If feeding an ndac why does choice of streamer matter?
Posted by: brushwoodgreen on 30 March 2013
Actually why stop there? You can save a ton of money. Buy an airport express, plug it into the nDac and stream from your whatever to the AE
Actually why stop there? You can save a ton of money. Buy an airport express, plug it into the nDac and stream from your whatever to the AE
Because of dropouts.
https://forums.naimaudio.com/di...89#23389351211073389
Fair point
But take away the dropouts which in my experience are rare to occasional. Would the sound quality differ AE to nDac vs NDX/NDS to nDac?
Fair point
But take away the dropouts which in my experience are rare to occasional. Would the sound quality differ AE to nDac vs NDX/NDS to nDac?
In my experience, yes.
If you use the search engine, you should be able to find quite a few threads on this topic. Richard Dane, for example, did quite a bit of testing between different CD transports for the DAC, and heard clear differences. After conducting his own set of listening tests, Simon-in-Suffolk chose the NDX as his transport for the DAC/555PS. There are also my own adventures...
But some folks say they hear no difference. Perhaps it is system-dependant, or perhaps it is expectation bias. Who knows.
@Bushwoodgreen -
Quite a few people have settled on using a Mac or PC as their transport for the DAC. All you need is a good USB-to-S/PDIF converter. Or, if you choose a later model Mac Mini, its optical output is said to be very good.
Personally, I am a big fan of UPnP and nStream, and have now settled on the NDS/555PS DR. I used to own the DAC/555PS, and tried all sorts of S/PDIF transports. I eventually bought the NDX when it first came out -- it sounded better to me and was more reliable than my previous transport, a home-built PC server with an RME 9632 sound card.
Some folks think that using an NDX as a transport for the DAC/555PS is overkill, and it is certainly not an inexpensive option! So, in order to be certain of what I was hearing, I asked Mrs. Hook and a friend of hers to participate in blind tests. In the end, the NDX proved itself to be a clear winner for our setup.
Looking forward to hearing what you choose to do. Best of luck!
Hook
Thank you Hook for your observations and ideas.
Yes, I am trying to grasp why there would be differences between different Naim streaming transports nd5xs vs. ndx vs. nds feeding the Naim dac. As you go up ladder, the audio quality improves but i suspect that's due to the better quality dacs built into the streamers. Do the components in the streaming circuits of these 3 streamers vary in quality and design - so far I have only read subjective reports but little on the relative construction and materials used in the streaming circuits of these 3 streamers.
Your point also alludes to another issue. You have essentially two Naim fans: the computer to ndac camp and the streamers camp but few have experienced both and posted on the journey from one to the other. These transition stories would be fantastically enlightening into the relative merits and cons. If you know of any postings with regard to this I would jump to read them but not easy to find using the search function.
Thank you Hook for your observations and ideas.
Yes, I am trying to grasp why there would be differences between different Naim streaming transports nd5xs vs. ndx vs. nds feeding the Naim dac. As you go up ladder, the audio quality improves but i suspect that's due to the better quality dacs built into the streamers. Do the components in the streaming circuits of these 3 streamers vary in quality and design - so far I have only read subjective reports but little on the relative construction and materials used in the streaming circuits of these 3 streamers.
Most people use Naim network players as sources, not just transports. I have owned the NDX and NDS, and have heard the ND5XS at shows. IME, and most who have heard all three agree that they represent a clear and audible hierarchy. If you are interested in learning about the different designs, you should read the white papers Naim has published for the NDX and NDS. Unfortunately, I don't think they released one for the ND5XS. Nevertheless, this will give you an appreciation of the R&D that went into these designs. Also, there is an older white paper for the DAC that is probably worth reading first, as the network players borrowed a lot from the DAC design. In fact, the NDS pretty much internalized the DAC, and then added streaming!
As far as their ability to deliver a S/PDIF signal goes, the reasons why they sound different are a bit more speculative. From the Naim DAC perspective, I think that most of us have finally gotten around to the realization that digital sources, be they network players or cd transports, still matter. When the DAC first came out, I was convinced by reading the white paper that all of these differences had been erased, and all that was needed was a "decent" S/PDIF output. Too many people with revealing systems have now heard otherwise, and agree that this is simply not the case. And those with ultra-revealing systems seem to be agreeing that this is also not the case specifically with the ND5 XS and the NDX. There are several possible explanations, all having to do with noise transmission of some sort: through the S/PDIF cable, back through the mains, or even through the air! RFI, EMI, mechanical vibration -- all of these matter, and that is why Naim has put so much engineering effort -- both electrical and mechanical -- into all of these areas.
Your point also alludes to another issue. You have essentially two Naim fans: the computer to ndac camp and the streamers camp but few have experienced both and posted on the journey from one to the other. These transition stories would be fantastically enlightening into the relative merits and cons. If you know of any postings with regard to this I would jump to read them but not easy to find using the search function.
One thing you will see is that the computer-to-dac fans tend to be single-setup oriented. Some want to keep networking out of the picture altogether, while others use the LAN to access their music libraries as shares. But their focus is on keeping it as simple as possible. Use the computer's USB as output, and go directly to a DAC V1, or uses a USB-to-S/PDIF coverter to bridge the gap to the DAC.
