HDX-production model

Posted by: gary1 (US) on 20 September 2008

I have to congratulate Paul and the team at Naim as they have really produced an excellent piece of Kit in the HDX. Today Scott (rega1) and I were able to listen for a couple of hours to the HDX which Dave Dever set-up at Promusica the other day. The machine we heard was only 2 days installed and according to the guys at PM was improving its playback as it warmed up over the previous 48 hours. Similar to what you'd expect with the Naim CDPs. Please note that for all who've demoed the HDX at the Summer events Ken clearly stated that the production unit is far superior in every way to the prototype. The software updates and wiring changes done by Naim have really elevated the playback of the HDX.

To start with the UI both on the screen and on a web browser was instantaneous and control using a remote was also rapid. Nothing like the slowness reported on other threads. We also got album art for ripped wav files to the HDX which we do not get using a standard PC.

We listened to the HDX +/- XPS2 and compared this to a bare CDX2.

To begin, the HDX is a great music player and we were very impressed with its performance especially when listening to 24 bit recording--> absolutely beautiful. 16 bit were also really outstanding and one can see the real benefit of having music management and the fact that the HDX is futureproof for 24 bit recordings. When comparing the HDX to the Naim CDP, we felt that the bare HDX was not as good as a bare CDX2, but was close. The HDX + XPS2 was better than the CDX2, although we didn't switch the XPS2 to the CDX2 to compare these two. The sound presence, voicing, PRAT, instrument separation etc... all of the things one expects from Naim are there. I agree with other comments that the XPS2 took the HDX to another level and removed some of the smoothness of the digital playback and made it really come to life, but in a different way than say adding a HC2 instead of a FC2x to a Naim system. The HDX is not a replacement for the CDS3 and above with 16 bit playback, as it does not match this level of quality. It is clearly a piece of kit for those who are looking for excellent digital playback and the advantages of music management, 24 bit replay, no CDs and all of the other benefits of having access to your music on a computer interface. For anyone considering an upgrade to or initial purchase of the CDX2 for $2K more I think this should be seriously looked at given what it offers.

In summary, an excellent addition to the Naim family. They have really delivered the goods on this one and got it right!! Big Grin
Posted on: 20 September 2008 by Claus-Thoegersen
Can you describe why you think the HDX is not on the cd s3 level. Even with a bare HDX I have ha hard time finding cds where my cd s3 clearly outperforms the HDX, and this is even without SPX on the HDX. I am sure tWhen I finally put my SPX on my HDX demo it will be better than my s3. As it is now they are very close with normal ripped cds!

There is a certain quality with the HDX that I have a hard time describing. When I compare my cd s3 and the HDX, they are very close, but I find that the musical details in each instruments are made clearer with the HDX. The HDX more often than my cd s3 just makes me forget my atemt on listening for what is best, I just enjoy the track that is played, even if I have heard it many times in an AB test.
Voices especially in the background can be heard more clear especially if you listen for the lyrics.

As I have written in another thread, I think that the music you choose for AB comparisons are important, especially when we are using a high quality hifi system not all cds will be good in these AB tests.

Claus
Posted on: 20 September 2008 by gary1 (US)
Claus, it's difficult for me to describe. I wish Ken or John could be writing this thread instead. There is a certain difference to the music which was readily heard that was not present with the CDX2. Some may like the presentation more or less than the CDX2. This was my opinion. This disappeared when the XPS2 was added. Now it is posssible that after a week that the differences may disappear and perhaps the HDX is better. I will need to return in a week or so to re-test. Needless to say for me this is a major improvement over the CD5x/FC2x which I currently own. Therefore for me the decision is a no brainer so to speak and I have ordered an HDX. The ability to play 24 bit and other factors make this an easy decision for me and where I want to go with my system and eliminate the use of CDs, music management, etc... Some of this will certainly be personal preference as John R has reported. My comments were made not to be critical of the HDX, but to note the differences that Scott and I heard over a few hours. This could change with break-in of the HDX which appears to be important as with all Naim gear. The "shortcomings" which I reported did not change my opinion of the overall excellent performance of the device.
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by John R.
As with every other Naim component it takes about a couple of weeks until the HDX reaches its top performance. So there is more to come Smile I think that some listeners must get used to the crystal clear neutrality and precision of the HDX which is very revealing with poor recording but audiophil heaven with great recordings. And I have to admit that it might not be everyones taste. The HDX leaves nothing between you and the music. I would compare it like using different kind of cartridges: The HDX is a ultra precise MC whereas the CDX 2 or other players are more like warmer sounding MM that do not deliver the very last bit of detail. Maybe a strange comparison, but hopefully it expresses what I mean.
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by HTK
What about ripping HDCD? Are the benefits of the 20 bit encoding taken over to the HDD?

