272/200 and 272/250DR

Paristhea posted:

I definitely prefer the sound of the 272 DAC over that of the Hugo. 

I'm curious to understand how you came to this conclusion. As I understand it, you can't take a digital output on the 272 into an external DAC and then back into the 272 analogue input (unless perhaps you have two 272s at your disposal!) so I can't see how it's possible to assess which aspects of sound quality are attributable to the DAC in this type of all-in-one unit.   

The way I'd test that is to play a digital source into the Hugo and then connect the Hugo to an analogue input. Then I'd connect the digital source to one of the 272s digital input. 

I know, it's hard to believe that anyone in their right mind could possibly prefer a Naim DAC to the mighty Hugo, but there were are: some people, eh?!!

Hungryhalibut posted:

The way I'd test that is to play a digital source into the Hugo and then connect the Hugo to an analogue input. Then I'd connect the digital source to one of the 272s digital input.

I guess that makes sense, although I can't help thinking that differences might be as much to do with implementation, interconnects etc. as the actual DAC performance.....but I'm in danger of overthinking here, they're both great sounding bits of kit.  

I know, it's hard to believe that anyone in their right mind could possibly prefer a Naim DAC to the mighty Hugo, but there were are: some people, eh?!!

A year or so back, you'd have been burned at the stake for saying that 

ChrisSU posted:

Paristhea posted:

I definitely prefer the sound of the 272 DAC over that of the Hugo. 

I'm curious to understand how you came to this conclusion. As I understand it, you can't take a digital output on the 272 into an external DAC and then back into the 272 analogue input (unless perhaps you have two 272s at your disposal!) so I can't see how it's possible to assess which aspects of sound quality are attributable to the DAC in this type of all-in-one unit.   

It was a very simple exercise:

Option 1: The 272 played digital music in uPNP mode when connected to the network via Ethernet cable. The source was my laptop where I keep my digital music library, which was connected to the network wirelessly. 

Option 2: From the laptop and via a USB cable connected onto a Hugo and from the Hugo into analogue input 1 of the 272.

I will add that I use J River media centre for playing all my music.

Exactly the same source and equipment plays through the 272 DAC or through 272 analogue1. Very simple.

So are we saying that IF you played a piece of music from a Hugo into a NAC282/HCDR/250 DR and then from the Hugo into the 272/XPS/250 in performance terms the latter would be at least the = of the former?  Now I hasten to add I haven't done this test nor I doubt I ever will but that must be the ultimate test of the pre-amp in the 272.

I have though heard the same WAV file played through NDX/XPS2/282HCDR/250 DR and then 272/XPS2/250DR and the former to these ears was considerably the better performer - the usual attributes, fuller, richer, deeper bass with better definition.  And so it should for the price differential.

But I repeat the 272 is an excellent product and indeed generally the gap is closing between the lower and higher ends.

Regards,

Lindsay

Paristhea posted:

ChrisSU posted:

Paristhea posted:

I definitely prefer the sound of the 272 DAC over that of the Hugo. 

I'm curious to understand how you came to this conclusion. As I understand it, you can't take a digital output on the 272 into an external DAC and then back into the 272 analogue input (unless perhaps you have two 272s at your disposal!) so I can't see how it's possible to assess which aspects of sound quality are attributable to the DAC in this type of all-in-one unit.   

It was a very simple exercise:

Option 1: The 272 played digital music in uPNP mode when connected to the network via Ethernet cable. The source was my laptop where I keep my digital music library, which was connected to the network wirelessly. 

Option 2: From the laptop and via a USB cable connected onto a Hugo and from the Hugo into analogue input 1 of the 272.

I will add that I use J River media centre for playing all my music.

Exactly the same source and equipment plays through the 272 DAC or through 272 analogue1. Very simple.

 

 

That looks to me as if this comparison is between two very different digital signal paths, a laptop/USB connection vs UPnP server/streamer. I would imagine that there are many more variables than just the two different DACs at play here, and my guess is that it would skew the results favour of the 272. Maybe HH's suggestion above would be closer to a level playing field?

Your judgment is up to you.  To me it was exactly the same because the 272 and the Hugo received exactly the same digital information.  The source was my computer.

The paths were different, but there is no information loss in the process.  You got your electronics mixed up here i am afraid.

