Where has the NDX into Hugo thread gone?

Posted by: Simon-in-Suffolk on 19 June 2014

Any ideas? 

There were some heated debates, but no more so than other recent exchanges on the forum, and those threads are still there...

i can only think of negative defensive reasons which I don't associate with Naim at all.. I hope it wasn't to do with that..perhaps the thread can go back into padded cell? It was a fairly useful resource for those wanting to use their Naim equipment with a Hugo source..

Posted on: 15 July 2014 by Aleg
Originally Posted by mikapoh:

Guys, you are all emphasising on system matching after Louis comprehensive review of the Hugo. Question arises - didn't naim source/DAC is the best match with naim amplifiers?  

 

I would say it is more of personal preference and expectations. 

 

On another note, I am intrigued to know how you earth your Naim gears with Hugo in between the chain since Naim use their source as earthing point.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I always thought that Naim uses the amp or the psu as earthing point.

hence the option to put sources into floating or chassis earth.

Posted on: 15 July 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk
Originally Posted by mikapoh:
I would say it is more of personal preference and expectations.

You are probably right. However in my experience the Hugo is beautifully balanced and insightful with  gorgeous  subtleties in textures, overtones and dynamics that simply seem to transform some recordings and grabs you in to that emotional musical experience (for example it moved me to tears when listening to Sandy Denny's Northstar Grassman and the Ravens - her voice had never sounded that evocative and haunting before, as I wrote in my review in the currently deleted thread). However if your system and probably most to do with speakers, has been balanced for a 'hotter' source, then these Hugo benefits may be lost to you or at least diminished.

 

Simon

Posted on: 15 July 2014 by Aleg
Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:
Originally Posted by mikapoh:
I would say it is more of personal preference and expectations.

You are probably right. However in my experience the Hugo is beautifully balanced and insightful with  gorgeous  subtleties in textures, overtones and dynamics that simply seem to transform some recordings and grab you in to the musical expierience. However if your system (probably most to do with speakers) has been balanced for a 'hotter' source, then these Hugo benefits may be lost to you or at least diminished.

My thoughts exactly.

 

The NAD sources, 252 and SF speaker already have a strong impact on the sound and will IMO definitely influence the choice for the most suitable DAC.

Some components need to compensate others to create the balance again. For some it is one component, for others another and others again can follow the 'middle road'.

Posted on: 15 July 2014 by Louis-Andre
Partnered with a Nap 300 my Nac 252 is much more engaging than when I was using it with a Nap 250.2. But I agree this is certainly a factor still has it has its own signature.
 
The Sonus Faber Cremona are probably the second biggest factor I agree. they look and sound gorgeous, but can sound too polite if used with a "too disciplined" Dac.
 
Not the Nad streamer though...this (Dac-less) streaming must be heard to be believed. Sound through this streamer is the most dynamic and open I ever heard, and I compared it with all Naim streamer (and my tweaked SBT/PSU/async USB SPDIG U2S. The Nad M50/M52 combo is a killer of a setup, amongst the very best there is today in the market at any price point (imho). My view at least.
 
Originally Posted by Aleg:
Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:
Originally Posted by mikapoh:
I would say it is more of personal preference and expectations.

You are probably right. However in my experience the Hugo is beautifully balanced and insightful with  gorgeous  subtleties in textures, overtones and dynamics that simply seem to transform some recordings and grab you in to the musical expierience. However if your system (probably most to do with speakers) has been balanced for a 'hotter' source, then these Hugo benefits may be lost to you or at least diminished.

My thoughts exactly.

 

The NAD sources, 252 and SF speaker already have a strong impact on the sound and will IMO definitely influence the choice for the most suitable DAC.

Some components need to compensate others to create the balance again. For some it is one component, for others another and others again can follow the 'middle road'.

 

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Louis-Andre
Hi Jan Erik,
 
I have also used this album totest material for teh past 10years! I love this album
 
No, I have not been able to try the Hugo with another streaming source than Nad...but I do not think this is a problem, as I compared the Nad to a NaimNDX (as streamer only) before buying the Nad,who gave me the most satisfying sound (for 6000 euros the combo,better be )
 
 
I have not been able to try the coax...Ihave 6 digitalcoax cables, but none works on teh Hugo (damn!)
 
Anyway, I am perfectly ok keeping my Teddy for now, who produces the best sound of teh 2, in my set up. If in the future  Naim or Teddy makes a new Dac with more insights on details, that might be what I am looking for. I can be patient!
 
