The new Naim DAC

quote:

Originally posted by Don Atkinson:
Why was the HDX used in the dems? I guess it was to show just how good the prototype DAC is by comparison. I can't think of any other reason.

A lot more demonstrators were using CD-free front-ends this year, Linn, Apple, and a couple of others even had an HDX.

It's been said many times on this forum that the HDX is about the same level as the CDX2 so it makes sense. Why would Naim not want to dem their new(ish) baby? Anyway, it did sound great!

HDX is a hard disk player at the x performance level. It is one box solution but still has an upgrade path through PSU and why not external DACs... Apart from X performance level HDX offers great convenience of use and their customers may value that (rip and play).

Naim Dac would be a very different product, depending on its performance it could be positioned as an HDX upgrade. The same as a power amp can be seen as an upgrade for a Supernait, why not?

Although Naim aims this Dac to computer audio users I think they could offer soon a streamer (transporter) partner for it. I think this would make sense, a separates range of digital audio composed of Naim DACs and Naim Transports and another range of "integrated" digital players (HD5, HDX, HDS...), and, as ever, separates above integrated in performance...

But this digital market is still developing, I am just guessing how may be the long term Naim product range. Now the ipod gen rules, HD audio downloads are still at their beginning... and classic and not so classic audiophiles still can't believe that any digital source can sound better than vinyl so...

For Naim investing in DACs could be interesting because DACS are not as dependent from computer technology as streamers (hard disk player or other type), I mean a DAC is less risky from the obsolescence point of view.

I congratulate Naim on launching a DAC,
I really like computer audio and if Naim cover my needs with a DAC I couldn't be more happy.
For me it was a kind of shock to check one year ago how good a computer and an under 1000 DAC could sound, apart for the great convenience of music servers.

If the Naim DAC gives S performance potential (I mean depending on the transport) then I think it could become one big success.

Finally, as competition is hard with excellent DACS at the 2000 price mark I guess Naim DAC performance will be superb.

quote:

Don, I wasn't aiming this at you,

No worries Steve, I felt It would help clear up a couple of ambiguities all round.

Cheers

Don

quote:

I am wondering what current HDX owners are thinking right now.

How do I feel about the New DAC?

Mixed feelings in some respects that I spent alot of $$ and now there is the potential to spend more to improve the performance (Go Naim). I will need to demo the current set-up vs. the same with the external DAC and the 555PS switched to the DAC and decide. If there is a significant improvement then knowing myself I'll swing for it. If not,then no.

Naim knew this issue would come up and they were smart to develop the DAC with the upgradeable PSU as the 555PS(and presumably the XPS2). It allows HDX users to "re-cycle" their psu's and CDX2/CDS3 owners the same luxury as well if they switch at some point. JS and I have been talking about this for some time and he hoped this would be the way they developed the DAC--it makes sense.

quote:

Originally posted by goldfinch:

quote:

Originally posted by js:

quote:

Originally posted by goldfinch:
IMO if Naim addresses this DAC to computer audio enthusiasts it should have AES/EBU input in addition to USB, optical or SPDIF. This would boost performance potential through the use of high end sound devices for streaming...

Why? There is nothing inherently better about AES/EBU and usually involves nothing more than additional circuits in line at the output and input of devices to allow noise rejection on long cable runs. It is still effected by the same cable characteristics, bandwidth limitations and impedences of a non balanced cable and has additional circuitry in line to worry about. I know that some are using the balanced input of their favorite DAC and like it but most doing so are actually doing it incorrectly without a proper level and impedence matching device. It makes a significant difference. You cant just short or float pin 3 from a Spdif. It will probably work but not correctly and is worse than just using the spdif in. Those with AES/EBU sources are fine but there's no advantage over spdif and actually a theoretical disadvantage unless both devices are fully balance in to out. At that point it becomes execution and preference. There are also VG passive matching adapters to go from AES/EBU to Spdif so anyone could use the DAC.

If there is nothing better about AES/EBU why for instance Lynx or RME sound cards use them?, I read somewhere the protocol for transmitting the audio signal is far superior in AES/EBU, isn't this an advantage?, I upgraded from a M-audio (SPDIF) to a Lynx AES16 (AES/EBU) for the Lavry and to my ears it was a significant upgrade, I always thought the AES/EBU connection has something to do with it.
Anyway, if Naim is aiming its DAC to computer audio (and this was exactly said by someone from Naim) they should make it very versatile, so not providing this connection would be a mistake, I know there are a adaptors, but it is not the same...

It's sounds better because of the JET topology as a similar quality non AES/EBU TC Konnekt uses DICE to apply the clock. Better cards with more sophisticated clock application and Jitter cancelling. There is nothing better about AES/EBY transmission in home aps though I do generally prefer an XLR connector. It's the equivilent of 2 Spdifs with one being phase inverted and depending on which AES format(there are 2) different voltage and impedence. There can be more going on in the stream but for this application it's meaningless and not used. Common for pro use with longer cables runs with lots of possible interference. Worthwhile for it's purpose but of no advantage for home use. It sounds better for you because you're using a better piece of kit correctly and your pro market DAC may be optimised for it but it's of no genuine advantage.

