Why is the nDAC so cheap?

Nice post Tim. Welcome to the Forum.

Your thoughts are spot on. Who cares if sources sound different when the lowliest can sound so good.

Start with what you have then demo other transports to see if they bring value and performance.

-Patrick

quote:

Your thoughts are spot on. Who cares if sources sound different when the lowliest can sound so good.

Good, good point.

quote:

quote:
Your thoughts are spot on. Who cares if sources sound different when the lowliest can sound so good.



Good, good point.

Agree

quote:

Originally posted by AMA:
[QUOTE]quote:
Your thoughts are spot on. Who cares if sources sound different when the lowliest can sound so good.



Good, good point.

agreed. I think this point got lost once white papers and theory got involved.

quote:

Originally posted by Tim Lloyd:
I took my leap recently after a great demo of the nDAC. For me, the difference maker was the way in which it transformed my inexpensive MP3 player (playing lossless file format) into a wonderful sounding source.

Yup... it's an incredible beast is the nDAC.

quote:

My demo of the product included extensive listening of the CD5xs via the nDAC which sounded awesome to me (and superior, as I would expect, to the MP3 player).

Without wishing to be disrespectful, if you expect it to sound better, then it may well just do that

quote:

But honestly, what an amazing product. I couldn’t be happier thus far. It’s not cheap, but I believe it’s a great value. And interestingly, might be a product that appeals to first time and budget focused customers, as well as the veteran ranks.

Yup. 100% with you on that. Really, although Ms S doesn't worry about what I spend my money on, £2k is a lot by anyones standards and "is it worth it?" wasn't a question that needed to be brought up in the purchase decision. It was so far ahead of our other sources that it really was a no-brainer (given how much we use it - many hours a day).

quote:

Originally posted by ashrafs:

quote:

Originally posted by AMA:
[QUOTE]quote:
Your thoughts are spot on. Who cares if sources sound different when the lowliest can sound so good.



Good, good point.

agreed. I think this point got lost once white papers and theory got involved.

It is a good point, but one I think that was lost more in the vehemence of the posts of those who have heard a difference between sources. Remember that Andy's OP was precisely making the point that his Naim DAC did wonders for all sources.

quote:

Originally posted by Andy S:

quote:

Originally posted by fatcat:
No need to separate anything, the clock timing is not carried with the data in a S/PDIF interface. It’s already separate. The S/PDIF interface causes jitter in the clock timing, read the white paper. As you know Naim only claim to eliminate jitter caused by the S/PDIF. Logically this means data jitter (Transport generated) is not removed.

I respectfully suggest you go and read up how all of this works. Your understanding of how the system works doesn't match with reality.

That was a parody of your previous post.

quote:

Originally posted by DarrellK:

It is a good point, but one I think that was lost more in the vehemence of the posts of those who have heard a difference between sources. Remember that Andy's OP was precisely making the point that his Naim DAC did wonders for all sources.

The Naim DAC is a quality product. It probably does improve all sources, I don’t know, I’ve only heard a few. I’ve listened to a Naim Dac connected to a good quality DVD player, USB stick, CD player and PC. Sound quality is very good, but doesn’t come close to a CDS2. It only does wonders, not miracles.

I’m tempted to audition a CD5 XS, but if it isn’t a significant improvement on a CDS2 there isn’t much point and hardly a cheap option.

quote:

Originally posted by fatcat:

quote:

Originally posted by DarrellK:

It is a good point, but one I think that was lost more in the vehemence of the posts of those who have heard a difference between sources. Remember that Andy's OP was precisely making the point that his Naim DAC did wonders for all sources.

The Naim DAC is a quality product. It probably does improve all sources, I don’t know, I’ve only heard a few. I’ve listened to a Naim Dac connected to a good quality DVD player, USB stick, CD player and PC. Sound quality is very good, but doesn’t come close to a CDS2. It only does wonders, not miracles.

I’m tempted to audition a CD5 XS, but if it isn’t a significant improvement on a CDS2 there isn’t much point and hardly a cheap option.

Yes, miracles take a little longer, as they say. (nDAC mk2 perhaps?). Here's hoping for DSD (SACD) decoding (with an appropriate input, it would probably have to be HDMI, to match the widest range of SACD transports)

quote:

Originally posted by fatcat:
That was a parody of your previous post.

Failed that double blind test didn't I But it is difficult to tell between parody and complete misunderstanding with some of the views expounded around here...

quote:

Originally posted by Andy S:

quote:

Originally posted by fatcat:
That was a parody of your previous post.

Failed that double blind test didn't I

Difficult not to fail when looking down a tunnel.

quote:

Originally posted by fatcat:
Difficult not to fail when looking down a tunnel.

Well, perhaps you could come up with a theory which explains why my tunnel is not the correct one to look down - or are you too busy looking down your own tunnel to see what's going on in reality?

quote:

Originally posted by Andy S:

quote:

Originally posted by fatcat:
Difficult not to fail when looking down a tunnel.

