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: 07 July 2014 by KRM

Hi Dusty,

 

There are two questions here:

 

- is the Hugo so good it improves on the DAC in the NDS?

- is the NDS so good it improves the way the the Hugo performs compared to lesser front ends?

 

You and I are both lucky enough to own an NDS so both questions are relevant to us. Most people will not buy an NDS with the cash they saved on the Hugo. However, if you have already shelled out on the streamer and the answer to both questions is yes, then it may make sense to buy the Hugo and keep the NDS.

 

The post the others are referencing addresses both questions (with the answer "yes") but focuses more on the second. Other posters have claimed the Hugo is better than the DAC in the NDS. 

 

The buzz surrounding the Hugo generally seems to be limited to claims that it is better than DACs costing 2 -3 times as much. The more extravagant claims (NDS + 555 is nearly 10 times) seem to be confined to this forum (and, yes, I know cost is not the best measure of audio quality) and arguably Hi-fi Choice.

 

I guess the only thing to do is try it or get on with enjoying the NDS :-)

 

Keith

 

 

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk
Originally Posted by KRM:

The buzz surrounding the Hugo generally seems to be limited to claims that it is better than DACs costing 2 -3 times as much. The more extravagant claims (NDS + 555 is nearly 10 times) seem to be confined to this forum (and, yes, I know cost is not the best measure of audio quality) and arguably Hi-fi Choice.

 

Keith, from what I have read the 'extravagant' or interesting claims of performance is certainly not limited to this forum.. I think the conversation (excluding some personal exchanges) on here compared to several  fora has been relatively restrained in terms of x is better than y. Usually this forum is a bit more balanced?

 

i have heard  about Gary's demo off forum. But on forum he said, as you say, both  DACs had certain qualities but there was an overall preference so I understand.. And so it is up to Gary to share again if the original thread is not restored.

 

The interesting bit is the quality of the source for the Hugo, and my theory is the extent of RF ground current on the Coax.

i understand Gary found the NDS as a source significant    compared to a Mac providing async USB.

 

My personal experiences mirror this . However I have found the NDX as a source for the Hugo truly wonderful.. Now others are convinced that an off board PSU helps here. I was less convinced when I tried with a 555PS, but only after I had inserted a healthy sized choke on the DC1.

 

i agree with you in as far as there is only one way to find which you prefer.. Listen to the bloomin' thing!

Simon

 

 

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by GraemeH
Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:
Originally Posted by GraemeH:

Listening to 'Moby Dick' just now and the drums sound like, well...drums!

 

How do they do that then?!

 

G

 

 

Hi Graeme,

 

They sound more like drums because the transient information that defines the attack phase of the drum strike is being more precisely recreated. 

 

"As any good engineer will testify, a recording’s transient detail – in other words, the first few milliseconds of sound energy contained in an instrument’s attack phase – forms a defining part of the overall sound quality of a track. This comes as little surprise when you realise just how much auditory information the ear extracts from a transient, with a sound’s complete identity often being formed in a time period as short as three or four milliseconds. "

(from http://www.musictechmag.co.uk/.../transient-modulator)

 

Daniel Levitin in his excellent This Is Your Brain On Music describes the importance of the attack phase (p. 53) :

 

"The gesture our body makes in order to create sound from an instrument has an important influence on the sound the instrument makes. But most of that goes away after the first few seconds. Nearly all of the gestures we make are impulsive - they involve short, punctuated bursts of activity. In percussion instruments, the musician does not typically remain in contact with the instrument after this initial burst....

 

... The introduction of energy to an instrument - the attack phase - usually creates energy at many different frequencies that are not related to one another by simple integer multiples. In other words, for the brief period after we strike, blow into, pluck, or otherwise cause an instrument to start making sound, the impact itself has a rather noisy quality that is not especially musical - more like the sound of a hammer hitting a piece of wood, say, than like a hammer hitting a bell or a piano string, or like the sound of wind rushing through a tube. Following the attack is a more stable phase in which the musical tone takes on the orderly pattern of overtone frequencies as the metal or wood (or other material) that the instrument is made out of starts to resonate. This middle part of the musical tone is referred to as the steady state...."

 

The avant-garde composer Pierre Schaeffer did some experiments in the 50s where he recorded a number of orchestral instruments on tape. Then using a razor blade he cut the beginnings off of these sounds. When he played back the tapes, he found it was nearly impossible for most people to identify the instrument that was playing. Without the attack, pianos and bells sounded remarkably unlike pianos and bells, and remarkably similar to one another.