 
Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:
Louis-André,
 
Well done on the write-up. As you say, system matching matters. Funny that you should mention The Barenaked Ladies' Gordon, as this is one of the albums I'm using for an ongoing review of another DAC. The track *The Flag* is the one that caught me. A beautiful rendition of a very sad - and common - story. 
 
Did you try the Hugo with another source than the NAD?
 
Jan

 

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by KRM

Wow! The Teddydac sounds better than the Hugo which sounds better than the NDS, according to taste, in some Naim based systems.

 

Just goes to show the importance of trying before you buy and the perils of swallowing forum chat whole.  Perhaps we should start a new thread - "Extreme System Matching" - where we can write about components that sound better than their Naim equivalenr at 5% of the Naim cost? To be fair, there are probably folk out their who reckon their £1,000 pre bests the 552!

 

Keith

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by HiFiman
Originally Posted by KRM:

Perhaps we should start a new thread - "Extreme System Matching" - where we can write about components that sound better than their Naim equivalenr at 5% of the Naim cost? To be fair, there are probably folk out their who reckon their £1,000 pre bests the 552!

 

Keith

Why not Keith and no doubt there are people who do think their £1000 sounds better then the 552, each to their own.

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by PhilP
Originally Posted by Louis-Andre:
 
Not the Nad streamer though...this (Dac-less) streaming must be heard to be believed. Sound through this streamer is the most dynamic and open I ever heard, and I compared it with all Naim streamer (and my tweaked SBT/PSU/async USB SPDIG U2S. The Nad M50/M52 combo is a killer of a setup, amongst the very best there is today in the market at any price point (imho). My view at least.
 
 

 

Louis-Andre,

 

have you ever tried the M50 with a hard drive other than the M52?  I wonder whether the overall performance would be just as good or is it the combination of the two that produces the best results?

  

Thanks,

 

Philip

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by tonym

There's no doubt that Teddy Pardo makes some very good kit, and specialises in very low-noise regulators, many of which (Super-teddy regulators) I've used in various  DIY projects (not to be detailed on this forum) to great effect. It's these regulators that are mainly responsible for the high quality sound from the T-DAC. I had a fairly brief try of one in my home system (a non-async. USB version) and I can see why folk might like it. However, for me it tended to gloss over details and lacked the airy, detailed sound of my own DAC at the time (a Sabre-based one with Paul Hynes regulators). My 555 was better than both.

 

As has been said by others, it's so important to hear these devices within your own system.

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by AllenB
Originally Posted by KRM:

Wow! The Teddydac sounds better than the Hugo which sounds better than the NDS, according to taste, in some Naim based systems.

 

Just goes to show the importance of trying before you buy and the perils of swallowing forum chat whole.  Perhaps we should start a new thread - "Extreme System Matching" - where we can write about components that sound better than their Naim equivalenr at 5% of the Naim cost? To be fair, there are probably folk out their who reckon their £1,000 pre bests the 552!

 

Keith

So true Keith, so true …… 

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Louis-Andre
Hi PhilP,
 
I only compared the Nad M50 (connected to my Dac) with NDX (again connected to my Dac). Both were very similar, in the sense that they did not seem to affect the sound of the Dac...I felt however that the M50 had a (very slightly) more open sound...but the main reason I bought it is because it supports fully Qobuz.
 
I bought the M52 without an audition. At first, I did not like the sound via my ripped CD, and I thought I had made a mistake. Turned out the Nad supplied USB cable was very bad and affecting the sound quite a bit. I tried a whole lots of USB cable, and the own that did it for me was the Oyaide Continental 5S....wow, this cable has changed everything for the better: better dynamics, better rhythm, more analogue sound...probably my best bang for the buck ever (0.6 m cable is "just" 250 euros).
 
Hope this helps
 
Originally Posted by PhilP:
Originally Posted by Louis-Andre:
 
Not the Nad streamer though...this (Dac-less) streaming must be heard to be believed. Sound through this streamer is the most dynamic and open I ever heard, and I compared it with all Naim streamer (and my tweaked SBT/PSU/async USB SPDIG U2S. The Nad M50/M52 combo is a killer of a setup, amongst the very best there is today in the market at any price point (imho). My view at least.
 
 

 

Louis-Andre,

 

have you ever tried the M50 with a hard drive other than the M52?  I wonder whether the overall performance would be just as good or is it the combination of the two that produces the best results?

  

Thanks,

 

Philip

 

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Louis-Andre

me again, sorry for highjacking the thread.

