NAD M66 (vs NAD M33 and M10V2)

[Cpopovic]

Especially as there are no all-encompassing facts including their correct interpretation

Exactly, we all wish hardware measurements could capture the real essence of music.

 

[bodhi]

Exactly, we all wish hardware measurements could capture the real essence of music.

What? No, I'm pretty sure you have misunderstood something.

Nobody needs measurements to capture "real essence of music" or whatever, they need to tell us if sound is reproduced correctly. I'm sure all these NADs do just that.

People can of course have different feelings about music reproduced from identical signals based on price or looks of the devices, but think most here don't bother.

 

[Descartes]

Does the M66 decode DSD SACD?

 

[pogo]

No. Dirac Live and BluOS only run on a PCM basis anyway.

 

[Shhh]

I'm looking forward to a "proper" subjective review of the M66 from an acknowledged and respected reviewer.

…

Darko's review is nowhere near as thorough as we (as potential buyers) need to judge whether the M66 is likely to be a satisfying long-term purchase. I'm patiently waiting for a proper review from someone I trust who has the wherewithal (several speakers and sources, more than one room and of course good measuring equipment), has excellent ears and invites respected associates to compare notes with. Then I'll take time to read it and decide on whether the M66 is likely to be a good purchase. No Youtube nonsense from self-appointed "experts" please!

and how much will you pay for that service?

 

[Hear Here]

> and how much will you pay for that service?

If a review source such as Stereophile or HFN wants to stay in business, they need readers and they get these by publishing meaningful and thorough reviews - for which they have the recourses and the skills of genuine experts.

Advertisement revenue (the financial backbone of their business) follows, but only to publications that attract readers. That's how it works in the "proper" world - not by self appointed "experts" who think they can post half-hearted and worthless "reviews" on Youtube etc. Sadly the days of valuable information from reliable and trust-worthy sources are diminishing with every new online development.

I'd happily pay the cover price of the magazine or a subscription to obtain the sort of review we, as potential buyers, need to guide us to our next costly purchase.

 

[Audio Flynn]

Are you sure the HDMI ARC socket cannot be used to send album artwork to a connected TV? Have you an M66 yourself or is it hearsay? It's a feature I value with my M33, specially when I have visitors.

Input gain settings on other M series such as M33, M32, M12 only apply to analogue inputs - never sure why digital ones could not have been made adjustable.

Thanks

I tried the HDMI card in my M32 and it would not communicate with my newer technology Samsung TV.

Disappointed.

 

[Audio Flynn]

I guess I am uncertain which power amp was used with the M66.

My M32 has digital out, which is why I did not buy the M33. Someday I will digitize LP from the 50s and 60s that are not out on digital.

I have a friend who is an old recording engineer and bass player that upgraded from the M32 to the M66 with M23 power amplifier.

His HK Citation and Decware tube power amps are no longer used.

 

[Descartes]

Darko's review of the NAD M66 !

One of the worst out there, paid to do infomercial for companies and 100% subjective reviews and personal opinions with no data to back up any claims!

 

[Descartes]

> and how much will you pay for that service?

If a review source such as Stereophile or HFN wants to stay in business, they need readers and they get these by publishing meaningful and thorough reviews - for which they have the recourses and the skills of genuine experts.

Advertisement revenue (the financial backbone of their business) follows, but only to publications that attract readers. That's how it works in the "proper" world - not by self appointed "experts" who think they can post half-hearted and worthless "reviews" on Youtube etc. Sadly the days of valuable information from reliable and trust-worthy sources are diminishing with every new online development.

I'd happily pay the cover price of the magazine or a subscription to obtain the sort of review we, as potential buyers, need to guide us to our next costly purchase.

If you think these rags are worth reading! Please they are all paid but the manufacturers do they will never say anything bad about a product, at best they will give a politically correct answer!

Here is what I am talking about: https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/audioquest-dragon-interconnect/

Massive rubbish!

 

[Hear Here]

If you think these rags are worth reading! Please they are all paid but the manufacturers do they will never say anything bad about a product, at best they will give a politically correct answer!

Here is what I am talking about: https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/audioquest-dragon-interconnect/

Massive rubbish!

If they were as bad as you say, no one would read them and they'd go out of business. With all well-written reviews (and I'm taking mainly about HFN and Stereophile) a certain amount of "reading between the lines" is required, but their reviews are thorough, the reviewers are knowledgeable and have the recourses (comparable units, range of speakers, at least 2 listening rooms, measuring kit, etc) that it's likely to be a useful review. Certainly one still needs to arrange a demo, preferably at home, but a good review is worth a great deal. I'd never have bought (or even considered) the speaker I went for in 2002 had it not been for an excellent multi-page Stereophile review.

 

[gwing]

I'd never have bought (or even considered) the speaker I went for in 2002 had it not been for an excellent multi-page Stereophile review.

And *that* is exactly why the hifi magazines exist and get paid by their advertisers. Their profit doesn't come from what you pay for the magazine so it isn't difficult to work out where the loyalty of magazines lies.

Back in the day I used to avidly read these things until I realised they were rubbish., especially after working for a while in the magazine advertising world. The only semi-mainstream publication I retained any interest in was "HiFi World" which was at least realistic and had a decent focus on DIY, even publishing their own designs.

 

[Hear Here]

And *that* is exactly why the hifi magazines exist and get paid by their advertisers. Their profit doesn't come from what you pay for the magazine so it isn't difficult to work out where the loyalty of magazines lies.

