STOP PRESS. NaimDAC v's ND5 XS: Dealer comments.
Posted by: Jasonf on 05 September 2012
Chaps,
Still on my quest to attain the true HiFi sound, I have heeded the very good sound advice by the Forum on a previous thread I posted relating to the Naim Dac and the ND5 streamer.
Originally, I was going for the UServe - ND5 XS - NAC 152 XS - NAP155 XS, then discovered that the UServe also streams radio and has a better nserve UI and the Forum generally considered the NaimDac to be superior in SQ to the ND5.
Therefore, my choice became: UServe - Naim DAC - NAC 152 XS - NAP155 XS.
After approaching my local dealer to arrange a demo for the NaimDAC option, these were his comments:
“Unitiserve + Naim DAC is not a bad option. We were discussing this part briefly when we had our demo in the summer. But still Naim network playing is a far better way to deliver the digital signal compared to using the coax into the DAC
It`s the better and safer way to deliver the signal because of computer decoupling and check-sum to prevent data loss. Yes, the Unitiserve user interface is better in some ways but with the latest N-Stream 3.0 this is providing a lot more info and metadata directly while listening, playlists will also be available for all streaming products soon. The Naim DAC compared to ND5 XS standalone is of course a better DAC - but the way to deliver the data is best from a network player which Unitiserve isn` t.
You will not go wrong by choosing Unitiserve + Naim DAC, you can always get a network player later on”.
I apologies for playing ping-pong with the Forum and my dealer but as a novice I need to understand the pros and cons if one is to spend that kind of money.
So here are some questions for the Forum:
What is "computer decoupling"?
What is the "check-sum"? and
....one has to use a coax into the Naim DAC from the UServe, this is not as good at delivering the digital signal as what into the NaimDAC from the ND5?
So are these point missed from the advice of the Forum or does the Forum consider it not to be important (not that I would ever doubt you guys)
.
Please feel free to express all types of emotion when replying to this post.
Posted on: 09 October 2012 by Jasonf
Hi Jan, very good point.
As a novice here that had not occurred to me. I am confident in the system in terms of SQ, the only slight niggle is with the UServe in that if it was a 3tb I would be certain of complete satisfaction for.....the next 5 years min.
Cheers.
Posted on: 09 October 2012 by Jan-Erik Nordoen
Originally Posted by Jasonf:
... the only slight niggle is with the UServe in that if it was a 3tb I would be certain of complete satisfaction for.....the next 5 years min.
Cheers.
Quick back of the envelope calculation...
Let's say that you listen to music on average 2 hours per day (perhaps I'm way off here).
1 TB = 1600 CDs = 2.2 years of listening every day for 2 hours, without playing the same track twice.
So a 2 TB will get you to 4.4 years. I assume that you take holidays and listen to the same music more than once ? You're safe for the next 5 years, at least !
Also, bear in mind that you're not limited to the internal storage of the UnitiServe. It acts as an aggregator for your other music stores (eg. NAS).
ATB
Jan
Posted on: 09 October 2012 by Jasonf
Hi Jan,
Yes you are probably right with your calcs. But storage and listening are two seperate things. For example my house is approx 270cubic metres but I only occupy a tiny fraction at any one time, but my family requirements deem that I need a certain size.
My concern is that as well as continuing to buy cd's I will be replacing many tapes, some compilations and hopefully downloading hidef music in lossless. I imagine it soon adds up but we will see. Additionally, if I spend 2000 pounds on the UServe I really don't want to buy a NAS etc, etc.
Cheers.
Posted on: 09 October 2012 by Bart
Originally Posted by Jasonf:
Hi Jan,
Yes you are probably right with your calcs. But storage and listening are two seperate things. For example my house is approx 270cubic metres but I only occupy a tiny fraction at any one time, but my family requirements deem that I need a certain size.
My concern is that as well as continuing to buy cd's I will be replacing many tapes, some compilations and hopefully downloading hidef music in lossless. I imagine it soon adds up but we will see. Additionally, if I spend 2000 pounds on the UServe I really don't want to buy a NAS etc, etc.
Cheers.
Jason I predict it will be some time before you NEED a nas if you buy a 2tb uServe. And when you do -- they are relatively inexpensive. We all have our individual issues, but of all the criticism I've read of the uServe, the 2tb internal hdd being "too small" is not one I've heard 'til now.