If the above statement were correct, there would be no difference in sound when placing a Melco unit in the path from server to streamer. That there are clear sonic benefits (as I have heard in a demonstration) in doing so suggests that the signal path, even in the digital domain, is important.

My statement is correct.  The digital information is identical irrespective of the path.

There is nothing simpler than a laptop feeding a Hugo with digital information.  Same information is also fed to the 272 via a network.  Imagine now if the network was able to change (enhance or reduce) the digital information

there are clear and audible differences between a Hugo and a 272 internal DAC. 

But all Naim sources I have heard ( including my DAC V1) do have this ability - to get you engaged in the music and forget about the sound. 

The Hugo may be to some to the better DAC (and has technical advantages), but once my DAC V1 plays music into 202/200 I just enjoy it.

And that is what the 272 does for me too.

I would have sold my DAC V1 once I got my Hugo, but somehow it is still at home playing nice music... 

Sade - from my iPad into USB input and sounds very nice to me.

I love my Hugo for what it does, which includes turning my car stereo into a hi-end listening experience, (and sounding great with my 282/250DR) but I think I could have been quite happy with a 272/250DR instead of 282/HCDR/250DR/Hugo

No regrets though, I'm just saying I could be happy either way.

Paris prefers his 272 to Hugo I see nothing unusual about that

 i heard the same thing and that's why I am impressed by 272

It is a simple question for me : is the music enjoyable or not? yes or no. And for the 272 it is a big yes.

 About Hugo : its a simple test we did and the Melco is not needed to prove that the Hugo got a proper digital feed. The USB input of the Hugo is pretty good

Of course, as we know, the Melco is the new Hugo. No system is complete without one. 

Paristhea posted:

Your judgment is up to you.  To me it was exactly the same because the 272 and the Hugo received exactly the same digital information.  The source was my computer.

The paths were different, but there is no information loss in the process.  You got your electronics mixed up here i am afraid.

 

Surely that would be like saying there is absolutely no difference whatsoever between, say, an ND5 XS and an NDS other than the different DAC they have?

Analogmusic, what you say above it is a different issue altogether, to which i have no further comment.

But the comment from CHRISSU is erroneous.  The digital signal is identical into both options, whether it is the Hugo or the 272 DAC.

I don't disagree - one is going to the preamp via the Hugo, the other is via the 272 streamer. But really it's semantics - the sort of debate geeky blokes like to have. What really matters, I think, is whether the whole system sounds good and enjoyable, rather than what each little bit is doing. 

ChrisSU posted:

Paristhea posted:

Your judgment is up to you.  To me it was exactly the same because the 272 and the Hugo received exactly the same digital information.  The source was my computer.

The paths were different, but there is no information loss in the process.  You got your electronics mixed up here i am afraid.

 

Surely that would be like saying there is absolutely no difference whatsoever between, say, an ND5 XS and an NDS other than the different DAC they have?

In case we got our wires crossed over, i refer to the digital information contained in the file to the Hugo or to the 272 DAC.

If we are both talking about the same thing, then the digital file is identical, irrespective of the path.  When you download a file from he US via god knows which satellite or whether you copy the same digital file from your server at work, or from a USB flash drive, all these files are identical.

The process of manipulating/extracting the data file into music happens inside the DAC's of either machines (272 or Hugo).

Hungryhalibut posted:

I don't disagree - one is going to the preamp via the Hugo, the other is via the 272 streamer. But really it's semantics - the sort of debate geeky blokes like to have. What really matters, I think, is whether the whole system sounds good and enjoyable, rather than what each little bit is doing. 

Fine with me, it was just a statement made which, if i understood it correctly, was a totally wrong statement. For some reason one attempted to belittle the test and subsequent preference i had for the 272 over the Hugo, on the basis that the path for getting the digital file into the 272 or the Hugo made a difference to the sound.  Preposterous statement.

OK, bits are bits! Let's leave it at that.

It is the same information 

maybe the Mac injected some noise into the Hugo through USB because there is no galvanic isolation on the hugo

but then maybe my router injected noise in the 272 through Ethernet

I know the Hugo very well know and both Hugo and 272 have musically enjoyable playback

Whatever it is not going to buy a Melco !

I don't know about noise going in as a result of cables, but the beauty of digital information is that you can not lose or add bits to it via the transportation route.

