Uniti Atom/Nova/Star - New firmware - March/April 2018 Comments

David Hendon posted:

I think there are more Nova owners not liking here than Atom owners. But anyway something not wholly desirable is going on and it need understanding!

best

David

 

I’ve Just been back through the thread, more Nova reporters than I remembered, because the first few posters were Nova owners and it’s been 5 pages, and my aged brain had forgotten. I didn’t write the names down while reading back through so could be wrong, but I think it’s 6 Nova and 6 Atom, 4-2 on Nova and 6-0 on Atom, but I could have lost track of user names. AlleyCat’s use of a 250 has buggered my hypothesis that the extra body of bigger systems (Nova/NAP100) compensates for the DSP change, a 250;will out-perform both easily.

Hungryhalibut posted:

I’m off to Naim tomorrow and will ask them the question. 

Is that the factory tour?

Can you look forward to a couple of NAP250s in the Goodie Bag 

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Alley Cat posted:

Thanks Simon, so are you saying the DSP effect is fixed and cannot be modified at all in software? What I'm trying to understand is exactly what 'DSP' does especilly as firmware 2.3(8574) lists DSP 1.0.2 in About>More, whereas 2.6 has a completely different version which is why I assume that DSP differs between the firmware versions.

Yes the  IIR based low pass reconstruction filter is set up by programming the SHARC based DSP processor...and it is a specific design to match the DAC reconstruction filter response... and is carefully designed to offer the required reconstruction performance (ie slope, phase shift, Q and cut off etc) to suit the overall  DAC and filter response architecture. It’s design I don’t believe has ever changed.

However what has  changed is the code execution timing, that is the exact timing that the particular SHARC operands that are executed, which controls the tiny side effects from the DSP module code execution... it is these ‘interference’ side effects that can be tuned so as change the overall modification  of the resultant audio  caused by the perturbations from the DSP and memory data flow. I understand that the Naim designers can almost tune these interference side effects to tweak the audio eq response, but it’s not always a precisely exact process and can be a bit hit and miss... think of it like being able to tune the sonic differences between FLAC and WAV decode. The overall result is ultimately set by Naim to match the agreed Naim sound as clearly just like Naim amp, and preamp performances the audio performance response is subjectively set by Naim... we don’t have different sounding flavours of NAC 552 for example

Now what this means however is that these effects are very exactly specific to each component’s physical architecture and implementation, which is why there are different DSP build optimisations for each Naim product and why sometimes new DSP timing optimisation builds  are required when there are other changes in the firmware.

i hope that makes some sense.

Simon

 Yes, thanks makes a fair bit of sense - I guess I'm just trying to understand where these sonic differences emanate from and having a feel for the underlying architecture does help, though naturally I wouldn't expect Naim to divulge too much about this themselves.

It's truly amazing that the code execution timing can have such a dramatic effect if the output of the DSP code is essentially the same.

Yikes, this is weird - I've just updated again to 2.6.

The app is now listing this as having DSP 1.0.2 !!!

Need to restart a few things and re-check.

False Alarm

App now shows 

1.255.59

Well I think after downgrading and upgrading again it's fixed something as it now sounds a lot more like it did. I did exactly the same procedure although this has gone straight to 2.6 without the intermediate firmware they released inbetween. I did a factory reset after both instnaces so I am perplexed as it sounds different to the first time, less harsh and more depth. I didn't imagine it before either as misses who never says anything said somethings changed after the first time to upgrade.

Suzy Wong posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

I’m off to Naim tomorrow and will ask them the question. 

Is that the factory tour?

Can you look forward to a couple of NAP250s in the Goodie Bag 

I was hoping to be able walk away with a Statement NAP S1 for evaluation.... assuming it will fit in the boot... 

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Suzy Wong posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

I’m off to Naim tomorrow and will ask them the question. 

Is that the factory tour?

Can you look forward to a couple of NAP250s in the Goodie Bag 

I was hoping to be able walk away with a Statement NAP S1 for evaluation.... assuming it will fit in the boot... 

Now that will be hard to hide in a bag.

