Pure streamer from Naim?

hi pcstockton,
don't get me wrong- the HDX is fantastique and it gives you a big push when adding the XPS! But right now, i could live without the internal disks and the cd-drive!

t#,

Not to be a dick but, why did you buy it then? Why not just sit tight and wait for the Naim DAC?

That is what the $180 Beresford is for!

>>That is what the $180 Beresford is for!

You need a considerably more elaborate DAC to match the sound of HDX, a Transporter or Linn DS. I surveyed Transporter owners with exotic CD players and DACs, (EMM, dCS, Esoteric), all of them think these exotic DACs with clock sync are of about he same level as the Transporter stand alone. There is also one fella with an elaborate system consisting of Magico speakers who swears by the Transporter, and has since given up his CD12, he did not think his exotic DACs bettered the transporter, at least not by much.

I also owned the Beresford due to the recommendation of some in this board. It was no better than the $299 Squeezebox 2.

>>Why not just sit tight and wait for the Naim DAC?

I am also receptive towards a Naim DAC. But after trying many DACs, I find a certain "rightness" with players with built in DACs. May be Naim was right all along about gluing their DACs into their CD players.

>>the HDX is fantastique and it gives you a big push when adding the XPS!

AS I said before, I think half of the cost of the HDX was put into isolating that built in hard disk which is a electrical and mechanical nightmare in terms of noise. And even after all that money into isolating it, it can oinly approach the quality when there is no hard disc involved.

On the other hand, the built in CD player is nice for me personally, who has always wanted to try a Naim CD player but never find justification for a stand alone CD player due to satisfaction with Transporter streamer.

The Uniti is sort of the answer with no Hard disc and a CD drive, but Naim decided streaming is only for teenagers who do not care about or afford Naim separates. To Naim, pure streaming is for the iPod dudes.

Like I said before, I guess us old farts who owned Naim for years are out of luck with our high end Naim iPods.

why did i buy HDX? well, it sounds great (thats why i sold my CDX2) ...but now, i use more music stored on my NAS system (with flac files) and i move nearer to HDX (it's just 50cm away from my ears) so i can easy live without internal drives! basically, i use the HDX as a streamer. Does anyone know when the Naim DAC comes out? Hope to see it in Munich...

Again, I'll differ in my comments.

I understand the continuing debate about the ripping/HDD on the HDX. You will eventually need an external NAS to rip to or to transfer files to as the HDX fills its drive.

Where I differ in my opinion is the a computer hooked up to a Naim DAC will equal the HDX. The HDX is also a music player developed by Naim with whatever internal components they have chosen to use.

Again the sound card in the PC/Mac is not the equal of what's been put into the HDX. While I know that most comments from the show were that the HDX/DAC was much better than MAC/DAC. A few felt they were the same. Those comments also tended to come from those who also prefer other DACs and feel that they are equal to expensive CDPs.

Again it's a personal preference as I don't want to start another argument over this topic.

Let's just agree that opinions will differ.

quote:

Originally posted by David Dever:
but NaimNet can–and can do video as well.

Is this via the Netstreams backbone or are we about to get some Naim love in the videa category?

quote:

Originally posted by gary1 (US):
Again, I'll differ in my comments.

I understand the continuing debate about the ripping/HDD on the HDX. You will eventually need an external NAS to rip to or to transfer files to as the HDX fills its drive.

Where I differ in my opinion is the a computer hooked up to a Naim DAC will equal the HDX. The HDX is also a music player developed by Naim with whatever internal components they have chosen to use.

Again the sound card in the PC/Mac is not the equal of what's been put into the HDX. While I know that most comments from the show were that the HDX/DAC was much better than MAC/DAC. A few felt they were the same. Those comments also tended to come from those who also prefer other DACs and feel that they are equal to expensive CDPs.

Again it's a personal preference as I don't want to start another argument over this topic.

Let's just agree that opinions will differ.

yes that might be true , that the ripping and playing over the hdx is essential to a typical naim sound reproduction and a pc or mac hooked up to the naim dac will sound different. but maybe the second solution will still be very satisfying ( a matter of taste )

what about a rip streamer ?... drop the ridiculous small internal drives and use the place for a better dac or a bigger transformer and improve even the sound of the hdx replay. in that case you will just need to attach a nas, something what need to be done today anyway , when you a a serious music listener .

