NDX / NDS?

What would be different from an NDX?

A reasonable question Geoff, is T38 referring to a machine that performs better than the NDX as per the cd player range i.e cdx to cds~????

Of course I could be way off the mark with that assumption......

quote:

Originally posted by Geoff P:
What would be different from an NDX?

The price

quote:

Originally posted by Geoff P:
What would be different from an NDX?

It wouldn't benefit from an nDAC as an upgrade for a start!

right...i was thinking in classes lik CDX to CDS...
do not know what makes a NDS....maybe a better display (a la HDX), maybe a better DAC section, more digi-inputs etc...

Ralf

The ability to spend more and crow about it. Sorry, no offence intended, but that's what 90% of it amounts to. Given that DAC technology is comparatively ancient and Naim have self evidently produced a top class product, there is little wriggle room to spare unless a significant breakthrough in the technology occurs and Naim end up reinventing their already reinvented DAC. I expect the rest of it will be down to firmware and added features. Which is not to say some improvements won't be possible. It remains to be seen. It is likely the nature of distributed audio that a generation has emerged who blur features and performance. I am firmly embedded in the latter camp. It might be an age thing. Should such a thing as an NDS (whatever that may be) emerge it won't be for some considerable time. If it really becomes technically possible to genuinely boost performance and bring out a range based hierarchy, there will be just as many (possibly more) people waiting for the likes of the 500DAC and the HDS. I'll take a mortgage level DAC - IF it sounds worth the outlay. I remain sceptical but I love nice surprises, so who knows?

Maybe the reason is because linn can offer a Klimax DS for 15k€?

quote:

Originally posted by T38.45:
Maybe the reason is because linn can offer a Klimax DS for 15k€?

Being ridiculously over-priced does not make it clever ...

Tog

But it seems there is a market?

quote:

Being ridiculously over-priced does not make it clever ...

Tog

Let me guess: CD555, 555PS, 552, 500 -- all seem to be not clever at all

quote:

Originally posted by likesmusic:

quote:

Originally posted by Geoff P:
What would be different from an NDX?

It wouldn't benefit from an nDAC as an upgrade for a start!

I think this is the key point. I found it quite strange that the initial announcements from headquarters for the NDX indicated that it could be upgraded with the nDac. Many asked why the "good" Dac was not put in there from the beginning. There seems to be some backtracking by them now and they are proclaiming that many will be happy with the NDX as it is.

The question still beckons why an "inferior" Dac was put in there in the first place (they said it not me).

Gregg

quote:

Originally posted by glevethan:
I think this is the key point. I found it quite strange that the initial announcements from headquarters for the NDX indicated that it could be upgraded with the nDac. Many asked why the "good" Dac was not put in there from the beginning. There seems to be some backtracking by them now and they are proclaiming that many will be happy with the NDX as it is.

The question still beckons why an "inferior" Dac was put in there in the first place (they said it not me).

Gregg

Hi Gregg,

There's no backtracking at all as far as I am aware.

We have always provided kit that (we believe) performs to a high standard however we have also always endeavoured - wherever possible - to make kit upgradable as time, enthusiasm or budget allows.

Take the CDX2 for example - that can be upgraded with both the addition of an external power supply and a DAC if the customer feels that it is appropriate but that is in no way an indication that the power supplies or DACs in the CDX2 are deficient.

It is not possible / practical to build a source component with the very best of everything in a single box and it not be prohibitively expensive / bulky / difficult to produce etc. and from my own use of the NDX I would suspect that many (if not most) owners will be very happy with the unit as it stands.

I am in the lucky position (of course) of having a prototype unit to play with and my *PREFFERED* use is with the Naim DAC and XPS as I personally like the presentation of the Naim DAC however that doesn't mean there is anything "wrong" with the NDX DAC itself - I just prefer it with the Naim DAC and XPS ... it's all down to personal preference etc.

Phil

quote:

Originally posted by Phil Harris:

It is not possible / practical to build a source component with the very best of everything in a single box and it not be prohibitively expensive / bulky / difficult to produce etc. and from my own use of the NDX I would suspect that many (if not most) owners will be very happy with the unit as it stands.

Phil

Phil,

The question most people have is why not simply have the same DAC chip in the NDX as it is in the DAC and CD555? That way you would pay a little extra over the current price Vs the cost of the nDAC to upgrade it. OK, I accept that a 2 unit NDX and DAC may outpurform an NDX with the same dac chip as in DAC because of isolation etc, but knowing that the best parts went in the NDX will give a lot of comfort.

On a separate point, I think there still is a room within the Naim digital product range for a dedicated streamer that connets to the DAC.

Please appreciate that these are my views and a lot more other people's on this forum.

ASenna04

According to the DAC white paper ..

"Two mono, true multi-bit Burr-Brown PCM1704K DAC chips are used in the Naim DAC – the same type as in all Naim high-end CD players including the CD555."

whereas according to the NDX white paper:

"The DAC chip in the NDX is a Burr-Brown PCM1791A used in external oversampling mode. This is the same DeltaSigma DAC used in other high quality Naim products "

so it doesn't seem that they are nearly identical and it's a bit surprising to have it suggested that it might simply be a matter of personal preference between them.

But many other aspects of the two designs seem to be frustratingly similar. Why couldn't the NDX just go the extra mile and use the same top-end DACs as the nDAC? How much more would it have cost? And if cost and complexity are issues, perhaps the apple and USB connectivity could be left out?

quote:

The question most people have is why not simply have the same DAC chip in the NDX as it is in the DAC and CD555?

Because it isn't that simple. It isn't like ANY DAC or CDP that uses these chips are on par with a Naim DAC or a 555.

I am guessing that overall circuit topology and implementation of multiple components drives what DAC chips are tried in the design. Then you've got to believe they pick the one that sounds the best.

Even these vaunted PCM1704K chips are not rare, are easily obtainable, and exist inside hundreds of DACs and CDPs. Theyc ant cost that much either.

It isn't all about bits... or chips.

-Patrick

Another comparison would be NDX compared to UnitiServe + nDAC - the latter combination doesn't cost vastly more, yet gives you a total Naim system all the way from the rip.

no please- not again a unitiserve thing...NDS was the point!
:-)