HDX audio review

Posted by: Bruce Woodhouse on 17 February 2009

I've been testing an HDX for the last 3 weeks, and thanks to those who have helped me get set up. I thought I'd try to post an 'audio review' rather than focus on the technical stuff. I could not find a lot of people posting recently on sound performance aspects. I'd be interested if others agree with my conclusions. My dealer seems to.

System= HDX+XPS, NAC52+ Supercap, SNAXO + HiCap, 2 x 140 and SBL's

I have swapped out my CDS3 for the HDX. I have not tried the HDX without the XPS.

If you don't want to read all the review then this is the summary; the HDX is extremely good, a worthy comparison at the level of the CDS3 but I think quite different in sonic character to this and other Naim CDP's.

The long version. For goodness sake let any test HDX warm up properly, and ensure it is not fresh from the box. I know Naim stuff always needs this but the HDX seems to have changed more during run-in then any other component I can recall.

The overall character of the HDX is quite subtle. It manages to convey a quite astonishing degree of detail, undeniably more than my CDS3 on some CD's. However it presents it all in a very unfussy and integrated way. It never shouts, more draws you into the music as a complete and balanced picture. It sounds very 'fresh' and clean but it definitely has a weightier bass than the CDS3 and the overall tonal presentation is somehow fuller. The bass is not slow or fat, and don't for a moment think it is overwhelming but my SBL's have revealed hidden depths this week. The top end is very clean and pacy but never shrill. When the music gets gritty it can sound as sharp and textured as you want but it sounds great with choral music which has a lovely rolling depth and shimmer, especially at greater volumes.

The CDS3 scores in a few areas. It has greater pace and energy, most noticeable comparing at lower volumes. The bass detail (rather than emphasis) is maybe slightly greater but the sheer PRaT (at least I think that is what it is) can make the HDX sound a little restrained alongside. The treble end on the CDS3 also has a crystal clarity that the HDX just falls short of, but with poor recordings this can almost become shrill on the CDS3. In fact in general I prefer the HDX when the music is louder or busier. I also think the CDS3 does something rather special with voices, that wonderful naturalness (when I first bought it I used the word 'gracefulness') that I never heard with any other CDP. The HDX is close but not quite there; it may be still improving but I think the CDS3 had this straight from the box.

It is noticeable that the HDX somehow freshens poor recordings in a way that the CDS3 does not. Perhaps this is the effect of a bit perfect rip but some CDs I thought were just bad productions sound a lot better on the HDX. I'm also very impressed how bog-standard iTunes or Amazon downloads sound through the HDX via a memory stick and the USB port. They are good enough that you can just get on and enjoy the music and are never distracted by dynamic shortcomings. I used to burn some iTunes download albums to a CD and play them on the CDS3. The HDX/USB route is not just easier but it sounds better.

So my conclusion is that the HDX has very significant sonic ability, but it is quite different. Against a CDS3 you may find it a tad polite. You might want the greater energy of the CDS3. It lacks a few of the CDS3's attributes but it replaces them with others, a weightier presentation, a slightly more relaxing sound at high volumes and a lovely balanced detailed sound. It always sounds interesting and fundamentally enjoyable. If you are testing an HDX it is worth a good long listen, I recall the CDS3 instantly grabbing me but the HDX reveals its qualities more over time and with a variety of music played. My memory tells me it is way ahead of the CDX/XPS I used to own. It still sounds like a Naim product but perhaps with its weightier and slightly less dynamic character it is a move away from the purest 'flat earth' sound? Maybe. I wonder if it is designed to be more palatable to those not just searching for the typical 'Naim sound'. Maybe.

I'd be interested how this compares with other's experiences. I still also have some issues with the functionality (and I have found three albums which it will not rip, the last three Wilco releases so something odd is going on there) but overall I'm impressed. It will be staying.

