ND555 Impressions

Darke Bear posted:

As to getting the Dealer to rebuild - I know it happens so talk to them as it is always better to watch someone else do it all that knows what they are doing if you don't want to dive-in yourself.

Cables - all you say but also keep the Ethernet or other digital cable from touching the analogue output if possible and certainly not running together. If the interconnect from the ND555 to the Pre (mine is SL) has to touch anything then the wood part of the Fraim is least-bad I find - avoid it touching the metal uprights.

It is tough to get a 'perfect' install but just achieve as much as you can and some things seem to be worth the effort to clear more to extract the best results. Place the ND555 in center of glass shelf on Fraim but near the front-edge of the glass and ensure the glass shelf itself is level with the front of the stack and centered - it is easy for it to get pulled to one side a bit and worth getting it all lined-up to sound best.

Indeed, good suggestions.. i would add best keep mains cables and speaker cables quite separate as well.

With regard to Fraim the other gotcha can be where the uprights have been dislodged, and the support spikes are not sitting centre in their cups. This can happen more easily with the taller supports.

Finally on higher end NACs ensure the control burndy is very close to the the main signal/ power burndy, so as to mitigate any spurious ground coupling. I think the effects here are marginal, but every bit helps.

I did,not feel too bad watching Andy from Signals putting my Fraim together. I just remembered the picture on the forum of Andy still smiling (might have been a grimace) of him putting the [@mention:1566878603998391] Fraim together. If memory serves me correct 3 or 4 racks at shoulder height, must have taken all day to assemble and install????

It took me 166 days and 79 pages of this excellent thread but one listening to jump on the bandwagon. Quite an impression already. What took you so long, he said. I should be able to report soon. ????

Chag - 

Chag... posted:

It took me 166 days and 79 pages of this excellent thread but one listening to jump on the bandwagon. Quite an impression already. What took you so long, he said. I should be able to report soon. ????

Chag - 

Chag, did you get your ND555?

Bert Schurink posted:

Also a change with the NDS is the remote control. I never used it with the NDS. But with the ND555 I already use it intensively for normal actions. It’s solid works everywhere. So my use scenario will become selecting an album through my iPad Mini, everything else through the remote.

Hi Bert and All

I too use the remote on the ND555 for most everything, except for selecting with either my iPhone or iPad mini.  I run only the Core as my other Naim source.  I do not run any 3rd party apps nor connect to my pc in any way.  So far, no glitches, no freezes, no issues with the apps once I learned how to use them.  I also have a Qb in another room, and can slave to the main system or run it alone.  I am happy with how this has all come together, after hearing some on this Forum who have not had it so easy.  Seemed to me that most who had issues were going with additional apps etc.  

My ND555 is now about one month old, so I am just finishing up Q1 of the burn in.  Its been great most of the time.  Once in a while a get a little forward presentation on a track or two, but for the most part, its just Music, Music Music to my ears and my wife's.

Bailyhill

TomSer posted:

Chag, did you get your ND555?

Not yet Tom, not yet, but I might still beat you to it. ????

Chag -

P.S. Thank you so much again for you know what. I will report more you know where.

Well - after a few months of run-in I tried replacing the old CAT5 Ethernet interconnect with another CAT7 1m lead. After a few minutes I removed it and went back to the old CAT5 and relief flowed back into the system.

The CAT7 introduces a bright edge and I found myself having to swallow while listening - which I only experience with pressure-changes such as Aircraft decent - and very high-frequency resonances, so possibly the latter.

No idea why - possibly the CAT7 screen connects more HF over from the digital boxes than the pure CAT5 does. CAT5 uses multiple twisted-pair balanced termination-matched transmission-lines so they are good at just transmitting data, which is why they are used. CAT7 should not be needed over 1m run anyway - but I tried it and not good in my system.

In a few more weeks I'll consider trying other cables as people have reported benefits but I'm beginning to think some of this is personal taste and I may just prefer the CAT5. The CAT5 gives an easy-going 'just there' presentation with nothing omitted. The CAT7 'cleaned things up' in a way that may actually be preferred on some systems that cannot handle all that the CAT5 lets through I'm wondering - don't know but my own thinking so far.

Main thing is not to presume the 'better' cable will give you a better performance in your system as it does not in mine.

...other than the above everything is sounding wonderful at present point of run-in. Old favorite CD-rips now sound better than the Vinyl versions I originally had. The wider-bandwidth seems to allow the sound to open-out without compromising very low bass notes in terms of clarity of rhythms and definition of transients like drum hits being loud and precise without smear.

DB.

