HDX magazine review.
Posted by: gary yeowell on 21 August 2008
Read an interesting article today, not sure of the mag, might have been Hifi News, but the reviewer made a very bold statement by saying that ripped CD's through the HDX/XPS2 was better than a CDS.... he did not say which CDS, but anyhow that's quite a bold statement and he was playing it through active DBL's so quite a revealing system.
I always take these opinions with a pinch of salt when they come from the comics, but you have to have something to read in Borders whilst drinking Starbuck's coffee. Just wondered if anyone had heard an HDX vs a good CD player and come to similar conclusions. It would seem that Linn are making similarly bold statements, bolder in fact, by stating the Linn DS is better than any CD player.
Gary.
I always take these opinions with a pinch of salt when they come from the comics, but you have to have something to read in Borders whilst drinking Starbuck's coffee. Just wondered if anyone had heard an HDX vs a good CD player and come to similar conclusions. It would seem that Linn are making similarly bold statements, bolder in fact, by stating the Linn DS is better than any CD player.
Gary.
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by Polarbear
Hi-fi Choice 
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by gary yeowell
Thankyou Polarbear, that will be the one then...
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by Polarbear
and a good review it is to.
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by abbydog
Yeah, it sort follows the when in doubt, compare to obsolete gear no longer in production school of reviewing ...
Curiously, this review was up on.a website yonks before the mag appeared, which puts a whole new slant on giving away your content for free...
Curiously, this review was up on.a website yonks before the mag appeared, which puts a whole new slant on giving away your content for free...
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by Christopher_M
Once upon a time, it was all about content. These days it's more about what are known as 'platforms'......Oh dear, I'm beginning to sound jaded
Regards, Chris
Regards, Chris
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by abbydog
Not a bit of it, Chris...
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by aht
The reviewer in question, Malcolm Steward, was a very influential figure in the 80's and early 90's; a Naim supporter, he was among the first to write a rave review of the 52 when it was first released. After many years in a different role in the audio industry, he has returned to reviewing Naim components, but it's always in the context of his olive system. So yes, he's using the original CDS as a benchmark. A little odd, in my opinion...
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by u5227470736789439
The CDS and CDS2 are still rather quality competitive CD players though ...
The CDS3 is finer in an evolutionary way. Some would say that the 555 is better in a revolutionary way ...
George
The CDS3 is finer in an evolutionary way. Some would say that the 555 is better in a revolutionary way ...
George
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by abbydog
I wouldn't judge the merits of CDS or HDX from a review, but CDS just seems an odd benchmark that potential buyers will find it very hard (almost impossible) to replicate in a dem. This makes it a bit of a cop-out for a reviewer, IMO. (IIRC Stereophile are the most notorious users of this weeze)
Imagine trying to compare the original CDS to a CDS3 - the sound has changed such a lot because of transports and DACs alone.
Of much more interest to potential buyers is HDX versus current CD player. That is a dem people will have to do themselves but it would be nice to think they'll not be swayed by a colourful review based on different generations of technology.
Imagine trying to compare the original CDS to a CDS3 - the sound has changed such a lot because of transports and DACs alone.
Of much more interest to potential buyers is HDX versus current CD player. That is a dem people will have to do themselves but it would be nice to think they'll not be swayed by a colourful review based on different generations of technology.
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by gary yeowell
Well it would seem from all the replies that the review machine was the original CDS so not really relevant in today's terms. I'm sure someone will put it up against a current machine soon.
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by u5227470736789439
Dear Abbydog,
I could not agre with you more! And surely by now, no one here treats any review, even from estemed members of Naim's Forum as more than a guide to possible selection of components to audition.
My view is that I will note a positive Naim Forum Member review of something, provided it is clearly from experience, but always ignoren a negative one due to the very real chance that the negative reaction is down to a simple difference of taste - a lesson I learned the hard way when I was put off SBLs because of negatibity, from someone whose view I once valued. When I got the SBL, I realised what a lot of time and effort I had wasted ...
Of course learning to judge what and whom to give credence to is a lifetime's work, but mag reviews have never swayed me apart from alerting me to the very existence of a product, otherwise unknown!
I last bought a Hifi mag back in 1999, when I was on a speaker search! Ever since then I have worked solely on the basis of auditioning even though this can involve time and travelling a long distance.
