Anyone compared ND5XS to NDX yet?

Why do you expect there to be a difference in the rendering between NDX and ND5 XS?

I would not jump to conclusions that nd5 and ndx being equal as renderers. Wait and hear for yourself and do not just look at technical sheets.

I was able to listen to NDX vs. ND5 (both without external PS) on Fraim with the rest of the chain being 552/300/wilson benesch ACT in the shop. ND5 was still a pre-production model. I have to admit that I do not like the ACT that much, Too mechanical and technical for my taste. Also I have to say that after owning the NDX since it's release I find it to be too forward sounding and too much hifi compared to the CDS3 or CD5, at least when placed on spider or fraim racks I will test this again soon, when I receive my full fraimlite racks.

Having said all this to clarify where I come from, I liked the ND5 VERY much. It was much more musical to these ears. And it was less forward and not so driving as the NDX. It will probably remind some people of the age old discussion of CD5 vs. CDX vs. CDS. And I think this emerging range seems to continue this tradition.

The NDX was clearly better regarding resolution, focus, frequency extension, no doubt about that, but the ND5 got me more involved into the music and It touched me more emotionally. Depending on what you're looking for, you will prefer the one or the other. And don't forget, the ND5 was a pre-production model. The NDX changed quite a bit from that stage to the final design.

Since the nDac is quite forward in it's voicing, I can imagine that whoever likes the nDac might also prefer the NDX voicing over the ND5. Because digital or not, you will hear the character of the source through the digital-to-analog converter. Many people have confirmed this and I also heard this before.

Hope this might help a bit as a first impression of the ND5.

Interesting stuff, thanks Meissmar. I agree, it's far from inevitable that the ND5XS will equal the NDX through the DAC. I also agree that the DAC is relatively forward in its presentation, but is the NDX? I would say it brings a sweetness to the music that belies the CD origins of the rips. It's certainly less forward than the CDX2 through the DAC in my system.

In the end, we all have different opinions and ears. Also, some would love the new machine to an NDX killer because they could save £1k and others will be distinctly unimpressed because they would then have wasted £1k.

Keith

Guido, the linn majik and akurate ds both have a digital output that should be equal according to this logic. But the akurate's is better feeding e.g. a nDac. Listen to both when they are available and make your choice after that. Don't just rely on technical data.

Hi, FWIW I don't find the NDAC at all forward when partnered with the 555PS. Very natural with fine clean frequency extremes. Compressed commercial music plays well with the NDAC/555PS. I found the the NDX on its own tonally quite similar although the frequency extremes are not as clean or extended, and the NDX isnt quite as tonally accurate as the NDAC/555PS and doesnt exhbit that uncanny striking realism. Also the stereo image takes a step forward (ie it fills the room more) on the NDAC/555PS compared to NDX.
I did however find the CDX2 qute forward sounding,(compared to NDX)  and I am sure it had slight upper mid left and some soft compression that made the CDX2 a very emotional player, but it does suffer slightly on very compressed tracks. The CDS3 was more neutral and accurate and at the same time slightly less emotional, but could handle tricky media well. However compared to the ndac/555PS being fed by nDX I  found the the CDS3 slightly lacking in very fine detail and atmosphere and had more rounded frequency extremes. Also it didn't quite image as well.
Simon

Hi Simon,
In your comparison between the nDac/555PS and NDX, what was your source for the nDac?

Sorry Jan, my post wasn't clear. My critical source for the NDAC is the NDX, although I use other sources such AppleTV that work quite well with the NDAC (but not in the same league as the NDX)
Simon

Hi Meissmar,

I agree again. Any back to back comparison of the Magik and Akurate reveals that streamers are not made equal.  The NDX sounds different again. If the Linn players' digtal outputs sound different I tnink it's reasonable (and commercially sensible) for Naim to be the same. Of course, they may sound exactly the same, but we are guessing at the moment. For what it's worth, my guess is that they will be different, but many will question whether the difference is worth £1,000.

Mr Underhill, I judge tonal accuracy by ear. My instruments I use from several CDs are folk violin, guitar, harmonica and accordion and to some extent grand piano. These instruments are very effective at showing tonal colour as very quickly they sound off and unnatural. Too much high end energy and suppressed upper mid, solo violins sound very off, they should have a nice subtle set resonances across the spectrum. Again a suppressed or filtered high end will make an accordion sound dull and unnatural. Nice balanced across bass, mid and treble will make a closely miced guitar sound striking ingle real, and again a well miced grand will have loads of subtle resonances and shouldn't sound uninvolving or synthetic / sampled.
I play piano (not so well) and various folk instruments ( somewhat better) and so I feel I have quite a good ear for this.
Finally unaccompanied english folk harmonies are great for accuracy, clearly the brain is very sensitive to human voices. I use artists such as Young Tradition and The Watersons to check for tonal accuracy. (little compression or processing used)
Simon