Unitiqute 2 vs NDX as streamer only

2 different worlds ! As you would expeat from a machine dedicated to streaming that cost 2,5 times more !

buy a used NDX because your amp deserves it !

+1

There's a difference! Whether it's worth the money, only your ears and wallet can decide.

I found a huge increase in SQ moving from ND5 --> NDX into my SN2.  I have to believe the difference between UQ2 --> NDX is even larger.  I would not want anything < NDX.

I am not sure of the internals of the ND5, but the NDS was designed with the same overall architecture as the NDX. That architecture allows for a precision digital source and / or quality analogue source. Much of my Naim componentry has changed, but I still have my NDX as a key part of my digital source because it is genereally a great bit of kit.

Just waiting for lossless streaming services to be integrated by Naim which should unleash the power of the ND players.

Simon

One story is that NDX of course came first, then ND5 came up with some small modifications which sounded so good that the NDX was modified accordingly (German HiFi mag). Indeed, their internals look similar, though there are slightly different DAC chips in the NDX, and this might correspond with Kevin's experience.

The streaming board in the qute 2 is the same as in the ND-family (isn't it?), but the DAC section is most likely less sophisticated in the qute. What seems to work well (even with the NDX) is:

streamer -> external DAC -> SN2,

and I'd expect that this should be good with the qute and e.g. DAC-V1, or also Hugo or upcoming chord 2qute.

Cheers,

Stefan

Yes, Stefan that is what I also think .

The difference between a Qute 2 and a NDX both into an external DAC

are marginal, because they use the same boards.

If there should be a difference, it would never justify the big price difference,

if you plan to use Qute 2 and NDX without their own DACs.

Peter

Stefan, I know the ND streamer boards are the same.. However, 'active' part in terms of the SQ when acting as the digital synchronous source, is the DSP chipset and precision clock with its low oise regulated PSU that creates a clean, highly stable asynch transport clock from a variety of digital formats. This is where the NDX seems to work well.

The ND5 is good, but when it first came out, to my ears it was definitely not in the same league as the NDX whether as digital transport or analogue source. Whether Naim changed the ND5 later, I don't know, but the ND5 certainly had / has an attractive price point.

i believe the only main mods (excluding firmware) to the NDX have been the updated streaming module to handle 192/24 and a larger playlist buffer (and now support Spotify), and changing the firmware update port from RS232 to USB.

Simon

Ime the NDX is significantly better than ND5 as both a stand alone and digital out source.

G

Theoretically you can stream with UQ2 digital to DAC-v1 and then analog line Out therever you Wanne go.

if necessary back to UQ2

could be better than nd5 and coat less than ndx

This is interesting because I have been wondering for some time if I would get a gain in sq moving from my UQ2 into Hugo to a NDX into Hugo or if I would be better off just saving for the remainder of my life for an NDS.  I don't know of anyone who has tried both devices into a Hugo or even an NDac.  

Dayjay, I have fed a few sources into my Hugo now, however not the UQ2, but the NDX via coax SPDIF has been by far the best so far... (I also use the NDX as a reclocker and shaper for digital inputs for the Hugo). The NDX to Hugo via SPDIF  is the connection that gives me the 'inner feel' to the music recording that can be so enchanting and addictive to listen to. (Been listening to Amy Winehouse's Back to Black this morning via this way and it oozes feeling and vibe with a lovely seperation of instrumentation). I can only assume it's some sort of synergy caused by low electrical noise, low jitter and galvanic isolation on the NDX.

Simon

Its a bit awkward Simon, for me to buy new the difference would have to be very considerable as the price difference is significant.  Buying second hand wouldn't cost that much but I only audtion dealers equipment if I intend to buy from them.  Something to think through and there are other components I can spend my money on in the meantime because the qute does sound very good through the Hugo

Not that relevant, but in order of preference when i heard it.

Mac to Hugo 4/10

Qute to Hugo 6/10

NDS to Hugo 10/10

That's useful to me Gary as it shows that there is more than just the dac to take into account and that the transport has am impact on sq too, thanks

The thing that struck me the most on that day was that what feeds the Dac was every bit or more important than the dac itself. I think this was borne out for me when i tried the Hugo at home as i only tried it with my Mac Mini, because i didn't have my Qute at the time. My dealer was of course also using a UnitiServe.

I'm astonished that a high number of this board have bought a Hugo to improve ndx

...and to improve NDX/555PS or NDX/555PS...ime.

G

IMHO not a good Signal for the valve of the ndx for the done invest.

I meant NDX/555PS & NDAC/555PS for the record.

G