I agree 100% that both are very enjoyable and i do remember the preceding weekend when we had tested the Hugo and the Naim DAC with the same source (more or less), the Hugo was definitely more pleasant.

But between the 272 and the Hugo the difference was not there any more, and personally i found the 272 DAC more punchy and dynamic, while staying sweet at the same time.  I had thought at that moment that the Hugo although very nice as well, was a little bit flat compared to the 272 DAC.  This is personal opinion of course, i am not an authority in the field 

I must add here that the source at that time (two weeks ago) was my iPhone which contains mp3 music (320 bitrate) mostly (some ALAC too).  But the source during last weekend's test was 24-bit flac files with 2500+ or 5000+ bitrate and some 16-bit files with 1000 bitrate.  A totally different level of data altogether, which might explain why the Naim DAC did not sound as good at that time.  mp3 files on hi-end equipment tend to sound harsh.  In fact i now have two libraries one of mp3 files for the car, and a separate of flac and wav files for the hifi.  I can not tolerate mp3 files on the hifi anymore.

I heard the same thing... It did sound like the 272 had more drive and dynamics while sounding sweet and analog like.

Maybe the volume control on the Hugo was set too low and I used the cheaper interconnect (headphone into DIN) rather than the better one (RCA-DIN) but we heard what we heard. We weren't out to prove that Hugo was better than 272, it was to test 272 into 100 then 200 then 250 DR

In any case, the 272 is a standalone unit, and should be used as such, (and the analog input preferably used for turntable) and it is very good !

I did not take into account that your files were MP3 2 weeks ago though...

Paristhea posted:

 I had thought at that moment that the Hugo although very nice as well, was a little bit flat compared to the 272 DAC.  This is personal opinion of course, i am not an authority in the field 

Could be - but that sounds more like a preamp matter/interconnect matter, the dynamics of the Hugo is one of its major strengths which is why it can do digital volume control with no or negligible quantisation loss of quality unlike most other designs.

Having said that I enjoy my slightly larger than life sounds from my CDX2 and previously NDAC, for some music it can make it sound really fun heavy blues being a case in point.

The Hugo is closer in style to the NDS than either of the above two - but interestingly I never got on with the NDS particularly well - I found it a little flat.. funny business. So perhaps the Hugo is 'flatter' than the bass oomph of the NDAC, but I find its beguiling neutrality and insight brings other benefits - but I still have my CDX2 on hand for when I want that coloured extra punchy sound.

As I have said elsewhere - if you like you music then you best have multiple sources to suit mood and music - I do

I note that there is a good write up of a 272 running active ATCs.. I guess if I had been lured by the Hugo that might be an interesting path to have followed by now... but once bitten its hard to go back - I did try briefly - but no dice...

Simon

Simon the Naim sound does seem to come more from the power amp (and due to not having parallel transistors) than the preamp.

I did try my DAC V1 into Dynaudio actives and Hugo into the same Dynaudio but it didn't work out for me musically.

analogmusic posted:

I heard the same thing... It did sound like the 272 had more drive and dynamics while sounding sweet and analog like.

Maybe the volume control on the Hugo was set too low and I used the cheaper interconnect (headphone into DIN) rather than the better one (RCA-DIN) but we heard what we heard. We weren't out to prove that Hugo was better than 272, it was to test 272 into 100 then 200 then 250 DR

In any case, the 272 is a standalone unit, and should be used as such, (and the analog input preferably used for turntable) and it is very good !

Indeed - on my 252 its turquoise setting with a VERY tightly applied hiline that gets the punch and drive.. but its not like the NDAC/555PS bass punch

analogmusic posted:

Simon the Naim sound does seem to come more from the power amp (and due to not having parallel transistors) than the preamp.

I did try my DAC V1 into Dynaudio actives and Hugo into the same Dynaudio but it didn't work out for me musically.

 

In me experience with Naim from circa 2004 --  I have found the Naim sound comes from various components - but the digital sources certainly seem to exhibit their own colour which is why have multiple sources to suit mood and music. Listening to heavy blues or rock when you have some buddies around for a drink or three with my CDX2 can be great fun... but not so satisfying for immersive listening. My 252 inputs are pretty much full up now  and yes it wasn't until I got my 252 that I really appreciated this.