nds vs ndac

The DAC chip on its own does not determine the sound quality, it is the complete design that is responsible for that. Both the DAC and NDS are excellent  - however, i'm hanging on for the DAC that is yet to come ... The Reference DAC. 

At this level one item is not really better than than another. There are preferences and people should buy whatever they prefer. 

My preference, as you'll find in many threads, is for the Naim DAC. This is because I don't like Naim's UPnP streaming or the need to use a PC to update the streamers. With a Mac, you just plug in the Naim DAC and it works. I like things to be really easy ... I detest DIY ... So the DAC is just right for me. Apple for computers and Naim for audio = best of both worlds in computer audio. 

So you'll get lots of different opinions, but no definitive to answer to which provides the better sound ... for the best sound we have to wait for the Reference DAC  - hopefully devoid of any streaming to complicate it and not one byte of Microsoft code in any shape or form. 

All the best, Guy

Hi Giovanni,

You will see different opinions here.  I would say that more people who have posted about each prefer the NDS, but a few prefer the Dac.

My own comparision was Dac + XPS2  versus NDS + one 555PS, and the NDS was MUCH MUCH superior.  But obviously the power supplies were different.

A few people have posted about the different sound characteristics.  Reading those posts may help you.  

Good luck!

Hi Giovanu, it depends what floats your boat. The NDAC/555PS and NDS/555PS are both very fine digital players. The former is a bit more analogue, punchy and organic, the latter is more refined and detailed and easier to setup out of the box. (IMO). The NDAC with two PSU (internal and external 555PS) does seem to really lift its performance. I suspect the NDS with 2x 555PS will have a similar effect, but I have not critically home demo'ed the NDS with two separated PSUs but with only a single 555PS with two burndies. Of course I am waiting for the reference DAC (if I can afford it) which will hopefully combine analogue organic punchiness with super refinement and super detail.

Simon

How does one attach two PSUs to the nDac? It's just got one burndy socket.

It looks like quite number of us here are waiting patiently for a Reference DAC from Naim. I wonder the current batch of power supplies (such as XPS-2, 555PS) are usable if ever such DAC will exist in foreseeable future. Then again, Bryston has launched their 2nd version of BDA hence our wait might be end soon?

naim are on a roll to cover all options wih streaming.  they will see nds is there best . no dac super for years if at all. wouldn't generate lots of sales.  it would have to beat dac plus psus

Shivoham, you use two PSU with the Naim DAC by using its internal to power the digital circuits and the external PSU via the burndy to completely separately power the analogue circuitry. If using an external PSU, the NDAC always configures itself to use two separate PSUs. It's a neat design IMO.

Simon

Rca/sun, there is more to a DAC than limiting it just to being used as a streaming network player. I really expect gains from a reference DAC, perhaps only very subtle, as we are talking exceedingly high performance level already, but none the less:

• Improved PSU mechanical decoupling.
• Removal of on board PSU and therefore require upto two burndies for complete PSU decoupling.
• Optimised PCB layout (given possibilities from above ).
• Alternate digital inputs like asynchronous USB, HDMI and perhaps DSD format.
• Visiual display on sample depth and rate.

The benefits that a standalone DAC has to the integrated network players by separating noisy network/streaming and control circuitry despite extensive screening  is I suspect equivalent the differences between integrated amps and separates.

But... We will see.

Simon

Giovanni,

at the cost of an NDS plus two 555PSs, you can have a real symphony orchestra in its hall for a week. You choose the material.

Why not try this, for once?

N.

maybe   display is useful.   board isolation enough     is enough  .  usb ok but not vital for most.  all others questionable.  most will stick to nds plus psu .  naim wants more new customers VI for example. I use dac/psu  cant see the need to change at all.... top end preamp/dac must be on the drawing board 

Yep, to put in context, there is no need to develop the DAC, but then we don't need hifi. I doubt if Naim will sit back and not develop their prestige products and be complacent.. They wouldnt be Naim if they did. To me combing the benefits from the DAC and the NDS whilst hopefully removing their respective  weaknesses is an obvious development, with I suspect quite a lot of low level design reuse possible. The topend combined DAC/preamp has merit if the decoupling can all be managed wel.. There is always the balance between modularity and convienience.  But I use only 3 inputs on my pre and shortly a tape loop for a mini DAT recorder.. and that's probably more than most so pre simplification is probably on the cards.

I use DAC/555PS, I always like to experiment and try new things however.. It's part of the hobby for me, which is why I tried the NDS/555PS. For me that was a retrograde step, but I am sure at one point I will listen to a DAC successor and say wow, that's great, how can I live  with out that.... What you don't know, you don't know.

