ND555 Impressions

I'm not running the Melco via a switch but direct by a single short low-quality (important) Ethernet cable. I also tried the top-end Meclo SSD and preferred the less-expensive HDD version on SQ terms. I'm not just buying into top-Melco and I listen carefully to what I find works and - for me - does not.

For example - I tried and disliked an expensive Ethernet cable compared to a stock lead connecting the Melco Server to the ND555. I also found putting the Melco server on a Fraim shelf was clearly audible compared to a cheaper HiFi shelf I tried it with at first. I also run the ND555 on its own Fraim stack of two Medium levels with both shelves below it empty. I try things on them, like the Melco, and it was better with the ND555 on its own.

It all adds up and I'm not suggesting I have it optimal but that I try to get it to sing in my room and with my system. Mine is S1 Pre into 3x 500DR Power Amps Active into S800 and running the ND555 with 2x555DR supplies - all SL cables for the rig.

I like what it sounds like - which is very fortunate!
I'd love to have Statement Power Amps but that is out of my league.

It is not a matter of 'right and wrong' but preference IMO.

DB.

Whouah !  4 active Statement amps Rich!   it’s the first time i hear of this possibility.

So you prefer, like DB, melco direct into nd555 vs ethernet with cisco 2960.  Very interesting.

Do you use some fancy ethernet cables or common ones?

French Rooster posted:

Whouah !  4 active Statement amps Rich!   it’s the first time i hear of this possibility.

So you prefer, like DB, melco direct into nd555 vs ethernet with cisco 2960.  Very interesting.

Do you use some fancy ethernet cables or common ones?

I think DB would need six Statement mono-blocks to replace his three 500s, French Rooster.  Mightly expensive and very heavy!

Richieroo posted:

Update....my ND555 has arrived at the dealers...I will be taking delivery on Wednesday....yippee. The dealer did say that the next batch expected would be in January!

Rich...it’s wednesday, did it arrive, or are you lost in the music?

nbpf posted:

The problem of deciding in which file formats (the emphasis is on the plural!) to store music has been discussed ad infinitum in this forum and such discussions are typically not very fruitful. Just store the files for replay in whatever format you please but do yourself a favour and rip, download, edit, backup and retrieve .flac files!

But was there not earlier advice offered to Richieroo to go ahead and rip in wav?

My head is beginning to hurt ....

MDS posted:

I think DB would need six Statement mono-blocks to replace his three 500s, French Rooster.  Mightly expensive and very heavy!

I'd rough-it with four if my Dealer (insanely) offered to swap my three NAP500DR for 4x S1 Power Monoblocks at no cost-outlay to me, the S800 bass drivers can be run in parallel.

I hear the Passive Statement system at my Dealers and it is on that fed by ND555 and 2x 555PS where I heard the Melco rip comparisons - it revealed it in more detail than I dare say. Suffice to say I've placed my order for my own Melco ripper today as I'm finding that I'm purchasing a lot more CDs to rip since I have the ND555, as as nice as the new non-Melco Rips are, the earlier Melco rips I did are just cleaner with more air around them and better timing. It is a shared imagination of four people so far - one of whom went away and convinced themselves it was placebo effect then came back and experienced the same again and is flummoxed to use the correct technical term.

But as long as people know there may be differences to be had - or not - no harm done...I hope.

DB.

I, absolutely, agree with DB on nearly all his findings. I use cheap ethernet cables, (tried £3000 super cables and lost the music and found great hifi) hdd drives, but I found the nas in another room running ethernet with a switch the best for me. That is our only difference in our findings, totally independent of each other, and believe me I try everything, use it for a week or two, and then go back. I find the going back is where you find if there is a gain or not.

RICHYH posted:

I, absolutely, agree with DB on nearly all his findings. I use cheap ethernet cables, (tried £3000 super cables and lost the music and found great hifi) hdd drives, but I found the nas in another room running ethernet with a switch the best for me. That is our only difference in our findings, totally independent of each other, and believe me I try everything, use it for a week or two, and then go back. I find the going back is where you find if there is a gain or not.

I may try the Server in another room sometime, but see no point in adding a switch as the Melco NAS already has, effectively, one inside it. House Ethernet in one port and clean HiFi Ethernet on another port to the ND555 and including a 6TB Database.
That was the point for me - a clean HiFi Grade switch and NAS in-one...if demo showed me it all worked.

I think there are many system configurations that will do good music and retain good HiFi along the way - in that priority.

I in no way say I have it right or optimal, just saying what I prefer.

It is a bit of a tribute to the ND555 that we get onto things like this having any real impact perhaps.

DB.

RICHYH posted:

I, absolutely, agree with DB on nearly all his findings. I use cheap ethernet cables, (tried £3000 super cables and lost the music and found great hifi) hdd drives, but I found the nas in another room running ethernet with a switch the best for me. That is our only difference in our findings, totally independent of each other, and believe me I try everything, use it for a week or two, and then go back. I find the going back is where you find if there is a gain or not.

