CDX2

I own a CD5X, similarly hobbled.

There was a time when Naim orthodoxy was that external DACs could not improve on one built in and optimize to suit.

Having made your choice, what is missing, beyond “options”?

Nick

Hi.  i'm pretty sure that the DAVE DAC is superior to the one in my 272, and that it would likely be better than the DAC in the CDX2.  Of course I have no way of proving that.  I'd also like to try the player with a Super Lumina DIN cable connected to the 272. 

The traditional method of improving a CDX2 mk1 is to add an XPS2 or 555ps.

It's a digital dead end so you are confined to using its analogue outputs.

Naim service department used to allow you to send your version 1 CDX2 to them to have it converted to allow digital output - not sure if they still offer this service? Be aware though that this process then permanently disables the analogue outputs so your CDX2 becomes a digital transport only.

I also recently purchased a CDX2 with digital out. However I' d not mess with an external dac. As above, best upgrade is XPS or 555ps

Regards

Roberto

You want to focus on the CDX2 as is... Naim felt that providing a digital out compromised the player so originally didn’t ... when the NDAC came along they did modify the CDX2.. but some of us who are passionate over the CDX2   believe the mark ones sound better than the later versions with SPDIF... and I am one of them.

The CDX2  has the same DAC decoders as the the ND555 and NDS, namely the Texas Instruments PCM1704K, but the analogue filtering and current to voltage conversion and isolation  is not in the same league as the ND555 naturally enough. The CDX2 also uses the famous and highly regarded Pacific Microsonics DSP chipset.. which really optimises CD and also supports through hardware HDCD should you have any of those. All of this is bypassed with the SPDIF out of course. If you convert a mark one to SPDIF this is lost for ever I believe... don’t do it. The whole magic of the CDX2 is from this highly crafted circuitry.... it would be like housing an Aston Martin DB11 in a shell of a Ford transit van...

The key thing with the CDX2 setup is support.. it really will sing on a shelf of Fraim. Naim DIN Hiline also really advances the performance of the player. I find if using top class NACs such as the 252 or 552 I prefer the CDX2 neat, without off board powersupply. On lesser NACs, an off board powersupply such as the XPS2 seems to be sometimes prefereable... and if not using Fraim seems to be very prefereable... strange interactions there.....

You have one of the best CDPs out there.. take a little care setting it up and it should reward you for years to come. Let it breath by partnering it with the best electronics and support you can... enjoy.

I would have thought that if you like the sound of Naim CD players the last thing you want to do is use a different DAC. There must be plenty of cheaper transports out there that you could have used? Just my thoughts of course.

Stu

I always felt my original CDX2 with first transport sounded way better than any of the later ones fitted with later mech, or later still, the version with digital out. In the same vein, i'm happy to own one of the last original mech versions of the CDS3.

I would love to listen to a CDX2.2, or a CD5 XS for that matter, digged out to a ND555. 

Chag -

Had a brief listen to my CDX2.1 this morning. It’s still sounding stunning and is now back as my primary source. 

Both CDX and CD5 (various incarnations) are fine players

A bit expensive used as dedicated transport with much wasted electronics

It would have been nice if Naim ever made a CD-transport only, to complement their nDac for us non streaming guys (I'm left with my CDS3) 

Thanks for the advice.  I won't convert to spdif, but rather will have a look at upgrading the power supply, and maybe getting a Super Lumina cable.

Chag... posted:

I would love to listen to a CDX2.2, or a CD5 XS for that matter, digged out to a ND555. 

I wouldn’t bother, complete waste of time.. you might as well rip the CDs and stream them

Upgrade your power supply CDX2 is a fine player. Another Dac will change the sound.

thebigfredc posted:

The traditional method of improving a CDX2 mk1 is to add an XPS2 or 555ps.

It's a digital dead end so you are confined to using its analogue outputs.

I always saw this as a boon.

Docmark, I would enjoy your CDX2 as it is. Just put it on a decent shelf.

C.

Yeah I agree, I found adding a PSU did not automatically improve a CDX2, and i found my PS555 worsened the performance by providing a slightly too forced or exaggerated sound.

Best try the CDX2 neat.. but on top quality support and interconnect.... my XPS2 changed the sound but I prefer the energy and PRAT without it... although this might be different on lesser NACs I admit.

