ND5XS to NDAC - which digital interconnect?

Good stuff - i'll catch up with you on email in the morning. 

Andy,

What do you use SeeDeclip for?  Just curious.

-Patrick

SeeDeclip? Don't use it at all....

CD->EAC->FLAC->xbmc is the main flow. FLAC-> WAV to play on the USB stick (just in case).

Don't forget that you are beholden to the same "placebos" and "self-fulfilling prophesies" that you use to explain away the experiences from people like Allen.

Is there ZERO chance that all sources sound the same because you expect them to? ZERO?  In much the same way as others' contrary expectations result in differing sound from differing sources?

Significant deltas between Front vs Rear USB inputs on the Naim DAC seems strange to me.  But I dont think EVERY source will sound EXACTLY the same through the nDAC.  I haven't heard any SQ deltas myself but I surely wouldn't fully dismiss the fact that they could.

The nDAC is not some magical device unlike anything the world has ever seen.  Naim thinks different sources will produce different effects and that is enough for me.  They even allude to it in the White Paper which everyone is relying on as the "word of god/Naim" on this matter. 

How do those parts of the white paper get so easily ignored?

How does this discussion always suck me in???? 

I tried a crappy DVD player, my Juli@ and a SB Touch all into my nDAC and did not hear differences.  Until I someone gives me a Qute or NDX to demo Im not going to try anything else, so why do i even read this thread???

I guess I am waiting patiently for the ONE WHO HEARD DIFFERENTLY.  No one seems able to falsify either theory.  It feels a lot like arguing with Christians about creationism.  I would absolutely LOVE to read about someone who realized all sources do sound the same or conversely someone who finally did hear a difference, after feeling otherwise this whole time.

I have a feeling that Andy and Noogle NEVER will, and Allen et al ALWAYS will.  Obviously both cannot be the case..... or could they.

I want new explanations from everyone on how BOTH could be the case. 

"Quantum DAC-ing: The Electrons are everywhere!"

oooooops.  Hard to tell you two apart.  That was meant for the Noogle.

-patrick

@Patrick - I de-clip all my FLACs with SeeDeclip.  A bit of googling will give you a (very!) comprehensive description of what it does.

I got that far....  I see what it does.  I just am not seeing why it is needed.

thx,

p

"The CuteStudio DeClip engine at the heart of SeeDeClip uses advanced heuristics to piece back together the missing information in the music and recover the shape of the waveform, in many cases with good accuracy. De-clipping/recovering the sound lost either at the recording or mastering stage has an interesting effect on the dynamics and indeed frequency content of the music  . . . "

I do give them credit for not claiming to be "bit-perfect"

HAHAHA.  Hilarious.

On one page they say only speakers can make a difference in replay and that any well-made hifi from the 70s and 80s (from the likes of Sansui, Pioneer and Sony) will absolutely destroy anything current:

"Speakers is the area where expensive modern stuff can better 70s and 80s stuff, if the money is put into the product, but FM receivers and amplifiers haven't moved that far - except for remote controlled volume controls!"

Yet on another page they are showing how they jack the music all up with DSPs and what-not to of course better the replay with things far more convoluted than:

"This means that the more aluminum, knobs, switches, lamps, dials, power etc the better.
The look to go for is big, brutish, heavy and massively over-engineered. Usually the power of the big beasts is such that by sheer control and huge damping factors they can sound pretty good too. So that new Musical Fidelity might get a better write up in the Hi-Fi press which they advertize in - but the big 20year old Pioneer will show it whose boss

Then I read how an airport express will give you the ultimate replay chain to your DAC with Airtunes.

That was enough for me.

No wonder everything sounds the same regardless of source or cable.  If you completely screw the music up enough I bet that would be the result.

-patrick

@Patrick -

Herewith the SeeDeclip ouput for Radiohead's track "Feral":

Analyse C:/Users/Chris/Music/Radiohead/The King of Limbs/04 Feral.flac

Reading 'C:/Users/Chris/AppData/Local/Temp/26C_04 Feral_75.wav', fmt: 2ch 44100:16, c1, data: len 3m:12.732585s [8499507].

[0] RMS -8.13dB (12852.02/32768.00), peak -0.00dB ([-32768->32767]/32768)

[1] RMS -8.38dB (12480.49/32768.00), peak -0.00dB ([-32768->32767]/32768)

Process -> C:/Users/Chris/Music/Radiohead/The King of Limbs Declip/04 Feral.flac

   8701 clips found, max gap 3.220ms [142] at 2m:58.106848s [7854512], 652.585ms [28779] lost.

   7830 clips found, max gap 4.014ms [177] at 1m:49.373356s [4823365], 754.399ms [33269] lost.

