Got the DAC, need help with the rest

Posted by: runic on 29 June 2010

So i've ordered the nDAC (rest of system is 202/Hi/200), I know i like the sound with a CD transport but I want to be able to access my entire music collection quickly which I have started to rip to a USB drive soon to be NAS.

My goal - the system must sounds as good, if not better, than my old CDX2. Any less than this and I will go back to picking CDs off the shelf.

The problem is it's hard to find demos of PC based systems, hence my post. I know there are those out there who have heard these systems so here is what I am considering:

Option 1: SB Touch (hard wired) --> nDAC
This is the simplest and possibly cheapest but I have read both bad and good things about this setup - some suggesting it's not as good as my old CD player.

Option 2: Windows7 Atom based media server (+JRiver?) --> HiFace ---> COAX --> nDAC
I am a competent PC builder and electronics engineer so building this is fairly easy for me. I know there are other USB.Digital interfaces on the market such as Bel Canto but can't find too many trustworthy reviews.

Option 3: Windows7 media server + Firewire card --> Weiss INT202 --> nDAC
After buying the nDAC this is over my budget but if the consensus is this is the only way to get decent sound I will save up!

Option 4: MacMini --> HiFace --> nDAC
I have no allegiance to Macs/PCs so this is not an issue.

Option 5: Windows 7 Media Server + Sound Card --> nDAC via COAX or optical
These pro sound cards (like the Lynx) seem to cost a fair bit so I'm thinking along the lines of the Asus Xonar STX.

All of the above can provide me with the control options I need too so sound quality and price will be the only issues.

So, which of the above will send as good as a CDX2?? (Please say the cheapest!). I am aware that some think all bit perfect sources sound the same, but I have heard differences between CD transports so i'll be hard to convince. All opinions appreciated.
Posted on: 29 June 2010 by PMR
Hi runic,

You are really trying to provide a reliable interface from the source component whether Toslink or Coaxial with the lowest jitter. However, it's not just the source, but also how the nDAC has implemented that interface and its unfair burden of having to manage jitter. So given I personally believe that the nDAC will be better with SPDIF Coaxial, I'd imagine that by using either the Weiss INT202 or HiFace you will garanteed a good outcome.

Interestingly, a Benchmark DAC1 really only needs a 'bit perfect' stream since its removal of jitter/clock errors is superbly implemented through UltraLock. Mind you, you can argue that the sound of the DAC1 is less warm, colourful and detailed compared to other converters.

So I'd go MacMini --> Weiss INT202 --> nDAC

Peter
Posted on: 29 June 2010 by js
I'd get the streamer and upgrade to a better one when I can. The Unitiserve will be a similar price to mac plus 202, have a dedicated player so no experiments and auto ripping to where you choose without prompt or attention.
Posted on: 30 June 2010 by Andy S
Personally, I'd be more concerned with how you drive the system and the consequent UI and make my choice from that. I have an atom based HTPC running Linux/xbmc connected to a TV with a 2 line VFD display so I can browse music without the TV on. This is driven by a 2.4GHz wireless remote. It's also used to play all of my ripped HD movies.

I'll be doing a comparison with a mac mini in a few weeks to see if I can hear any differences then.
Posted on: 30 June 2010 by 0rangutan
I'd second js' suggestion and go for the SB Touch.
This will sound great and be easy to operate (particularly with an iPhone/Touch control option) and can be easily upgraded at a later date when something better comes along (eg. a standalone Naim Streamer). The outlay will be cheapest and you will recover much of the costs when selling it again in future.

John
Posted on: 30 June 2010 by runic
Thanks John, I think it's a good option too. What concerns me is that if the sound quality is not as good as my cd based system then I will start looking straight away at other options or even that it will put me off PC audio - i am both weak willed and lazy.
Posted on: 30 June 2010 by 0rangutan
I'm only guessing, but I suspect the SB Touch + NDAC will sound better than your CDP. The SB Touch has an improved chipset over previous models and the NDAC really should take this to a great level.

There are bargains to be had on the SB Touch online and I believe that if you buy direct from Logitech, they offer a 30-day trial/return policy (or they did previously).