There was a huge refusal by many here to believe that the coax (which is what I assume we're talking as it's the Naim's best known input) is a clear upgrade over TOS yet now AES/EBU which is generally just a modified Spdif in use is now the way to go. If it comes on the DAC it will be for marketing to the pro market and no more. I've tried adapters with the same bits of kit at each end. Have you?
It's great that you have the Lynx card in your setup as it is a clear advantage over the TOS out. It's a genuine upgrade and great Kit. I understand why you like it. I'm one of the guys who helped get that type of right think going. By the way, Ken's Nagra is XLR only as that is the pro interface but it's not what makes it good. I've always wondered why I2B wasn't more popular as the clock wouldn't have to re-attached but you have to go with the flow.

Js,
No I haven't tried any adaptor, I just ordered a suitable cable (Belden AES/EBU) for connecting a Lynx AES16 to a Lavry. I think you know I was having sound dropouts with via Spdif caused by mains, but they disappeared since I changed to an AES/EBU interface. At least I thought the stronger signal of the AES/EBU interface was the solution to that problem.
On the other hand, I think some of the AES/EBU advantages you point out can be useful in domestic environments. For instance, long cable runs (you can keep the computer far from the system), it is more interference-proof, this was exactly my experience, and finally, user could choose among more audio devices for streaming (pro and not so pro, I think most new music servers-streamers have AES/EBU).
So, it would be a pity that Naim brand new DAC wouldn't have an AES/EBU digital input.

quote:

Originally posted by goldfinch:
Js,
No I haven't tried any adaptor, I just ordered a suitable cable (Belden AES/EBU) for connecting a Lynx AES16 to a Lavry. I think you know I was having sound dropouts with via Spdif caused by mains, but they disappeared since I changed to an AES/EBU interface. At least I thought the stronger signal of the AES/EBU interface was the solution to that problem.
On the other hand, I think some of the AES/EBU advantages you point out can be useful in domestic environments. For instance, long cable runs (you can keep the computer far from the system), it is more interference-proof, this was exactly my experience, and finally, user could choose among more audio devices for streaming (pro and not so pro, I think most new music servers-streamers have AES/EBU).
So, it would be a pity that Naim brand new DAC wouldn't have an AES/EBU digital input.

The longer cable runs still suffer from from the same bandwidth and cable character issues as any single ended cable. Common mode noise cancelation is the only advantage and you hear the same differences in cable type and length as you do with Spdif. The dig files are stored as single ended files. A second out of phase signal needs to generated somewhere in the chain which to me is just complication though not a problem if done well. Generally at the outs and ins. I could be wrong but I believe the Spdif that you were using was TOS and direct fron the computer. Though it wouldn't have mattered in your case if it were tos or coax for this discussion I'm only referreing to coax. The Lynx works because it's simply a better card with well sorted buffers that can also be increased if dropouts occur. It's the card and not the interface. You can run a coax 30' though I wouldn't do that with any dig format I was trying to get the best from. AES/EBU does have a significantly greater distance spec but that doesn't make it better for getting the ultimate performance from the format. Just more managable for pro use that sometimes requires AES/EBU to get a job done at all. Being able to do something and doing it well aren't the same. There's no advantage at normal lengths. If streamers have AES/EBU it will be at the analog out to cater to those with balanced preamps. Not the DIG out.

Thanks for your informative posts, I see what you mean,
before I was using an M-audio 192 sound card, I think its spdif was real spdif though,

Anyway I would like to stick to the Lynx card so I would like to see a future Naim DAC with this input,

Do you think would it be possible to make a cable from a Lynx card but ending in a spdif connector instead of the XLR? would it be better than using an adaptor?

quote:

Originally posted by goldfinch:
Thanks for your informative posts, I see what you mean,
before I was using an M-audio 192 sound card, I think its spdif was real spdif though,

Anyway I would like to stick to the Lynx card so I would like to see a future Naim DAC with this input,

Do you think would it be possible to make a cable from a Lynx card but ending in a spdif connector instead of the XLR? would it be better than using an adaptor?

You're better off with the adapter as it will be transformer coupled and they are quite good. It would go at the end of the break out cable in this case and you'd run a coax. The one we use has a BNC for the Spdif. I'll take a look when I get to work and see what make. There's a couple different ones available. I haven't listened to one Ferenc recommended which I think terminates to RCA. Perhaps he can weigh in as he's more familiar with that end of the market. You certainly did well with that card. It should serve you well regardless of which DAC you choose. I know adapter is a dirty word but we can't let the cart get before the horse. If it works better overall than it's better. I don't like break our cables but it doesn't stop your card from doing a great job.

We also had a quirky M-audio card way back. I think it was the audiophile 192 or something like that. I'm sure some work great as they get lots of use but it didn't interface that well with how I wanted to use it and the sound didn't approach what you're using now.