UPnP users, by contrast, trade off some of that simplicity for flexibility. By using the network, they can listen to the same music libarary on multiple playback devices in multiple locations, and more than one person can listen to the same library at the same time. For example, in addition to my main Naim setup, I also use a Mac running PlugPlayer and headphones while using the treadmill. Mrs. Hook also uses PlugPlayer at her PC, and so on. And, if you go the trouble of making sure your setup is secure, UPnP can be safely extended over the internet to remote locations.
I started off as single user with a PC running MediaMonkey. Then one day, Mrs. Hook said, hey, I want access to the libarary too. My first attempt involved putting the music on a NAS, with each of us mounting the same share, and each of us running MediaMonkey. Unfortunately, everytime I added music to my library, I had to also remember to update Mrs. Hook's copy of the MM database. By moving to UPnP (i.e., "music as a service"), I eliminated the need for multiple private databases. Now, whenever I add music, her UPnP server automatically discovers it and makes it available. Viola!
Anyway, hope this helps a little. At the end of the day, both [PC|Mac]->DAC and UPnP network players accompliah the same thing: ease of access to your music. Both are capable of delivering amazing sound quality. If you are technically inclined, then I think you will enjoy the white papers (look under the product web pages under manuals), but eventually, please let your ears and heart, not your brain, decide what sounds right to you!
ATB.
Hook
Brushwoodgreen, Hook makes some splendid points. I would however encourage to think as an engineer would..( assuming you are not already an engineer). The sound and presentation as the end result is made up of lots of elements all working in harmony and synchronisation. Therefore a D to A converter with its analogue and digital filter and current to voltage converters is equally important to the power supply, clocks and EMI coupling from other items such as streamer boards and SPDIF receiver/buffers.
Therefore what I am trying to say in the real world, although great designs reduce the affects and couplings they are rarely if ever eliminated. So that means a slightly noisier or transport jittery SPDIF can be cleared up at one level like within the NDAC, but in doing so side effects can be caused elsewhere with EMI coupling or clock modulation.. What does that mean? Well different digital sources can sound subtly different into the NDAC and other DACs for that matter.
This point appears contentious to some.. Perhaps whose understanding is limited to sales / marketing papers and block diagrams.. But if you accept this point, a lot of frustration is removed, and ultimately you revert to trusting your ears without your sub conscious telling you what you are hearing can't be happening as it doesn't match with simplified conceptual view of reality.
Therefore to your point. If the ND5XS sounds the same or better than the NDX into the NDAC use that. If the NDX sounds better and you are prepared to spend the additional funds get that.
Simon
And in Naim forum land these two are Kirk and Spock, well actually more Picard and La Forge. But +1. You won't find better info/guidance.
Andy
And in Naim forum land these two are Kirk and Spock, well actually more Picard and La Forge. But +1. You won't find better info/guidance.
Andy
Thanks Andy, but not entirely accurate...
S-i-S is the real deal, and I just play an engineer on TV.
First dibs on being Kirk though, and mostly because he got to make history by kissing Uhura! ;-)
ATB.
Hook
Can I be Harry F. Mudd??
Simon's suggestion of listening and deciding if you can (a) tell the difference and if (b) any difference you hear is "worth it" of course is a fine suggestion. No better route to finding what you like.
Plan B, which I have also done (in addition to in-home, a vs b auditioning), is to simply aim for the top and assume you'll like it. I did that with my NDS and was neither disappointed or left wondering whether I'd have been happy spending less. Indeed I have never had that thought regarding my NDS. I am less and less likely to do that going forward, however.
As Naim says, everything matters.
Into a NaitXS, I liked the UnitiQute -> nDac/XPS-2 combo the best. Yes, even better than the ND5XS or the NDX used as digital streamers into the nDac/XPS-2 - I tried all of them.
The NDX felt tighter - and maybe was better - but I preferred the slightly diffuse nature of the UnitiQute as the transport - and ultimately into the NaitXS level amplification the difference in $$ wasn't worth it - even if I were to convince myself that the NDX is better.
The only reason I would not get the UnitiQute - lack of automation support - which meant I had to sell the nDac/UnitiQute and stick with the NDX. And I did not want to do three boxes for source.
So, other factors to consider too.
In addition system synergy is key:
I much prefer the ND5XS over the NDX into the Nait XS - With or without PSU - on either the source of amp (XPS-2, FlatCapXS, HiCapDR)
It's only when I started using a 202 that I have a clear preference for the NDX - probably also because I've started let things be...
So - source first is a good - as long as you stay within the range - in fact in Naim's marketing blurb where they talk about upgradeability - "The simplest upgrade is to change, say, the CD player or preamplifier for a more sophisticated model in the range" - maybe I'm reading too much into "in the range" ..
I am less and less likely to do that going forward, however.
Well, maybe just once more: get the 252/300. ;-) And then you won't have to do that again.
Very interesting topic. It still looks like very few people have done a serious comparison between a full blown CAS setup (whether through USB/SPDIF converter or not) versus a Naim streamer though
Can I be Harry F. Mudd??
...
Harcourt Fenton Mudd?
You mean that no-good, slippery interplanetary crook, deceiver, fleecer, flim-flammer, hustler, scam artist, shark and swindler?
Why...of course you can! 
