Linn Majik DS vs. Akurate DS

Posted by: T38.45 on 22 December 2009

Ok,,,we're on the NAIM side of live Smile ...but did anybody listen an 1:1 bench between the two systems?
Is there a big difference?
great to hear from you!
regards Ralf
(wish you all the best for holiday!)
Posted on: 22 December 2009 by js
I'd also like some sort of absolute proof of any differences stated or any opinion should be discarded off hand. Winker LOL Big Grin I'm sure there are differenences and something that all those with an interest should just go listen to themselves. I suspect there are a good # of relative reviews on Linn's site. Smile
Posted on: 22 December 2009 by naken janne
T38,
I have compared the Majik DS with the Akurate DS (both with the first non-Dynamik power supply) in a Linn system. The difference is substantial. It takes a big step up with the Akurate.

Talk on Linn forums claims that the Majik with Dynamik is rather close to the first Akurate without Dynamik, and that the Akurate with Dynamik gets rather close to the Klimax without Dynamik. The improvements from the Dynamik I have not heard myself though, but that is what is typically claimed.
Posted on: 22 December 2009 by T38.45
hi naken janne,
tx for reply!
i only know majik and klimax,,,,
Posted on: 23 December 2009 by T38.45
Had a call with a linn dealer, he said that the gap btw majik and akurate is much bigger than akurate to klimax... so it would really be cool to bench a majik+naim dac vs. akurate (guess akurate is in same pricerange than ndac+majik)...
if you have a chance to compare, please let me know;-)
merry christmas to all
ralf
Posted on: 23 December 2009 by js
Pretty valid but we have no idea of the quality of the dig out so even that comparison is to be taken with a grain of salt.
Posted on: 23 December 2009 by rich46
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
T38,
I have compared the Majik DS with the Akurate DS (both with the first non-Dynamik power supply) in a Linn system. The difference is substantial. It takes a big step up with the Akurate.

Talk on Linn forums claims that the Majik with Dynamik is rather close to the first Akurate without Dynamik, and that the Akurate with Dynamik gets rather close to the Klimax without Dynamik. The improvements from the Dynamik I have not heard myself though, but that is what is typically claimed.


lot of talk about the linn units, we shouldnt forget ,they are expensive.

valve for money, no real competion from others yet.linn cd players were not selling, guess customers choose other models

we have all got cd collections .if you then rip then you have no new music to listen to. ive down loaded high quaility music and they are very impressive but limited selection.
we rushed into cd and left vinyl to quick . dont let it happen again.

i do have soos which is use for different rooms, and the quality is good.

ive only got one naim product, the dac is great as a hub. sonus sounds great through it
Posted on: 23 December 2009 by naken janne
quote:
Originally posted by js:
Pretty valid but we have no idea of the quality of the dig out so even that comparison is to be taken with a grain of salt.


I was not sure what you mean with the "dig out" quality. If the two compared sets use the same server providing the data, and are connected to the same pre amp, shouldnt that be rather perfect for an A/B comparison between a Majik DS/Naim DAC vs Akurate?
Posted on: 24 December 2009 by Steeve
I believe the Akurate doesn't have a digital output so any comparisons would have to be as is vs. a source with the Naim DAC.

Steeve
Posted on: 24 December 2009 by ferenc
quote:
Originally posted by T38.45:
Ok,,,we're on the NAIM side of live Smile ...but did anybody listen an 1:1 bench between the two systems?
Is there a big difference?
great to hear from you!
regards Ralf
(wish you all the best for holiday!)


I always wonder what is the reason or benefit to know what is the "difference"? One can listen music, not difference (generally speaking), so in a completely different (unknown) environment, system what any "difference" can mean for anybody, really? No offense, just ask Smile
Posted on: 24 December 2009 by js
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
quote:
Originally posted by js:
Pretty valid but we have no idea of the quality of the dig out so even that comparison is to be taken with a grain of salt.