 

I have serached the house for a high quality digital cable ( optical or coax) that fits the Hugo, and I cannot find any. even my Hifi dealer has nothing that fits it. So I would be really interested in knowing WHICH cable company fit the Hugo?

 

If I can get some advices, I would then like to compare this with the Chord supplied optical cable....maybe it is the latter that has a detrimental impact on the way it sounds in my system...??

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Jan-Erik Nordoen

The sleeve of the Naim DC1 RCA plug is thin enough that it easily fits the Hugo. I've not found any significant differences between it and the optical cable supplied with the Hugo, when feeding it from a UnitiServe. The Hugo seems quite cable agnostic...

 

Jan

 

P.S. your question can hardly be called a thread highjack !

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Aleg
//////////////////Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:

The Hugo seems quite cable agnostic...

 

Jan

 

 

Not wrt to COAX SPDIF vs USB, but that's more than just a cable.

 

COAX SPDIF (using Apogee WydeEye + 2 ferrite chokes) is in my setup preferable to USB (using Vertere D-Fi)

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Louis-Andre
I sense some irony here!
 
Originally Posted by AllenB:
Originally Posted by KRM:

Wow! The Teddydac sounds better than the Hugo which sounds better than the NDS, according to taste, in some Naim based systems.

 

Just goes to show the importance of trying before you buy and the perils of swallowing forum chat whole.  Perhaps we should start a new thread - "Extreme System Matching" - where we can write about components that sound better than their Naim equivalenr at 5% of the Naim cost? To be fair, there are probably folk out their who reckon their £1,000 pre bests the 552!

 

Keith

So true Keith, so true …… 

 

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Jan-Erik Nordoen
Originally Posted by Aleg:

COAX SPDIF (using Apogee WydeEye + 2 ferrite chokes) is in my setup preferable to USB (using Vertere D-Fi)


From the same source?

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Aleg
Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:
Originally Posted by Aleg:

COAX SPDIF (using Apogee WydeEye + 2 ferrite chokes) is in my setup preferable to USB (using Vertere D-Fi)


From the same source?

Not completely. Pathway is different.

 

Source is audioPC with jcat USB3-card, then:

- one is jcat USB-cable into Sonicweld USB/SPDIF via Apogee WydeEye BNC/BNC 50 cm and then vdHull BNC/RCA-adapter into Hugo

- second is Vertere usb-to-micro usb into Hugo

 

 

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Louis-Andre
Hi Tonym,
 
Do I understand correctly that you replaced your CD 555 with the Chord QBD76 HDSD DAC? Have you compared yours with the Hugo?
 
 
 
Originally Posted by tonym:

There's no doubt that Teddy Pardo makes some very good kit, and specialises in very low-noise regulators, many of which (Super-teddy regulators) I've used in various  DIY projects (not to be detailed on this forum) to great effect. It's these regulators that are mainly responsible for the high quality sound from the T-DAC. I had a fairly brief try of one in my home system (a non-async. USB version) and I can see why folk might like it. However, for me it tended to gloss over details and lacked the airy, detailed sound of my own DAC at the time (a Sabre-based one with Paul Hynes regulators). My 555 was better than both.

 

As has been said by others, it's so important to hear these devices within your own system.

 

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Louis-Andre
 
Thanks Jan. If you did not hear much difference, that probably means this is the end of the trial for me. That is a shame, because I would have like to have a slightly more precise Dac like the Hugo. I dont understand why the sound is less emotional via the Teddy in my system, and I seem to be the only one with that issue. Damn. Ho well, that's life, cannot always have everything
 
 
Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:

The sleeve of the Naim DC1 RCA plug is thin enough that it easily fits the Hugo. I've not found any significant differences between it and the optical cable supplied with the Hugo, when feeding it from a UnitiServe. The Hugo seems quite cable agnostic...

 

Jan

 

P.S. your question can hardly be called a thread highjack !

 

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by lovethatsound
The CHORD company Anthem Digital Tuned ARAY coaxial has been made 2 fit the Hugo.
Posted on: 16 July 2014 by PhilP
Originally Posted by Louis-Andre:
Hi PhilP,
 
I only compared the Nad M50 (connected to my Dac) with NDX (again connected to my Dac). Both were very similar, in the sense that they did not seem to affect the sound of the Dac...I felt however that the M50 had a (very slightly) more open sound...but the main reason I bought it is because it supports fully Qobuz.
 
