DAC

Posted by: Chris Murphy on 29 September 2009

Stunning. Have mine to do a roadshow with. Just set up and OMG....sorry have to head back and listen... Smile
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by js
quote:
Originally posted by glevethan:
I do not think it is unreasonable for people (me Big Grin) to ask for alternatives to $9K front ends.
Regards
Gregg
Nor do I. Smile
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by glevethan
quote:
Originally posted by js:
I also don't think the HDX is required for goodness from the DAC. An HDX will give repeatable excellent dig out service for those that don't want to mind all the little things or simply want Naim due to good experiences.


Hey guys - how about an HDX "light" - ditch the twin hard drives/ripper and associated (junk) and give us a more reasonably priced digital source that can feed the new DAC. Just don't take too long to do it - time it with the release of the DAC. That way you can sell both a DAC and also the source.

Gregg
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by js
Wouldn't surprise me. STX or Entiti. Big Grin
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by likesmusic
Why would different NAIM sources sound different with this DAC? Isn't the whole ground-breaking point of the DAC that it buffers the data and reclocks it? And that S/PDIF noise is suppressed through electrical isolation of its DSP front end? (to quote the white-paper).
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by gary1 (US)
quote:
Originally posted by likesmusic:
Why would different NAIM sources sound different with this DAC? Isn't the whole ground-breaking point of the DAC that it buffers the data and reclocks it? And that S/PDIF noise is suppressed through electrical isolation of its DSP front end? (to quote the white-paper).


Because despite the fact that the digital information is "bit perfect" there are other factors which influence the final result which you are not accounting for.

In fact many papers suggest that much of the reason for the differences is still unknown despite the fact that they can be heard.

The question is going to be is the Mac/DAC good enough for someone to have the less expensive front end source or not. The decisions from here get more complicated.

I wouldn't expect the "cheaper" sources to sound as good, but the relative or not so relative differences will be for each individual to judge and decide what's right for them.
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by pcstockton
Jeez,

Arent you all understanding that we are talking about very small degrees of difference. A CDS3/XPS while not as fine as a CDS3 /555ps, is still a REALLY nice CDP.

Not using the 555ps with a CDS3 does not make it a shit combo.

Where is this need to "get the most out of" coming from? Are you saying if the HDX/DAC is better than a Mac/DAC you wont buy the Naim DAC? That doesn't make sense.

Surely having a Mac/DAC, and it being VERY good, and then having the option down the road of upgrading to the HDX, would be advantageous? Are you simply trying to avoid the upgrade path?

Its like you are saying you want it the DAC to better your CDS3 but you dont want to pay more for it.

If the HDX/555ps/DAC was better than a DS wouldn't it then be the goal?

I am totally confused at the logic employed here regarding front ends.

Start with a Mac/DAC and see where that gets you. Then upgrade as needed/wanted.
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by glevethan
quote:
Originally posted by pcstockton:
Jeez,

Arent you all understanding that we are talking about very small degrees of difference. A CDS3/XPS while not as fine as a CDS3 /555ps, is still a REALLY nice CDP.

-YES IT IS A REALLY NICE CDP - BUT THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE. IF YOU HAVE NOT THEN DO THE DEMO.

Not using the 555ps with a CDS3 does not make it a shit combo.

-NOT AT ALL - A CDS3/XPS2 IS ABOUT AS ANALOGUE SOUNDING AND FINE AS IT GETS!

Where is this need to "get the most out of" coming from? Are you saying if the HDX/DAC is better than a Mac/DAC you wont buy the Naim DAC? That doesn't make sense.

-NOT SAYING THAT AT ALL. IF I NEED TO SPEND THE $21K REQUIRED FOR THE HDX/DAC/PS THAN I NEED, AS AN EDUCATED CONSUMER, TO CONSIDER THE OTHER ALTERNATIVES IN THAT PRICE LEAGUE.

Surely having a Mac/DAC, and it being VERY good, and then having the option down the road of upgrading to the HDX, would be advantageous? Are you simply trying to avoid the upgrade path?

-IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO AVOID THE UPGRADE PATH ON THIS FORUM.

Its like you are saying you want it the DAC to better your CDS3 but you dont want to pay more for it.

