Video Asylum

Posted by Neil (i) on February 02, 2001 at 21:11:37:

In Reply to: Decision between NAD T761 & Arcam AVR100 posted by klint on February 02, 2001 at 18:39:58:

I asked the same question and this is the response I received from someone in the know:Neil,

I have owned an Alpha 5 40W integrated amplifier, then a NAD AV316 Prologic
Amplifer (75W 2ch,50w/30W in Prologic) , and now the AVR100, so i know a bit
about both companies.

The NAD is a good all-rounder. Bass is a bit more heavy, but it not as
dynamic as the Arcam (it seems a tad sluggish...). The NAD is more polite,
neutral, where as the Arcam has a warmer sound, and because of its dynamics,
it is more involving. Low level detail seemed to come off sounding more
natural and "airy" with the Arcam. In my opinon, in this price bracket low
level detail VS signal/noise ration seem to go hand-in-hand. The NAD has a
better S/N ratio, but you hear less low level detail because it is in effect
filtered out to get that good S/N, whereas in the Arcam, the background hiss
is more audible, but you get more detail because Arcam tried to get the
signal path as simple as possible with the least number of parts and
filters... Don't get me wrong, it is not that bad but you do hear the hiss
from the speakers more when there is no sound on the Arcam when you stand
next to the speakers...

NAD may be a tad better for rock, while the Arcam knocks the sock off of the
NAD for blues,jazz,classical, and even techno/ambient. Stereo effect seemed
to come off better with the Arcam.Did not really compare the Dolby Digital
performance though, but i guess they must me similar

BUT this all depends on your Speakers...If your speakers are overly bright
and agressive, maybe the NAD is better to tame them.

All-round i still feel the ARCAM is a better deal and worth the price
difference.

Good luck,

Stéphane