Why is a Chord Hugo better than a Naim DAC

I know the Hugo is not as bright or etched as the NDAC, but as I said before there is more to the Hugo than highlighting the audio, the Hugo is more subtle, however I can envisage on some systems it may sound shut-in or dull... 

Anyway irrespective of subjectivity, the NDAC can't (yet) play the DoP SPDIF output from the Naim streamers with the new firmware. However DSD sounds jolly good on the Hugo when fed by a Naim streamer.

Simon

Sometimes people who have invested time and money in other products are often (and understandably so....) 'protective' of their possessions. Naturally they are reluctant to change and potentially be financially disadvantaged by replacing the item with something different. As such they 'hang on to' what was once the cutting edge product and defend it vigorously in order to convince themselves that they 'still own the better product' - when in reality, if they could be less subjective and more open minded, they may recognise that evolving technological developments can produce superior products for less cost.

Although I own Hugo (which to my ears is superior to some other products mentioned on this forum), I still remain objective and would certainly change it, if there was an alternative better sounding product for sensible cost.

At the moment, I don't believe there is.

Even if nDAC were to sound better with its 555PS, I think that it is simply too expensive for a potential 'slight' improvement in sound quality - if indeed this is the case.

In the real world, not everyone is in the 'money no object' camp and this is where Hugo will continue to be a world beater - sound for pound ratio without any concern over the law of diminishing returns etc 

Mr Frog, indeed you can't let the price tag dictate your tastes, otherwise you are a fool unto your self. I had an NDAC/555PS, loved it. I always keep an open mind. I tried this little Hugo thing... Wasn't quit sure what I was hearing.. I had never heard digital sound like this. I didn't rush to any conclusion. I did however later end up selling my NDAC/555PS and kept the Hugo. .. and yes I lost money when I sold them on.. But in the end for me I had a better system that allowed me to connect more effectively to my recordings.. I enjoyed my NDAC/555PS whilst I owned them.. However for me it's about musical naturalness and connectivity that comes first... Not the price tag or even the brand.. or what is the point?

Simon

Well said Simon.

I can understand the folk who hang on to their expensive kit, but it's a shame because they are missing out - as you undoubtably know 

The Hugo experience has taught me the same thing Simon, it isn't about the brand or the money, it is all about the enjoyment of the music and how the kit gets out of the way between me and the song being played.

I think it is back to the old debates 30 years again Naim/Linn vs the establishment about what is important in music replay. They argued that PRAT was essential first and foremost. 

And while I can't argue with PRAT and enjoy it immensely, I feel that timbre, naturalness and what Rob Watts calls "variability" cannot be ignored.

I am pasting below a post of his from head-fi to better explain (hope that is ok Richard Dane)

"The key difference in the sound is variability - live acoustic music has unbelievable variations in the perception of space, timbre, dynamics and rhythm. Additionally, each instrument sounds separate and as distinct entities. By comparison, high-end audio is severely compressed - depth of sound stage is limited to a few feet (listen to off stage effects in say Mahler first - in a concert the off stage effects sound a couple of hundred feet away but on a hi-fi it is an ambient sound a few feet away). Timbre is compressed - you don't get a really rich and smooth instrument playing at the same time as something bright. The biggest problem is the dominance effect - the loudest instrument is the one that drags your attention away - this constant see-saw of attention is the biggest reason for listening fatigue, a major problem with Hi-fi."

 to be fair to Naim the issue mentioned by Rob "Additionally, each instrument sounds separate and as distinct entities." is something that Naim does really well and in fact my father in law who doesn't know Naim at all, commented on this very aspect when he heard my kit i.e. you can hear each instrument clearly and distinctly on my DACV1/202/200/HCDR (before I got the Hugo)

Mr Frog,

you and Simon have made some very good points. I agree with what you both say but there will always be the 'Naim or nothing' opinions. 

Steve

from the same post from Rob Watts

"So a real challenge is defining what true transparency is. My definition, is to latch onto the idea of variations - if a modification makes the sound more variable, then its more expressive, and hence more transparent, even if it sounds, in tonal balance, darker or smoother and superficially less impressive."

His thoughts on R2R DACS

The problem with R2R is that the OP can't switch fast enough, as there are a lot of switches involved in the R2R ladder, so in practice you can't run them above 16 FS - but I can run mine at 2048 FS so the digital domain is much closer to the original un-sampled analogue waveform. There are lots of other problems with R2R - noise floor modulation, code dependent glitch energy, high distortion at small signal levels, and moderate distortion at large signal levels."

and 

"R2R DAC's which have more distortion for small signals due to glitch energy and resistor matching problems - issues that are impossible to solve)."

+1 It is not very easy to demo Chord devices here in Berlin but, at a certain point, I certainly will organize a demo.

It should not be that difficult to design a DAC that just consumes data stored in a local memory while being completely disconnected from the outside world (USB, Ethernet, etc.). Connection could be re-established (e.g., for wireless replay control or data feed) by pressing a button on the device. Would this be a SuperDAC? At least, it would be a pure DAC: source-agnostic by construction and fully devoted to DA conversion. The means of bringing the data to the device (Ethernet, USB, ...) would be a matter of convenience and have no impact on the sound quality.

