolete?

What are my alternatives in the 1500-1800 range for a receiver which has most of the bells and whistles but at the same time give a solid stereo performance?

Your comments will be greatly appreciated....

 

[mouettus]

What are my alternatives in the 1500-1800 range for a receiver which has most of the bells and whistles but at the same time give a solid stereo performance?

Your comments will be greatly appreciated....

Marantz 6003/7002. Solid amp section! Shares the same sound quality traits as the NAD ("warmness"), and it's got all the HDMI things you need, plus audissey or whatever they call it.

Best compromise IMO. I'd go that way if I had to do it again.



-OR-


Any entry/mid receiver you like + Emotiva amp

 

[bandphan]

There is some debate as to an avr's "sound". Being that unless you want to do in home auditions under dbt conditions its up to your ears, however imo this is not a tonaly subjective issue.

 

[nitin_mehra20]

Marantz 6003/7002. Solid amp section! Shares the same sound quality traits as the NAD ("warmness"), and it's got all the HDMI things you need, plus audissey or whatever they call it.

Best compromise IMO. I'd go that way if I had to do it again.



-OR-


Any entry/mid receiver you like + Emotiva amp

I am getting a great deal on MRANTZ 8001 (700 bucks) Will this be a better buy?

 

[mouettus]

I am getting a great deal on MRANTZ 8001 (700 bucks) Will this be a better buy?

Solid model but a bit old. It does 1080p via HDMI but I don't think it has the new HD audio codecs. Just make sure your BD player is not bitstreaming and rather sending a PCM signal to the amp and you're all set. (that's what my PS3 does)

 

[greggp2]

If you are willing to spend $1800, then get an Emotiva XPA-5 and a Marantz 6000/7000 series, or wait for the UmC-1 to be released if you can. Provided the UMC-1 doesn't have bugs, which Emotiva is being very careful on releasing, trying to work out any potential issue, the SQ out of this combo will be better than any AVR you can buy except maybe the highest end receivers out there that cost 4-5k.

If you can pick up an 8001 for $700, provided it has the Codecs you are seeking ( I don't think it does ), than that might be a good way to go and down the road, get an external Amp, (ie like an Emotiva) and I think you'll be very happy with the performance...

 

[greggp2]

Truthfully though, I think wouldn't get hung up on HD Audio. You can still get HD audio through the Analog multichannel outputs. Just get a good Blu-Ray player that will give you decent speaker and bass management crossover and I think you won't be missing anything. Again, Marantz or NAD. I'd go with the NAD.

If it were me, I'd try and get an Arcam. I'd be really curious if even Seth could say anything bad about the Arcam AVR350, other than the HDMI upscaling and HD codecs it doesn't have. For me, I could care less about these items. The HDMI scaling is not that great in receivers in the price range you are looking at and the HD codecs are a non issue for me with Multi-channel Analog in. Personally, I think the Analog sound is clearer and sounds less processed... But that's me..

 

[nitin_mehra20]

Truthfully though, I think wouldn't get hung up on HD Audio. You can still get HD audio through the Analog multichannel outputs. Just get a good Blu-Ray player that will give you decent speaker and bass management crossover and I think you won't be missing anything. Again, Marantz or NAD. I'd go with the NAD.

If it were me, I'd try and get an Arcam. I'd be really curious if even Seth could say anything bad about the Arcam AVR350, other than the HDMI upscaling and HD codecs it doesn't have. For me, I could care less about these items. The HDMI scaling is not that great in receivers in the price range you are looking at and the HD codecs are a non issue for me with Multi-channel Analog in. Personally, I think the Analog sound is clearer and sounds less processed... But that's me..

Hmm...

I am unsure if any store sells ARCAM in the US with warranty

Regarding NAD, I definitely can't pay full price for it so refurb is the best way to go. But 1 year warranty leaves me a little shaky spending so much money into it.

On the other hand,UMC-1 +XPA5 seems like a great option, but dunno UMC-1 will be released

I am still so confused as to what to go for

 

[nitin_mehra20]

I would like to buy an XPA-2 amp which will cost abt 700 bucks, that leaves me 800-1000 bucks to buy a receiver which will give me all the latest codecs.

Any suggestions??