ATB from Goerge
I could not agre with you more! And surely by now, no one here treats any review, even from estemed members of Naim's Forum as more than a guide to possible selection of components to audition.
My view is that I will note a positive Naim Forum Member review of something, provided it is clearly from experience, but always ignoren a negative one due to the very real chance that the negative reaction is down to a simple difference of taste - a lesson I learned the hard way when I was put off SBLs because of negatibity, from someone whose view I once valued. When I got the SBL, I realised what a lot of time and effort I had wasted ...
Of course learning to judge what and whom to give credence to is a lifetime's work, but mag reviews have never swayed me apart from alerting me to the very existence of a product, otherwise unknown!
I last bought a Hifi mag back in 1999, when I was on a speaker search! Ever since then I have worked solely on the basis of auditioning even though this can involve time and travelling a long distance.
ATB from Goerge
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by abbydog
Wise words (as usual) George. I do agree! I'm now looking forward to four whole days enjoying some music thanks to the Bank Holiday (and the dire weather). Every cloud has a hi-fi lining...
Posted on: 21 August 2008 by jon h
The thought that a mint CDS1 is not "relevant" today is amusing.
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by Stover
Seems to me that what people purchase, can afford or what that is new on the block, is for them the best offer.
Examples as SN better than 202 hi 200. 282 hi better than 252 and you Naim it.
They might be, but I find it a little odd.
Naim told me HDX2 is levelled beneath CDX2, HDX2 XPS might be equal to a bare CDX2.
Who knows?
Steinar
Examples as SN better than 202 hi 200. 282 hi better than 252 and you Naim it.
They might be, but I find it a little odd.
Naim told me HDX2 is levelled beneath CDX2, HDX2 XPS might be equal to a bare CDX2.
Who knows?
Steinar
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by ken c
i havent read the article in question but i have always found Malcom Steward's contributions interesting and entertaining.
enjoy
ken
enjoy
ken
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by Guido Fawkes
quote:These days it's more about what are known as 'platforms'......Oh dear
I thought started in the 7Os with Elton John
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by rupert bear
The wierd thing is - this has been discussed over in the Distributed Audio forum for the past week (thread 'I got it!' or some such).
Are Naim playing a bit of a game here - seeing if geek-audio will overtake fogey-hifi without either side acknowledging the other?
Bear in mind with this review that the CD player MS is comparing the HDX to is the original CDS, designed in about 1991. Things have moved on... (sorry this has already been said above)
Also, it does sound illogical from a purist standpoint that 'copying' a CD to HDD would sound better than playing it in the first place. But the hot topic in CD players (if there is one) this year seems to be about servos and buffers (Rega, Cyrus), so maybe the rather flaky process of spinning a CD and reading the data is being addressed here in a more fundamental way.
Me, I'll hold out for the HDZ with 4 times the storage (and the ability to record off line inputs) - what's the point in designing a standalone box and then asking folk to add a pile of computer hardware onto it?
Are Naim playing a bit of a game here - seeing if geek-audio will overtake fogey-hifi without either side acknowledging the other?
Bear in mind with this review that the CD player MS is comparing the HDX to is the original CDS, designed in about 1991. Things have moved on... (sorry this has already been said above)
Also, it does sound illogical from a purist standpoint that 'copying' a CD to HDD would sound better than playing it in the first place. But the hot topic in CD players (if there is one) this year seems to be about servos and buffers (Rega, Cyrus), so maybe the rather flaky process of spinning a CD and reading the data is being addressed here in a more fundamental way.
Me, I'll hold out for the HDZ with 4 times the storage (and the ability to record off line inputs) - what's the point in designing a standalone box and then asking folk to add a pile of computer hardware onto it?
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by Guido Fawkes
quote:i havent read the article in question but i have always found Malcom Steward's contributions interesting and entertaining.
Malcolm is one the best hi-fi writers IMHO as he majors on music - I first listened to Mary Black and Mary Chapin Carpenter because of enthusiastic articles I read by Mr Steward and they are both fantastic artists.