I was not sure what you mean with the "dig out" quality. If the two compared sets use the same server providing the data, and are connected to the same pre amp, shouldnt that be rather perfect for an A/B comparison between a Majik DS/Naim DAC vs Akurate?
I'm not fully aware of the circuits and layouts in question but I suspect that there are different PS's and it depends on how the dig out is configured. The HDX has a seperate digout circuit for SPdif so as not to be affected by the dig feeding it's own DAC etc. There may be a fair bit of noise or jitter there in majic, may not. Probably not compared to lesser things like SONOS etc. but perhaps not dig out optimized in a device from a maker that would rather have you step up the ladder than use anothers DAC. It may also be VG but we don't know as this hasn't been compared much as a source to a HDX or direct computer interfaces etc. It's a fine comparison but there's more to this and I wouldn't judge the ultimate cost effectiveness of the DAC based on this comparison alone. At least not yet.
Posted on: 24 December 2009 by naken janne
quote:
Originally posted by js:
It's a fine comparison but there's more to this and I wouldn't judge the ultimate cost effectiveness of the DAC based on this comparison alone. At least not yet.


Of course the DAC as such can not be evaluated in a comparison with an Akurate DS, since it depends on what kind of transport it is use with. But dont you think that a comparison between the set Naim Dac& Majik DS can be compared with a Akurate DS by simply listening to which one is the best? I think for the ones interested in a Akurate, product combinations in a similar price range from both naim and linn are worth considering.
Posted on: 24 December 2009 by js
I think I explained it pretty well. Sure but it won't be definitive. Perhaps another streaming source at the majic's or lower price is even better at dig out. That would make the comparison moot in terms of overall value for $ unless the DAC was already better in every case anyway which would make this discussion moot. Winker People keep trying to simple down a lot of varialbles. Comparisons are fine but here, you're doing 3 things to come up with the result of one. majic to akurate as streamer )and they wont be identical even with similar circuits due to supply and layout), SPdif out quality (and if shared will be affected, is it transformer coupled?) vs none, and the DAC.
Regardless, I have no idea of the outcome and just wanted to add the precautionary note.
Posted on: 24 December 2009 by naken janne
quote:
Originally posted by js:
Regardless, I have no idea of the outcome and just wanted to add the precautionary note.


But I still did not see the problem with a comparison. If an Akurare is better then it is better or a Majik/DAC is better then it is better. If it would turn out that the Akurate is better, and we want to dwell further into WHY the Majik/DAC did not perform as well, then we can start changing component etc to try to pinpoint reasons, but that would be a different test with a different purpose. If on the other hand Majik/DAC would turn out stronger than Akurate, then hte outcome of a such a comparison be that we can take Akurate off from our purchasing list.

So I would argue that it is perfectly fine to compare an Akurate with a Majik/DAC, just like we can compare for example a SuperNait with a Nac 152XS and a Nap 155XS. The one sounding the best is simply the best.
Posted on: 25 December 2009 by ferenc
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
quote:
Originally posted by js:
Regardless, I have no idea of the outcome and just wanted to add the precautionary note.


The one sounding the best is simply the best.


If it were so simple. Simply there is no better or best. Just something you like better. No overall or general judgement.
Posted on: 25 December 2009 by js
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
quote:
Originally posted by js:
Regardless, I have no idea of the outcome and just wanted to add the precautionary note.


But I still did not see the problem with a comparison. If an Akurare is better then it is better or a Majik/DAC is better then it is better. If it would turn out that the Akurate is better, and we want to dwell further into WHY the Majik/DAC did not perform as well, then we can start changing component etc to try to pinpoint reasons, but that would be a different test with a different purpose. If on the other hand Majik/DAC would turn out stronger than Akurate, then hte outcome of a such a comparison be that we can take Akurate off from our purchasing list.

So I would argue that it is perfectly fine to compare an Akurate with a Majik/DAC, just like we can compare for example a SuperNait with a Nac 152XS and a Nap 155XS. The one sounding the best is simply the best.
Accounting for preference, sure it counts as a package and I have no issue with that. I was just pointing out that it is not a definitive evaluation of the DAC reagrding price or overall goodness. In system evaluations are just that and valid for that system but no more unless we're very sure about the associated pieces. Smile
Posted on: 25 December 2009 by naken janne
quote:
Originally posted by ferenc:
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
quote:
Originally posted by js:
Regardless, I have no idea of the outcome and just wanted to add the precautionary note.


The one sounding the best is simply the best.


If it were so simple. Simply there is no better or best. Just something you like better. No overall or general judgement.