Alley Cat posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Alley Cat posted:

Thanks Simon, so are you saying the DSP effect is fixed and cannot be modified at all in software? What I'm trying to understand is exactly what 'DSP' does especilly as firmware 2.3(8574) lists DSP 1.0.2 in About>More, whereas 2.6 has a completely different version which is why I assume that DSP differs between the firmware versions.

Yes the  IIR based low pass reconstruction filter is set up by programming the SHARC based DSP processor...and it is a specific design to match the DAC reconstruction filter response... and is carefully designed to offer the required reconstruction performance (ie slope, phase shift, Q and cut off etc) to suit the overall  DAC and filter response architecture. It’s design I don’t believe has ever changed.

However what has  changed is the code execution timing, that is the exact timing that the particular SHARC operands that are executed, which controls the tiny side effects from the DSP module code execution... it is these ‘interference’ side effects that can be tuned so as change the overall modification  of the resultant audio  caused by the perturbations from the DSP and memory data flow. I understand that the Naim designers can almost tune these interference side effects to tweak the audio eq response, but it’s not always a precisely exact process and can be a bit hit and miss... think of it like being able to tune the sonic differences between FLAC and WAV decode. The overall result is ultimately set by Naim to match the agreed Naim sound as clearly just like Naim amp, and preamp performances the audio performance response is subjectively set by Naim... we don’t have different sounding flavours of NAC 552 for example

Now what this means however is that these effects are very exactly specific to each component’s physical architecture and implementation, which is why there are different DSP build optimisations for each Naim product and why sometimes new DSP timing optimisation builds  are required when there are other changes in the firmware.

i hope that makes some sense.

Simon

 Yes, thanks makes a fair bit of sense - I guess I'm just trying to understand where these sonic differences emanate from and having a feel for the underlying architecture does help, though naturally I wouldn't expect Naim to divulge too much about this themselves.

It's truly amazing that the code execution timing can have such a dramatic effect if the output of the DSP code is essentially the same.

Anything that consumes CPU cycles could affect the sound I suppose.. Looking at the fixes in the 2.6 firmware there was a lot of changes and CPU optmisations so I guess thry have to change something's to maintain the same base sound signature. Although In this case its not.  Although I seem to have got back to it somehow.

Been happy up to now with the upgrade on the Atom but now twice in the past hour the Atom has gone off, the standby button flashes and it reboots

David Hendon posted:

I think there are more Nova owners not liking here than Atom owners. But anyway something not wholly desirable is going on and it need understanding!

best

David

 

I have an Atom feeding the highs of my PM1, the bass section being driven with a NAP 100. Since the latest firmware update and I can assure you that I noticed a notable change in the sound: the sound seems more detailled but at the same time there is much less authority and PRaT to me : less crisp and less grunt much more quiet/calm tonal balance. 

I find myself using the volume + button more and more, just to get my lounge filled with sound, which was not the case prior to the update. My mind ain't playing me tricks, I do can hear a clear difference before and after the update. 

So please naim, come on, bring back the real naim sound back to my Atom. 

Granthar posted:

Been happy up to now with the upgrade on the Atom but now twice in the past hour the Atom has gone off, the standby button flashes and it reboots

Did you factory reset after the update? If not I would recommend to and see if that helps. If you already did make sure your network connection is ok. I had my Atom reboot when it lost network a few times when in use.

Bouba posted:

David Hendon posted:

I think there are more Nova owners not liking here than Atom owners. But anyway something not wholly desirable is going on and it need understanding!

best

David

 

I have an Atom feeding the highs of my PM1, the bass section being driven with a NAP 100. Since the latest firmware update and I can assure you that I noticed a notable change in the sound: the sound seems more detailled but at the same time there is much less authority and PRaT to me : less crisp and less grunt much more quiet/calm tonal balance. 

I find myself using the volume + button more and more, just to get my lounge filled with sound, which was not the case prior to the update. My mind ain't playing me tricks, I do can hear a clear difference before and after the update. 

So please naim, come on, bring back the real naim sound back to my Atom. 

Bouba, I have always meant to test to see if the internal amp stays on when a new Uniti device is used with an external amp (I assume it does - older units could be set to disable the internal amp) -  from what you're saying I think you're bi-amping with the internal amp feeding high frequency and NAP 100 feeding low frequency.

hello all

i want to reach out and acknowledge that some customers have feedback that they aren't happy with the latest release of software. whilst our feedback would strongly indicate that the majority of customers are happy with the release that does not mean that we at Naim are ignoring those whom have raised issue. The release of 2.6 under-went significant and considerable testing at Naim before release, and we all felt the release was ready and sounded good.

