How does NAD stack up?

Discussion in 'AV Receivers' started by Brock, Oct 24, 2003.

  1. Brock

    Brock Extra

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Going up against other brands like Yamaha, HK, and Denon, where does the NAD T742 A/V receiver fit in? Is it comparable with these other manufacturers, and if so, which models from these other brands come closest to the T742?

    In general, what kind of reputation/reliability does the NAD name carry?
     
  2. FeisalK

    FeisalK Screenwriter

    Joined:
    May 1, 2003
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think NAD is best known for delivering audiophile sound at budget prices. NAD built the first (and best) of all budget amps 20 years ago, the NAD 3020 (this article sorta gives an insight into what the NAD name carries). Current models, they make a serious stereo amp in the C370, a superb CD player in the 541i and it looks like they've won the TPV receiver of the year award for the T762 (bwahh i want one!). ok so I'm biased [​IMG]
     
  3. ReggieW

    ReggieW Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2001
    Messages:
    1,571
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Brock,

    It stacks up quite well. I have a NAD T762 and the stereo production is better than any receiver I've ever heard. I am not joking when I say the T762 could hang with some entry level separates and all for $1299. I have PSB Stratus minis all around which are 4 ohm speakers, and their sensitivity rating is known for not being kind to most mass market receivers. The NAD drives them easily, loudly, and cleanly without distortion. The T762 is a 6.1 receiver that puts out 100 wpc with all channels driven, but if someone does a through test, it will probably be more like 110-115 wpc. The T752 was recently tested and was rated at 92 wpc with all channels driven, though NAD only claims 80 wpc. I just sold the 541i CD player which was also outstanding - arguably the best CD player you'll find under a grand. I only sold it because I purchased a Denon 2900 which also has excellent CD playback, and the fact that the T762 decodes HDCD just like the 541i, so I had to clear up some rack space. The NAD DOES NOT have all of the features that some of the Japanese counterparts may have (DTS 24/96, video upconversion, etc.), but the NAD really makes up for it where its important - in its performance. I say go for it.


    Reg
     
  4. george_k

    george_k Agent

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Reggie,

    I have a couple questions about your speakers, but I don't want to hijack this thread therefore I've sent you a PM.
     
  5. DarrylM

    DarrylM Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Perfect Vision just awarded the NAD 762 with the Editor's Choice Award for 2003 (or some award like that). Sound and Vision also wrote a very positive article on the 752.

    I recently bought the 742 to get me by until the new 763 comes out this year. It replaced a Sony ES receiver, rated for over twice the power. I can tell you that -- in my living room at least -- the 742 doesn't break a sweat while watching movies at reference level (75 dB). I don't hear any strain and the unit runs considerably cooler than any Sony I've ever had. It's a solidly built unit with a simple interface and a clean facade. I got a great deal on it, and I have been more than pleased with its overall performance.

    NAD generally doesn't cram too many features into its receivers, but rather focuses on performance instead. Many features found on today's receivers are pretty useless for me, anyway. The 742 does offer things like RDS, composite to S-video conversion, and pre-amp outputs, but you'll have to step up to something else for component switching, adjustable low-frequency cross-overs, and 6.1/7.1 audio.
     
  6. Rich Wenzel

    Rich Wenzel Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Messages:
    556
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    NAD is really famous for its soft-clipping...

    NAD arguably makes the most musical receivers in the sub $1000 category...

    NAD receivers have had some QC issues and have fans (if that bothers you)

    NAD has its own proprietary processing, called EARS

    If NAD rates its amp section at 5x80 into 8 all channels driven, you know it is...not like most mass marketers and even some top brands...heck i have seen bryston amps that have not met their specs...classe...etc...NAD typically beats their specs....

    NAD is distinctive looking, whether you like the look or not, nothing really looks like it....

    Rich
     
  7. DarrylM

    DarrylM Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  8. JerryMa

    JerryMa Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2003
    Messages:
    93
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I only heard of NAD this past summer and I recently purchased a T762. Great unit. Still getting used to using it after having my Sony stereo receiver for the last 7 years, but its a dream.

    I'm currently using Bose 301's with it, soon to be replaced, possibly with Axioms.

    I listened to a T752 head-to-head with a Denon 3803 in a stereo comparison and the NAD was much more pleasing to my ears for music. You should listen to other brands to get a sense of what you like to hear, but you will not be disappointed if you pull the trigger on the NAD.
     

Share This Page