Without readers, advertising would dry up, so the most important thing that mags must retain is readers, despite the bulk of their revenue is from advertisers.

Likewise a TV station would soon close down if its content was such that viewers vanished. Not because they get revenue from viewers (not a single penny) but because advertisers recognise that the station is likely to get them sales. The station is financially supported by advertising, but that in turn is 100% influenced by viewer numbers and that in turn requires worthwhile content. Same with audio magazines.

 

[Hear Here]

A forum member recently asked me publish a post to outline the key differences in sound between the NAD M10V2, NAD M33 and NAD M66. I had the pleasure to either own, listen or trial them so here is my take.


Starting with the NAD M10V2

The NAD M10V2 is a great entry in to the audiophile world. It offers an engaging sound profile, delivering a well-balanced and detailed listening experience. Its bass response is authoritative and well-controlled, without overpowering the mids or treble. Vocals are rendered with clarity and natural timbre, while instrumental textures are presented with precision. The overall soundstage is expansive, allowing for ample separation between instruments and vocals, creating a sense of spaciousness and depth. The NAD M10V2 excels at reproducing a wide range of genres, from lively pop and rock to lush orchestral pieces and delicate acoustic performances. A great all-rounder.

NAD M33

The NAD M33 offers a better sonic experience with its enhanced power and precision. The bass response is even more authoritative, with exceptional impact and detail. The mids are enriched with a natural warmth and richness, while the treble is extended and airy, adding sparkle and definition to the sound. The soundstage expands further, creating a more immersive and enveloping listening experience. Instrumental timbres are rendered with remarkable accuracy, revealing subtle nuances and textures. The NAD M33 is particularly well-suited for genres that demand a dynamic and engaging presentation, such as jazz fusion, progressive rock, and electronic music. Still a great integrated amplifier.

NAD M66

The newly launched NAD M66 is closer to the audiophile sound quality, we are all thriving for, offering a reference-level listening experience. The bass response is simply sublime, with effortless authority and exceptional definition. The mids are incredibly smooth and balanced, with a captivating naturalness and vocals are engaging and natural. The treble extends to remarkable heights, revealing the finest details and textures with remarkable precision. The soundstage is expectional and creating an great sense of immersion and presence. Instrumental timbres are rendered with absolute accuracy, allowing listeners to hear each instrument distinctly and in its purest form. The NAD M66 is the ideal choice for audiophiles seeking the pinnacle of sonic fidelity, capable of reproducing even the most demanding recordings with clarity and realism.

Conclusion :

Overall, the NAD M10V2, NAD M33, and NAD M66 represent a diverse range of NAD audio products, and cater to the needs of a wide spectrum of listeners:

The NAD M10V2's versatile and engaging sound profile is suited for everyday listening, while the NAD M33 elevates the listening with enhanced power and precision. The NAD M66 however has audiophile sound quality, offering an unmatched listening experience to more demanding users but this demand comes with hefty price tag (€6K for the streaming DAC only). Again, these are my personal impressions and others may have diverging opinions.

I hope this helps!
Christian

Christian - After all the abusive crap that some other members have chucked at you, let me say Thank You.

While I understand that this particular forum is all about measurements that are picked up by microphones, and effectively nothing about the sound that reaches our ears (I sometime wonder if this forum is populated largely by the deaf), it was interesting to read your highly subjective summary.

However, for context, please let us know about the rest of your system and room.

What speakers?
Presumably no subs
What amp with the M66?
Presumably the M10 and M33 were using their own amp
Hopefully no Dirac or DLBC was used
What size is your room and has it any particular features that may significantly affect the sound?
Did others listen with you and how much consensus was there?
When you mention comparison with high end audiophile kit, what did you have in mind and how did the M66 compare?

I personally care less about measurements, as the "character" of an amp (or more particular speakers) cannot realistically be measured. For that reason, I'm anxiously awaiting a proper full review from a respected expert such as a Stereophile reviewer.

Had it not been for Robert Deutsch's excellent, thorough and believable review of the Avantgarde Unos in 2000, I'd never have considered buying these amazingly entertaining speakers. I chose them after excitedly reading his multi-page review as he described with great detail (and accuracy as it transpired) exactly the sort of sound I was looking for - and very different from the ATC50 Actives I was then using. After a 10 minute audition in a very unsuitable London basement showroom, I bought a pair. These Unos were kept for 17 years before an upgrade. After trying at home other good speakers (eg Audion, Martin Logan, Quad), I decided to stick with Avantgarde, first moving to Duos and more recently Duo XDs.

It is with these XD speakers that I am currently using the excellent M33 (previously M32 and before that SETs), but an upgrade is called for as the speaker level on the Audiophile Scale (though perhaps not on the Measurements Scale) indicates than an upgrade from the M33 should bring audible improvement. I'm considering the M66 feeding Atma-Sphere's Class D monos, but I'll also give the M23 an audition as power amp. However I do need to satisfy myself that this upgrade will make a difference to justify the outlay.

Thanks again and don't be put off by comments by some here, even though (on this forum) much of it may be justified!

 

[Hear Here]

At $5500. You would think they would have added AES out.

Why should a high quality should a preamp with a top-end DAC (ESS9038PRO) include such a digital output? If you have so little faith in this DAC, best perhaps to use separates with all those signal-spoiling cables!

 

[wizardofoz]

I was really thinking hard about the M66 but it’s been trumped by the new Lumin P1 mini which ticks all my boxes and then some including DSD and SFP network