The real benefit of the CDX2 is its DSP, DAC implementation, current to voltage stage and analogue filtering stage.. top class..it’s what makes the CDX2 such a special and distinguished world class CDP.

Personally I found the xps on the cdx2 a great improvement, when I had a 282.  The sound was fuller, bigger, more fluent and softer, with an analog quality.  It put the cdx2 in another dimension.

For me personally adding a 555 did the same, but on a grander scale. 

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Yeah I agree, I found adding a PSU did not automatically improve a CDX2, and i found my PS555 worsened the performance by providing a slightly too forced or exaggerated sound.

Best try the CDX2 neat.. but on top quality support and interconnect.... my XPS2 changed the sound but I prefer the energy and PRAT without it... although this might be different on lesser NACs I admit.

The real benefit of the CDX2 is its DSP, DAC implementation, current to voltage stage and analogue filtering stage.. top class..it’s what makes the CDX2 such a special and distinguished world class CDP.

You basically write here that it is better to move the money towards the pre instead of a ps on the source. Nothing wrong with that, I just make a comment here that the money for the PS on the source could also be used as a significant part of the cost for the pre ...

... and nobody thinks that a 552 is a bad idea ...

French Rooster posted:

Personally I found the xps on the cdx2 a great improvement, when I had a 282.  The sound was fuller, bigger, more fluent and softer, with an analog quality.  It put the cdx2 in another dimension.

Yeah when I had my 282 that is when I did feel I needed my XPS2 on the CDX2..to somehow reign it in to match the exuberance of the 282, but with the 252 and 552 I found it better with no PSU and my CDX2 did and continues to really sing with great presence, timing, and authority giving that beautiful characteristic Naim PCM1704K sound.... and I hear those tell tale traits in the ND555 as well.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Yeah I agree, I found adding a PSU did not automatically improve a CDX2, and i found my PS555 worsened the performance by providing a slightly too forced or exaggerated sound.

Best try the CDX2 neat.. but on top quality support and interconnect.... my XPS2 changed the sound but I prefer the energy and PRAT without it... although this might be different on lesser NACs I admit.

The real benefit of the CDX2 is its DSP, DAC implementation, current to voltage stage and analogue filtering stage.. top class..it’s what makes the CDX2 such a special and distinguished world class CDP.

Interesting comment. A few months back when I had a fuse issue with my XPS DR, following a 3 week switch down whilst I was away, and was waiting for new supplies I decoupled my CDX2 for the first time ever and had it bare for a few days. My immediate thought was that it had a less full bodied sound, a flatter soundstage and something was definitely missing at the top end - but that it was not something I couldn’t live with if I had to. The detail all still seemed to be there. Popping the XPS back into the mix demonstrated what it actually brings to the party and, in my view, it does lift the player to a new level.

Like you I think the CDX2 is one of the finest source components I have ever heard. It represents everything that I value in the Naim brand/sound.

Ardbeg10y posted:

You basically write here that it is better to move the money towards the pre instead of a ps on the source. Nothing wrong with that, I just make a comment here that the money for the PS on the source could also be used as a significant part of the cost for the pre ...

Yes well summarised. In the 15 years or so of being a Naim customer I have learnt the most important element in a Naim system is its NAC.. get that right and it tends to bring everything else along with it.

I’ve just changed my pre from 272 to 282. I tried my bare CDX2 into the 272/555 which sounded very good. Bare CDX2 into 282/HCDR i feel is quite a step up in authority, depth and sheer musicality and is a far more relaxing listen. 

I’m just in the process of demoing my cdx2 with a 555ps, at the moment it is paired with an xpsdr...

I’ve read here on the forum in the past that it’s not a great pairing, similar to a 555ps with a 272?

But you can only judge with your own ears in your own listening room.....

And Definitely not experiencing any forced or exaggerated sound...,for me... quiet the opposite.... it sounds very grown up, controlled and balanced....with beautiful timing......

It’s  only been hooked up for 48 hrs..... but I think I’m hooked.....

I think it might depend on the NAC you are using...the higher end NACs appear to work well with the bare CDX2... the 282 seems to prefer the CDX2 with a PSU.. at least that is what I found.

Are you placing your CDX2 on a Fraim? It’s incredible isn’t it?. it some how transforms the CDP...in my experience definitely the best upgrade you can give the CDX2.. closely followed by DIN Hiline