Official DAC Argument Thread

True but there is a clear difference. It's also been mentioned regarding the PCI upgrade for the HDX. Not only are there differences, Naim apparently understands why and how to optimise. That they don't fill us and competitors in on every nuance is understandable. Sales are about being able to dem and hear a difference, not some extensive explanation of life, the universe and everything which is about what it would take to cover all the bases. Look at the last thread to see how poorly that goes over other than as an exercise.

quote:

Originally posted by dave simpson:
Patrick,

Just curious as to how some would react to measurements opposing what they experience vs the actual test outcome;-)

I honestly don't believe anyone out there will deny their senses despite the natural desire to be "enlightened" with science always telling us what must be.

regards,

dave

That is a great question Dave.

Got to admit that if I were the only person in the world who thought that, say, a particular component sounded great, and everyone else in the world thought it sounded like crap, then I would probably not buy it. Peer pressure is a powerful force!

I guess I wouldn't mind occasionally being in the minority opinion about some audio product, but generally speaking, I gravitate to the well-reviewed stuff.

Also, I think we all like to be reassured that we are making smart audio purchase decisions. Isn't that part of why we all gather here? To confirm what we think we are hearing? Isn't that why we seek the consul of an experienced, credible dealer, etc.?

Would be different for me if I was really good at the science. If I was, I think the DIY path would be pretty cool. Heard the other day from my dealer that Bill Firebaugh (inventor of the Well Tempered Amadeus) builds his own amps and electrostatic speakers. I think it is only in these very rare people where the science and the senses are actually the same thing.

Hook

quote:

Originally posted by js:
True but there is a clear difference. It's also been mentioned regarding the PCI upgrade for the HDX. Not only are there differences, Naim apparently understands why and how to optimise. That they don't fill us and competitors in on every nuance is understandable. Sales are about being able to dem and hear a difference, not some extensive explanation of life, the universe and everything which is about what it would take to cover all the bases. Look at the last thread to see how poorly that goes over other than as an exercise.

Yeah, but if a customer asks you: Why does that 500 cost so much more than the 100, do you simply demo it? Don't you also have to tell the customer the whole story in order to help them grasp the uniqueness and value of the high-end?

I do appreciate that Naim walks a fine line when it comes to disclosure. Competition is fierce, statements can be taken out of context and used against them, etc.

But if a company representative is willing to say something in a public setting, then they should be willing to put it in writing.

And oh yeah, the last thread did not go over well simply because people took Andy's technical arguments personally. Even though he never told anybody that they weren't hearing differences, people inferred from his arguments that they he was calling them liars.

Hook

quote:

Nothing and no one (but Andy and a few less vocal members) suggest that all transports will sound identical.

I do not think all transports sound identical. But if I believe in the nDAC white paper. The nDAC should make them all sound good and Naimish.

quote:

The White Paper (my only source of knowledge on the subject) DOES NOT mention anything to the contrary.

Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that they sell transports that cost more, some twice that of the nDAC?

quote:

In fact it specifically uses words/phrases such as "minimizes", "significantly reduces" etc... .

But is it significant enough for us not to have to worry about transports? Or not significant enough so they can sell more transports that cost more than the DACs? What would you say if you were their marketing person?

quote:

Also they specifically did not include a traditional USB input due to the connection to a "noisy electrical environment".

So according to the paper, USB is noisy, but SPDIF is less noisy…. And nDAC is designed to isolate “significant reduce” the impact of the 2 culprits, electrical noise and jitter. Being a dumb consumer reading into white paper of my favorite logo, I thought buying the nDAC and a half decent transport would be quite sufficient. And so far my experience agrees with that. But being an audio-fool, I am always open to better.

quote:

Clearly Naim DOES think that sources will sound different or they wouldn't have this reservation.

Again, it would be stupid for them to shut the door completely. In audio fool world, it is always wise to leave the door slightly open. Imagine if Naim declares that all transports will sound identical through this DAC, that would kill a significant portion of their business.

Linn was super brave in explicitly telling everyone that CD is dead in their book, and bet their company on their DS range. That is a big gamble but I have a feeling that it also saved their company.

quote:

And regarding your "test", do you have any clue how expensive and difficult it would be to perfectly measure the output of a speaker in an effort to measure source comparisons?

quote:

It would be easier to measure the DACs digital output, which i think the White Paper describes, and I am sure Naim has done.

I do not know. But I know that Naim and most high end vendors and Naim customers are decidedly in the subjective camp. Remember Stereo Review and how we defied it?

quote:

Do you really think Naim would develop, market and sell two different CD transports if they couldn't hear (yes HEAR, NOT measure) a difference between the two?