-NOT AT ALL - I JUST DON'T WANT TO PAY MORE FOR SOMETHING AND HAVE IT BE INFERIOR TO MY CDS3. AGAIN SEE THE POINT ABOVE - AT $21K I WOULD NEED TO LOOK AND COMPARE TO OTHER SIMILARLY PRICED ALTERNATIVES (AND THOSE ALTERNATIVES WHICH ARE BOTH CHEAPER AND MORE EXPENSIVE - AND WHICH MIGHT PROVIDE BETTER RESULTS).

If the HDX/555ps/DAC was better than a DS wouldn't it then be the goal?

-YES

I am totally confused at the logic employed here regarding front ends.

-SEE ALL OF THE ABOVE ANSWERS.

-IF I AM NOT MISTAKEN BY LOCKING INTO A HDX THEN I AM ALSO LOCKING INTO ITS SOFTWARE SYSTEM TO CONTROL MY PLAYBACK - DON'T WANT IT. WOULD LIKE THE OPTION TO USE A COMPUTER FRONT END AND THE MYRIAD OF CONTROL SOFTWARE OPTIONS AVAILABLE.

Start with a Mac/DAC and see where that gets you. Then upgrade as needed/wanted.

-THAT WILL WORK FOR MANY HERE. FOR THOSE OF US ALREADY STARTING AT A HIGHER LEVEL IT IS DIFFICULT TO GO BACKWARDS.



-KINDEST REGARDS
GREGG
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by js
quote:
Originally posted by likesmusic:
Why would different NAIM sources sound different with this DAC? Isn't the whole ground-breaking point of the DAC that it buffers the data and reclocks it? And that S/PDIF noise is suppressed through electrical isolation of its DSP front end? (to quote the white-paper).
"How to overcome the problem of S/PDIF noise entering a DAC
The Naim DAC’s high-speed DSP (digital signal processor) front-end is electrically isolated from its high-resolution DAC and analogue circuits. Also, the two sections are run from separate power supplies. Together these measures significantly reduce the digtal RF noise which could affect the analogue stage."

It says electrically isolate from the DAC and analog stages, not eliminate an inherantly noisey stream. There's no smoothing etc. happening here samples will be of signal plus noise at those points sampled. You can only sample what's there. Anything else is an approximation. Electrical noise via the SPdif and supply interaction will still be isolated from the most critical stages. They're minimizing source interaction noise and eliminating jitter but noisey bits aren't perfect ones.
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by kuma
quote:
Originally posted by pcstockton:
Gregg,

Maybe it wont "smoke" the DS, but perhaps it will simply be as good yet different. You know, the whole "house sound" thing.

Sure was.

At the same dealer, I much preferred the HDX over DS.
In fact, the Klimax made me nuts so badly that I had trouble listening the tune all the way through even.
It was so fregging laid back, where is the mojo? Confused
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by aht
It will be interesting to hear the HDX/DAC/555PS vs. 555 comparisons. To me, while both 555 and HDX have the Naim house sound, they ultimately have dissimilar presentations, so it may be hard to declare an absolute winner.
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by pcstockton
quote:
Originally posted by kuma:
I much preferred the HDX over DS...... It was so fregging laid back, where is the mojo? Confused


Kuma,

The HDX, especially with the 555PS, is so damn good I cant imagine it getting much better for me. It is simply too much for me to consider spending on a source. A whole system? Sure. But too much for my budget unfortunately.

I heard the HDX through my 102 and a new 200, my NAPSC and eventually a 282. OH MY F-ING GOD. You must be kidding me. This is like winning $10 Million in the lottery. Sure $236mil would be better, but $10 is just fine for me!!!!!!!!!!

I cant even fathom how good a CDS3 must be if people think the HDX pales in comparison.

I am going to guess it is like the fully tricked, fully Fraimed, LP12/Armageddon/SL/SC, in front of the 252/300/SL2s with n-Sub. Which was face numbingly, hilariously, fantastic. Decapitating. Took my head clear off. This is the ideal, the form.

Active?? Even better? I hate you. It cant get better.

Coming from a 102/180 Beresford. I think I can be REALLY happy with 282/HC/180/Bare Naim DAC.

The HDX/DAC/555PS/ et al, will have to wait for that lottery win. I guess I should start playing.

-patrick
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by kuma
quote:
Originally posted by pcstockton:
I cant even fathom how good a CDS3 must be if people think the HDX pales in comparison.

I think the difference here is the transport obviously.
All S players always sound more natural than X series CD players and that the HDX isn't the exception in the sonic traits.