Of course I am not making general statements. But I still follow my old first Linn dealers advice I got 20 years ago "if it sounds better, it is better". So in my view it is rather simple actually.
Posted on: 26 December 2009 by ferenc
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
quote:
Originally posted by ferenc:
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
quote:
Originally posted by js:
Regardless, I have no idea of the outcome and just wanted to add the precautionary note.


The one sounding the best is simply the best.


If it were so simple. Simply there is no better or best. Just something you like better. No overall or general judgement.

Of course I am not making general statements. But I still follow my old first Linn dealers advice I got 20 years ago "if it sounds better, it is better". So in my view it is rather simple actually.


Without generally accepted, measureable standards one can not say a hifi equipment is "better" than another or the rest. As the opinion is subjective one can say only "likes more". According to my limited understanding, "better" is based on somekind of objective and repeatable facts. In case of any hifi device it is usually not the case.
Posted on: 26 December 2009 by js
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
quote:
Originally posted by ferenc:
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
quote:
Originally posted by js:
Regardless, I have no idea of the outcome and just wanted to add the precautionary note.


The one sounding the best is simply the best.


If it were so simple. Simply there is no better or best. Just something you like better. No overall or general judgement.

Of course I am not making general statements. But I still follow my old first Linn dealers advice I got 20 years ago "if it sounds better, it is better". So in my view it is rather simple actually.
In a particular setup when comparing 2 things, not 1 to 3. Hearing a piece put through it's paces in multiple arrangements and situations gives a better overall perspective of it's capabilities. I've often seen a less informative piece of kit sound more acceptable by being able to dumb down a bad source. A better source would have you go another way. Not at all implying that is the case in this instance as I expect the Majic to be pretty good but there is always some relaitivity to these comparisons. If you've ever done A/Bs in a room full of speakers, you might understand that an observastion with odd harmonics, tonality and lack of being able to display dynamic contrast may sway a comparison. I see TVs with speakers, secondary speakers and open laptops in showrooms and homes with critical listening going on and absolute goodness statements being made all the time and scratch my head over it. That Linn dealer probably used single speaker dems and compared one variable at a time in an established setup which would make his statement more valid but it doesn't validate yours in this instance other than you will prefer one and that it will be better in that situation.
Posted on: 26 December 2009 by naken janne
quote:
Originally posted by ferenc:
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
quote:
Originally posted by ferenc:
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by js:
Regardless, I have no idea of the outcome and just wanted to add the precautionary note.


The one sounding the best is simply the best.


If it were so simple. Simply there is no better or best. Just something you like better. No overall or general judgement.

Of course I am not making general statements. But I still follow my old first Linn dealers advice I got 20 years ago "if it sounds better, it is better". So in my view it is rather simple actually.


That is exactly my point. Since it is all about perception (perceived pleasure), and not about some sort of absolute measure, of course what sounds better (i.e. perceived better) is per definition better (for that particular listener). It is just like when you say after a nice dinner "this is the best tasting dinner I have ever had" I think everybody by the table understands that you are not talking about a combination of "23% factor salty", "5% factor temperature" etc based on some kind generally accpete taste index, but simply this was the meal that gave you the most pleasant taste experience.

Linn seems to have deviated partly from this the last years. They now talk about "tune-dem". It might work for professionals installing equipment, but since I think the method does not fully cover how I personally enjoy music, I think it also means that you get validity problems. So for me the good old "if I enjoy the music more, it is a better piece of equipment" works the best since the reason for buying the equipment is the joy, not trying to listen to certain "tunes". But I am sure there are people with different opinions and who are happy with their methods of evaluation as well.

Then of course you have other aspects which are universal for any kind of systematic controlled experiment (which A/B comparisons are examples of) but I consider that being a different and rather complicated topic.

In response to JS:
"That Linn dealer probably used single speaker dems and compared one variable at a time in an established setup which would make his statement more valid but it doesn't validate yours in this instance other than you will prefer one and that it will be better in that situation."

That is of course assumed to be the case when I refer to what I prefer and what my linn dealer said. I did of course mean that the comparison is taking place in such an environment. To compare unit A in a certain context (room, music, surrounding equipment etc) with unit B in a totally different context would hardly give more than very vague indications.