PS when you fully realize the cost of downloading hi res music, you won't be downloading hundreds of gigs worth 
And if you can afford to do so, you can afford a few hundred on the nas.
Posted on: 09 October 2012 by Jan-Erik Nordoen
I second Bart's comments. I'll add that once you've experienced the gains in SQ after ripping CDs onto the UnitiServe (or any other server for that matter) - and then playing back through a competent DAC or network player - you may reconsider the merits of downloading hi-res music. I have several hi-res downloads and their 16/44 versions, but I'm not convinced. For me, it still comes down to performance, recording & mastering quality.
Since purchasing the 1TB UnitiServe about 2 years ago, I'm up to 865 albums out of its 1600 album (CD) capacity. I buy about 100 CDs per year, so still a ways to go before switching to the 2 TB version.
Hilsen fra Montréal,
Jan
Posted on: 09 October 2012 by Jasonf
Hi Bart, thanks for putting my mind at rest.
No criticism here on the UServe, infact as you know from previous threads, I have been a staunch defender of it in just about every way, I hope I don't come to regret that
It was just an expressed concern.
Posted on: 09 October 2012 by Bart
Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:
I second Bart's comments. I'll add that once you've experienced the gains in SQ after ripping CDs onto the UnitiServe (or any other server for that matter) - and then playing back through a competent DAC or network player - you may reconsider the merits of downloading hi-res music. I have several hi-res downloads and their 16/44 versions, but I'm not convinced. For me, it still comes down to performance, recording & mastering quality.
Since purchasing the 1TB UnitiServe about 2 years ago, I'm up to 865 albums out of its 1600 album (CD) capacity. I buy about 100 CDs per year, so still a ways to go before switching to the 2 TB version.
Hilsen fra Montréal,
Jan
Jan I am in the process of getting my 1tb 'updated' to the current 2tb version. The ability to put my "other" music on it, rather than on a nas, was very intriguing. I'll still own the nas, but liked the idea of everything in one place.
Posted on: 09 October 2012 by totemphile
Jason,
The UnitiServe is essentially a NAS, just with a ripping engine built in. Same as a RipNas. The former has Naim UPnP server software on it, the latter Asset UPnP, it even transcodes to WAV on the fly for those who think WAV sounds better.
For some reason you have convinced yourself that the US is so different from the rest. It isn't. It's an expensive piece of kit that offers no real advantage over an AssetNas or RipNas or any other good NAS such as QNAP or Synology. Linn recommend RipNas and AssetNas for all their systems, including their top end Klimax range, where just the streamer costs €14K or so. dbPoweramp is supposed to be the best ripping software in the PC world, no less accurate than Naim's algorithms. Bit perfect. Both RipNas and AssetNas come with a DTC for Mac.
The US is essentially a PC, it can fail just like any other NAS, Macbook or Mac Mini, probably more so than the latter two. Apparently it can even catch a virus. No such thing with a Mac. In any case, you will need to back up your ripped files for sure, either on multiple portable USB drives or via a professional NAS with multiple drive slots and automatic back up function (RAID) and a USB drive stashed away. There are plenty accounts where the US has failed, have a look at this thread here just as an example: https://forums.naimaudio.com/di...nt/19447375247499192. You'll find more using the search functionality.
Naim's recommend solution for streaming audio is to have a propper NAS in place. Most at Naim seem to recommend QNap, many here on the forum prefer Synology or Vortexbox, if a Mac guy. If you listen to the highenders here your US shouldn't be anywhere near your hifi. So a pretty little box out of sight, might as well get an AssetNas then. Alternatively you could get a Mac Mini and run Asset UPnP on it now. Spoon, the developer of dpPoweramp and Asset UPnP, has just released a beta version for Mac. You can be sure it will be very good, if it isn't already. €400-€500 for a NAS and back up, €650 for a new Mac Mini, €898 for a 2TB AssetNas, compared to €2990 for the US.
I think the fact that you are somehow put off by ripping CDs via XLD on your Mac is mainly down to you not knowing anything about ripping and possibly having been reluctant to give it a try. Bottom line, no big deal and at least €2100 more in your pocket for better speakers....
Food for thought, that's all I am saying...
Cheers!
tp
Posted on: 09 October 2012 by totemphile
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Marky Mark
Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:
the demo showed that a better method (TCP/IP) for getting data into a lesser DAC was preferable to a lesser method (S/PDIF) into a better DAC.
