AV Receiver Reviews

NAD T 787 A/V Receiver HT Labs Measures

HT Labs Measures

Two channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 152.7 watts
1% distortion at 184.5 watts

Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 110.3 watts
1% distortion at 149.2 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 98.9 watts
1% distortion at 119.6 watts

Analog frequency response in Bypass mode:
–2.06 dB at 10 Hz
–0.64 dB at 20 Hz
–0.14 dB at 20 kHz
–3.35 dB at 50 kHz

Analog frequency response with signal processing:
–4.08 dB at 10 Hz
–1.28 dB at 20 Hz
–1.20 dB at 20 kHz
–42.86 dB at 50 kHz

This graph shows that the T 787’s left channel, from A1 input to speaker output with two channels driving 8-ohm loads, reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 152.7 watts and 1 percent distortion at 184.5 watts. Into 4 ohms, the amplifier reaches 0.1 percent distortion at 180.1 watts and 1 percent distortion at 207.1 watts.

Response from the multichannel input to the speaker output measures –1.93 decibels at 10 hertz, –0.60 dB at 20 Hz, –0.16 dB at 20 kilohertz, and –3.44 dB at 50 kHz. THD+N from the A1 input to the speaker output was less than 0.036 percent at 1 kHz when driving 2.83 volts into an 8-ohm load. Crosstalk at 1 kHz driving 2.83 volts into an 8-ohm load was –70.19 dB left to right and –75.42 dB right to left. The signal-to-noise ratio with an 8-ohm load from 10 Hz to 24 kHz with “A” weighting was –103.26 dBrA.

From the Dolby Digital input to the loudspeaker output, the left channel measures –0.95 dB at 20 Hz and –1.25 dB at 20 kHz. The center channel measures –0.98 dB at 20 Hz and –0.87 dB at 20 kHz, and the left surround channel measures –0.98 dB at 20 Hz and –1.10 dB at 20 kHz. From the Dolby Digital input to the line-level output, the LFE channel is +0.81 dB at 20 Hz when referenced to the level at 40 Hz and reaches the upper 3-dB down point at 58 Hz and the upper 6-dB down point at 68 Hz.—MJP

Video Test Bench
While the NAD will cross-convert from an analog input such as component to an HDMI output, it performs no video processing at all from an HDMI input to an HDMI output. Its output resolution will always be the same as the source resolution. As tested from a 1080p HDMI input to a 1080p HDMI output, the passthrough performance on our standard tests was flawless.—TJN

COMPANY INFO
ARTICLE CONTENTS

COMMENTS
ShinezALot's picture
Submitted by ShinezALot on August 3, 2012 - 3:48am

This product doesn't have a USB port on it? What am I missing here? In going through the owner's manual (available at their site) I see nothing about USB and the iPod connection is by way of a Doc that is sold separately (see pag 8). And no DAC either.

And this is future proof by way of Modular Design Construction (MDC)? Can I get a module that provides for a usb port?

Or does NAD know something about usb that I don't (it's going away)?

On this product retails for $4,000?

Sound quality must be amazing though....

kevon27's picture
Submitted by kevon27 on August 5, 2012 - 11:43am

You have to really love the TAD brand to get this thing for $4000..
I say, shop around before you buy.
Marantz AV7005 = $1000- 1599
Emotiva xpr-5 = $2000 (sweet overkill)
or
Emotiva xpa-5 = $900
..
So you can get the Marantz AV 7005 for a $1000
and two xpa-5's for $1800
all totaling $2800. I would even have enough money to get an Oppo BDP-95, which brings the total to $3800 and still have $200 left..
Now that's $4000 well spent.. Sorry TAD.

Masteraudionson's picture
Submitted by Masteraudionson on August 9, 2012 - 12:56pm

Based on your comment, it appears that you think that the most of the performance is based on the amplifier portion of the system. In fact, in most cases, my customers eventually realize that the digital and preamp section of the system is at least as important to the sound quality if not more important. If you are using a receiver that is lacking sufficient power then an decent outboard amp will certainly allow you to play louder without clipping distortion but it will not improve the sound quality as much as you might like to think. I would bet that the NAD(I am an NAD dealer) will sound much better than your proposed combo. I have reached this conclusion after many first hand experiences with exactly what you are suggesting. By the way, I am a NAD dealer because I tried several of the major mass market brands and was consistenly dissappointed with the sound that I got when I used them.

applebyter's picture
Submitted by applebyter on August 7, 2012 - 8:34pm

NAD may not win in the mass market, but hopefully people interested in high-end audio will have better value judgement.

