Naim vs Benchmark
Posted by: Starre on 21 May 2009
How does the CD5x (got one) compare to Benchmark DAC1?
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by PMR
quote:Originally posted by Eric Barry:
So I guess if I listen to stuff made before 1974 I'm remiss if I don't use JBL 4412/4411 (or their home equivalent L100) fed by Crown amps or Altec 604s fed by McIntosh tubes, despite their very colored sound? Or maybe, just maybe, engineers listen to their monitoring system as a particular lens to which they are sensitive rather than as a privileged version of the truth and we don't need their equipment to climb Mt. Olympus.
And for the record, some of the very worst sounding cds I own were mastered at Abbey Road by Peter Mew. Come to think of it his cds sound like the way people describe the Benchmark--dry, grainy, bright, etched, hard to listen to, lifeless. [Note for the record that my current view is that the Benchmark has a noticeable but slight tendency in this direction but is overall quite good--if not as good as my Naim digital overall.]
This is the million dollar question. I feel you would need to trust the engineer, and as such, I would want to replicate his system as close as possible in order to capture his overall intention. That doesn't mean it will sound better, I just think this is a commonsense approach if you are trying to get to the heart of the recording, and the sense of the moment.
I have a recording from a well know festival artist that was recorded on a 4 track DAT machine, and it is still once of the best recording I have regardless of the likes of Stockfisch, Linn and Naim etc. This recording sounds better through the DAC1 then any other CD player, Lavry etc. I've had the pleasure to try. However, the Lavry, and in particular the DA11, works more enjoyably with all music.
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by JYOW
quote:Originally posted by Eric Barry:
his cds sound like the way people describe the Benchmark--dry, grainy, bright, etched, hard to listen to, lifeless. [Note for the record that my current view is that the Benchmark has a noticeable but slight tendency in this direction but is overall quite good--if not as good as my Naim digital overall.]
I would not go that far. The Benchmark DAC1 that I used to own did not sound grainy, but did sound a bit stark. But it certainly did not "murder" all other mid price CD players as another poster had asserted.
The very average CD5X I just purchased does not give anything to the DAC1 that I remember. Lacking none of the details and having PRaT in spades - something which the Benchmark would never even start to understand IMO. PRat is a strange thing, a sort of thing that you would know when you learn to know it, or when you experience it in real life.
But of course according to one poster my lowly 202/200 system is not qualify to critique the DAC1, which apparently is the holy grail to the audio elites. But in a lowly system such as mine I love the CD5X much more than the Benchmark, but that's just me, and they are both bought out of my own shallow pocket.
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by Adam Meredith
quote:Originally posted by PMR:
.... I feel you would need to trust the engineer, and as such, I would want to replicate his system as close as possible in order to capture his overall intention.
Most, if not all, early development listening at Naim is done in a bare cubic room the acoustics of which could charitably be described as hellish. It is, with experience, possible to listen through the room and it then becomes more starkly informative than a well balanced acoustic. The sound in this room is NOT what we would ever present to customers nor would we choose to live with it ourselves.
The engineer seeks consistent and known tools when working towards the final mix. In (some/many/all) recording studios there will be a listening room separate from the work side.
The sound quality through the two systems/rooms will differ. That in the listening room is what the engineer intends - the sound in the studio is how he achieves it.
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by DeltaSigma
quote:Originally posted by Eric Barry:
But WHAT are they demanding? Generally, dynamic-range compression so their cd sounds as loud as the competition, and eq meant to kill small animals, screaming LISTEN TO ME--ME, ME, OVER HERE LISTEN TO ME.
This is probably the case with a lot of contemporary material (as I said, I'm not a huge fan of a lot of it). However, I would expect that if these recordings were meant to sound that way, and end up doing so when replayed, then the replay equipment is doing its job effectively (garbage in, garbage out, etc.). In that event, I would expect it to also accurately capture the musician's intention when I'm listening to the music I'm interested in - with results that are much more satisfactory to me.
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by PMR
quote:Originally posted by JYOW:
But of course according to one poster my lowly 202/200 system is not qualify to critique the DAC1, which apparently is the holy grail to the audio elites. But in a lowly system such as mine I love the CD5X much more than the Benchmark, but that's just me, and they are both bought out of my own shallow pocket.
There's nothing wrong liking the CD5X in the context of your system.
Though I think you would find the comparison rather interesting if you compared the DAC1/Lavry to a CDS3/555 or other high-end player in the context of a transparent/highly resolving system and then entered the CD5X into the mix. In that you might be surprised by all their similarities. Indeed, the DAC1 may well lead the way if the system is suitably sounded. As I said earlier, many will prefer the Lavry since it's similar sounding to Naim and probably works better in a Naim system all things considered.
The DAC1 isn't perfect, but it's close enough for you to worry about something else in your system, like your speakers.