[0] RMS -14.14dB (6432.29/32768.00), peak -1.74dB ([-27075->26825]/32768)

[1] RMS -14.39dB (6252.05/32768.00), peak -1.05dB ([-29068->29046]/32768)

Writing 'C:/Users/Chris/AppData/Local/Temp/26C_04 Feral_76.wav', fmt, data.

Totals

 16531 clips (45.32Hz), 0m:1.406984s [62048] lost (max gap 4.014ms [177] at 1m:49.373356s [4823365])

 threshold 1/min(0.02Hz) vs 16531/3m:12.732585s [8499507](45.32Hz), verdict -> declip

[0] FIXED:  7600 simple,   979 copied,   157 shifted,     0 left.

[1] FIXED:  6735 simple,   910 copied,   268 shifted,     0 left.

Total of 16531 clips, average clip frequency 45Hz, 1.4s of the track lost to clipping, biggest single clip 4ms (177 samples) long.

You might like the sound of square waves through your speakers, but I find them most unmusical!

Correct.  It just cracks me up that they say:

1) "Naim and Usher" CD players probably dont give very good replay.  Usher?  I thought they only made speakers.  And not very good ones at that.

2) Vintage hifi is where it's at.

Then

3) You need ultra sophisticated pro computer software to get good replay.

Im sure the software does exactly what it says.  No argument there.

-p

No hi res. 

Wont work with UPNP.

very high jitter.

I use PP and an old iPhone 3G for streaming to the BBQ.

-Patrick

@PCS..

No.. They could sound the same because I expect them to sound the same. I fully admit that.

I'd like to see someone who does hear differences state that a possibility that there are differences because they want to hear them (whether sub consciously or not). That's singularly missing from any post - if someone has heard it - it must be there so the naysayers must be wrong...

Fairs fair and all that 

PS. I had to google SeeDeclip. Why would anyone want to use that? I thought people claiming the nDAC sounded different between different sources was confusing enough.............

Noogle, I used to use an Airport Express into my NDAC/555PS and also into my NDX. It sounded really rather mediocre, and only marginally better than my frankensteined squeezebox. I did replace it with an AppleTV2 which was a lot better despite both resampling to 48khz/16it.  So my family (who probably don't even know what the term audiophile is) and I definintely heard difference in performance between the two, despite in your mind they should've been identical? Because of its laclustre digital output my Airport express is now used solely as a wifi access point, to which it does an excellent job.

I tried to compare Apple TV2 and Squeezebox Touch, both connected to the nDAC. When I added a PSU to the Squeezebox, it sounded better than the stock Apple TV2.

Zinger and I did a test together on the Apple TV2, we axed the optical out and soldered a coax in it instead.  Then we did an A/B comparing the mod Apple TV2 vs. the stock Apple TV2 on the nDac.  we found the modded Apple TV2 sounded better (the difference being the stock Apple TV2 feels less lively). This was not what we've anticipated - we thought the nDAC would be indifferent to the digital input (at least we didn't think the Apple TV2 was designed for a coax and we tried the same test on a Benchmark DAC, there weren't any difference in sound quality).

Andy -
Clipped original:


Reduced level:


Peaks reconstructed:

Yes. I fully understand what it does, but I listened to the declipped track they have as an example. It sounded worse than the clipped but 2dB down track IMHO....

If it has been mastered that way, that's the way it is. Warts and all. I don't listen to Californication because of it - and I only ever listened to Metallicas last (was it last, I lost interest) that was so heavily clipped it was painful. If the original artist is happy their stuff is clipped to heck, then that's their problem - I either like the distortion or don't bother with the music.

Andy fair question, but both Airport Express and AppleTV present 48kHz 16 bit. I have no idea whether Apple use the same method in both. But looking back it was Noogles querying whether Airport Express was anygood, and hopefully he will find my reply of some use for his own experiments.

Simon

Patrick

I was intriqued by SeeDeclip based on the posts. I tried the sample wav files on thier site, I think its Black Eyed Peas. I actaully preferred the un adjusted version on my system!!  It seem to have a better dynamic range and more punch ... perhaps i do have the wrong kind of ears .. or the wrong system.....

Nope. The unadjusted sounds better on my £5 PC speakers too. The adjusted lacks the punch. Just goes to prove that the producers are right to clip everything into oblivion....

 Its not so much clipping that bothers me, but I do find audible distortion becasue of over compression  within the mix  soo distracting, particuarly on vocals and can rob the life out of a track and makes it sound so artificial.  I have some horror discs. Now to me that is sloppy mastering. Its almost like switch everything to 11 and let the lmiter deal with it...

My hall of shame is headed by

Pete Molinari; A Train Bound for Glory. Produced by  Adam Landry and recorded at Playground Sound Studios in Nashville. Now its not clear to mewho the recording / mastering engineer is but they should be ashamed of themselves.

Simon