I bought the M52 without an audition. At first, I did not like the sound via my ripped CD, and I thought I had made a mistake. Turned out the Nad supplied USB cable was very bad and affecting the sound quite a bit. I tried a whole lots of USB cable, and the own that did it for me was the Oyaide Continental 5S....wow, this cable has changed everything for the better: better dynamics, better rhythm, more analogue sound...probably my best bang for the buck ever (0.6 m cable is "just" 250 euros).
 
Hope this helps
 
 

Louis-Andre,

 

thanks for your detailed reply.  I'm trying to decide which digital source to go for - likely to be a Mac Mini or a DAC-less streamer so your comments on the NAD M50 were of great interest.  It's a shame that it's so much more expensive in the UK (and Europe) than the US (£1999 versus $1999) but it does look very well-made and the full support for Qobuz integration is a significant plus. I will try to get a home demo.

 

I'm surprised that NAD would go to such trouble developing the "Master Series" and then supply such a poor quality USB. 

 

Thanks again,

 

Philip

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by lovethatsound
Van Den Hul the optocoupler mk 2 optical fits the Hugo.
Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Louis-Andre
Hi Philip,
 
I am really happy with the Nad M50/52, and the Qobuz support is really nice ( I use it all the time). Also, last month Nad made a partnership with Spotify Connect, so that works flawlessly with the Nad as well (of course quality is much less than Qobuz, but useful to find music).
 
The USB cable supplied is low quality (similar quality to the one provided with Hugo), but I think it makes sense for Nad doing this, as it is much better for the buyer to experiment which USB cable works best in his/her system. For example, I tried a variety of Audioquest (up to Diamond ) USB, but fell for the Oyaide who had the most "solid" and analogue sound. 
 
Nad guys are also a joy..they respond to queries within 24 hours, and are very useful.
 
If you want, I can give you more details over phone (you can just drop me an email at "louisandrevill@yahoo.com" and we can exchange numbers.
 
Otherwise, you can buy the Nad combo with confidence in my view. Build quality is very good...they are built like a tank it seems! And it sounds superb to my ears
 
Originally Posted by PhilP:
Originally Posted by Louis-Andre:
Hi PhilP,
 
I only compared the Nad M50 (connected to my Dac) with NDX (again connected to my Dac). Both were very similar, in the sense that they did not seem to affect the sound of the Dac...I felt however that the M50 had a (very slightly) more open sound...but the main reason I bought it is because it supports fully Qobuz.
 
I bought the M52 without an audition. At first, I did not like the sound via my ripped CD, and I thought I had made a mistake. Turned out the Nad supplied USB cable was very bad and affecting the sound quite a bit. I tried a whole lots of USB cable, and the own that did it for me was the Oyaide Continental 5S....wow, this cable has changed everything for the better: better dynamics, better rhythm, more analogue sound...probably my best bang for the buck ever (0.6 m cable is "just" 250 euros).
 
Hope this helps
 
 

Louis-Andre,

 

thanks for your detailed reply.  I'm trying to decide which digital source to go for - likely to be a Mac Mini or a DAC-less streamer so your comments on the NAD M50 were of great interest.  It's a shame that it's so much more expensive in the UK (and Europe) than the US (£1999 versus $1999) but it does look very well-made and the full support for Qobuz integration is a significant plus. I will try to get a home demo.

 

I'm surprised that NAD would go to such trouble developing the "Master Series" and then supply such a poor quality USB. 

 

Thanks again,

 

Philip

 

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Marky Mark
Originally Posted by Louis-Andre:

On the other hand:  I found the Hugo sound a bit “dull” and a bit too “laidback” to my taste (and in my system). While it seems to “check all boxes” rather quite well, I very often felt “disconnected” from the music, focusing more on details/architecture, less on the musical message. Maybe because I have a 252 (less “forward” than a 282), and/or maybe because my speakers (SF Cremona Auditors) are already on the warm side? I really donot know…but in MYsystem, the Hugo missed out a little bit on the emotion of the music.

Sounds like it could be good for those who enjoy analytical listening.

 

The 252 is more revealing of source than the 282 although the latter is still an excellent pre.

 

The 282 is also an energetic pre-amp so perhaps it may limit the dullness of a source?

Posted on: 16 July 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk

Mark, could be.. I don't know the 252, but 552 works well with Hugo so perhaps the 552 is more similar to 282 than 252??

I suspect its more speaker related than NAC however.  

I would say if you prefer an analytical sound I would steer clear of the Hugo, it does dish out the detail like some of the best analytical type sources - it tends to steer a more neutral path.

Simon