I have also found this to be the case, but I bought my nDAC before the introduction of the network players (streaming client + DAC). If I were starting today, I would go directly to one of the latter.
If S/PDIF is so compromised, why does the reference NDS offer it?
i can see that over TCP/IP it is possible for an implementation to deliver the entire file almost at once to the DSP/DAC. Perhaps useful if jitter were an issue on other inputs. However, am struggling to think of what else could offer any improvement?
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Bart
Originally Posted by totemphile:
Jason,
The UnitiServe is essentially a NAS, just with a ripping engine built in. Same as a RipNas.
Not if the consumer wants to use the UnitiServe as a player as well, with a direct digital connection to say the Naim DAC. That combo does make good music and allows the UnitiServe to serve as a player on the main hi fi and as a server to say a UnitiQute in the bedroom.
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Eargasm
Well i don't know what kind of computer skills you have, but the UnitiServe is just a weak computer with limited fields of use with no real advantages at all, i dare say it is for seniors past 70 that do not know sh*t about ripping, storing or anything about Networks? This might be an advantage if you like?
NAS, always discussions about them, why do people think that just because they added their music to a NAS, it is safe?
No, if you plan on keeping your record collection intact for the rest of you'r life a proper file server is needed, configured with raid mirroring incase of failed disk AND off-site backup (offline, in a safe), also remember a consumer HDD needs to be replaced every 3-5 years, to be safe. Professional server disks have a much greater life span but the cost can be to high..
This is how i do it, i will never take any shortcuts when it comes to the most important aspects of my music and hi-fi.
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by totemphile
Originally Posted by Bart:
Originally Posted by totemphile:
Jason,
The UnitiServe is essentially a NAS, just with a ripping engine built in. Same as a RipNas.
Not if the consumer wants to use the UnitiServe as a player as well, with a direct digital connection to say the Naim DAC.
Very true and that's the one scenario where I think the US is worth its money. If, however, it is merely used as a server in conjunction with a Naim Streamer, then I think its value is debatable. For those who argue that Naim rips sound better, my personal view is that this difference will not come into full play unless you are much higher up the system hierarchy, probably at least NDX(possibly with PSU)/282/HC/200. Take DaveBk as an example, he has got a Naim DAC, 555PS DR, NAC252, SuperCap, NAP300, Ovator S-600s and just ordered the NDS. He wasn't able to hear a difference between WAV and other formats, likely to have been FLAC (Dave please do correct me, if I misinterpreted your recent posts). For a more detailed discussion and other views see this thread here: https://forums.naimaudio.com/di...83#19447375257019683
The point I am making, the difference in SQ between the US serving WAV rips and an AssetNas transcoding on the fly and serving up WAV files to a Naim streamer, will be minute, if audible at all. Certainly at ND5XS/152/155XS level the difference will be even less pronounced, if Jason can hear it at all. Getting better speakers or a better source will be reap much bigger rewards IMHO. To invest in the US in that scenario is a huge luxury with little real life benefits. You can configure a RipNas, Mac Mini / iTunes as well as XLD on Mac in such a way so that you simply need to slot in the CD you want to rip, click on rip/import CD, job done. It will pull the meta data and album art automatically. There will be the odd CD where you might need to fill in some of the meta data but the same holds true for the US, it can happen there too. If you want the Naim streaming experience, including the UI of their apps, then the ND5 is all you need. nStream offers the Naim experience, interactive meta data and album art all via iPad and functionalities such as in track forwarding are bound to come at some point with a future update. All of this is not reliant on having the US in place as well, you can rip and store your CDs in many other ways with the same result in convenience and sound quality, certainly at XS level.
Best
tp
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Jan-Erik Nordoen
Originally Posted by Eargasm:
Well i don't know what kind of computer skills you have, but the UnitiServe is just a weak computer with limited fields of use with no real advantages at all, i dare say it is for seniors past 70 that do not know sh*t about ripping, storing or anything about Networks?
Dead on ! Not to mention woodworking and electronics skills ; remember, a speaker is just a monkey coffin using outdated technology from the 1920s, which I dare say is for juniors under 50 who don't know their lock mitres from their rabbet joints and wouldn't recognize group delay if it hit them in the cochlea.