Well, perhaps you could come up with a theory which explains why my tunnel is not the correct one to look down - or are you too busy looking down your own tunnel to see what's going on in reality?

LOL
So you accept you are looking down a tunnel. At last.
Maybe in you’re tunnel, you’re theories are correct. The point is you shouldn’t be looking down a tunnel.

quote:

Originally posted by fatcat:
The point is you shouldn’t be looking down a tunnel.

And you seem to be spoiling for a fight and adding nothing but disinformation - either that or you have a deeply held and totally flawed understanding of digital audio reproduction. Whichever.... not my problem

quote:

Originally posted by DarrellK:

quote:

Originally posted by fatcat:

quote:

Originally posted by DarrellK:

It is a good point, but one I think that was lost more in the vehemence of the posts of those who have heard a difference between sources. Remember that Andy's OP was precisely making the point that his Naim DAC did wonders for all sources.

The Naim DAC is a quality product. It probably does improve all sources, I don’t know, I’ve only heard a few. I’ve listened to a Naim Dac connected to a good quality DVD player, USB stick, CD player and PC. Sound quality is very good, but doesn’t come close to a CDS2. It only does wonders, not miracles.

I’m tempted to audition a CD5 XS, but if it isn’t a significant improvement on a CDS2 there isn’t much point and hardly a cheap option.

Yes, miracles take a little longer, as they say. (nDAC mk2 perhaps?). Here's hoping for DSD (SACD) decoding (with an appropriate input, it would probably have to be HDMI, to match the widest range of SACD transports)

can we really compare the cd player with the dac. for me the dac is a hub, a digital pre amp effectively.

At risk of resurrecting a dead horse, I did some comparison of some music I happened to be enjoying tonight.

Songs
1. Boulder to Birmingham - Emmylou Harris
2. The Look of Love - SHelby Lynne
3. Forget About it - Alison Krauss

Equipment into Naim DAC:
1. A one week old Mac Mini - HiFace - dACK BNC to BNC cable
2. Squeezebox Touch - QED RCA to BNC cable

Both sounded awesome and I enjoyed them equally, and this DAC really does sound awesome. And like someone said before, even if there are differences I enjoy both so much that I wouldn't care.

At least for tonight, I really do not need anything better. And I cannot recall the Weiss DAC ever sounding this good.

JYOW, I wish you threw in TP into this test -- just to see that it betters HiFace and Squeezebox Touch

I wish I still had the Transporter as well...

I was also thinking of getting the INT202 but I am quite happy as it is.

quote:

I was also thinking of getting the INT202 but I am quite happy as it is.

No reason for grief -- the difference is so subtle that it does not worth hassle and extra investment. From what I hear between TP and HiFace it does not justify 1,700 USD price gap.
I have Hi-face but TP is still my main source because it's soooo comfortable -- it just does not mess with my laptop activity.

Yes, too bad Logi techs seem to have no interest in it.

The new Touch is a nice/neat little package in terms of built quality etc... But in terms of ergonomics and software they obviously have lost much of the Sean Adams mojo.

quote:

But in terms of ergonomics and software they obviously have lost much of the Sean Adams mojo.

I wonder if Sean will continue his creative activity outside Logitech

Probably too busy enjoying life with all that $

You couldn't make it up (well, actually you could, unfortunately) - in one of the recent hifi magazines, a reply to a reader's question about using the Cambridge Audio 840C (a well-regarded player at about £750, with a very good jitter performance, according to reviews) with the Naim DAC, was basically "don't do it, you need a much better source".

Now, both sides of the discussion in this thread are agreed that the DAC sounds great (to the extent of sounding better than almost any other digital source) regardless of transport. Have these "journalists" actually tried any of this stuff out, or are they just spouting "received wisdom", moreover, received from themselves?

The risk for propagandists is that eventually they believe their own propaganda.

The greater danger is the that unwary believe the propagandists.

The certain truth in the case of replay will be found with our ears!

ATB from George

quote:

Originally posted by DarrellK:
Have these "journalists" actually tried any of this stuff out, or are they just spouting "received wisdom", moreover, received from themselves?

Reminds me of a discussion about 2-3 years ago with What HiFi. This was the time people were becoming aware of 24fps (frames per second) playback being vital for fluid motion on BluRays. WHF had reviewed the then latest Panasonic (PZ70 IIRC) and claimed it displayed at a multiple of 24fps. They were 100% adamant that it displayed no judder and were actually quite rude to people suggestions that they might have got it wrong. Several days later, after a thread not unlike this one on their website, they had to publish a (very public) apology and admit that the TV in question didn't actually display at a multiple of 24 fps, but did 3:2 pulldown and displayed at 60fps. They had (allegedly) tested this and couldn't see any judder which was very plain to see if you know what to look for. Not trusted a reviewer since

If you want to see it it's here: http://community.whathifi.com/forums/t/23144.aspx or if that gets modded, google "Panasonic 24fps customers need to know"