Bruce
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by Rockingdoc
Helpful review Bruce, I'm still dithering which way to go on hard-drive storage and replay. Is yours connected via ethernet?
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by u5227470736789454
Thanks Bruce,

Very helpful and informative, I hope you continue to update us along the way - as per my previous posts, the HDX looks like the route for me, and it's always good to hear owners thoughts and impressions.
Looks like I need to get a long trial loan - hadn't budgetted for the XPS though, maybe someone reading this can let us have some information ref the bare HDX vs the XPS'd HDX

Thanks again

Barrie
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by Bruce Woodhouse
Rockingdoc,

I've connected mine via an ethernet cable to the hub now. I also tried it via an Airport express which worked fine but I have now installed the permanent cable. Just have to re-plaster the ceiling now....

Barrie.

One day I'll take off the XPS and see how it sounds. At the moment I'm busy ripping and enjoying the music.

Bruce
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by u5227470736789454
quote:
At the moment I'm busy ripping and enjoying the music.


and that sounds like a very sensible thing to be doing.
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by SC
Great to read your findings Bruce, thanks.

I've rarely read/heard the HDX talked of in the same breath as the CDS3, more the CDX2, so I find this even more encouraging...Some of the differences you mention and attribute to the HDX, I think I would actually prefer, regardless of whether it was a HD or CDP....I also find it interesting that 'poorer' recordings are slightly 'saved' through the HDX, another big plus....

I recently had a few hours in demo with the HDX with the 555ps, but with 'only' 202 and 200 providing support...I liked it a lot, for first impressions anyway. There was 2 incidents of the HDX 'locking up' in the space of a couple of hours, not a good look, but I was assured this was due to the internet connection and the fact the HDX was on the previous software version (?). To be honest, I was having more trouble getting the speaker results I wanted, so I wasn't really analysing the HDX all that much...

I too would be interested in 'bare' HDX performance, as I doubt initially I will be able to fund for an extra psu...

All in all, and with reading your good write up, I'm finding it hard to resist as the perfect 'all round' source....Just need to find the pennies !

The only thing remaining, possibly, is what else gets added to the HD Naim portfolio in the next week or so.... Winker

Steve
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by gary1 (US)
Bruce,

nice write-up. Yes I was also surprised by the improvement of the HDX as it warmed up fresh from the box and really came on good between day 2 and 3, but really needs a few weeks to hit its stride.

My thoughts:

HDX (bare)-- very good, as I've said before CDX2 level, but it did some things better especially in the base range.

HDX/XPS2-- added improvements, much the same way as adding to the CDX2. Removed any "slight digital tendency" and quieted the whole performance down.

HDX/555PS-- again more control, detail, quieter, more audiophile sounding if you will.

Overall: PSUs really make the bare HDX which was quite good much better.

I don't know what cables you are using, but I added first a Hi-line and then powerlines to the equation. Progression (555PS/FC2x/SN).

The Hi-line really took care of the hi's and completely cleaned up what I noticed to be a "slight struggle" at the very high end. Almost like it was struggling to get through the small cable. Eliminated with the HL.

The PLs really made a huge difference and the additions of each in a stepwise fashion were significant. In addition to more PRAT, detail, and bigger soundstage, there was more depth to the music,again quieter, really nice focusing of voices, especially after PL on FC2x and then the PL on the amp side of the SN really just gave the whole thing total control and presence.

Did you get a chance to listen to 24 bit--- different ballgame, hard to go back.

SC, I'm using the HDX with SN/FC2x so your 202/200 is not an issue.

Interface-- easy to use, but it does need some tweaking. I think it will all get sorted out, but the first released version was pretty good.

Overall, I agree that the presentation is different from what you have grown accustomed to with Naim. IMO no less engaging, but different. Same way SN is from other pre/amp combos. For some it's not their cup of tea. I agree that you need some time with the HDX to really hear what it can do, especially if you are used to the higher end Naim gear including pres/amps/cdps due to the tonal and musical differences.
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by Bruce Woodhouse
Power cables are bog-standard (actually a Grahams Hydra) Gary. I've never been much of a one for tweaking cables etc, perhaps I should. I tend to be happy with everything after a 'box' purchase and just leave it all alone.

I'd be unsure which component to upgrade with a Powerline first, perhaps the HDX's PSU? I guess once I started I fear I'd end up buying them for every box!

