Naim HDX vs Naim DAC + Squzzebox Touch
Posted by: jim329 on 06 October 2009
I know both Naim DAC & Squeezbox Touch not being launched yet. But just wondering if HDX sounds wonderful as well, I may not consider non naim product...
Just wondering to ask HDX users for the ripping CD, can I pull out those ripped files out to my NAS for storage purpose? Further, can I just use HDX as streamer which reading files from NAS rather than activate the internal Hard Disc?
Just wondering to ask HDX users for the ripping CD, can I pull out those ripped files out to my NAS for storage purpose? Further, can I just use HDX as streamer which reading files from NAS rather than activate the internal Hard Disc?
PWD is using the standard Wolfson filters and renaiming them. That's not a bad thing but none really thrilled me personally. The default with native rate was best with what we played. Be intersested to hear your findings as my view is just another opinion and all should be auditioned.
Buffer reclocking can be a quite useful and becoming more common so topology and execution is key. Interesting catch words for the filters, clock amd buffer memory reclocking that aren't really unique though good ideas.
What doesn't make sense to me is that they claim no jitter from DIG in but when used via an Is2 connection with their own transport and HDMI cable, performance will be increased which would only be due to better clocking. Having it both ways? The transport did sound better via I2S.
Buffer reclocking can be a quite useful and becoming more common so topology and execution is key. Interesting catch words for the filters, clock amd buffer memory reclocking that aren't really unique though good ideas.
What doesn't make sense to me is that they claim no jitter from DIG in but when used via an Is2 connection with their own transport and HDMI cable, performance will be increased which would only be due to better clocking. Having it both ways? The transport did sound better via I2S.yep, samples for evaluation and the difference was significant. Also doesn't mean it isn't good and all should judge for themseles but I don't get why such a significant difference though I do understand the normal advantage of an I2S when jitter is an issue. It allows there to be one clock between the 2 pieces instead of 2 to reduce jitter induced by resyncing. The source was also the very same transport so where would the extra noise be coming from? Same supply, environment and ground. Noise isn't inherent to a dig stream and must be generated somewhere. It's possible some noise came along for the ride via tranceiving etc. though you would hope not but this was not subtle. Clocking is the difference with this connection and the HDMI cable used here should not be a connection advatage. It's very possible that I'm missing something completely and could be why it doesn't make sense to me. 
quote:What doesn't make sense to me is that they claim no jitter from DIG in but when used via an Is2 connection with their own transport and HDMI cable, performance will be increased which would only be due to better clocking. Having it both ways? The transport did sound better via I2S.
js
It looks reasonable to me.
They run I2S data from transport to DAC through HDMI cable and have almost no losses in this scenario.
As I understand the PWD design the I2S data travel directly from PWT transport to PWD's Wolfson chip by-passing the data buffer and on-board super-clocking and slaving the Wolfson chip to the input I2S master clock.
When running the same transport to DAC through S/PDIF they fight against S/PDIF generator's jitter and cable noise and S/PDIF receiver's jitter by means of complex DAC's jitter rejection circuitry. To do this they first recover a master clock from S/PDIF input data, then decode the data, then save them to stack data buffer, then reclock them and then send them through internal I2S interface to Wolfson chip slaving the chip with on-board super-fine clock (same which is used for buffered data reclocking).
And now they claim that although these efforts improve the sound substantially but still are NOT sufficient to achieve the same data precision as through the external I2S HDMI cable and the difference is AUDIBLE.
It's a key statement. Either it's a fact or just another promo to motivate sales of PWT
(another 3 K$ BTW)I just wonder if Naim brought something new to resolve this problem in the new DAC?
Eventually I'm not going to contest the jitter rejection between PS Audio I2S and Naim DAC S/PDIF as far as Naim DAC S/PDIF receiver will be good enough to achieve CDS3 quality
As do I. With the Naim there is at least no need for choosing a filter. The topology of using ultra high clock freq. makes it moot.
I'm in agreement with everything that you wrote about the configurations except that other than noise which should be comparably low if designed well, it's either bit correct and/or jittered at the DAC or not. Another interesting bit is that I preferred another transport via S/Pdif to theirs in I2S which added to the I don't want to go further about sound or transports etc. as all should do their own listening. Just thought that the improvement of I2s and truly jitter free clocking didn't jive. At the end of the day, it only matters if it's better in the way you use it in your system and not whether I2S is better or worse than SPdif as configured. I don't think many reading this are looking for a $6K CD player which is the advantage an I2S accomplishes anyways.
I'm in agreement with everything that you wrote about the configurations except that other than noise which should be comparably low if designed well, it's either bit correct and/or jittered at the DAC or not. Another interesting bit is that I preferred another transport via S/Pdif to theirs in I2S which added to the
I don't want to go further about sound or transports etc. as all should do their own listening. Just thought that the improvement of I2s and truly jitter free clocking didn't jive. At the end of the day, it only matters if it's better in the way you use it in your system and not whether I2S is better or worse than SPdif as configured. I don't think many reading this are looking for a $6K CD player which is the advantage an I2S accomplishes anyways.quote:Another interesting bit is that I preferred another transport via S/Pdif to theirs in I2S
It's another piece of important information.
Good example of how one week of forum chat and solid theoretical basement can be ruined after one hour audition of real piece
.js - You are a lucky guy having access to all of these toys.
I'm still waiting for my dealer to bring PWD for auditioning. As well as Naim DAC.
What does theory sound like? 
I find it interesting that they slave the DAC with the transport instead of the other way around. It's generally accepted that keeping the clock as close to the DAC as possible is the best way to limit jitter in this configuration. Probably just something to do with the overall design of the 2 and the I2S is clearly better in their combo so it is working. Like I said, most here won't care about the transport and need to listen as you would at home if it's an option. The I2S is also nothing groundbreaking. I believe that Linn and Audio Alchemy among others used a version of this interface in their early seperates. Some called it by another name but were using the Phillips protocals.
I find it interesting that they slave the DAC with the transport instead of the other way around. It's generally accepted that keeping the clock as close to the DAC as possible is the best way to limit jitter in this configuration. Probably just something to do with the overall design of the 2 and the I2S is clearly better in their combo so it is working. Like I said, most here won't care about the transport and need to listen as you would at home if it's an option. The I2S is also nothing groundbreaking. I believe that Linn and Audio Alchemy among others used a version of this interface in their early seperates. Some called it by another name but were using the Phillips protocals.quote:At the time I bought the amplifiers, the dealer I used had a special offer - Spend over £6k and get a Hi-Line for free. So it was an easy decision for me!
Oh, the more I read this forum the more I got a feeling that I'm the only Naim customer who buys the Naim gears at Naim cost
Anyway -- no itch for the contest with the other alternatives?
I plan to upgrade to Linto and look for the matching RCA-DIN cable.