I'm in total agreement with Simon on this and I would like to see all the features he has indicated in the Reference DAC when it hits the streets later this year. As i've no interested in UPnP streaming, the NDS is not for me, I just find Naim streaming far too complicated and I'm just not after an around the house lifestyle music system.

I doubted the need for USB, but now I see it as essential and far more useful than Ethernet. My reasons are that for devices that follow the USB audio standard you just plug them in and they play. It supports all resolutions and it supports DSD. 

Moreover, by feeding my system from a computing I can apply parametric room correction in the digital domain so there are features that make a Reference DAC compelling for me. 

If the Reference DAC came with a 552 level preamp built in then that would interest me very much indeed though it would need at least one analogue input for my LP12. Oh and a PSU with no mechanical hum please.

I would be stunned if Naim were not working on such an item. Naim even equipped the NDS with a digital out in preparation for the Reference DAC so those still keen on streaming could use the NDS as a streamer in to the Reference DAC. And there is a space of the NDS web page under upgrades to write in Reference DAC  

Hi Simon -

Weren't the first three goals achieved with the NDS?   Analog and digital were moved to their own boards to improve electrical isolation, and then mounted on heavy brass plates and suspended to improve mechanical isolation.  The other change I noted was that the DSP now buffers on-chip instead of using separate RAM, and the code has been optimized to reduce power draw.

Of course, comparing the NDS and DAC is not exactly apples and oranges, what with the streamer module built-in to the NDS.  I was glad to see that, in comparison to the NDX, the NDS's streamer module has much better shielding.  In my view, the only way to compare the NDS and DAC is to compare the NDS to the DAC plus transport, since as we've all learned, the DAC is not transport-independent.  Like you, when I owned the DAC, I eventually decided that the NDX was the best-sounding transport.

Anyway, if you agree that the NDS design already follows your recommendations for a new reference DAC, then are we really only down to new inputs and display enhancements?  I can see sample depth and rate with nStream, so not seeing it on the NDS's display doesn't bother me.  In fact, other than setup time, I never use the display.  But inputs are certainly a more interesting topic...

There has been a lot of demand for USB connectivity here on the forum over the last couple of years, and to be honest, I have not quite understood why.  USB has been such a rapidly changing target, from 1.1 to 2.0 to 3.0 that, in my view, it always made perfect sense to relegate USB-to-S/PDIF translation to an external device.  Perhaps the USB standard has finally settled down, but I am not sure.  Computer manufacturers seem to love changing interfaces rapidly in order to churn the install base (e.g., Thunderbolt).  If another major USB rev occurred, I would prefer to only have to change out an external device.  Manufacturers like Bel Canto agree with this view, and have introduced their own lineup of USB-to-S/PDIF devices (and not only to deal with the rate of change, but also to support the necessary galvanic isolation).  I believe Naim has a similar philosophy, and until the DAC-V1, they too recommended external USB-to-S/PDIF devices as well.  Even now, Naim has hinted that the optocoupler used in the DAC-V1 may not necessarily be up to the task of USB isolation in a reference-level product.  So given they are not settled on this key piece to the puzzle, my opinion is that a reference-level DAC, or any other reference-level product with built-in USB connectivity, may not be right around the corner.

Again, correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't HDMI bring the same challenges as USB in terms of isolation and rapidly changing standards?

Lastly, on the topic of DSD, I was one of the folks who jumped on this bandwagon several years back.  I liked the sound of SACD's, and so I bought a Korg recorder to capture needledrops in 2X DSD files.  I continue to do so, but I translate them to 24/88.1 FLAC files for editing and streaming.  Some may hear a sonic advantage of DSD over PCM, but I am not convinced that it is significant enough to actually replace even a single well-recorded 16/44.1 CD rip.  Also, from a business perspective, I am a bit cautious of all the recent hype seen in magazines and at audio shows.  The industry seems desperate for some new, big thing, and there are those who would love nothing more than to develop a marketplace of audiophiles who are willing to pay a large premium for "DSD studio masters".  So far, I am not particularly impressed with higher resolution PCM downloads, so that adds to my skepticism about DSD.  It seems to be a niche technology within a niche marketplace, and this adds to my doubts about whether there can be enough volume to build any sustainable momentum for DSD.