Was the Cat7 well run in, DB? ????

Chag -

No it most certainly was not!

I needed to hear it at least add something musically more than it took away, but several months of suffering and lack of music may run it in perhaps - but I'll give it a miss.

It was an inexpensive purchase to see if that direction was worth exploring - for me presently it is not. I've got some longer runs of CAT7 for elsewhere near the system to the music Server I'll also try at some point too - that may work better as I suspect it is the extra isolation of the very floppy non-screened CAT5 both mechanically and by not bringing the Music Server screen volts near the ND555 that worked in its favor in my system.

I'm not saying this will be general in all systems but just raising awareness that it may be worth exploring if you think it is all sounding too 'clean and bright'. I think better cables exist so I'll try some others in future.

Some cables and even equipment I hear tidy-up performance by eliminating low-level noise along with the music that happened to be in there with it and I just don't like that effect - some call it 'alarmingly clear' and I experience it as a bit sterile. Possibly injection of HF buffs-up edges at expense of decay and background acoustic info is how I hear it to an extent.

DB.

Hi DB,just ordered some cat5e to try out against my cat 7, your right about  the ND sounding a bit t bright and clean .

At least CAT5 or CAT5e is inexpensive to try.

A lot of these impressions may be very personal and system-dependent.
In my system the CAT5 is more natural and easy to listen to - nothing sounds strained and my Active system does not want any extra 'zing' added and the more neutral source sound fits it better. But other systems may be better balanced with another sonic signature.

DB.

Darke Bear posted:

No it most certainly was not!

I needed to hear it at least add something musically more than it took away, but several months of suffering and lack of music may run it in perhaps - but I'll give it a miss.

It was an inexpensive purchase to see if that direction was worth exploring - for me presently it is not. I've got some longer runs of CAT7 for elsewhere near the system to the music Server I'll also try at some point too - that may work better as I suspect it is the extra isolation of the very floppy non-screened CAT5 both mechanically and by not bringing the Music Server screen volts near the ND555 that worked in its favor in my system.

I'm not saying this will be general in all systems but just raising awareness that it may be worth exploring if you think it is all sounding too 'clean and bright'. I think better cables exist so I'll try some others in future.

Some cables and even equipment I hear tidy-up performance by eliminating low-level noise along with the music that happened to be in there with it and I just don't like that effect - some call it 'alarmingly clear' and I experience it as a bit sterile. Possibly injection of HF buffs-up edges at expense of decay and background acoustic info is how I hear it to an extent.

DB.

There are lots of things I learned from a few years with the NDS, what I can say is that streaming is more tweaky than Analog.
Everything does matter. Everything does change the overall sound.
From the ethernet cable to the brand and model of the hard drive inside the UnitiCore.
From the ground switch ("chassis"/"floating") to other electrical components connected near the streamer (smart TV, router, etc.)

CAT5e does sound more like "just the music", however it lacks some beauty, extra clarity and bigger sound of a premium ethernet cable like the Chord Sarum T which I use.
Normal CAT7 are good but less musical than the CAT5e. Too bright to my ears.

CAT5e are always darker sounding, which is good, but instruments doesn't have that kind of luxurious sound. For example: a Steinway
piano doesn't sound like a Steinway piano (it could be Yamaha too) until I connect the Chord ethernet cables.

I found that two Chord Sarum T ethernet cables (from UnitiCore to switch and from switch to ND555) are not good; too bright and fatigue.
I ended up with Chord Signature from UnitiCore to switch and Chord Sarum T from switch to ND555, sounds very balanced to me.

I'm so used to the Chord ethernet cables that it might affect my conclusions at this point.
Whenever I go back to normal cables I'm getting bored.

Extremely interesting topic though, bits are not just bits after all...

BP.

Reading these last few posts about different ethernet cables made me wonder about my situation. I simply have basic Cat-5 running for about 50 feet from switch to the ND 2 floors up with about 10 feet running outside. Is that a SQ issue?

thanks

I think bits are still bits, but the overall circulating electric circuit formed between ND555 as rendering source - and then the Analogue line to the Pre and the Ethernet digital feed - and their mains connection all make a more complex system than we would like. 

The Ethernet alone is balanced but not perfect and will have some common-mode signal as there are a lot of digital volts there compared to the analogue dynamic range that could have noise injected into. The ND555 is an excellent engineering solution but nothing is perfect and all links in the chain matter it seems.

DB.