Bruce
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by gary1 (US)
Bruce,

I was skeptical at first and believe me the last thing I wanted to do was spend more $$ on cables. Unfortunately hearing is believing. I guess I shouldn't have demoed. Have never heard the Hydras.

I did do a dedicated mains and that was quite a difference. So I'm not totally surprised that a better mains cable does make it sound much better. You can always question the price. So now people are doing Audio response Naim designed power blocks + PL (s), etc... Obviously there is no correct answer here.

For upgrades you really need to demo and experiment. The 555 was a significant improvement over the XPS2 (never heard the XPS). The 555 comes with the PL (I know you pay for it). Which is the better way to go can only depend upon what you hear with the various combinations. I actually added my things one step at a time so I really heard the differences and it convinced me, unfortunately.
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by tonym
Unlike yourself Gary, I've not got a separate mains feed for the Hi-Fi, yet even on my slightly less than ideal arrangement each Powerline I've added (seven so far) has brought about a significant improvement in sound quality.

It appears to me they're most effective when plugged straight into a wall socket rather than using a powerstrip-type setup.
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by u5227470736789454
Hi Tonym,

I found the connecting the powerstrip to the socket with a PL and then PL's from that to the boxes worked for me, but maybe thats because the supply from the socket is "dirty" and using the PL/Powerstrip acts as a sort of first filter I don't know

Barrie
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by John R.
@ Bruce: A really nice and detailed review.

I never compared a HDX to a CDS 3, but I compared my bare HDX to my bare CDX 2 for a couple of weeks at home using Hi Line to 282, Hi Cap and 250. To cut a long story short: I sold my CDX 2.

I always considered a CDX 2 to be a very "fast" and "forward" sounding CD player and this is why I once bought it. Other CD players simply sounded too slow in comparison once you compared it to the CDX 2. The CDX 2 is a great CD player and I think that it offers great value for money, but to my ears the HDX does a few things better. I think that the HDX offers better PRaT and it is easier to follow the rhythm, the bass is better defined, more details and a rock solid 3D soundstage and better dynamics. And all this is coming from a dark black background which gives the music a relaxed and natural foundation although the HDX is very, very fast with lots of dynamics. The only thing that I prefered with the CDX 2 is its slightly warmer tonality, but this is not saying that I think the HDX is sounding cold and analytical. Going back from the HDX to the CDX 2 sometimes made me think that the CDX 2 is "slow" and missing some impact - and this although the CDX 2 is such a "fast" player!

Adding a Powerline improves everything further and gives an even deeper soundstage, more impact and simply the feel of more energy with the music. The HDX and the CDX 2, too of course, deserve a Powerline. To me this is a no brainer.

Adding a PS 555 turns the HDX into another beast and this is among the best digital playback I ever listened to - expecially with some high resolution files. Adding a PS 555 to a HDX improves all of the above mentioned aspects. I would love to hear a HDX/PS 555 in comparison to a CD 555...
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by gary1 (US)
JohnR, excellent description of the diferences between the CDX2 and HDX. This was exactly what we heard the first day out with the HDX at PM and that nicely sums it up.
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by Paul Labrador
[QUOTE]Originally posted by John R.:
....I always considered a CDX 2 to be a very "fast" and "forward" sounding CD player and this is why I once bought it. Other CD players simply sounded too slow in comparison once you compared it to the CDX 2. The CDX 2 is a great CD player and I think that it offers great value for money, but to my ears the HDX does a few things better. I think that the HDX offers better PRaT and it is easier to follow the rhythm, the bass is better defined, more details and a rock solid 3D soundstage and better dynamics. And all this is coming from a dark black background which gives the music a relaxed and natural foundation although the HDX is very, very fast with lots of dynamics. The only thing that I prefered with the CDX 2 is its slightly warmer tonality, but this is not saying that I think the HDX is sounding cold and analytical. Going back from the HDX to the CDX 2 sometimes made me think that the CDX 2 is "slow" and missing some impact - and this although the CDX 2 is such a "fast" player!
Adding a Powerline improves everything further and gives an even deeper soundstage, more impact and simply the feel of more energy with the music. The HDX and the CDX 2, too of course, deserve a Powerline. To me this is a no brainer.....
[QUOTE]

@ John R.
In a few demo's I heard the same differences between CDX2 and HDX. I'll make the same change and trade in my CDX2.
I already have a Powerline in a XPS2, coupled with a Hih-Line in the SuperNait with Hicap and two other Powerlines.
I think the result wil be very high quality compared to the investment.
Perhaps a PS 555 in the future ????