Well worth trying it before heading off down the more expensive alternative routes.
Posted on: 30 June 2010 by js
The UnitiServe is less than a month off so you could make due with you DVD player for a bit also and see how that fits. The biggest issue I see with the touch is the switching supply and that it's built to a price in general. Should hold you through if you're in a hurry for a streaming source. The one I heard was detailed, quiet, and a bit cold, lacked a bit of texture.
Posted on: 30 June 2010 by likesmusic
Another vote for the Touch - it'll get you into the game without costing a fortune, works well, means you can get stuck into ripping (a much bigger investment if you value your time) and when a better streamer does appear, you can put your Touch in another room and still get value from it and your (by then) ripped cds.
Posted on: 30 June 2010 by PMR
quote:
Originally posted by runic:
Thanks John, I think it's a good option too. What concerns me is that if the sound quality is not as good as my cd based system then I will start looking straight away at other options or even that it will put me off PC audio - i am both weak willed and lazy.
Hi runic, the guys are wrong here IMO unless you really want to cut corners on investment. The Uniti was out of date before it even hit the shelves, so it's not a long-term solution.

Firstly, you go buy a new MAC, because it's great overall investment, and simply nothing compares using iTunes as a music player controlled by an iTouch or iPhone using the Apple Remote application to control the music. Secondly, the Weiss INT202 passes data from Firewire to SPDIF 'bit perfect' using Firewire 800 (new MAC) with hardly any measurable jitter, which would be fantastic news for the jitter/interface sensitive nDAC.

You pay your money, but the above it a great investment for any future system with the new MAC given you way, way, way more flexibility.

Peter
Posted on: 30 June 2010 by Hook
Hi Runic -

Welcome to the forum!

Given your experience with building PC's, and given the cost of a Lynx card, I would recommend option 2.

I went with option 5 (RME 9632, JRMC 15), and have been thrilled with the results. Installed Windows 7 Pro so that I could use Remote Desktop to control the player software, and it works great.

One nice thing about using a DIY PC as a music server is that, should you choose to buy a dedicated streamer at a later date, the PC can be easily re-deployed for other purposes.

Good luck!

Hook
Posted on: 30 June 2010 by js
quote:
Originally posted by PMR:
quote:
Originally posted by runic:
Thanks John, I think it's a good option too. What concerns me is that if the sound quality is not as good as my cd based system then I will start looking straight away at other options or even that it will put me off PC audio - i am both weak willed and lazy.
Hi runic, the guys are wrong here IMO unless you really want to cut corners on investment. The Uniti was out of date before it even hit the shelves, so it's not a long-term solution.

Firstly, you go buy a new MAC, because it's great overall investment, and simply nothing compares using iTunes as a music player controlled by an iTouch or iPhone using the Apple Remote application to control the music. Secondly, the Weiss INT202 passes data from Firewire to SPDIF 'bit perfect' using Firewire 800 (new MAC) with hardly any measurable jitter, which would be fantastic news for the jitter/interface sensitive nDAC.

You pay your money, but the above it a great investment for any future system with the new MAC given you way, way, way more flexibility.

Peter
Guess what? PCI>1394a(firewire 400) which is what the very good and costly INT202 uses. Also PCI>1394b(firewire 800) Big Grin Firewire is a poor reason to buy a computer over a streamer. You can prefer one but that wont be it. I think ghook2020's idea pretty reasonable but also not cheap. Once I get to that type of output, I think I'd at least want to hear what the same company that makes my favored DAC can come up with.
Posted on: 30 June 2010 by PMR
quote:
Originally posted by js:
quote:
Originally posted by PMR:
quote:
Originally posted by runic:
Thanks John, I think it's a good option too. What concerns me is that if the sound quality is not as good as my cd based system then I will start looking straight away at other options or even that it will put me off PC audio - i am both weak willed and lazy.
Hi runic, the guys are wrong here IMO unless you really want to cut corners on investment. The Uniti was out of date before it even hit the shelves, so it's not a long-term solution.

Firstly, you go buy a new MAC, because it's great overall investment, and simply nothing compares using iTunes as a music player controlled by an iTouch or iPhone using the Apple Remote application to control the music. Secondly, the Weiss INT202 passes data from Firewire to SPDIF 'bit perfect' using Firewire 800 (new MAC) with hardly any measurable jitter, which would be fantastic news for the jitter/interface sensitive nDAC.