I frankly don’t know. But if they have transports to sell they’d better be quite biased in their listening test.

quote:

Wouldn't they be better off screaming from the rooftops that the Naim DAC is completely source independent?

No, count the number of CD players and transports they have and add the prices of all those up including power supplies. That would be about 20 times the price of the nDAC. Would Naim want to stop selling all those transports/CD players? May be until they develop a whole line of streamers & nDACs to recapture that revenue.

quote:

Do you REALLY think Naim has data to the contrary but are withholding it and basically lying to everyone?

Not lying, the whole high end audio industry is based on subjectivity. Let’s face it, we are all buying dreams to a degree. Or else we would all be buying Denon receivers and be perfectly happy with it.

If that is lying, than everyone in the high end world are liars. Depends how much you believe in your own lies I guess…

I would not call them liars or else I would not buy their products. But Naim is a business after all. What Naim is doing is correct, leave it up to the users to judge. Meanwhile I am quite sure that Naim is very very busy developing new products, network clients, DACs for the brace new world. I think they have opened a Pandora box and need to monetize on it.

When I was young nipper and the first time that DAC's were in vogue the big downside was jitter. I guess that is why Naim stuck to the one box policy and had no digital outs on their players. There was a big push at the time for clock upgrades with companies like Trichord seliing upgraded clocks and power supplies for them I even had a Digital Output Board fitted to an old Micromega Logic player connected to a PT Ordinal. ("Jitterbusters" such as the Theta TLC, Monarchy DIP and the Trichord Pulsemaster(?) sold well too).
I'm guessing that the idea of the upgraded clock was to get as close to the 44.1kHz CD spec as possible to get the data off the CD as best as you can? I don't know a great deal about electronics but I am guessing that the more precise the clock in the transport/player then the more precise/accurate the data is read off the disc? If it isn't there in the first place then all your reclocking etc won't bring it back even though you may well have a legitimate data stream that will still be read by the DAC.

By the way don't all modern DAC's reclock and buffer the data?


"Stands back, lights the blue touch paper and waits for the replies"

I thought so too. My previous Weiss DAC also re buffers and with noticeable delays.

Actually the main reason I change to the nAC, aside from being buts for the logo, is I expect the voicing of the analogue stage should be more naimish, making all sources sounding like a Naim.

Come to think of it, had they not made the white paper and shroud this in mystery, people would still buy it and would not ask all these difficult questions.

IMO, with computer audio it is more difficult for manufacturers to distinguish themselves from others. After all most of us rely on and expect 100% correct transfer of data every day. Nobody would ever think twice when receiving a Powerpoint of whether it is generated from an Acer or a Lenovo, or if it is transmitted with Cisco routers or CD or LAN.

In the olden days we buy a Naim amplifier or a LP12 largely because they have been blessed by the hands of gurus. Times have changed, and it is surprising how well both Naim and Linn has evolved into this brave new world.

quote:

Originally posted by ghook2020:

I would argue that they have always had such a list. It is called the Price List. And it shows clearly how Naim ranks their components.

I think people that prefer the 300 to the 500 disagree.

Some prefer the 5x to the CDX2. Others think the 72 is better than anything but the 552. I think Ive often read here that the FC is "better" on the 5x than a HC.

The price list will give you some general idea of "fineness" but personal preference (read "better") wildly varies.

-Patrick

quote:

Originally posted by nap-ster:
I'm guessing that the idea of the upgraded clock was to get as close to the 44.1kHz CD spec as possible to get the data off the CD as best as you can?

Not just to get close to 44.1, but to reduce jitter in it. The absolute frequency is relatively unimportant compared with clock stability. The problem with a clock is that crystals don't produce square waveforms and you need some form of circuit around them to resonate and then get a half decent and usable clock out of the back. Quality of the clock is thereby governed by the circuit that generates it and it's stability under differing temperature/voltage/noise conditions.

quote:

but I am guessing that the more precise the clock in the transport/player then the more precise/accurate the data is read off the disc?

Depends what you mean by precise. Getting the right data off the disc is quite easily, getting it off at exactly the right time is more difficult.

quote:

By the way don't all modern DAC's reclock and buffer the data?

The issue isn't about reclocking/buffering per se, but how you generate the clock that does the readout. Traditionally, the clock that does the readout is slaved to the incoming clock in some way so that the buffer neither over or underfills. I'm not sure many/any other DACs will implement the same strategy that Naim have of taking a number of reference clocks and selecting the one that best suits the incoming rate. It's a clever solution to the problem, but it is potentially expensive as you need some form of active monitoring (like a DSP) in the system to rate control.

quote:

Originally posted by JYOW:

quote:

Nothing and no one (but Andy and a few less vocal members) suggest that all transports will sound identical.