All these impressions restarted my interest for melco.  Have you heard big differences in sound quality between the entry level melco and the middle one?  

French Rooster posted:

All these impressions restarted my interest for melco.  Have you heard big differences in sound quality between the entry level melco and the middle one?  

I only really auditioned the middle (HDD) and top (SSD) ones.
The top SSD version does do some things better in mid and HF smoothness, but I preferred the somewhat more 'raucous' HDD version especially in the way it handles bass dynamics. I was told later that the SSD one apparently runs-in more, so I may not have heard all it could do.

The Active system likes any component that lets it range uninhibited over the music and the components I use allow that, so I'm pleased.

If interested get a demo of it against a good alternative NAS and also hear other ways of doing the data-feed to convince yourself what you prefer, for you.

I'm not aiming to be 'right' here, just point out differences and that a system is just that - a combination that will work or not for you if you take care in putting it together. At this price-point (or any really) you should ensure you have the best configuration that can deliver what you want. If you are already happy - leave well alone!

DB.

French Rooster posted:

RICHYH posted:

I, absolutely, agree with DB on nearly all his findings. I use cheap ethernet cables, (tried £3000 super cables and lost the music and found great hifi) hdd drives, but I found the nas in another room running ethernet with a switch the best for me. That is our only difference in our findings, totally independent of each other, and believe me I try everything, use it for a week or two, and then go back. I find the going back is where you find if there is a gain or not.

All these impressions restarted my interest for melco.  Have you heard big differences in sound quality between the entry level melco and the middle one?  

Sorry French Rooster, but I do not use the melco, as I did not prefer it.

RICHYH posted:

French Rooster posted:

RICHYH posted:

I, absolutely, agree with DB on nearly all his findings. I use cheap ethernet cables, (tried £3000 super cables and lost the music and found great hifi) hdd drives, but I found the nas in another room running ethernet with a switch the best for me. That is our only difference in our findings, totally independent of each other, and believe me I try everything, use it for a week or two, and then go back. I find the going back is where you find if there is a gain or not.

All these impressions restarted my interest for melco.  Have you heard big differences in sound quality between the entry level melco and the middle one?  

Sorry French Rooster, but I do not use the melco, as I did not prefer it.

yes, sorry, i didn’t read enough precisely.   You use nas in other room but also hdd.  The hdd are connected to the front of the nd555?

Darke Bear posted:

At this stage I want to put the information into circulation for others to try - if they like. Hopefully it can at this stage be up to individuals to form opinions from the result of their own experience was my aim in context of this forum.

If this were a purely technical forum then I'd not bother and if I were minded go off and perform experiments and submit a report of it all after a long time. I can't be bothered with that.

The magnitude of the differences depends on quality of the recording and the caliber of playback system. Good mastered CD format material via the ND555 will show it - and I'd say also the NDS or lower down a fair way of sources. Through an iPod phone - probably not audible and of no import.

If spending a lot on a system and - like me - just about to rip my entire CD collection, I wanted to make sure I was doing it the right way. We tried the usual DB Power Amp method and then transferred the file to server, as my Dealer had done to that point. They told me it could be done also via a CD Drive connected by USB cable into the Melco Server so I asked to see that done - and asked if there was any difference?

At that point the Dealer had no idea but was up for letting me hear. They also just had arrive the expensive Melco ripper and was just un-boxing it there and then and I groaned at the price and considered it a 'snake-oil' product and asked to also include that into the same demo to eliminate it and make my purchase easy.

All I was looking for was an easy way to rip CDs and putting them into a drive and the Melco Data Server, which I was getting anyway, doing it all for me was appealing, so I did not need anything else - and it would be nice to confirm the rips were not any different from elsewhere.

That is not what happened as I described. I recount my experience - not why - I would like to know. I have a choice now of awaiting a technical proof of what I can easy hear before ripping any more music to play, or proceeding with getting the best rips I can, albeit at a price more than I wanted. In context of my system it is not a lot, but given I expected no difference at all then it surprised me.

DB.

I know rips from Naim HDX and Naim UnitiCore sounded different. I admits I was surprised by that . 

These anecdotal reports from a lot of people and in particular from someone in USA who recommends the Core as what he had success with and put me onto the possibility of getting poor Rips.

I honestly had no idea or experience and in my normal way experiment without any preconception - that was hard here as I wanted there to be no difference - a bit is a bit...etc.

But there were differences and I end-up where I am at present. I like the Melco and the Naim Core approach has a strong following so there are many good ways perhaps to do it.

I just wanted an automated system that I loaded the disk into and it did all the rest - artworks and such and I just kept loading CDs. It turns-out I do go in and edit some Artworks myself as I want the correct version and the Ripper does not always get that right when there are a lot of versions.

The difference in replay quality may also depend on the overall system - I only did the A-B-C testing on a Melco Database and it may accentuate that - I don't know.

One thing that put me off streaming compared to CD replay via my CD555 was a tendency to 'murky' and flat sound at times in some streaming situations - and the Melco hosted DACs or Streamers always had more life in them to me, so I went that way as it was part of why I went to an Active system.