You pay your money, but the above it a great investment for any future system with the new MAC given you way, way, way more flexibility.

Peter
Guess what? PCI>1394a(firewire 400) which is what the very good and costly INT202 uses. Also PCI>1394b(firewire 800) Big Grin Firewire is a poor reason to buy a computer over a streamer. You can prefer one but that wont be it. I think ghook2020's idea pretty reasonable but also not cheap. Once I get to that type of output, I think I'd at least want to hear what the same company that makes my favored DAC can come up with.
Sure the Firewire 400 is used in the INT202, but I'm just illustrating that the MAC Mini using Firewire 800 is technology driven, i.e. a good investment. The only alternative as mentioned is in building a PC using Windows 7, but it’s unlikely you’ll achieve the same silent design as the MAC Mini without a great deal of work and potentially cost. Windows 7 if you need PCI for MADI etc., otherwise Firewire to SPDIF Coaxial via INT202/MAC using Amarra or Pure Music if you want auto sample rate adjustment.

Look, Naim have nothing to compete with this (never will), though you can choose the nDAC if you simply preferred its sound and want to stay Naim for HiFi.
Posted on: 30 June 2010 by js
I'd say the other way around but to each his own. Glad you like firewire(as do I when in it's place) but I prefer not needing it in the first place. First I was crazy when I brought up the TC firewire here when all were using stock tos out. Now I'm wacky again. Use what you like and yours is fine. I'll bet on purpose built by a trusted audio company every time.
Posted on: 01 July 2010 by goldfinch
I can also recommend the PC route, I use a small ITX fanless PC with the Lynx AES16 pci card and Windows 7 (Wasapi) and JRMC 15 with great results. I am still exploring this route and I have just bought a s/h RME card, next upgrades will be an SSD disk and an external clock (maybe the black lion).
Posted on: 01 July 2010 by Andy S
quote:
Originally posted by PMR:
The only alternative as mentioned is in building a PC using Windows 7, but it’s unlikely you’ll achieve the same silent design as the MAC Mini without a great deal of work and potentially cost.
No, Win7 is not the only alternative - you could use linux. And you can buy mac mini style near silent PCs for £200. You can be up and running with a PC based solution for less than the cost of a SB touch....
Posted on: 01 July 2010 by Eloise
quote:
Originally posted by Andy S:
No, Win7 is not the only alternative - you could use linux. And you can buy mac mini style near silent PCs for £200. You can be up and running with a PC based solution for less than the cost of a SB touch....

Agree with the "Linux" comment, disagree with the implication that a £200 near silent PC is comparable to a MacMini, though a £200 silent PC will work as a music server.
Posted on: 01 July 2010 by Andy S
quote:
Originally posted by Eloise:
though a £200 silent PC will work as a music server.
and a HD video player too Winker It is certainly quick enough in library mode on my music and a near perfect htpc as far as I'm concerned. What else does it need to do?
Posted on: 01 July 2010 by runic
I'm happy that i can build a fanless PC, based on either Windows or Linux for £3-400 (200 seems tight to me for decent components). I do not care if i end up with PC or Mac, I have used Macs enough to know their advantages. However, the issue for me is whether there is any difference between the sound - i.e. does the firewire implementation a mac sound different to a PC. It shouldn't, it's digital after all but I have read otherwise and not had the opportunity to compare myself.

The one question i'm more interested in is how do these systems compare to a good CD player? I think there is some psychology at work with some people's reviews of PC audio - i.e. "I've bought all this stuff now so it had better sound superior to my old CD player!"
Posted on: 01 July 2010 by Andy S
Without reopening old wounds (search the forums if you want), the only way we could come up with the nDAC sounding different with different front ends was either non bit-perfectness or RFI. Let's assume we are bit perfect from the PC (and this can be more or less difficult depending on the chosen software) then we're left with RFI - either through the cable and jitter if coax/RCA or through jitter if via optical.

The best you will do with the nDAC therefore is a front end with an ultra low jitter output connected via optical or ultra low jitter/good power supply connected via RCA/BNC. You can do that a number of ways....