Still I don't really care what Hi-Fi Choice writes about the HDX, but if it is written by MS then I'd give it more credibility. When I get to hear one then I'll get an impression of whether it improves on my CDX2 - not heard it so don't know. All that software in it does concern me as well as the need to network it - it is much easier just to plonk on a CD or LP and sit back and listen.
quote:I'll hold out for the HDZ with 4 times the storage
I think I'll wait too, but I don't want it to have hard disks in it - horrible clunky noisy things from the dark ages.
ATB Rotf
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by rupert bear
quote:Originally posted by ROTF:quote:i havent read the article in question but i have always found Malcom Steward's contributions interesting and entertaining.
Malcolm is one the best hi-fi writers
...although he does sometimes seem to be fighting yesterday's battles (as well as using yesterday's hardware) - e.g. in this article he states "Too many listeners imagine dynamics as a one-way street, wherein quiet suddenly becomes louder", which sounds a bit 1982 to me. Sorry.
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by GrahamFinch
I haven't read the review but heard the HDX at two summer roadshows. It was demoed with 252\555 nap500 and sbls at one event and 552\555\500 sbls at second event. Both times with\without nsub in play and also switching standard mains leads and powerlines.
No direct comaprsions was made with a current cd player but the Naim staff themselves admit it does not sound as good as the cds3 when used as a "normal" cd player. They feel it may be compared more realistically to cd players like cd5x. The advice, however, is to rip the cd and play it back from the hard drive rather than using the cd as a normal player.
That is why they made it. The unit is designed as a convenient alternative to cd and no doubt will evolve over time.
The point about ripped cd's on HDD theoretically sounding better that normal cd's is that the HDX software rips "bit for bit" and apparently playback from HDD has less jitter.
Overall the HDX sounded impressive and for many will be all they need. Good quality with convenience and representing what Naim feel will be the future for music playback.
Most at the dems I went to were impressed with the HDX but some said they still wanted ultimate performance and would sacrifice the convenience of the HDX for their top end players.
No direct comaprsions was made with a current cd player but the Naim staff themselves admit it does not sound as good as the cds3 when used as a "normal" cd player. They feel it may be compared more realistically to cd players like cd5x. The advice, however, is to rip the cd and play it back from the hard drive rather than using the cd as a normal player.
That is why they made it. The unit is designed as a convenient alternative to cd and no doubt will evolve over time.
The point about ripped cd's on HDD theoretically sounding better that normal cd's is that the HDX software rips "bit for bit" and apparently playback from HDD has less jitter.
Overall the HDX sounded impressive and for many will be all they need. Good quality with convenience and representing what Naim feel will be the future for music playback.
Most at the dems I went to were impressed with the HDX but some said they still wanted ultimate performance and would sacrifice the convenience of the HDX for their top end players.
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by gary yeowell
quote:The thought that a mint CDS1 is not "relevant" today is amusing.
The term used John was with regards to what is available today 'new' and of a similar price as a benchmark, one simply cannot compare apples with oranges, but i know what you mean. I for one consider the CDS1 to be one of Naim's finest CD spinners and in many respects prefer it to later models but that is not relevant to the discussion of today.
Gary.
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by KenM
I have heard the HDX and was distinctly underwhelmed. It came nowhere near the performance of a CDX2 with which it was compared head-to-head. Playback was via ripping to the hard disk. The rest of the system was 202/200/Zu Druids.
That was a direct comparison but if I had to guess, I would place the HDX below my CD5 and probably more in line with the CD5i. I believe that this is the way music playback will develop, but much more work needs to be done.
Ken
That was a direct comparison but if I had to guess, I would place the HDX below my CD5 and probably more in line with the CD5i. I believe that this is the way music playback will develop, but much more work needs to be done.
Ken
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by 151
i take magazine reviews with a bucket of salt,absolute waste of time.
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by gary yeowell
quote:i take magazine reviews with a bucket of salt,absolute waste of time.
Which is what i said at the beginning, and why i asked if anyone here had actually heard one side by side with a good player instead of spouting conjecture. It would seem KenM has.
Posted on: 22 August 2008 by 151
sorry for conjecture spouting,i didn't read your post properly,i should be shot or 50 lashes maybe.quote:Originally posted by gary yeowell:quote:i take magazine reviews with a bucket of salt,absolute waste of time.
Which is what i said at the beginning, and why i asked if anyone here had actually heard one side by side with a good player instead of spouting conjecture. It would seem KenM has.