GREAT!!!!

seriously i would have bought a hdx long ago. since i believe in the techniques naim is using for ripping and replaying the music. something what will be up to date for a long time ( because it is software based can also be updated by the user ).on the other hand the discs and the drive is something , what will be change the whole time in the future and will give the hdx a maybe not too long living span ( the first version of teh ripp-transport has been changed already. following by much shorter rippingtime 3 min ).maybe it would be clever to free the hdx from stuff like that ?also to make it an save future investment. in the end it isn´t so cheep.

quote:

Originally posted by pylod:
seriously i would have bought a hdx long ago. since i believe in the techniques naim is using for ripping and replaying the music. something what will be up to date for a long time ( because it is software based can also be updated by the user ).on the other hand the discs and the drive is something , what will be change the whole time in the future and will give the hdx a maybe not too long living span ( the first version of the rip-transport has been changed already. following by much shorter ripping time 3 min ).maybe it would be clever to free the hdx from stuff like that ?also to make it an save future investment. in the end it isn´t so cheep.

There have always been rumors/discussion of a "high-end" version of an HDX. With the D/A converter, it is easy to imagine one that comes in three boxes. One box being a d/a (streamer and hopefully free of any moving parts but WITH an analog volume control), one box that houses the hard drives and transport for ripping (the way I personally believe it should have always been) and then the power supply.

That said, there is something to be said for a perfect rip, every time. I just had a large portion of my music collection professionally ripped in WAV., and I will forever, leave it to the professionals going forward. Maybe that is the special sauce of the HDX. People do such a lousy job ripping on their own that just having a decent rip, improves the sound...

quote:

Originally posted by Cjones:

quote:

Originally posted by pylod:
seriously i would have bought a hdx long ago. since i believe in the techniques naim is using for ripping and replaying the music. something what will be up to date for a long time ( because it is software based can also be updated by the user ).on the other hand the discs and the drive is something , what will be change the whole time in the future and will give the hdx a maybe not too long living span ( the first version of the rip-transport has been changed already. following by much shorter ripping time 3 min ).maybe it would be clever to free the hdx from stuff like that ?also to make it an save future investment. in the end it isn´t so cheep.

There have always been rumors/discussion of a "high-end" version of an HDX. With the D/A converter, it is easy to imagine one that comes in three boxes. One box being a d/a (streamer and hopefully free of any moving parts but WITH an analog volume control), one box that houses the hard drives and transport for ripping (the way I personally believe it should have always been) and then the power supply.

That said, there is something to be said for a perfect rip, every time. I just had a large portion of my music collection professionally ripped in WAV., and I will forever, leave it to the professionals going forward. Maybe that is the special sauce of the HDX. People do such a lousy job ripping on their own that just having a decent rip, improves the sound...

yes something like that will most probably appear on the marked sooner or later.what about some more boxes ?...can never get enough of boxes ...

i still would decide for the hdx´sans disc . rise the price bit and build a proper dac inside and bring it to cds3 level in one box

quote:

Originally posted by pylod:
i still would decide for the hdx´sans disc . rise the price bit and build a proper dac inside and bring it to cds3 level in one box

Why the CDS 3 level? Why not the CD 555 level? I recall that lots of people here are saying that the Lavry DA10 sounds better than the CDS 3?

quote:

Originally posted by QTT:

quote:

Originally posted by pylod:
i still would decide for the hdx´sans disc . rise the price bit and build a proper dac inside and bring it to cds3 level in one box

Why the CDS 3 level? Why not the CD 555 level? I recall that lots of people here are saying that the Lavry DA10 sounds better than the CDS 3?

because maybe the hds is reserved for the cd555 performance.i had alavry myselve. it was and is very good in my opinion. i still would rate it somwhere between a cds2 and cds3...good enough if u ask me ...

quote:

Originally posted by gary1 (US):
Again the sound card in the PC/Mac is not the equal of what's been put into the HDX.

That assumes you use a "soundcard". Why would you do that when you can output via USB? I do.

Secondly, I dont think Naim developed any "new" technology with the computer parts inside the HDX. I would bet that everything in there is "off the shelf". They just put it all in one box for us.

Yes it does sound amazing...Truly a joy.

I wouldn't chalk up much of its incredible performance to its computer parts or Windows software or Seagate hardrives.

I would be more inclined to look at the clocking, the DAC, the analog outputs (might be most important) etc...