Anyway, sorry to ramble. Now back to the original thread topic.  As many sensible folks have stated, we live in wonderful times, and there are lots of incredibly good options for achieving high quality digital playback.  The NDS works best for me for several reasons.  I hear a more natural tonal palate when compared to the NDX->DAC, and instruments and voices sound more real to me.  I also hear a bigger sound stage, with more space between images.  Lastly, I believe these gains have been made without the loss of any toe-tapping in the process. I believe that with the NDS, Naim has made their best effort to date to try and improve on the DAC's foundation technology.  Whether or not anyone else agrees will have to be determined by their own listening tests.

ATB.

Hook

Couldn't have put it better Hook, particularly in view of my lack of technical knowledge. I just tend to go with what I like within the bounds of what I can afford. And returning to the OP the best advice is the usual advice - go listen and trust your own ears. I personally rate the NDS/555PS more highly than HDX-SSD/DAC/555PS for the musical reasons Hook outlined above. A kind of unforced, unprocessed realism. But just look at all the things you *could* incorporate into a music system right now. Never has there been so much choice and so many possibilities. Rejoice!

Hello Giovanni,

I had this question burning at the back of my mind for many months. Lots of opinions and experiences. Leaving out my preference for Android over Apple, in terms of pure sound quality, the DAC and NDS are closer than you may think. They do use the same decoding chip after all.

Once you properly isolate the DAC, which is one of the key benefits to the NDS, IMHO the difference is negligible. You can get a lot out of the Naim DAC...and I mean a lot! It is very good once you help it with supports/shelves. So to me, it comes down to if you want the streaming built-in or if you have a separate streaming device (or two). I have an SBT and my TV going into the DAC and I'm still shocked at how good it sounds now. But I still prefer my CDS3 

Always good to have options and save a few dollars as well

Arun

Hi Hook, I really believe there benefits, possibly major to remove the noisy streaming circuitry from the NDS to have in a dedicated DAC. The DAC is helped by simpler more spaced circuitry such that the balancing act of optimising the DSP to some extent and definitely the processing code is not so critical.

The brass suspended boards and off board independent PSUs in a simplified(read less noisy) DAC should yield benefits, and as i suggested there should be reuse of detail design, just like the NDS uses elements from NDAC classic.

I wonder if the lower noise environment in the DAC is one of the reasons I prefer it.. But this just idle speculation..

Arun, good advice on the NDAC isolation, also a ferrite chokeclamped around the SPDIF interconnect seems to subtly help very fine detail.

Simon

If the separate functions can be disabled, maybe the current ultimate is one NDS into a second NDS, each with a pair of PS555's.  Can streaming and DAC functions be discretely disabled?  Maybe there would be a benefit, even without disablement.  Either way, should we expect the sound to be identical, or is that unlikely?  If different, I guess I would expect some noticeable improvement, based on what I have digested from this thread.

I am probably far from the first to think of this.  I do not recall reading about such a test here, though.  

Nick

Hear hear -- Hook you've said it better than I possibly could. 

Of course my "test" wasn't fair for two reasons; one, my comparison was spaced apart in time (no a vs b switching, and I was hi fi-less for a week between), and two, it was Dac + XPS2 vs. NDS + 555PS.

But I rely more on my wife's ear than mine; she only sees black boxes and I don't tell her what I've changed (or cost) before she listens.  To me, and her, NDS + 555PS sounded FAR more "analog" than the Dac + XPS2.  And I am more than happy to say to anyone that it was with different ps's, in my system, in my room.  "YMMV"

PS: I am now at the head of the line for both HiCap and 555PS DR upgrades.  The HiCap will be done this coming week, and the 555PS as soon as the next kit arrives at AVOptions.

Hi, Iver,

One would hope there would be no additional gain from breaking out the "twins" into dedicated Fraim stacks.  .  It's a lot of Fraim, already!  

The more I consider adding an NDX plus PS to my nDAC / 555, the less farfetched my idea of a pair of NDS's begins to seem to me . . . maybe if I exercise restraint and limit myself to an XP5XS on the streamer, and a single 555 on the DAC . . .

Imagine the domestic confusion, though.  I have enough trouble already getting them not to play a CD in the DVD player.  Now I am going to have to put post-its on each NDS for all of us to keep them straight -- and have only just got them trained on Squeezebox and Mac!  They think I am mad . . . they're right of course.

Still, we might learn something interesting from testing some of the scenarios. 

Nick

Hi nick, well I think we might find the reference DAC looks like the NDS but with those horrible noisy streaming electronics removed. Which... Is close to your suggestion.

This is what I mean about a lot of reuse possible here.

Simon