I do not think all transports sound identical. But if I believe in the nDAC white paper. The nDAC should make them all sound good and Naimish.

Good post JYOW.

I wish we could agree on what we mean by transports. I have no problem with CD players sounding different - I know they do. But this is based on experience of the complete machine, which includes its own DAC and analog stage. Are we to assume that the bitstream coming from the dig. out of a CD5X and CDX2-2 are the same?
If so, then perhaps the nDAC is not doing as good a job as we are being led to believe, in levelling the playing field

I guess I'm more interested in why hard disk sources (including streamers and USB sticks) sound different through the nDAC

I can confirm through my limited efforts that they do, but let's not prejudge what AndyS will find.

PS : I don't think measuring the output of the same speaker twice will yield the same results within the realms of accuracy of measuring two different digital sources

quote:

Originally posted by pcstockton:

quote:

Originally posted by ghook2020:

I would argue that they have always had such a list. It is called the Price List. And it shows clearly how Naim ranks their components.

I think people that prefer the 300 to the 500 disagree.

Some prefer the 5x to the CDX2. Others think the 72 is better than anything but the 552. I think Ive often read here that the FC is "better" on the 5x than a HC.

The price list will give you some general idea of "fineness" but personal preference (read "better") wildly varies.

-Patrick

You are 100% correct, Patrick. Not everyone agrees with how Naim stack ranks their products.

But in the case of those products with digital outputs, I am just not sure how Naim stack ranks their ability to function as transports for the DAC.

The only clue I have is what Munch says he heard from a Naim guy at a show. Not saying Munch is wrong. He seems like a really good guy, and I have no doubt he heard what he heard. That is, unfortunately, not enough for me to agree that it represents Naim's official position.

And again, you are right. If Naim said at one of these shows that the CDX2 is a much better sounding digital transport than the CD5 XS, then there will still be plenty of us that do not agree.

Would be interesting to have a dealer take the covers off the two CD players and tell us....Voila!...the S/PDIF processor on the CDX2 is hand-crafted in Salisbury, and the one in the CD5 XS is a commodity import. Then, even if they still sound the same to most of us, at least a value argument could be made based on their reliability, etc.

Have also been thinking more about JS's comment about Naim's expectations of their dealers, and how critical the demo is to the sale. Let's say a customer is sold on the Naim DAC. And then the dealer demos both CD5 XS and CDX2 as digital transports. Then the customer says, gee, I really cannot hear a difference, but given the CDX2 is a much more expensive player, it just has to be a better digital transport, right?

What is a dealer supposed to say? Yes it is, because we heard a Naim representative at a show said so? Of course not...the answer is always the same...let your ears be your guide grasshopper...what you say is true, the CDX2 is more expensive...trust your ears....and...the CDX2 is sold.

Hook

PS - I will now shut up on this topic. Am not trying to piss anyone off. Love Naim, love my dealer, customer for life, etc. I simply feel that Naim is making a mistake by allowing this inconsistent (non-existent?) messaging about their products to persist, and I think it ultimately places dealers in an awkward position with respect to selling with integrity.

I'd tell him not to buy it. Fortunately, I doubt it comes up for a couple of reasons. Not many are looking for an expensive transport and if they are, they will hear the difference. I'm always telling clients that if they don't hear a difference to save their money or spend it where they can benefit more. The problems appear when they can hear every difference which is not uncommon when presented in a proper swquence and that's where value guidance is important. You also get folks that aren't audiophiles per se and don't really care about differences in lesser kit because it's just different as opposed to better, worse and you need to hit a threshold of goodness before anything becomes important to them. They are actually into music rather than care about hearing differences. These folks are often the most rewarded for making the effort to find a Naim dealer.

Not sure on the rules of links (it still seems a bit arbitrary to me) but I found some great questions asked of a number of key people at different companies (e.g. Bel Canto, Weiss, Playback Designs etc) at Positive Feedback. Have a look here:

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue41/ca_intro.htm

Whilst there are a few dissenters, most say that if you have good jitter rejection and RFI immunity, the source doesn't matter. Whether you believe them or not, the fact they asked 10 people exactly the same questions makes for interesting reading.

Apologies if this has been posted before, but I've been on a boring conf call and it kept me going

quote:

Originally posted by ghook2020:

What is a dealer supposed to say?

ANY good dealer would tell them to get the 5x, AND get a powerline, hiline and new level of fraim for the difference in outlay.

Dealers are about developing relationships not screwing people over. My dealer wont let me buy things somethings ("wait for the naim DAC"). He had an olive HC but said "you dont want it". It needed servicing.