To those that aren't happy i would like to say that we accept your feedback and to tell you that Naim R&D are actively working on understanding your experiences and why it would manifest itself - the team at Naim will assist those in need

Trevor

Trevor Wilson posted:

hello all

i want to reach out and acknowledge that some customers have feedback that they aren't happy with the latest release of software. whilst our feedback would strongly indicate that the majority of customers are happy with the release that does not mean that we at Naim are ignoring those whom have raised issue. The release of 2.6 under-went significant and considerable testing at Naim before release, and we all felt the release was ready and sounded good.

To those that aren't happy i would like to say that we accept your feedback and to tell you that Naim R&D are actively working on understanding your experiences and why it would manifest itself - the team at Naim will assist those in need

Trevor

Thanks Trevor, I’m sure your acknowledgment will be appreciated by all. So in what form will this assistance be?

Trevor Wilson posted:

hello all

i want to reach out and acknowledge that some customers have feedback that they aren't happy with the latest release of software. whilst our feedback would strongly indicate that the majority of customers are happy with the release that does not mean that we at Naim are ignoring those whom have raised issue. The release of 2.6 under-went significant and considerable testing at Naim before release, and we all felt the release was ready and sounded good.

To those that aren't happy i would like to say that we accept your feedback and to tell you that Naim R&D are actively working on understanding your experiences and why it would manifest itself - the team at Naim will assist those in need

Trevor

Trevor

I greatly appreciate your response as I'm sure others do here.

There's clearly a diverse range of opinions from overwhelmigly positive, no/little change to I susepct a small number of negative experiences.

I'm sure all who've reverted would be more than happy to help R&D in any way to understand our specific experience and setups.

AC

Mercky posted:

Trevor Wilson posted:

hello all

i want to reach out and acknowledge that some customers have feedback that they aren't happy with the latest release of software. whilst our feedback would strongly indicate that the majority of customers are happy with the release that does not mean that we at Naim are ignoring those whom have raised issue. The release of 2.6 under-went significant and considerable testing at Naim before release, and we all felt the release was ready and sounded good.

To those that aren't happy i would like to say that we accept your feedback and to tell you that Naim R&D are actively working on understanding your experiences and why it would manifest itself - the team at Naim will assist those in need

Trevor

Thanks Trevor, I’m sure your acknowledgment will be appreciated by all. So in what form will this assistance be?

hello Mercky, i would trust that tech support will contact those whom need support directly

Hello Trevor,

I for one appreciate you reaching out.

However, I have to say I am perturbed by the fact that the sound quality of my Atom was changed as part of the upgrade and without prior warning or a clear and easy reversion path without having to join a forum to discover why my unit had changed its sound.

I also discovered I was not alone, so I would caution about the positive feedback you say you have received and question the source of such feedback. Not every Naim user is aware or a registered user here.

Perhaps going forward, your development team may be more forthright with improvements in firmware and the possible changes in sound quality that users may experience as part of the upgrade. This is HIFI after all and sound is the fundamental concern to those who choose Naim products over other brands.

I can’t get my head around 2.6, tonight I was listening to a favourite prog on iradio which plays an eclectic mix of music, it’s only 128k but it sounded excellent I have to say. Right now I’m listening to Jon Hassell ‘Tonight the Moon came dropping it’s clothes’ on Tidal and it sounds sublime, bags of detail AND bass! Am I burning in to 2.6? 

Trevor Wilson posted:

hello all

i want to reach out and acknowledge that some customers have feedback that they aren't happy with the latest release of software. whilst our feedback would strongly indicate that the majority of customers are happy with the release that does not mean that we at Naim are ignoring those whom have raised issue. The release of 2.6 under-went significant and considerable testing at Naim before release, and we all felt the release was ready and sounded good.

To those that aren't happy i would like to say that we accept your feedback and to tell you that Naim R&D are actively working on understanding your experiences and why it would manifest itself - the team at Naim will assist those in need

Trevor

Trevor - i did not believe and neither do the number of threads and comments suggest it is a minority, also using the forum as a measure is not fair as allot of Naim owners do not use it.