Paul
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by gary1 (US)
Paul, I hate to say it, but the 555PS makes a significant difference. Another one of those unfortunate problems.

Interesting, we now have a couple of members who are trading in the CDX2 for an HDX. Based upon my listening and the versatility the HDX offers I'm not surprised. I've also not been surprised that my dealer is selling more HDXs than CDS3s given an evaluation of the positives and negatives taken as a whole.

Enjoy
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by spacey
yes i can concur, my local dealer is selling lots of HDX's ive been trying to dem one but they keep selling so to quickly according to him
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by Roy T
Would anyone like to comment on controlling the HDX by browser rather than the windows client?

I don't use windows and would like to be assured that I can use the kit via Ubuntu and Mozilla Firefox, a couple of screen shots of the browser interface would be most welcome if this is at all possible.
Posted on: 17 February 2009 by garyi
As I understand it the interface is browser based so you can use it from any platform on the LAN with a browser.

The application for more detailed adjustment is PC only though.
Posted on: 18 February 2009 by Roy T
Garyi, that it what I hoped for and expected never the less it is still nice to have it confirmed. Is it still a good bit of kit without being able to access the detailed functions provided by the windows based application?
Posted on: 18 February 2009 by js
If the browser is flash compatible, it will work.
Posted on: 18 February 2009 by garyi
Roy I wish I owned one to be able to tell you, haha.
Posted on: 18 February 2009 by gary1 (US)
Roy,

The IPUI from the browser looks exactly like what you see on the front plate of the HDX.

I use mine via a windows tablet pc which is wirelessly connected to my LAN. All other connections are direct ethernet.

The interface is very easy to use, make changes, add tracks on the fly, make playlists etc... It is not perfect, but version 1 was pretty good I must say and very attractive as well. There are some things that need to be addressed and I know I've personally e-mailed Naim with the things that I've found in my 5 months of use. I hope alot of these things have been sorted out and will appear in the new version soon to be released.

Because of a few issues, some things need to be done via the desk top client which I believe requires windows at this point. If I had a Mac I'd add the windows software and then problem solved.
Posted on: 18 February 2009 by Roy T
Mr G and Mr G, spot on and exactly the information I was seeking. A wander down to my local dealer with my Ubuntu / Mozilla powered laptop under my arm may be in order.

Many thanks.
Posted on: 18 February 2009 by james n
Good to see the HDX getting some good press from some happy users on here at last. Glad you are enjoying it.

James
Posted on: 18 February 2009 by gary1 (US)
quote:
Originally posted by james n:
Good to see the HDX getting some good press from some happy users on here at last. Glad you are enjoying it.

James


James, the majority of HDX users who are enjoying their kit either do not know about the forum or read and do not post. They, IMO are the lucky ones. Winker
Posted on: 21 February 2009 by BobF
quote:
The overall character of the HDX is quite subtle. It manages to convey a quite astonishing degree of detail, undeniably more than my CDS3 on some CD's. However it presents it all in a very unfussy and integrated way. It never shouts, more draws you into the music as a complete and balanced picture. It sounds very 'fresh' and clean but it definitely has a weightier bass than the CDS3 and the overall tonal presentation is somehow fuller. The bass is not slow or fat, and don't for a moment think it is overwhelming but my SBL's have revealed hidden depths this week. The top end is very clean and pacy but never shrill. When the music gets gritty it can sound as sharp and textured as you want but it sounds great with choral music which has a lovely rolling depth and shimmer, especially at greater volumes.



Hi Bruce

Good description. I am running a nude HDX and found the same thing with regard to detail, at first you think you have lost some, but as you listen it is there in spades.

Cheers

Bob