You might have read about some actually preferring CDX2/555PS combo over S3/555PS. It's a similar sort of difference with HDX.

So, I am interested in hearing the Naim DAC brings the HDX or X players closer to the 'S' camp.

P.S. I found the 555CD to be a whole different kettle of fish from either X or S players albeit still has the Naim sound.
Posted on: 30 September 2009 by Joe Bibb
quote:
Originally posted by JB76:
e.g mac dac "worst" though that seems unfair as it still sounded good.

The HDX was the suprise, was the best in every config with the DAC.



A surprise? You obviously have a different notion of what constitutes a surprise. Given they make the HDX, surely it would have more of a surprise if the DAC implementation was optimised for anything other than that.

The real comparison (for those who wish to) is to compare an HDX/Naim DAC with other source/DAC implementations, where they may not be optimised for one make.

Making a DAC that was optimised for computers rather than your own products, now that would have been a surprise. Big Grin

Joe
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by likesmusic
If we have to accept that different NAIM sources sound different, perhaps because of some not entirely understood or intended causes, then does it not follow that the memory-stick input should be the best of all soures, as it does not involve any residual issues with S/PDIF? So could/should/does a memory stick perform at least as well as an HDX with the same data?
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by Exiled Highlander
Isn't speculation a wonderful thing. Almost as good as listening.

Jim
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by Roy T
Specular speculations when powered by a speculum are wonderful things. Almost as good as listening.
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by Chris Murphy
I have been away from the shop today. I am planning to sneak in early tomorrow to see how the DAC is four days on...

Report in the morning. Day two revealed info I have never heard on albums before...
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by JB76
I have to say I think the HDX sounds quite laid back next to my old CDS1?

Oddly the 555ps made all sources sound a little more forward - perhaps the extra detail? - though I still preffered it, it was truly awesome with the dac.

The point of personnel interest for me is whether the HDX/DAC/XPS combination sounds anything like the HDX/DAX/555PS I heard, if it does then i'm made up Smile

I have to point out that all the combination I commented on where through a 552 pre-am so the differences may well be less noticable through a lesser pre-amp. There is not much point spending £10k on a source and then piping through 2k's worth of amps imho - you need a bit of balance.

I suspect the mac/dac or mac/dac/xps through most systems would be awesome and plenty good enough - and you get spotify/net radio too - the one thing the HDX does not currently support - (yet) Roll Eyes
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by DaveBk
quote:
The point of personnel interest for me is whether the HDX/DAC/XPS combination sounds anything like the HDX/DAX/555PS I heard, if it does then i'm made up

I have essentially the same question - is the 555PS on the DAC worth an extra £2k over the XPS when using a 252/300 level amp?
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by JB76
I asked the guys at naim this and they said the XPS will give you 75% of wha the 555ps will do.

But I guess I have to wait what that means in my system.

Signifiacantly when I heard the HDX/DAC/555ps they guy sitting next to me had a CDS3/555ps/52NAC and he was talking about going shopping after the dem..
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by naken janne
quote:


Signifiacantly when I heard the HDX/DAC/555ps they guy sitting next to me had a CDS3/555ps/52NAC and he was talking about going shopping after the dem..


What did "go shopping" mean? Was he so exited that he was going to buy the dac, or was he so bored that he started thinking abou other things such as what he needed to buy on the way home?
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by JB76
He was considering buying the DAC and felt the hdx/dac/555ps exceeded the CD3/555ps in performace terms (though we did not demo).. Roll Eyes
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by Exiled Highlander
JB

He was trolling. Don't feed the trolls would be my advice.

Jim
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by DaveBk
quote:
I asked the guys at naim this and they said the XPS will give you 75% of wha the 555ps will do.

Not bad at £2k less. I heard the DAC, then DAC+XPS at at early summer roadshow and the XPS made a big difference. This was through an early pair of Ovators that were still suffering from an excessive bass bloom, but the increased detail was still apparent.
Posted on: 01 October 2009 by naken janne
quote:
Originally posted by JB76:
He was considering buying the DAC and felt the hdx/dac/555ps exceeded the CD3/555ps in performace terms (though we did not demo).. Roll Eyes


Thanks, sounds like he must have been impressed. I really have to listen to it myself soon, but still fun to hear your comments. And they do not exactly make me less curious.