But of course everything, even the most rigorous experiment in the world (I am a researcher) can always contain factors which are not controlled for in the experiments, so if you draw into extremes we simply can not say anything about any thing and you can even on a logical basis question if we exist at all, if you are really sitting here reading this thread etc. But for more everyday pragmatic purposes, for me still "if it sounds better, then it is better" works rather fine even if I am aware of that from a theoretical point of view always can be criticized.
Posted on: 26 December 2009 by js
Extreme is that better is always better regardless of conditions. There is nothing rigorous about the comaprison in discussion and comparing it to such is also extreme. All I said is that you can't have an absolute evaluation of the DACs capabilities compared to another with an unknown set of source, and dig interface. I don't understand the problem with that. If you prefer one to the other, it counts but does not define better for another circumstance of different streamer/computer interface etc. By the way, if you've been to shops lately, signal speaker dems are becoming rare so I wouldn't assume that to be the case anymore. Frown
Posted on: 26 December 2009 by naken janne
quote:
Originally posted by js:
All I said is that you can't have an absolute evaluation of the DACs capabilities compared to another with an unknown set of source, and dig interface.

I think we are talking about the same thing, but differ in term of of conclusions to be drawn. I mean that it is perfectly ok to do a comparision between Akurate DS and a Majik DS/Naim Dac combo and you can conclude which one you prefer (with the limitation of matching issues) but also limit your conclusion from such a test to this the products tested specifically and not try to extend them further.

But what is far more vague, and what I understood you tried to point out, is that we can not draw very far reaching conclusions regarding the DAC only and compare it with e.g. an Akurate since the DAC appears to be largely influenced by the digital source. And there I share your view, since we have no idea about Majik DS's contribution to the equation, if there are better sources available etc. The initial tests of the DAC seems to range from "fantastic" with a really good source to "rather good" with a poor source so of course it is not possible to determine how good it is unless you also include the source. But still I think that for example the much anticipated comparison between a 555 and a HDX/DAC/555PS is relevant and that you can decide which of the two sources you prefer based on such a comparison.

What I meant with "extreme" is that from a theoretical/logical perspective the evaluation of any kind of equipment certainly offers a myriad of challanges in terms of how to control the experimental design. You have the room (which is very complex in itself), racks etc, the music (different types of music can be differently presented with different equipment), the listener (placebo, do you really appreciate the same song the same way the first as the tenth time?, does the listener like the music, is the listener in a good mood or not, and of course the more vague "perception"), surounding equipment, humidity, temperature, quality of the electricity, the person in the shop migh influence you, etc etc. And to make things even more complicated, all these factors mentioned are not independently influncing the outcome, but can of course also influence each other and then you end up, from a scientific point of view, where one has to be very cautious drawing any conclusions at all. But that is the type of arguments keeping me busy 80 hours a week, so when I go to the hifi shop, I leave my scientific mind at home and just enjoy what I listening to and make up my mind based on that although I realize that the experiment I just made was very limited.
Posted on: 26 December 2009 by BobF
[QUOTE]Originally posted by naken janne:
Linn seems to have deviated partly from this the last years. They now talk about "tune-dem". It might work for professionals installing equipment, but since I think the method does not fully cover how I personally enjoy music, I think it also means that you get validity problems. So for me the good old "if I enjoy the music more, it is a better piece of equipment" works the best since the reason for buying the equipment is the joy, not trying to listen to certain "tunes". But I am sure there are people with different opinions and who are happy with their methods of evaluation as well.
.QUOTE]

NJ

nicely put

Cheers

Bob
Posted on: 27 December 2009 by ferenc
quote:
Originally posted by naken janne:
quote:
Originally posted by js:
All I said is that you can't have an absolute evaluation of the DACs capabilities compared to another with an unknown set of source, and dig interface.

What I meant with "extreme" is that from a theoretical/logical perspective the evaluation of any kind of equipment certainly offers a myriad of challanges in terms of how to control the experimental design.


Good point.
This is why I used to say: do not do comparisons at all!
Not at the hifi shop, not at home. Just listen music.

The basis of a good long term decision or conclusion is not doing comparisons.
Take the goods at home, convince your dealer to let you to live with it for a week or for couple of days. If you are interested in long term satisfaction from your system. If you want to have a "winner", than it is a differenct case. Smile

Music listening is lot more than comparing sounds of different equipments quickly in few hours. Comparisons usually are about sound, but you probably want to listen music. Music is lot more than the sound itself.