I thought about it on the drive in and couldn't think of why transformer was required for an AES/EBU output to Spdif in and wondered if it could be done with resistors off of one leg so I did some checking. While a transformer will be needed for a balanced dig in from single ended out the reverse may not be true. Here's a link to differences in format and how to match by building resistors into an end plug. http://www.epanorama.net/documents/audio/spdif.html Looks like pin 3 is shorted with impedence matching and level reduction done with a resistor bridge to ground off pin 2. I would keep the cable under 2M in this configuration and frankly, I think they almost all get worse over 1M anyway.

Canare, Neutrik and Graham Pattern Systems make xformer based adapters in either direction.

quote:

Originally posted by Adam Meredith:

quote:

Originally posted by connon price:
Some differences could also arise from difference between Coax and Optical transmission.

In fairness - the Apple doesn't "sound" with co-ax (I am lead to believe).

Sorry if I didn't make that clear. Yes, Apple is TOS and HDX is Coax, so even if they were both playing the same high quality (HDX?) rip and are comparing apples to apples, they are being squeezed through different presses on the way to make apple juice. A difference could (would) result.

hm...

Why not a BNC connection?

quote:

Originally posted by connon price:

quote:

Originally posted by Adam Meredith:

quote:

Originally posted by connon price:
Some differences could also arise from difference between Coax and Optical transmission.

In fairness - the Apple doesn't "sound" with co-ax (I am lead to believe).

Sorry if I didn't make that clear. Yes, Apple is TOS and HDX is Coax, so even if they were both playing the same high quality (HDX?) rip and are comparing apples to apples, they are being squeezed through different presses on the way to make apple juice. A difference could (would) result.

You got that wrong

Generally, the voicing on the coax cables varies greatly whereas for the optical's tonal balance was very similar. ( quality varies plastic vs. glass optical and their terminations )

I found Naim DC1 to have warmish and has a good body over the optical cables I have tried in the past.

quote:

Originally posted by kuma:
hm...

Why not a BNC connection?

There are now 75 ohm spec RCA connectors thanks to video so things are no longer so dire but I also like BNC. I believe they are simply following the appropriate standard.

Pity.

They ( Naim ) do not want to be accused of *funny cable* brand again, probably, too.

BNC connection never took off in the market place, oddly.

I'm very glad we are finally getting one of these. Most DAC's are pretty small. Why is this new Naim DAC in such a large box? Adam?

quote:

Originally posted by Edot:
I'm very glad we are finally getting one of these. Most DAC's are pretty small. Why is this new Naim DAC in such a large box? Adam?

Big Box, Big sound.

Funny you asked as many others have said the box wasn't big enough.

quote:

Originally posted by Edot:
I'm very glad we are finally getting one of these. Most DAC's are pretty small. Why is this new Naim DAC in such a large box? Adam?

Metal is money.
The DA-10 fits nice and snug into a Flatcap box

quote:

Originally posted by js:
I thought about it on the drive in and couldn't think of why transformer was required for an AES/EBU output to Spdif in and wondered if it could be done with resistors off of one leg so I did some checking. While a transformer will be needed for a balanced dig in from single ended out the reverse may not be true. Here's a link to differences in format and how to match by building resistors into an end plug. http://www.epanorama.net/documents/audio/spdif.html Looks like pin 3 is shorted with impedence matching and level reduction done with a resistor bridge to ground off pin 2. I would keep the cable under 2M in this configuration and frankly, I think they almost all get worse over 1M anyway.

Canare, Neutrik and Graham Pattern Systems make xformer based adapters in either direction.

AES/EBU to S/PDIF signal level converter

AES out:
2+------330 ohm------------------- SPDIF in
.............................|
3+.....................91 ohm
|............................|
1---------------------------------
|
-ground

Here you go for the diagram. Ignore the period dots and you've got it. Verticle lines show connections. Needed to use characters of some sort to position things. If it were me, I'd short pin 3 at the XLR end and built the resistors into the RCA.

quote:

Originally posted by js:

quote:

Originally posted by kuma:
hm...

Why not a BNC connection?

There are now 75 ohm spec RCA connectors thanks to video so things are no longer so dire but I also like BNC. I believe they are simply following the appropriate standard.

BNC is my favourite connector - I hate RJ45 with a passion: horrible tacky plastic things.

It was regarding connection to and what was available on the DAC.

quote:

Originally posted by js:
It was regarding connection to and what was available on the DAC.

js ,
Do you have Skype on your computer at work or home?
Would like to have a quick chat about High rez recordings off the LP12 ie Vinyl to hd or cd.

sorry, no but feel free to email. I'm typing handicapped anyway so you're better off. js95@sbcglobal.net

Looking at that diagram I copied from the site, it seems to me that the values could be more optimized. Perhaps it's the best compromise and a xformer is still preferred but it's worth a try for those that want to give it a shot as it may be close enough in impedance to not matter much.

No I didn't know skype though I knew those sort of things existed.