Naim’s frustrating distributed audio strategy
Posted by: JYOW on 17 May 2010
Naim’s frustrating distributed audio strategy
I don’t think I am alone in all this. My following BS’ing will probably make me an enemy of the state so be it.
I can call myself amongst other things a pioneer in distributed audio. Like a couple of folks here in the Naim forum I have enjoyed Slim Devices since they had the Squeezebox 2 and went on to experiment with different DACs and eventually upgraded to their more audiophile Transporter.
To get better sound lately I also bought into the iTunes concept and bought a Macbook pro to connect to a Weiss DAC2. And with Naim’s introduction of nDAC I jumped ship and switched to that to connect to my Macbook with M2tech Hiface.
And throughout all these years I have waited for Naim to come up with that simple streamer that delivers Naim sound. And repeatedly all I saw was near misses - Products that seem to be almost there but missed the mark completely.
It all started with the HDX…..
A very promising device that unfortunately also included all the costly unnecessary noise making hardware built in, which include a CD transport, 2 X hard drives, a touch screen that no one ever touches, and an espresso maker . But worst of all, this means that Naim has to develop costly rocket science to isolate all those noise makers that do not need to be there in the first place. So we have a worst case scenario here, customers have to pay for all the unnecessary peripherals AND the expensive measures to reduce the impacts caused by the noise made by these peripherals. The worst part is, it will only approach the performance of the same device with all those peripherals stripped off.
It is like a formula one car that has its brake full on all the time and a super engine to compensate for that friction.
The most ironic thing is since we associate price with performance, so everyone starts to associate the HDX to the similarly priced CDX2 , the CDS3 or even a CD555. Which makes me think, if Naim removes all the peripherals and stick the same DAC as the CD555 wouldn’t it sound way better than the CD555?
--
I guess Naim is struggling internally. On the one hand it wants to get into distributed audio. On the other hand, a high end client with no CD inside would kill the myth of the high end CD transport, which similarly is a solution that no longer needs that problem (of real time CD reading.) I speculate that a chunk of the parts cost and R&D that go into the CD555 is on the “quiet room” to deafen the CD transport. Well with distributed audio all that is not needed.
But from reading through past discussion I don’t think Naim has a problem with having both HIGH END products co-existing. There will always be people who only treasure the touchee feelee of a silver disc and a sexy transport. Those same people will not touch distributed audio with a 10 feet pole due to their own attachment with the physical world OR the fact that they are not comfortable with tinkering with computers. I cannot, for example, ever picture my father being able to get into distributed audio. So for these people the privilege of owning a CD555 is still very much valid.
But for the rest of us, please could Naim not worry about jumping into the purist high end distributed client with both feet.
It is very simple, just do what Linn does and do it better. Design a HDX like machine with killer server and playback software, killer Naim power section and killer digital and DAC section. In fact, it could be as simple as asking the Naim DAC to grow an Ethernet port. And all that talk about S/PDIF RF noise and transport jitter is academic.
When can we have a higher end Unity, UnitCute and a Unitserve without all the freebees? Is distributed audio only for the all-in-one UNI folks?
It really is ironic, all Naim has to do is to subscribe to the “less is more” concept. Which is what attracted me to the simplicity Nait 2 decades ago.
I sense an internal struggle over at Naim land. But just ask yourself, how many Uni’s and HDXs have you sold? How many DS’s have Linn sold in the past few years?
I don’t think I am alone in all this. My following BS’ing will probably make me an enemy of the state so be it.
I can call myself amongst other things a pioneer in distributed audio. Like a couple of folks here in the Naim forum I have enjoyed Slim Devices since they had the Squeezebox 2 and went on to experiment with different DACs and eventually upgraded to their more audiophile Transporter.
To get better sound lately I also bought into the iTunes concept and bought a Macbook pro to connect to a Weiss DAC2. And with Naim’s introduction of nDAC I jumped ship and switched to that to connect to my Macbook with M2tech Hiface.
And throughout all these years I have waited for Naim to come up with that simple streamer that delivers Naim sound. And repeatedly all I saw was near misses - Products that seem to be almost there but missed the mark completely.
It all started with the HDX…..
A very promising device that unfortunately also included all the costly unnecessary noise making hardware built in, which include a CD transport, 2 X hard drives, a touch screen that no one ever touches, and an espresso maker . But worst of all, this means that Naim has to develop costly rocket science to isolate all those noise makers that do not need to be there in the first place. So we have a worst case scenario here, customers have to pay for all the unnecessary peripherals AND the expensive measures to reduce the impacts caused by the noise made by these peripherals. The worst part is, it will only approach the performance of the same device with all those peripherals stripped off.
It is like a formula one car that has its brake full on all the time and a super engine to compensate for that friction.
The most ironic thing is since we associate price with performance, so everyone starts to associate the HDX to the similarly priced CDX2 , the CDS3 or even a CD555. Which makes me think, if Naim removes all the peripherals and stick the same DAC as the CD555 wouldn’t it sound way better than the CD555?
--
I guess Naim is struggling internally. On the one hand it wants to get into distributed audio. On the other hand, a high end client with no CD inside would kill the myth of the high end CD transport, which similarly is a solution that no longer needs that problem (of real time CD reading.) I speculate that a chunk of the parts cost and R&D that go into the CD555 is on the “quiet room” to deafen the CD transport. Well with distributed audio all that is not needed.
But from reading through past discussion I don’t think Naim has a problem with having both HIGH END products co-existing. There will always be people who only treasure the touchee feelee of a silver disc and a sexy transport. Those same people will not touch distributed audio with a 10 feet pole due to their own attachment with the physical world OR the fact that they are not comfortable with tinkering with computers. I cannot, for example, ever picture my father being able to get into distributed audio. So for these people the privilege of owning a CD555 is still very much valid.
But for the rest of us, please could Naim not worry about jumping into the purist high end distributed client with both feet.
It is very simple, just do what Linn does and do it better. Design a HDX like machine with killer server and playback software, killer Naim power section and killer digital and DAC section. In fact, it could be as simple as asking the Naim DAC to grow an Ethernet port. And all that talk about S/PDIF RF noise and transport jitter is academic.
When can we have a higher end Unity, UnitCute and a Unitserve without all the freebees? Is distributed audio only for the all-in-one UNI folks?
It really is ironic, all Naim has to do is to subscribe to the “less is more” concept. Which is what attracted me to the simplicity Nait 2 decades ago.
I sense an internal struggle over at Naim land. But just ask yourself, how many Uni’s and HDXs have you sold? How many DS’s have Linn sold in the past few years?