-Patrick

quote:

Originally posted by Andy S:

Whilst there are a few dissenters, most say that if you have good jitter rejection and RFI immunity, the source doesn't matter.

Is the Naim DAC, and ALL of its relevant parts, "immune" to RFI? is anything?

quote:

The nDAC should make them all sound good and Naimish.

I thought buying the nDAC and a half decent transport would be quite sufficient. And so far my experience agrees with that.

completely agreed JYOW.

quote:

Originally posted by pcstockton:
Is the Naim DAC, and ALL of its relevant parts, "immune" to RFI? is anything?

Well, my source is connected by optical and 10ft away from the DAC. Plus the DAC sits inside a Faraday cage, so should be as immune as you can get from stray RFI from outside.

It will be interesting to listen (and I will try too assuming we have time) when James is here as the sensible place to put any other equipment to test is ontop of the nDAC. Also, I have a DVD player that has coax out, so again, an interesting test.

PS. The pics interspersed in those articles linked to are great. Seen most of them before, but I just love the one of the RAND Org. view of a home computer in the year 2004.

Andy,

It appears you have taken decent measures to try to minimize possible effects of the source. This is most likely why you are experiencing little to no difference between sources.

And I would agree that in a vacuum, or in theory, that all sources would sound the same through the Naim DAC if bit perfect.

But as we are in reality where the Mac Mini might be sitting on the Fraim and connected via a BNC Hiface, and might compromise something in the chain to the point that USB is "better"

In my case I have a electrically noisy PC that silently vibrates a lot (relatively speaking), sitting within 12" of both the DAC and my Preamp. I would be an idiot to think that the PC could not possibly affect SQ either in the DAc stage, the analog outputs, or my preamp in some fashion. If I got a Hiface and connected via coax or BNC it could even get worse.

Shit, if it matter what side of the rack you site your Hicap, how can a PC sitting directly next to things not have some detrimental effect.

So when you consider ALL of the possible sources, methods of connection, mains issues etc, I can easily see why people are hearing differences.

I am just guessing, but I think a Unitiserve, HDX or CDX2 might be optimized to work in concert with a traditional Naim system in a way my PC is not.

Just a thought.... This is why I think we are hearing differences.

The funny thing is everyone is probably correct. You are right that in theory, and when optimized as much as possible, there is little to no difference. Others are right in hearing differences between various compromised sources.

I think the key is that most think the USB is best. It is probably the least compromised, or as perfect as possible.

I am sure the HDX, Uniserve, and CD5x/X2 are probably suitably optimized to minimize extraneous factors. They each bring their own list of merits and are therefore priced differently.

I am also assuming that a if a dealer knows the DAC customer will ONLY use the CDP as a transport for the DAC they will not push people to the CDx2 (which has a better analog output).

Anyway..... my thoughts.
-Patrick

Sources on isolation shelves, with different mains cables, supplies? Funny stuff goind on. The DAC is in a thickish aluminium case. RF shouldn't be real issue unless very strong, at an input or most likely, both.

quote:

...
The funny thing is everyone is probably correct. You are right that in theory, and when optimized as much as possible, there is little to no difference. Others are right in hearing differences between various compromised sources....
-Patrick

Well said Patrick. It is the only conclusion that makes any sense.

The people who are hearing differences are not imagining them. And there is no way to interpret the Naim DAC design as being anything other than source independent.

All that is left is the environment.

Those of us who are hearing differences may be well served by following Andy's example and using a longish Toslink cable to minimize environmental effects when performing comparisons.

Would be interesting to hear from someone who has done this, and still hears differences.

Hook

When I compare, I like to compare to my best source combo which so far has not included a tos.

Crikey - we're only on page 2 and having a love-in.... What is the forum coming to

NO WE'RE NOT! I think we pretty much covered it before. Maybe we should start a new source appreciation thread. Have a fun audition with James, Andy.

I am not a technician, but my understanding of CD transports and CD players in general is that while the data on the CD is, shall we say "perfect", the job of pointing an RF laser at a shiny disk to extract that data in an "error free" state is the first technical challenge.

From a casual read of what has been said in various threads, there seems to be a general belief that what is heading out the SPDIF connection is a bit perfect representation of what was on the disc...is it ?

Semms generally agreed in history that the CD mech has a lot to do with that process and the environment the extraction job is taking place in...

Keen to hear others views..

quote:

Originally posted by js:
NO WE'RE NOT!

YES WE ARE...!

quote:

Maybe we should start a new source appreciation thread.

Only if we can have a "I appreciate all sources equally" thread