Cheers
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by gary1 (US)
HTK, I don't know. I didn't get into this kind of detail since I do not own any HDCD. If it can't be riped to the HDD, then it will be able to be ripped to an external NAS and played back. This feature is coming soon with a software update.

I have to say we played many 24/96 files that Ken recorded and then had downloaded to a Stick drive which was plugged into the front USB drive of the HDX. These were absolutely beautiful and really showed where its at with the HDX. These were all really excellent recordings as well all know that 24 bit garbage is still 24 bit garbage.

In fact most were the 24 bit A/D vinyl using LP12/superline/SN/SC/Nagra/Wavelab Pro.

Munch: my system is SN/FC2x/REL 3.5 subwoofer/SF Cremona Auditor M
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by Klout10
AFAIK, the HDX makes a "bit perfect" copy of each disc. So I have no doubt the data will be on the HDD. However, to fully obtain the benefits of an HDCD encoded disk you need a digital filter which can decode this data.

I've not found any information that the filter incorporated in the HDX could do this job...

Maybe Naim HQ can clear things out...

Regards,
Michel

quote:
Originally posted by HTK:
What about ripping HDCD? Are the benefits of the 20 bit encoding taken over to the HDD?
Cheers
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by Klout10
BTW, gary1, I'm curious if you will trade in the FC2x in as well together with the CD5x?

Regards,
Michel
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by gary1 (US)
quote:
Originally posted by Klout10:
BTW, gary1, I'm curious if you will trade in the FC2x in as well together with the CD5x?

Regards,
Michel


Michael, no I will use the FC2x for the SN. Here again, despite other reviews I prefer the SN with the FC2x to the HC2. In my opinion less is more in this application and IMHO the HC2x while definitely providing more detail and presence does cause the SN to lose its PRAT. It was readily noticeable and the music seemed slow and bordered on being heavy. I tired of this very quickly. Others will and have disagreed. That's my 2 cents.
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by rega1
Again gary, very good write up, and spot on. I was floored by the ability to insert a thumb drive with 24/96 files loaded up and just start playing. There was a nice upgrade when the XPS was was added. Very smooth, very precise, plenty of space between instuments, and the bass was holding its own without mush and sponginess.

Claus, to answer your question. The HADX will probably surpass the CDX2 after a 2 week+ warm up / break in period, and added an XPS will surely help send it there. As far as the reason that (for now) it does not quite reach the CDX2 threshold, IMO, you still can't eliminate ALL the "DIGITAL" sound playback aspects. This is just a fact of what the HDX was designed for and engineered to do, digital playback. The CD2X is a wonderful machine, and did present a warmer, smoother, non-digital sound. We played the same CD in the CD2X and ripped to the HDX, started a track simultaneously, and switched back and forth to compare, and you could hear the warmer sound from the CD2X, with a bit more room and air, but I don't think the HDX is run in yet. Winker

Personal conclusion......