I haven't heard this model. Any other NAD audio product I've listened to was far superior to any Marantz audio gear going for under $10K. And the Marantz gear was superior to other "name" brand audio gear.

I'm not convinced about the benefit of a USB port on receivers/processors, but am willing to listent to arguments. My impression from other manufacturers that do include USB is that to do it right is expensive. Personally I can't see the benefit of having a computer in the room with this type of equipment versus using something that can stream the audio over IP (e.g. a Squeezebox). I'd rather have my computer somewhere more useful.

If you want to plug an iPod into something like this you'll need a dock anyways, it would be pointless plugging an iPod into a USB port for gear of this quality.

ShinezALot's picture
Submitted by ShinezALot on August 9, 2012 - 6:56am

applebyter:

I hope I didn't test your patience too much with my comment on USB. The point isn't to use a computer as a source; I just like the idea of having an iPad or iPod as source for the convenience of it. Understand exactly what you mean about sound quality (sq); however, this receiver also has a tuner and how does the sq from that compare to USB? My guess is not too favorably. But you have to have a tuner right?

But hey, we all know what it is like when you want to buy a receiver or processor with really great, sublime sq as your main goal: most options have you buying loads of stuff you really don't need or want like tons of connection options (check out the back of the Denon A1-HDA for example).

So NAD has a niche and they have decided that USB is just going to insult, alienate, or otherwise frustrated their niche market. I understand that.

The last statement made by Michael in his review has me especially curious. That's not because I don't trust him: I am sure he is being quite honest. But I wish I knew what other AV receivers are only second best, in his mind, compared to this NAD product. I have looked at all of the reviews he's posted here going back about 9 years. Some good receivers are not among his reviews. So I wish I knew if he has heard the Anthem D2V, Arcam AV888, Denon A1-HDA, or Bryston SP3. Or maybe someone else can provide their opinion. Does this NAD product sound better than all four of these? I realize this is very subjective, but other opinions would be interesting to hear.

Spaceman's picture
Submitted by Spaceman on August 8, 2012 - 1:30pm

I own the T757 and although the sound is great (also in stereo)one thing that is very annoying is the fact that the the digital input (coaxial and optical) cannot cope well with digital audio formats like MP3 or FLAC. A slight delay occurs at the start of each track.
Only solution NAD can offer is to connect devices through analog connection (on an AVR receiver !)
Can the reviewer verify if this is an issue on this model as well ?

Ladyfingers's picture
Submitted by Ladyfingers on January 17, 2013 - 10:19pm

I can confirm that the gap occurs on this model too. I assume it's some noise-gating tech or other, as my Sony HTiB managed to lock onto digital streams with no gap at all.

If you're a NAD fan, I would rather wait for the PCM-PWM amplifier tech as featured in the C390DD and M2 to make an appearance in their receiver line. It will, eventually, and will sound amazing.

KYFHO69's picture
Submitted by KYFHO69 on December 16, 2012 - 5:09am

The end of the review states "Overall, the NAD T 787 is the best-sounding A/V receiver I’ve yet heard." If that's the case then why is the rating for sound performance marked down? Makes no sense to me.

palmva's picture
Submitted by palmva on December 21, 2012 - 3:53am

i purchased this reciever partially as a result of this result and some dedicated time listening to it at the dealers and in my home. Before I tell you my opinion, I would like to state that I have owned the NAD T773, flagship reciever prior to this purchase. Let me tell yyou, this amp has fantastic dynamic range compared to the aforemention T773 and it has transformed my speakers performance 10 fold. I've gotta say this reciever has an iron clad grip and control of my speakers with contributes to an imperceptable distortion level.

For those that believe that this reciever isn't worth the $4K, try it for a weekend in your home, turn out the lights and just watch or listen. Believe me, you will change your mind!

X