To view it as a change is probably better, some like it, some do not.

For over 20 years i have purchased Naim equipment for a specific sound (at least at demo/purchase) and that has always been consistent, but now i have ended up 6mths into owning a Nova a product that i personally would not have bought.

The response from Naim has been poor, denial, refusal, then relying on beta testers to justify.

An option must be offerred that support the original DSP at launch 2.3.1 (i think) and that must be supported moving forward, not as Naim advised, if you downgrade you get no support.

Obsydian posted:

Trevor Wilson posted:

hello all

i want to reach out and acknowledge that some customers have feedback that they aren't happy with the latest release of software. whilst our feedback would strongly indicate that the majority of customers are happy with the release that does not mean that we at Naim are ignoring those whom have raised issue. The release of 2.6 under-went significant and considerable testing at Naim before release, and we all felt the release was ready and sounded good.

To those that aren't happy i would like to say that we accept your feedback and to tell you that Naim R&D are actively working on understanding your experiences and why it would manifest itself - the team at Naim will assist those in need

Trevor

...The response from Naim has been poor, denial, refusal...

Obsydian, with all due respect, that doesn't seem to match up with what I have just read here from Trevor.  He has acknowledged that some customers are not happy with the sound they are hearing on their units after the update, says that Naim are not ignoring those who have raised the issue, and that R&D are looking into why some are experiencing something so different to others. He has also invited anyone who feels they have this issue to contact Naim to work with them in getting to the bottom of it.  Overall, I think that's a good, fair, and right response.

Richard Dane posted:

Obsydian posted:

Trevor Wilson posted:

hello all

i want to reach out and acknowledge that some customers have feedback that they aren't happy with the latest release of software. whilst our feedback would strongly indicate that the majority of customers are happy with the release that does not mean that we at Naim are ignoring those whom have raised issue. The release of 2.6 under-went significant and considerable testing at Naim before release, and we all felt the release was ready and sounded good.

To those that aren't happy i would like to say that we accept your feedback and to tell you that Naim R&D are actively working on understanding your experiences and why it would manifest itself - the team at Naim will assist those in need

Trevor

...The response from Naim has been poor, denial, refusal...

Obsydian, with all due respect, that doesn't seem to match up with what I have just read here from Trevor.  He has acknowledged that some customers are not happy with the sound they are hearing on their units after the update, says that Naim are not ignoring those who have raised the issue, and that R&D are looking into why some are experiencing something so different to others. He has also invited anyone who feels they have this issue to contact Naim to work with them in getting to the bottom of it.  Overall, I think that's a good, fair, and right response.

Well maybe let's setup a poll and survey forum users.

My response related to the Naim response ( I was clearly told, tough it's approved and not for debate)  prior to Trevor post, but if that direction is to email Naim then I and others have already repeatedly done that, should we do so again.

Accept this maybe a Marmite topic, but lets imagine we changed the Naim sound on amps, again some may like it others may not - the option should be given which you want and supported by Naim.

I think Naim  should offer a web based solution off some kind. Only fair to those costumers who do not speak or write English.

fred47 posted:

I think Naim  should offer a web based solution off some kind. Only fair to those costumers who do not speak or write English.

Yep we need to help costumers.

Obsydian, in the light of Trevor's post above, if I were in your shoes, I would make contact again with Naim and go from there.

Trevor et al

It is unacceptable to say (at least in my Naim Support email) that I will lose bug fixes going forward if I revert to 2.3 and on the other hand I will lose the sound quality if I move to 2.6.

Bugs by nature are the original functionalities which were badly coded/implemented and require fixing to bring the product to the expected functionality.

The sound quality was agreed & accepted at the point of sale.

Naim need to provide a way to achieve both of these; state this is their intention; provide a timescale; provide a product exchange (if there are differences/anomalies) with the manufacture/components of some units which are causing these differences or agree a refund program with the nearest dealer.

It is not acceptable to leave customers in the lurch, second guessing what Naim want us to do, an official response and procedure is required.

Nobody wants to spends thousands and end up with buggy or terrible sounding paperweights. Some people have an established history with the Naim brand, other people are new - Naim's actions will be mine & others perception of the company.