NAD 720BEE inputs


How can a supposedly high-end piece of stereo equipment like the NAD 720BEE not include optical or coaxial inputs? Wouldn't coax or optical provide higher quality sound -- wont the traditional RCA connections comparatively diminish sound quality?

If I had to guess ... it is because the C720 is a two channel receiver most likely used for audio listening only and that the most likely purchaser would be using a cd player and not a dvd player. Given this hunch on my part, why is there not a phono input?

The Outlaw RR2150 got it right.

Regards, Rich
OK, but since sound quality is supposedly better with optical/coax, wouldn't a two channel receiver also be a candidate for the best sound possibile?

I think I know where you are coming from concerning the DVD player, which would be the need to separate more than two channels of sound.

The NAD C720BEE is an analog receiver. It does not have a builtin DAC like A/V receivers, so there will be no digital inputs on coax or optical.

It's quite likely that you will get better sound using the analog outputs from your DVD player into the C720BEE versus the digital outputs from your DVD player into a comparably priced A/V receiver.

interesting point but its hard to believe given that digital signals are supposedly superior. I assume the difference would be in the quality of the amps: audio vs. a/v?

Concerning your second point, can you point me somewhere on the web explaining why that may be the case? or, are you speaking simply from personal experience?
The only advantage that digital has over analog that I know of is transmission immunity to noise. A digital signal still has to be converted to analog to power the driver in a speaker. There are systems that keep the music signal in a digital format until the last possible point by placing DACs in the speakers.

I don't understand what is hard to believe about an analog component not supporting digital inputs.

The idea that the DAC and analog section in a DVD player being better than that in an AV receiver is based on meeting a price point and complexity. Let's pick $500. The typical 5.1 AV receiver has to have 6 DACs, 6 analog sections, 5 amplifiers, 6 channel volume control, AC3 decoding, DTS decoding, analog routing, video routing, speaker delay and level setup, etc. Compare that to the 2-channel analog output from a DVD player. It's quite reasonable to expect that fewer compromises will be made to meet the price point in the DVD player than the AV receiver.

Maybe this makes a little sense.

The features on the C720 are the clue as to who NAD believes will be the most likely buyer. The C720 will appeal to an buyer who needs a stereo receiver as the system cornerstone and will not be using it for HT purposes. The user listens to the radio and CD's and possibly tape. To my thinking this means an older listener, who has most likely given away his/her LP collection years ago. NAD's marketing of its basic products also says don't get too caught up with cables. So they are thinking lower cost speaker cables and interconnects. It doesn't seem like it was a "superior" issue, but rather a "most likely to use" issue.

Regards, Rich
Regarding the digital cable vs. analog cable issue, I've done several A/B tests on my own equipment and in all instances music through good analog cables (e.g., Nordost Red Dawns) was far more musical than that via a digital cable. Just my .02 worth.
For example....

The analog outs from my big cheap mega-DVD changer sound far better than the DACs in my now retired NAD T743. I'm not talking about subtle differences between $500 and $1000 CD players... I'm talking night and day is there bass or isn't there differences (and yes, speaker settings were correct).