I do know at least two people I respect that do not get on with Melco sound as being too 'forward' so you need to audition. I found a lot of that was solved by cable-matching, as it does not like a bright Ethernet cable in my system.

DB.

nigelb posted:

It seems to me that the ND555 has upped the stakes so much that apparently the 'quality' of the rip is now detectable, if such a phenomenon exists. I have no reason to doubt DB's findings and he has one of the most revealing systems out there, and a sensitive ear for such things.

It is just a shame that the Core's ripping capabilities were not part of the test, but I do understand that DB had already committed to Melco for serving duties.

Yes I wish that too. I wonder how UnitiCore does SQ wise against Melco? 

Darke Bear posted:

And even more curiously I'm a TaiChi Instructor with 25 years experience teaching a class and I agree!

DB.

Very cool that you are a TaiChi instructor!  ????

cycling66 posted:

nbpf posted:

The problem of deciding in which file formats (the emphasis is on the plural!) to store music has been discussed ad infinitum in this forum and such discussions are typically not very fruitful. Just store the files for replay in whatever format you please but do yourself a favour and rip, download, edit, backup and retrieve .flac files!

But was there not earlier advice offered to Richieroo to go ahead and rip in wav?

My head is beginning to hurt ....

Sure as he seemed to be comfortable with editing .wav files. If one has a good tool to edit .wav rips and one does not care about storage space and data transfer time than .wav is certainly fine.

As a matter of fact, however, there are more and better tools for managing .flac files than there are tools for managing .wav or .aif files. Also, .flac files are smaller. Thus, my generic advice is to use .flac for ripping, editing, securing, etc.

On another thread: I had a look at the Melco D100 and it looks like a very nice reader. I would have no concern connecting it to my laptop for ripping. It is hopefully faster and certainly heavier and much nicer than the typical 50$ plastic reader. But I would not want the rips to go directly into an N1 or into any other dedicated music server. That does not make any sense to me: transfering the data to the music server is the very last step of my workflow, not the first one! 

Am I the only one here who was not impressed by ND555 demo vs. home and NDS? This time with 252/300/Focal. I have totally different, more revialing system home, but my expectation was that I should be impressed anyway with that more modest system. I definitely need to do a home demo because of based on this NDS is not broken and sounds pretty close to ND555.

What happened

• Rythm: sounded exactly same, no difference
• Bass: was maybe a bit more wider at the low end but difficult to say because of speakers
• Dynamics: difficult to say, so much system dependent
• Openess/clarity: no difference, so much system dependent
• Voice: not fair to compare because of Focal is not the best one

So, please help me a bit if you have some thoughts why to replace NDS?

Gandalf_fi posted:

Am I the only one here who was not impressed by ND555 demo vs. home and NDS? This time with 252/300/Focal. I have totally different, more revialing system which affects but my expectation was that I should be impressed anyway with that more modest system. I definitely need to do a home demo because of based on this NDS is not broken and sounds pretty close to ND555.

What happened

• Rythm: sounded exactly same, no difference
• Bass: was maybe a bit more wider at the low end but difficult to say because of speakers
• Dynamics: difficult to say, so much system dependent
• Openess/clarity: no difference, so much system dependent
• Voice: not fair to compare because of Focal is not the best one

So, please help me a bit if you have some thoughts why to replace NDS?

No comparison in the ND555 vs NDS. ND555 is noticeably better. Not sure why you did not hear much difference . 

Interesting hobby this. My thoughts on a couple of recent themes. First I prefer single supply on the ND 555. I have no experience with Melco but hear the difference with a rip of a CD via the core versus a previously ripped file from the serv or in respect of a file of undetirminable providence. I had noticed this previously with my NDS and frankly it came as a bit of a surprise. I was intrigued with Darke Bears experience with hard wiring the iPad to Ethernet and tried this last night. I felt their were pros and cons but accept that this could in part be how I configured the connections. I then tried listening with the wi fi on the iPad turned off. Ie select album to play then turn wifi off on the iPad. Again I was surprised at what I heard. Practically though doing that ie turning wi fi on and off as required is a whole lot less hasell than going through the whole registration set up thing when using an Ethernet connection. As they say everything makes a difference but the challenge is in trying to fiqure out whether it’s better or worse

Hi quick question........have taken delivery of my ND555 yipee........ and it comes with new burndies............are these directional?.........I seem to remember the NDS burndies had a marker at one end........can anyone advise........

Rich, dealer installed mine with red collar and double green collar at nd555 end. The collars are about 4 inches from the connectors.

Just for completeness, double green collar burndy is on socket 2, not sure if it makes a difference.

Thanks Gazza.........I did not get home until late last night........I briefly looked at one burndy..and thought oh .... no real obvious marker.......I did notice a green section through the mesh outer binding.......... and did wonder ....... I imagine the other will correspondingly be red. Thanks for your advice ....great.............I will power her up at the weekend............

Gazza thanks for the socket info ......... that was going to be my next question!