As to CD vs nDAC, well, unless they have exactly the same DAC stage, they will sound different anyway. Whether one is better than the other - I don't think there is a correct answer...

And PC for £200 - just look at the Acer Aspire Revo 3610 - fully built for you - just add software Smile My HTPC cost around £400, but I have gone mini ITX mobo with PCI-e expansion (for future graphics or audio upgrade), SSD plus silent power supply and a Silverstone case to put it all in.
Posted on: 01 July 2010 by runic
quote:
Originally posted by Andy S:
Without reopening old wounds (search the forums if you want), the only way we could come up with the nDAC sounding different with different front ends was either non bit-perfectness or RFI. Let's assume we are bit perfect from the PC (and this can be more or less difficult depending on the chosen software) then we're left with RFI - either through the cable and jitter if coax/RCA or through jitter if via optical.

The best you will do with the nDAC therefore is a front end with an ultra low jitter output connected via optical or ultra low jitter/good power supply connected via RCA/BNC. You can do that a number of ways....

As to CD vs nDAC, well, unless they have exactly the same DAC stage, they will sound different anyway. Whether one is better than the other - I don't think there is a correct answer...

And PC for £200 - just look at the Acer Aspire Revo 3610 - fully built for you - just add software Smile My HTPC cost around £400, but I have gone mini ITX mobo with PCI-e expansion (for future graphics or audio upgrade), SSD plus silent power supply and a Silverstone case to put it all in.


I take my hat off to you (and Acer) - I would have difficulty building that for that price.

If it is as simple as reducing jitter and RFI as much as possible then that makes me think the media PC or MAC with jitter reducing interface might be the best way. Although I suspect RFI may be more of a problem - after market PSUs here I come!

I'm afraid i don't agree about one being better than the other as a simple matter of opinion, within the boundaries of my own taste I find a difference in both DACs and transports that to me translate as better or worse. I am genuinely interested in hearing from people who have converted to PC based audio as to whether it sounds as good as their old CD setup.
Posted on: 01 July 2010 by Hook
Hi Runic -

If you haven't done so already, you might want to look at the computeraudiophile web site and search for "CAPS" -- easy to follow instructions for building a high-quality PC-based music server.

Two parts dominate the cost of the build: audiophile sound card, and thick aluminum enclosure. If support for 88.2/176.4 is not important to you, the well-reviewed Xonar cards are inexpensive alternatives. And there are a number decent enclosures that are also not very expensive.

Good luck.

Hook
Posted on: 01 July 2010 by Andy S
quote:
Originally posted by runic:
I'm afraid i don't agree about one being better than the other as a simple matter of opinion, within the boundaries of my own taste I find a difference in both DACs and transports that to me translate as better or worse. I am genuinely interested in hearing from people who have converted to PC based audio as to whether it sounds as good as their old CD setup.
Moved from CDS1->streaming PC. much happier now.

As to better, what I meant was that they may sound different, but which is "better" is a personal opinion.
Posted on: 02 July 2010 by Eloise
quote:
Originally posted by ghook2020:
Two parts dominate the cost of the build: audiophile sound card, and thick aluminum enclosure. If support for 88.2/176.4 is not important to you, the well-reviewed Xonar cards are inexpensive alternatives. And there are a number decent enclosures that are also not very expensive.

If I understand correctly, the Asus Xonar cards do now support 88.2 and 176.4 The other alternatives are ESI Juli@ card, M-Aduio Audiophile 192 and Prodigy HD2 cards. You could even use M2Tech HiFace - could probably mount it internally with internal USB connection - or Halide Bridge (limited to 24/96 support).

You should be able to build something similar to the C.A.P.S. without the Lynx AES16 card and with different case for around £300.

Eloise
Posted on: 02 July 2010 by runic
I have looked at the CAPS server and it looks almost identical to what i would have built anyway. What I don't want to do is spend the money on the sound card if a HiFace would give just as good results. There seems to be little concensus about which gives better results.

I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that i'm just going to have to try some things out and sell it on if I don't like it.
Posted on: 02 July 2010 by js
I'd ask ferenc. He has a lot of experience with both the Lynx and HiFace. My guess is that the PCI Lynx would be preferred in a linear supplied, fanless PC.