Wat, you do not know whether there is a DAC in Naim's pipeline or you do know there is none? Thanks, nbpf

It is not a simple answer. You can keep hoping for months or years or be open minded as Simon Suggested and try a number of DACS, I found what I was looking for in Chord Hugo but there are so many others. You may find NDAC/XPS is the one for you.

The Chord PFGA has taken many years to reach what it is today, and the learning curve required is massive. Other companies cannot simply replicate 30 years of accumulated Rob Watts knowledge in a few months.

As I said earlier, the gauntlet was thrown many years ago with the Chord DAC64 and Naim knew about this since then.

I was reading an old review of the Mark Levinson 30.6 DAC (we are taking about 1992) and the NDAC and the old Levinson processor (you can read this on stereophile) have a lot in common. There appears to be nothing massively new or innovative in the NDAC if the Levinson DAC was already doing RAM buffer reclocking and selecting one of 36 fixed clocks based on the average transmission rate (sounds familiar?). 

In my humble opinion one thing is audibly very clear to me. Off the shelf DAC ships are sonically inferior to customized PFGA Dac approach.

Analogmusic it is probably fair to say that Naim are at the upper ends of the performance curve for their use of the commercially available  hardware used in their DACs/Streamers.. and even some of those components are specially chosen to ensure a tighter performance tolerance than that of the manufacturers. 

However if you compare this to Naim's expertise in the amp space where it has 30 + years of experience.. with many of its pioneering design principles expanded and developed on through to its current portfolio  and the use of bespoke built driver transistor components.. it's not surprising that there are differences in the DAC performances with those that have been doing with DACs what Naim have been doing with amps for the last few decades.

Simon

Hi Simon, A very valid point you bring. In addition the DAC technology I think is still evolving and getting better. And the development steps are quicker progressing than in other areas of hifi equipment (like amps).

If you take the time to reconsider - you may see that is a silly comment.

I have not NT heard the Hugo so have no opinion on it.

However, I've not heard a Naim product that didn't, at some level, 'do it' for me.

Conversely - I have never heard a Chord product that did anything for me.

The Hugo would, obviously, have to sound not like other Chord products for me to be inclined to audition - in any reasonable expectation of liking it.

Much like the sequence of 'new sound' B&W loudspeakers which, at each iteration, didn't do it for me.

These are not quality judgements (nor are any here) they are matters of taste and, therefore, closed for useful discussion.

Open for argument though.

I am not incurious about the Hugo but, as I am not in the market for such a product, I'd only listen if it fell in my lap. The future promises that it and other stuff may so do.

The future (like the past) is another land.

Adam I understand your loyalty to Naim, but for me it always about the music, never about the brand or a certain style of presentation. If others can do it better then I am all for it.

Anyway what a number of us are saying is we would like Naim to build us a DAC with a PFGA  approach.

This may seem obvious to those who work in specialist technology fields, but the burden of a full-time expert FPGA specialist is not something that most specialist hi-fi manufacturers could typically afford at market rate, except on a consulting basis (which itself would be quite expensive).

To that end, there are a large number of highly-skilled consulting engineers who work at more lucrative full-time careers in the defense, automotive, semiconductor or telecommunications industries, and offer their expertise at a reduced rate to (specialist) audio manufacturers strictly because they enjoy the hobby, or are looking to get involved in something worthwhile in their retirement years that is not income-dependent.

This is not necessarily a bad thing, and it is by no means a slight upon those designers who work within the industry full-time - it's just the case IMHO that there are specific technologies that, on a day-to-day basis, are overkill for 90% of the requirements of building a hi-fi product.

A future in audio reviewing ?

You may but you didn't understand my comment.

You said ANY customised PFGA DAC. I am sure, with an afternoon's training, I could customise such a DAC to be shit - probably not even work.

What you might have meant is that customisable PFGA DACs offer, in your limited knowledge, the best platform for building the best presently (when built) available DACs.

Adam you know what I meant and I have explained it above.

For instance PS audio also offer a DAC with FPGA, but is (according to those who have heard) not the same quality as Chord Hugo.

On Chord's website there is a powerpoint showing the Hugo with 2 different noise shaping algorithms, one with a lower noise floor and better performance.

So all Naim need to do (according to the forum) is bring out an FPGA DAC based streamer with full Tidal support (and all future streaming services...), DIRAC room correction (and a properly implemented daylight saving clock) and everyone will be happy 

Thanks Wat. I very much agree with your observations. On the other hand, even if Naim is not planning to market new pure DACs or to further develop its own DAC approach, they will have to cope with improving digital to analog conversion technologies to keep their streamers competitive. These are also DACs, finally. Best, nbpf.

Exactly, should be ready for release next week then 

So -

not content that Naim should copy SOMEONE else you want them to copy EVERYONE else.

I just want the discontented of the forum to be happy Adam.

Someone took the Red pill...

The digital reconstruction filter is very different. The Levinson used an off the shelf chip with a typical linear phase characteristic, the Naim an DSP running a minimum phase filter. Both filter and DAC are important IMHO.