 

The last piece of the first quote above is worth repeating : "the sound's complete identity is often being formed in a time period as short as three or four milliseconds". This means then that better reconstruction of the transient should allow the brain to more rapidly identify the instrument. This concurs with my experience of the Hugo ; instrumental timbre is more convincingly portrayed than anything else I've heard up to now and it shows up across the board, including bass instruments. My speakers and headphones seemed to have gained an extra octave in the bass, but more importantly, far better definition throughout the bass region.

 

Jan

Thank you Jan for such a fulsome and interesting response to my throw away observation.

 

G

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by DrPo
Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:
. However I have found the NDX as a source for the Hugo truly wonderful.. ...

Simon

 

 

Hi SImon, I am currently evaluating upgrading my streamer from UnitiLite to NDX...In lieu of the Hugo and your above observation do you think a quality streamer like NDX is still a meaningful investment?

Greg

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk

Greg - I have not compared the digital out of a UniLite to a NDX so cant comment.

 

What I can say the NDX as a SPDIF stream generator is excellent. In fact on the NDX setup screen you set it up for either SPDIF out or DAC out or both. But when one or the other it appears to work at its best.

 

The NDX does accurately (ie using a precision well regulated clock) create an SPDIF stream. Although these days jitter in SPDIF is mostly irrelevant for DACs recreating the sample clock, the process of taking any jitter out of the stream and reclocking is going to create sums and differences of frequencies - and I *suspect* this may well create electrical noise or hash on the internal powerlines. Therefore a low jitter source is still desirable - but not because of the clock jitter directly. My ears tell me this is also probably the case.

 

So in terms of sound I can say - and I reported on the other thread that appears still lost - that the NDX coupled to the Hugo is a wonderful source.

 

Hopefully when the other thread returns you can read my write up of the NDX feeding the Hugo and it may help you with your purchase decision on getting an NDX - I am sure the thread will be back shortly, perhaps Richard has got some technical difficulties with it and I am sure he is a busy man.

 

Simon

 

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by DrPo
Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:

Greg - I have not compared the digital out of a UniLite to a NDX so cant comment.

 

What I can say the NDX as a SPDIF stream generator is excellent. In fact on the NDX setup screen you set it up for either SPDIF out or DAC out or both. But when one or the other it appears to work at its best.

 

The NDX does accurately (ie using a precision well regulated clock) create an SPDIF stream. Although these days jitter in SPDIF is mostly irrelevant for DACs recreating the sample clock, the process of taking any jitter out of the stream and reclocking is going to create sums and differences of frequencies - and I *suspect* this may well create electrical noise or hash on the internal powerlines. Therefore a low jitter source is still desirable - but not because of the clock jitter directly. My ears tell me this is also probably the case.

 

So in terms of sound I can say - and I reported on the other thread that appears still lost - that the NDX coupled to the Hugo is a wonderful source.

 

Hopefully when the other thread returns you can read my write up of the NDX feeding the Hugo and it may help you with your purchase decision on getting an NDX - I am sure the thread will be back shortly.

 

Simon

 


HI Simon, thanks for your detailed response. Actually UL does not have a digi out so there is no "comparison" to be made with the NDX into an external DAC. I have also received similar advise (to the effect that a Hugo might provide more benefit on top of the NDX compared to an external PS) from other forum members. But I still struggle to come to grips with the notion of redundancies in the source set up (double power supplies, double DAC) - I guess I need to overcome my hesitation if I am to remain part of the NAIM community

 

Greg

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by Simon-in-Suffolk

Greg - I look at it as resilience - but then I am an engineer. If you take the Hugo out with you (after all it could go wherever you go..) then at least with the NDX you have a stand by DAC.

Its the same way I look at power sockets on the wall - some of them are empty with no plugs  connected to them, but they are there if I should need them....

 

Simon

 

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by DrPo
Originally Posted by Simon-in-Suffolk:

Greg - I look at it as resilience - but then I am an engineer. If you take the Hugo out with you (after all it could go wherever you go..) then at least with the NDX you have a stand by DAC.

Its the same way I look at power sockets on the wall - some of them are empty with no plugs  connected to them, but they are there if I should need them....

 

Simon

 

having been a theoretical Physicist for almost a decade I was trained to hate redundancies but as I am not practising this any more I guess I can relax . Too bad I invested one month ago on a good portable USB DAC for my (very frequent) business travelling. Now that will be a real redundancy! 

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by Shanks
+1...except for the engineering part, which they clearly seem to excel at. 
 