There is no question the HDX is special. But the fact that it can be upgraded with the Naim DAC tells me all I need to know.

Theoretically, there should be little if any difference between:

1) a NAS feeding the HDX with Naim DAC.
2) same NAS feeding PC then output to Naim DAC.

quote:

Originally posted by gary1 (US):
Again it's a personal preference as I don't want to start another argument over this topic.

It sure seems like you want to.

You cant just hit and run. "I am right and there need not be any further discussion about it."

Whatever....

quote:

Originally posted by gary1 (US):
Those comments also tended to come from those who also prefer other DACs and feel that they are equal to expensive CDPs.

Implying that we should discount their opinions and experiences??

Of course it isn't possible that the contrary views we held by mostly HDX owners. No way.

Who is more invested in their preconceptions and prejudice? A person who is pissed they spent $8500 for $500 of kit, and needs to hear a difference? Or the person who is willing to do either, but cannot hear a huge difference to justify the cash outlay of an HDX?

Ahhh one of the most heated debate on audiophile forums and I agree, a quality digital out is the same as any other.

Anyhoo...pcstockon what do you use to get a digital signal via usb?

Occean,

I personally use an M-Audio Transit. 24/96 bit perfect passthru. USB to toslink.

Although I have looked into some more sophisticated, reclocking, I2S converting, USB to Digi converters, I am waiting for a USB DAC of my liking.

I am hoping the aspects of such a converter would be incorporated into my future DAC. If not, this kind of USB-to-digi solution could always be incorporated.

Check out some products available from Empirical Audio.

-p

PC,

I purposely put in my comments that it was a "personal preference." I have no preconceived notions as I also said we'll have to wait and listen. Furthermore I'm not pissed at all over what I spent and I've listened to the HDX and the Lavry so I know where my opinion sits at this point.

I would like to just have the DAC out so I can hear if it is additive or not to my system. I'd like to know what they are working on as I'd like to buy once and not look to trade in after a time.

As far as you hypothesis vis a vis the PC/DAC or HDX/DAC unfortunately from what I've heard despite your repeated comments that they should sound the same they do not.

quote:

Originally posted by gary1 (US):
I'm not pissed at all over what I spent and I've listened to the HDX and the Lavry so I know where my opinion sits at this point.

I know you are not pissed. I was referring to those who have actually heard the DAC with the HDX at the show you referenced.

And yes you say "personal preference". But what you mean is personal conjecture. Since you haven't heard the DAC with a PC nor with an HDX, I am not sure why you would have a preference of one over the other.

But I can guess how you will feel when you do.

Did you get a chance to hear the HDX through the Lavry? I would guess that a PC/Lavry vs HDX/Lavry would bear some of this out. For example, I did not think the HDX in front of the Beresford sounded much different than my PC, although I didn't A/B them on the spot. Although, the HDX bare was miles ahead of anything through the Beresford. Once again, I think the DACing and other aspects are to blame here. Not the source of the files.

-p

quote:

Originally posted by AllenB:

It's also widely regarded that the DAC in the HDX isn't up to much, kind of confirmed by the fact that the forthcoming standalone DAC will be an upgrade to it. Where Naim excel is in the output stages, and these are most affected by the power supply upgrades, hence the improvement in the HDX when using the XPS2 / 555PS over it's in board supply. IMO the performance of the DAC and computer parts remain the same, no big deal here.

I agree with that, I am willing to try the Naim DAC with my "audiophile PC". Since my Lavry improved with the addition of a Lynx AES16 I think the latter will be also hard to beat with the Naim DAC. I have still to be convinced that an stand-alone streamer has something extra over a standard computer and a good low jitter sound card. What is more, an asynchronous USB or firewire DAC would even make nearly irrelevant the audio device used in the computer, which would make any computer a perfect streamer solution. Let's see how Naim plots its strategy regarding streamers, hd players and dacs but I think I will stick to my computer and put the money in the DAC/PSU.

I think that's not a stupid at all, assuming the Naim ripping software is far superior to all the rest. We have seen the superior ripping issue is controversial, I know my PLEXTOR drive with its utilities are supposed to make perfect rippings, just as widely used programs also claim to do. If Naim ripping software is really superior they could make a good profit selling it for computers.

Weiss sells a sampling rate converter software (SARACON), for windows. This is intended for pro users and it is also supposed to do far superior upsampling than ordinary playback software.