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Hook
Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:
Originally Posted by Eargasm:
Well i don't know what kind of computer skills you have, but the UnitiServe is just a weak computer with limited fields of use with no real advantages at all, i dare say it is for seniors past 70 that do not know sh*t about ripping, storing or anything about Networks?
Dead on ! Not to mention woodworking and electronics skills ; remember, a speaker is just a monkey coffin using outdated technology from the 1920s, which I dare say is for juniors under 50 who don't know their lock mitres from their rabbet joints and wouldn't recognize group delay if it hit them in the cochlea.
A perfect reply. If I were keeping a list of best posts ever, this would go on it.
Cheers Jan-Erik!
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Jan-Erik Nordoen
Ah, thank you Hook, I thought about that one all the way to work this morning
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Jan-Erik Nordoen
Originally Posted by Marky Mark:
If S/PDIF is so compromised, why does the reference NDS offer it?
For the same reason that Naim offers RCA inputs next to the DINs on its preamps, I would guess.
I don't have the technical background to explain why TCP/IP is better than S/PDIF, perhaps Simon can help out.
Jan
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Bart
Originally Posted by Hook:
Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:
Originally Posted by Eargasm:
Well i don't know what kind of computer skills you have, but the UnitiServe is just a weak computer with limited fields of use with no real advantages at all, i dare say it is for seniors past 70 that do not know sh*t about ripping, storing or anything about Networks?
Dead on ! Not to mention woodworking and electronics skills ; remember, a speaker is just a monkey coffin using outdated technology from the 1920s, which I dare say is for juniors under 50 who don't know their lock mitres from their rabbet joints and wouldn't recognize group delay if it hit them in the cochlea.
A perfect reply. If I were keeping a list of best posts ever, this would go on it.
Cheers Jan-Erik!
Jan is on a roll. 
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Jan-Erik Nordoen
It just gets my goat that one has to almost apologize around here for thinking about buying a UnitiServe or - god forbid - actually buying one. Over to you Jason, it's your thread.
Jan
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Marky Mark
It has been discussed before including on this thread. There might be some potential for RF interference on S/PDIF. However, it is closely related to the professional audio protocol AES and successfully conveying a FLAC / MP3 within a living room is more akin to hitting a very large target 2 metres away with a few drops from a water pistol than filling a bucket 500 metres away.
I have tested the theory that TCP/IP into lesser DAC > S/PDIF into better DAC and it is does not hold. I would agree though that if the input connectivity to the streaming device was set-up badly and compromised enough then the better DAC downstream might not make a silk purse out of it. This could equally apply to a network/streamer/dac device though.
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Noogle
Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:
It just gets my goat that one has to almost apologize around here for thinking about buying a UnitiServe or - god forbid - actually buying one. Over to you Jason, it's your thread.
Jan
Where's the fun in having a boring black box that just works?
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Marky Mark
Originally Posted by Jan-Erik Nordoen:
It just gets my goat that one has to almost apologize around here for thinking about buying a UnitiServe or - god forbid - actually buying one. Over to you Jason, it's your thread.
Jan
Although a little disrespectfully put across he made some good points. There is a lot of misinformation on forums and this is why threads should not belong to individuals. Not long ago we were discussing the vital role of checksum in sound quality - enough to make a man drink bleach.
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Jan-Erik Nordoen
Originally Posted by Marky Mark:
Although a little disrespectfully put across he made some good points. There is a lot of misinformation on forums and this is why threads should not belong to individuals. Not long ago we were discussing the vital role of checksum in sound quality - enough to make a man drink bleach.
I have a dream... Audio Truth Goggles :
http://www.niemanlab.org/2012/...ment-of-consumption/
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by MangoMonkey
Hmm...
If you guys think you're so smart ...
Could you explain why music from dbAsset on my PC sounds perfect, while the same rips coming from my Synology NAS sound midrange forward in comparison?
It's all playing through an NDX, and the network topology is similar, but not the same (but I can make it the same to get around the switch issue).
This makes me almost want to get the UnitiServ since I don't want to leave my PC on all the time. However: The UnitiServ might very well sound worse, and I'd rather go build a new PC.. or get a Mac and run the new dbAsset version on it...
Posted on: 10 October 2012 by Marky Mark
Originally Posted by Shivoham:
Could you explain why music from dbAsset on my PC sounds perfect, while the same rips coming from my Synology NAS sound midrange forward in comparison?
But which brand hard disks are you using in your NAS and in your PC? You're gonna need a screwdriver.....
