* Richard Lang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 15 May 2000
| It's not surprising really, the two are designed for different things:
| the receiver is really designed for home theatre television/DVD and the
| odd radio broadcast in your lounge, and the integrated amp is designed
| for music - and has less electrical gadgetry inside to fuzzy up the
| source music.
This is exactly where the NAD T760 really shines. It is designed to do
both, with sufficient isolation inside the cabinet to prevent "fuzzing" of
the audio. Sure, their component amplifiers sound better, but that is
getting into the area of needing $3500 electrostatics to hear a significant
difference.
Also, NAD stuff doesn't include useless features. The T760 is probably the
simplest A/V receiver on the market today.
| By the same token i have to say I wasn't surprised by the recent MD-L thread
| on how MDs burned on portables sound worse that the same thing burned on a
| home deck. Both "do" the same thing, but a home deck is designed
| specifically for it and has all the same bonuses of any other audio
| component as against portables or midi systems - isolation of key parts from
| interference, more constant power supply, more stable transport etc.
Which is largely meaningless when dealing with digital signals, which are
effectively immune to interference.
| But then you can't take a home deck with you to bootleg a Foo Fighters
| concert, can you!
In this sort of situation I am more likely to blame the mics than the
recorder.
--
Rat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> \ Happy Fun Ball may stick to certain types
Minion of Nathan - Nathan says Hi! \ of skin.
PGP Key: at a key server near you! \
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