Originally Posted by KRM:

Never mind an MBA. If you proposed Chord's strategy in a GCSE exam you'd be looking at a re-sit in the autumn 

 

Keith

 

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by Chordialjohn
Yes we at Chord Electronics were somewhat taken by surprise at Hugo's performance it was never meant to rival our own reference Dac products. Disruptive technology is often like that it always seems to come out of the blue but in reality it's a slow progression over years. Product which change the rules for everyone in the same market.  Take the iPhone, it's capabilities took the  phone markets by storm causing massively disruptive changes to the players in that business yet if we alalise where and when the disruptive tech came from. It can be traced right back to a bunch of British guys working for HermanHauser's acorn computers. Way back in the eighties they'd worked out how to make processors run a lot faster and do much more with a greatly reduced number of instructions or RISC as it became known these RISC chips are now in all smart phoned and about every other PDA and laptop on the markets these days. By combining these capable chipsets along with another technology developed by another bunch of clever guys and Marconi flat display  panels you get the iPhone. The technology had been arround for years before someone with the vision like Steve Jobs  to pull it all together. In our own small case it was Rob Watts supereb Dac technology developed over Thirty years. I was fortunate twenty three years ago when he aproached me with a different way of designing a Dac with the technology of the day, that would cost Ten times as much as existing solutions and by the way it needed fifty times the power to run it too. Before I heard it I thought he had a screw loose, but then I listened to his prototype and became a firm covert to Robs approach  it sounded bloody amazing! His first Dac for us was our Dac 64 and very successful it was, but difficult to produce though. Taking four huge Xilinx  chips, for the time, Bleeding edge of technology FPGS. We've had twenty years of Moore's law since then and a progression of lower powered and even more capable DACs. What seems to have come from nowhere has been a slow progression that has culminated in Hugo.
When We realised just how much power we could now pack into a small package in terms of the latest generation low voltage  working massive scale FPGA's and also just how much power in terms of battery running time. We realised we just might have a disruptive technology product on our hands we didn't know just how disruptive it would be, not that we are complaining about that too much and Hugo will not be the last Dac to be developed by us or Naim and I'm sure Hugo will be bettered by both companies in the short term.
Posted on: 08 July 2014 by KRM

Perhaps I should have said exraordinary rather than extravagent?

 

Elsewhere, It's either seen as an amazingly good portable DAC or nearly as good as the likes of the  Auralic Vega (<£3,000) and may or may not be better than the QBD76 ( Chord crapping on their own products, seemingly). It's passed the Linn forum by, but here it's better than the NDS + 555. I'm not criticising, I'm just saying that the Naim forum is going further than most.

 

Keith

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by gary yeowell

I can't remember my exact words but the essence of my post really centred around the fact that what fed the Hugo was as important as the Hugo itself. I mentioned that we only tested one track between the NDS/555x2 as a standalone against the NDS/Hugo. I felt i had a preference for the Hugo, but did say that in another system/room/track i might have come to a different conclusion, as there were elements to admire in both.

 

On the day, the Hugo/Mac was the least satisfactory for my ears, which surprised me as up till now i have enjoyed my V1/Mac, and even more surprising as i've not 'loved' any of the Naim streamers till  the demo. The Hugo/Qute was very nice and the Hugo/Arcam slightly less so, but the Mac had a hard edge and etched sound that was less natural, albeit communicative musically.

 

So yes, is it the Hugo that is getting the best out of everything, or the Naim Streamers that are getting the best  out of the Hugo? No idea. I concluded by saying that i felt the ND5/NDX might be a nice compromise with the Hugo, but only guesswork as we didn't try it.

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by Steve J

Most of the most useful people that used to be on the Linn forum have also now passed it by. The Linn forum that is. 

 

Keith, the only way to know what it's like is to try one for yourself. I've not heard one bad review of the Hugo. I understand the reservation of those who have invested a lot of money in Naim streamers but technology doesn't stand still. There are those who say the NDX/NDS with a Hugo sounds better than a Hugo alone, and there are some who say the Hugo with MacMini sounds better than NDS/555. The only constant is that the Hugo is considered an improvement whatever the set up and the only person who can decide whether it's good enough for your system is your good self.

 

ATB

 

Steve

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by Chordialjohn
Hi what's happened to my earlier post that concerned Hugo being disruptive technology.

With best regards John E.Franks.
http://www.facebook.com/chordelectronics


> On 8 Jul 2014, at 18:58, "Naim Audio Forums" wrote:
>
Posted on: 08 July 2014 by Steve J

Gary,

 

With the MacMini, was it using iTunes? If it was then did it also use Audirvana which makes a significant improvement in SQ over iTunes alone? In addition what file format was being used for the Naim streamers and iTunes? You could have been listening to hi-res files with the NDS and mp3 with the MacMini. I could be cynical and say it would be an easy ploy for a dealer to use to push the streamers.