HDX with an XPS will equal a CD2X after a month and some run in, but we will have to see. It is an addition that will compliment any system, and will keep you intrigued for many hours as there seems to be a lot of options and abilities to keep you learning and playing. Smile

rega1
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by Claus-Thoegersen
[QUOTE]Originally posted by rega1:
Claus, to answer your question. The HADX will probably surpass the CDX2 after a 2 week+ warm up / break in period, and added an XPS will surely help send it there. As far as the reason that (for now) it does not quite reach the CDX2 threshold, IMO, you still can't eliminate ALL the "DIGITAL" sound playback aspects. This is just a fact of what the HDX was designed for and engineered to do, digital playback. The CD2X is a wonderful machine, and did present a warmer, smoother, non-digital sound. We played the same CD in the CD2X and ripped to the HDX, started a track simultaneously, and switched back and forth to compare, and you could hear the warmer sound from the CD2X, with a bit more room and air, but I don't think the HDX is run in yet. Winker

Hmm I see no real difference between a Hard disk player and a cd player, they are both digital in nature, at least so much that both nneed a DA converter to be able to connect to a preamp. I am not sure how long my HDX has been at with my dealer, but at least for some weeks, and they have put music on it so it has gone through a longer run in period.

On my test I am using Chord Indigo on the HDX and the standard Naim cable on my cd s3, wich of course gives the HDX an advantage, at least for fans of the Indigo cable.

Today I did change the earth switch on the HDX, from what I assume is the default, and it seems to have improved my cd s3 performance so now the 2 players are very close. I still think I hear the same details but what makes the difference is the presentation on the HDX that is more musical over the cd s3, but I am sure in a real double blinded test I would not be correct on guessing what is playing each time!

Claus
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by gary1 (US)
Claus, I agree with Scott's comments in that the HDX was only run in for 2 days and should continue to improve. With the XPS2 I thought the HDX better than the CDX2 at this stage. I will definitely return to PM in a few weeks to see how things have come around. Mark said huge difference between the first two days and I believe someone from Naim said it needs at least 5 days to run in. So we will see.

Definitely at this early stage in comparison to the bare HDX the bare CDX2 sounds warmer and smoother as Scott mentioned. For some this may be better and as John R. commented using this exact descriptive I believe he preferred the musicality of the HDX better. I know someone else commented that they and a Naim dealer preferred the CDX2 by alot and he purchased the CDX2. While at this stage I preferred the CDX2 "overall" to the HDX I did not think that the difference was major. In fact there were things that the HDX clearly did better than the CDX2 especeially in the realm of bass playback. I know Scott and I immediately could here this and I believe John R made mention of this as well.

All in all it is an excellent bit of kit.
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by gary1 (US)
quote:
Originally posted by rega1

Claus, to answer your question. The HADX will probably surpass the CDX2 after a 2 week+ warm up / break in period, and added an XPS will surely help send it there.

rega1


Spoke with Scott earlier and he meant to says CDS3
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by David Dever
quote:
Originally posted by HTK:
What about ripping HDCD? Are the benefits of the 20 bit encoding taken over to the HDD?


HDX doesn't rip HDCD discs at 20-bit, because they're not data-encoded as 20-bit, but rather 16-bit (with a useful range any where between 14-bit and 18-19 bit).

Given that the HDX is capable of high sample rates and bit depths, releases which have been mastered at higher bit depths (prior to decimation/encoding within the Pacific Microsonics encoder) will outperform (even at 20-bit) their HDCD equivalents.
Posted on: 21 September 2008 by rega1
quote:
Originally posted by gary1:
quote:
Originally posted by rega1

Claus, to answer your question. The HADX will probably surpass the CDX2 after a 2 week+ warm up / break in period, and added an XPS will surely help send it there.

rega1


Spoke with Scott earlier and he meant to says CDS3


Thanks gary,
I apologize fo the mistake. I tried to change my post but it was past the 40 minutes. I was busy cooking dinner and cleaning my vinyl today Smile Gary's correction is "correct". Too many numbers and letters for my weary head as I did not get much sleep last night, I was dreaming I purchased an HDX and set of SF Stradivai's, I woke up to check my bank account to make sure I was dreaming and I just couldn't get back to sleep... Big Grin

rega1