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by JYOW
quote:Originally posted by PMR:
Though I think you would find the comparison rather interesting if you compared the DAC1/Lavry to a CDS3/555 or other high-end player in the context of a transparent/highly resolving system and then entered the CD5X into the mix. In that you might be surprised by all their similarities. Indeed, the DAC1 may well lead the way if the system is suitably sounded. As I said earlier, many will prefer the Lavry since it's similar sounding to Naim and probably works better in a Naim system all things considered.
The DAC1 isn't perfect, but it's close enough for you to worry about something else in your system, like your speakers.
My Lavry did sound more naimly than the Benchmark in my system. But then again the Naim CD5X was even more naimly, I guess by definition. With the CD5X I found out what PRaT really sounded like.
So given that if one had a Naim system, I guess that one would naturally be looking for more naimness.
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by JYOW
quote:Originally posted by PMR:
The DAC1 isn't perfect, but it's close enough for you to worry about something else in your system, like your speakers.
Shoud I? (be worried about my speakers?)
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by JYOW
quote:Originally posted by PMR:
Though I think you would find the comparison rather interesting if you compared the DAC1/Lavry to a CDS3/555 or other high-end player in the context of a transparent/highly resolving system and then entered the CD5X into the mix.
Actually I have heard the CD555/PS555 in a rather ordinary Naim system, including 202/200 even Nait5i with some <$2000 Neat and Focus Audio speakers. In all cases the CD555 sounded so good it gave me chills. Chills that I never got with my DAC1/Lavry.
But then obviously somehow you have a highly resolving system that managed to show otherwise.
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by kuma
quote:Originally posted by JYOW:
In all cases the CD555 sounded so good it gave me chills. Chills that I never got with my DAC1/Lavry.
Same here.
They just won't time as well as CD555.
Different people listen to different things.
If a CD555 appeals to all people, then I probably don't like it as much as I do and probably wouldn't have bought it.
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by Adam Meredith
quote:Originally posted by kuma:
Different people listen to different things.
The "Naim Sound" can only be a perception and this is individual to the listener.
Naim produce models with which they are satisfied and which, for us, fit into a logical hierarchy. Listeners will bring their taste/opinion to the range - creating an alternative hierarchy.
No problem - this is (a small part of) life.
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by Mr.Tibbs
quote:The DAC1 isn't perfect, but it's close enough for you to worry about something else in your system, like your speakers.
Exactly. The DAC-1 has so little signature of its own that the overall result in a system will be dominated by speaker (and to a lesser extent) amplifier choice. As well as my 102/Hi/250 -- Ergo IIIs, I've tried the DAC-1 through a CB 42.5/110 -- MS20s, and also a Nait3 -- bookshelf Tannoys, and I've been impressed at how Naim-like the presentation is in each case.
I'd love to hear the Mac/DAC-1 via a 552/500 into my Ergo IIIs. Given the sound I'm getting now I'm convinced the DAC-1 could easily stand a more open window than the 102/250. I wouldn't be so sure my old CDX/CDPS would hold up so well under such close scrutiny.
Mr Tibbs
Posted on: 08 June 2009 by kuma
quote:Originally posted by Adam Meredith:
Listeners will bring their taste/opinion to the range - creating an alternative hierarchy.
I guess everyone's definition of *naim like* changes because of it.
Posted on: 09 June 2009 by Eric Barry
I will say that the Benchmark is about as "Naim-like" as I'd expect a $975 box made by someone other than Naim, and who would likely deny electronics can even have a sonic signature such as "Naim-like," could be. This I attribute to a bass that has some force behind it and also knows how to get out of its own way, a quality I find rare in non-"flat earth" audiophile gear. If the Lavry is better it must be quite good. If a Naim Dac (presumably costing 2-3 times as much) is what I expect, then it will be very good indeed, as you Brits say. Still, I hear some residual edginess in the DAC1 and my wife doesn't like it at all.
Posted on: 09 June 2009 by kuma
quote:Originally posted by Eric Barry:
If the Lavry is better it must be quite good.
Wong.
They sound different to one another.
And I don't find either of them Naim like.
Try even a SuperNait DAC.
Now, that's very Naim like.
Posted on: 09 June 2009 by QTT
quote:Originally posted by kuma:
Wong.
Does it sound Chinese? LOL.
Posted on: 09 June 2009 by kuma
Dung.
Posted on: 10 June 2009 by PMR
quote:Originally posted by Eric Barry:
I will say that the Benchmark is about as "Naim-like" as I'd expect a $975 box made by someone other than Naim, and who would likely deny electronics can even have a sonic signature such as "Naim-like," could be. This I attribute to a bass that has some force behind it and also knows how to get out of its own way, a quality I find rare in non-"flat earth" audiophile gear. If the Lavry is better it must be quite good. If a Naim Dac (presumably costing 2-3 times as much) is what I expect, then it will be very good indeed, as you Brits say. Still, I hear some residual edginess in the DAC1 and my wife doesn't like it at all.
There's not problem liking the Naim sound or even thinking it's better. The fun in this hobby is enjoying the music, whilst knowing it can always be better.
Mr. Tibbs, you won't to hear the DAC1 direct through Active ATC. It's not a shoot-out any system would like to face regardless of cost.