Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    AR Newbie
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1

    Marantz SR7400 vs NAD T763

    I'm in the market of an A/V receiver. I'm considering both receivers.
    Could anyone give suggestion?

    Thanks,
    padi

  2. #2
    Forum Regular Registered Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Posts
    135

    Marantz

    Although I have never actually listened to a NAD I have a Marantz and think it is a great machine. Performance is everything I need and more! I think if you go with the 7400 you will be a happy camper!

  3. #3
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Toronto CAN
    Posts
    144

    Marantz also

    Hi,

    I have used equipment by both (C350 by NAD, and SR4200 by Marantz). They both had good build quality, insides were neat and used good parts. The receiver was definitely more 'solid' than the integrated. As far as operations, they both ran like gems. Musically, I would give the edge to the Marantz unit. Keep in mind that these are just my opinion on the units I owned.

    Check out the reviews of the products you seek on the review pages.

    THOB

  4. #4
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,559
    Marantz has an atrocious record in Canada for repairs. NAD does not.

    As for actual quality of power supplies and parts the NAD is superior. I have not done a direct comparison of the two however.

    This site reviews some of theolder models - as they are trying to sell magazines they only produce the archive stuff - nevertheless the recievers other than features pretty much stay the same for several model years at least.

    http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_l...category=MULTI

  5. #5
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Margate, Florida
    Posts
    614
    Quote Originally Posted by muzik2921
    I'm in the market of an A/V receiver. I'm considering both receivers.
    Could anyone give suggestion?

    Thanks,
    padi
    Muzik2921; In the past, I have played with two channel NAD equipment. Either the sound was great and rather ferocious in its quality or the sound stunk and was rather atrocious to listen too on various models at least on receivers. Suprisingly NAD reminded me of solid state Dynaco units whose pre-amp and power amp sections also acted that way but worse so that the same model of one item were inconsistent in their audio performance.
    If the 763 falls into the status of the great NADs that I have heard it would probably be a devestating unit. I would certainly if possible try to listen to one, try to perhaps buy a manual to see how it is to set up( on the Marantz site I think you could download the 6400 manual which gives you an idea of the set-up of the Marantz).

    My brother recently bought the 5400. The reason I have not commented on this site on this unit because my brothers speaker set-up does not meet my criteria for testing.and therefore I cannot render a fair test. He previously had a Yamaha 2095 on the same speakers on the same set-up. I liked the Yamaha sound better overall, he likes the Marantz better. One thing the Marantz appears to do well is dialogue reproduction which is quite intellgible which is better than the Yamaha or on my system, my Sherwood 6095R while maintaining excellent separation. I though the Marantz decoded DTS very well. I noticed that the NAD you want to purchase does not offer 96/24 DTS, CIRCLE SURROUND and does not indicate whether it does DTS-ES DISCRETE. When he bought the 5400, he almost considered going to the 7400 since his sound quality was not too hot. He has a supply of speaker cables collected over the years and changing the cables helped the sound. The sound also has improved on the Marantz unit from break-in. If the 7400 has good sound quality, for the features it offers, it would be a good buy. I would say it would be good if you can audition both or buy at a place that offers you a money back guarantee on either item.

  6. #6
    F1
    F1 is offline
    Forum Regular F1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    209
    Quote Originally Posted by the hand of boredom
    Hi,
    I have used equipment by both (C350 by NAD, and SR4200 by Marantz). They both had good build quality, insides were neat and used good parts. The receiver was definitely more 'solid' than the integrated. As far as operations, they both ran like gems. Musically, I would give the edge to the Marantz unit. Keep in mind that these are just my opinion on the units I owned.
    Check out the reviews of the products you seek on the review pages.
    THOB
    Talking about parts inside the receiver.. here's what's inside last year SR7300:
    Big EI Bando transformer
    Double 15,000uF Audio Grade Elna power supply capacitors
    All Elna capacitors troughout
    Crystal 24/192 DAC
    Cirrus Logic processor

    Well, that NAD is a much heavier unit with toroidal transformer.
    But anyway, the parts don't tell much about the sound so it's better to listen yourself.
    Good luck.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Denon, Yamaha or Marantz Receiver
    By spricajder in forum Home Theater/Video
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 01-22-2009, 02:45 PM
  2. No successor for the Marantz pm8000?
    By stereophonicfan in forum Amps/Preamps
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-07-2004, 08:26 PM
  3. Marantz DVD 8400 / Progressive Scan
    By hade in forum Home Theater/Video
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-06-2004, 04:01 AM
  4. Marantz DVD player 8400 / Pioneer 868 (avi-s)
    By hade in forum General Audio
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-06-2004, 03:50 AM
  5. Marantz problem I have?
    By John1974 in forum Home Theater/Video
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-21-2003, 01:33 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Latest AudioReview Articles

Hot Deals

Latest News

AudioReview on Facebook