 

ATB

 

Steve

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by linntroika

Hi Gary

 

Any thoughts on the Hugo compared to the CDS3 ?- i demo the Hugo last week and was mighty impressed but it was not a home demo , therefore could not make a comparison

 

Cheers

 

Brian

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by gary yeowell

Steve, the dealer in question was not trying to push anything as i know him well and i was not there for any of the above. We listened to the same track throughout, it was ripped from the same CD with the same format, and the Mac was using i Tunes, and then J river. J River was marginally better to my ears than I Tunes, but still less 'nice' than the streamers. 

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by PhilP
Originally Posted by Steve J:

Gary,

 

With the MacMini, was it using iTunes? If it was then did it also use Audirvana which makes a significant improvement in SQ over iTunes alone? In addition what file format was being used for the Naim streamers and iTunes? You could have been listening to hi-res files with the NDS and mp3 with the MacMini. I could be cynical and say it would be an easy ploy for a dealer to use to push the streamers.

 

ATB

 

Steve

and was the test done blind?

 

Tongue in cheek because it obviously wasn't but there must clearly be an expectation bias - the more expensive source must surely sound better...

 

That said my dealer ran a demo for another customer working their way up from Unitiqute, ND5, NDX and NDS and found the sound improved all the way up the chain.  This was into another v. transparent DAC not the Hugo.

 

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by GraemeH
Originally Posted by linntroika:

Hi Gary

 

Any thoughts on the Hugo compared to the CDS3 ?- i demo the Hugo last week and was mighty impressed but it was not a home demo , therefore could not make a comparison

 

Cheers

 

Brian

If I can jump in.  (I had a CDS3/555PS for a good number of years)

 

I'd say the Hugo has the musicality of the CDS3 but resolves and integrates the detail better. Bass lines are more present and tuneful and the leading edge of notes clearer to distinguish between instruments.

 

It sounds less smeared and more 'real' to me than the CDS3/555PS.

 

G

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by gary yeowell

Brian, my only yardstick is that during the dem i asked to hear a CDX2.2 standalone so i could get handle on where all these fit in. It was a different presentation but musically i felt it somewhere around the Hugo/Arcam level. Considering i feel that the CDX2.2 is quite a way behind my CDS3 i concluded that i'd need something like an ND5/NDX/Hugo combo to get something that challenged what i listen to. Even then it is probably more of a 'preference', but as i say i didn't have the opportunity to try it and so am using my judgement based on what i could hear.

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by gary yeowell

Graeme, i am not doubting your preference, but would point out that the system you are using now is nothing like the system you were using when you had the CDS3. I was actually surprised how well the CDX2.2 held up considering all that had been said about the Hugo. Only way to tell for sure is how we did it on the day, same system, very revealing, 552/500/Titans, and switch from one source to the next playing the same piece of music.

 

That's how i see it anyway...

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by KRM

Interesting stuff Gary.

 

A few years ago we had a demo of the Unitiserve, NDX and Akurate into the Naim DAC. Big differences with the Userve a distant third.

 

Steve, I know, I know. It's the investment plus the fact that my trusted dealer doesn't do Chord thst holds me back. 

 

Keith

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by GraemeH
Originally Posted by gary yeowell:

Graeme, i am not doubting your preference, but would point out that the system you are using now is nothing like the system you were using when you had the CDS3. I was actually surprised how well the CDX2.2 held up considering all that had been said about the Hugo. Only way to tell for sure is how we did it on the day, same system, very revealing, 552/500/Titans, and switch from one source to the next playing the same piece of music.

 

That's how i see it anyway...

 

Originally Posted by GraemeH:

Sure Gary, but the constant is the music. My core collection I've listened to for atleast 20 years and I spent lots of those with the CDS3 system, and now with the NDX Hugo System.

 

I remember how it sounded then and I know how it sounds now...

 

Technology moves on.

 

G

 

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by gary yeowell

Understand…. i am not trying to tell you otherwise. You have intimated however that your present 'system' exceeded your previous, even before the Hugo.

Posted on: 08 July 2014 by HiFiman

I am using the UQ1 (192 version) into the Hugo, 4 days and the results are astonishing.

What strikes me is the bass lines and the depth of the music much better then the UQ into nDac/XPS2 which I owned for a while.

 

Has anyone changed the wall wart PSU for something better? Mark Grant has handed me SBooster PSU to try which I hope to introduce in the next couple of days.