It’s hard to know what to do for the best,lm still having issues with run in,most of the time the ND sounds wonderful but tonight not so good,just have to keep playing about with it,but it can be dissopointing sometimes though.

jsaudio posted:

Reading these last few posts about different ethernet cables made me wonder about my situation. I simply have basic Cat-5 running for about 50 feet from switch to the ND 2 floors up with about 10 feet running outside. Is that a SQ issue?

thanks

If you think it is not sounding as immediate and clear as you expect then try a shorter run - or include a switch closer to the ND with a short link from that, as the switch will regenerate to an extent the signal feed to the ND.

I have been told by someone I respect that a run of more than a couple of meters is audible and not better, but I've not personally verified that so you need to experiment.

But if you enjoy what you have now, perhaps declare victory!

DB.

really system dependent - and upstream hardware dependent. I need a bunch of Audioquest cables in the pipeline to keep the noise floor down.

Bob green posted:

It’s hard to know what to do for the best,lm still having issues with run in,most of the time the ND sounds wonderful but tonight not so good,just have to keep playing about with it,but it can be dissopointing sometimes though.

That is run-in and will pass more and more with time. If you are having the wonderful moments then these will bed-in and improve more and more and the less-wonderful run-in moments get less over time, but still peek-in at times for a bit.

Mine is still running-in but far enough now that it is generally sounding wonderful with fewer dips. Hence I can try some minor experiments to optimize - and in this case fail, but gather useful info from that test and others that posted their experience.

DB.

Perhaps it’s worth remembering Ethernet patch leads irrespective of any ‘CAT’ specification are RF loading stubs to the send serial line twisted pair in the Ethernet lead. Although much effort has gone to minimise this on the new Naim architectures, if you can hear a difference between a connected lead with the link up and link down.. you are hearing the crosstalk from the load of the RF stub and other PHY related clock jitter. If you hear a difference on physical connection irrespective of link status, you are hearing the effects of common mode circulating HF / RF currents.

There is mention of transmission lines, but typically Ethernet leads are rather imperfect at a nominal 100 ohms impedance and are based on telephone extension wiring transmission lines to a large extent... 

Finally the bits are bits reference kind of misses the points.. that assumes static values... of course with serial links and sample stream data, the timing between data values becomes a variable to, and indeed this in itself can cause intermodulation artefacts coupling into connected electronics... the TI paper I have often referenced on this forum goes into this technically from a summary level with respect to Ethernet .. and relevantly different Ethernet leads.

So yes there are variables from

1) as DB says common mode circulating currents,

2) crosstalk

3) RF stub loading

4) Ethernet PHY layer clock stability

Having said all that, I have found the Ethernet interface on the NDX2 i am trialling hugely improved over previous Naim streamers... and I believe the approach between the NDX2 and ND555 is the same.

One other thing for those noticing some day to day variability from ND555 system playback is something overlooked - it is a wider-bandwidth source especially at low frequencies with respect to what it pushes through your system's speakers into your listening room.

One thing I just realised after some odd LF splashy effect I was getting on some low-bass fast rhythm drumming - my listening room door was not as I normally have it - opened it to where it is normally and the bass cleaned-up and was faster and more catchy as the song intended.

I have a large listening room that connects into another room of similar size via a connecting door and I find I get better deep bass with that door open and it was only partially open to where I had it normally. The ND555 especially with two supplies has bass that just keeps on going down and is inherently very clean and tight if on the recording and it can pump my room with a lot more energy at the very low-end.

...reading Simon's post has also given me some ideas to try at some point but I'll only report if they actually do anything worthwhile.

DB.

Darke Bear posted:

Bob green posted:

It’s hard to know what to do for the best,lm still having issues with run in,most of the time the ND sounds wonderful but tonight not so good,just have to keep playing about with it,but it can be dissopointing sometimes though.

That is run-in and will pass more and more with time. If you are having the wonderful moments then these will bed-in and improve more and more and the less-wonderful run-in moments get less over time, but still peek-in at times for a bit.

Mine is still running-in but far enough now that it is generally sounding wonderful with fewer dips. Hence I can try some minor experiments to optimize - and in this case fail, but gather useful info from that test and others that posted their experience.

DB.

Like DB is saying , the ND555 has a roller coaster burn in . Sound quality goes up and down . Many have heard and commented on it. So do not feel you are the only one or that is just your imagination. I would leave it running constantly for awhile . It will then smooth out . But it does take some time . It is not a one week burn in . Enjoy Bob green. 

[@mention:1566878603876589] , [@mention:1566878603992423] ,

Silly suggestion perhaps, but why not feeding your NDX2/ND555 through WiFi ?

Problems related with Ethernet's galvanic connections would be solved.

Of course, WiFi has its own drawbacks. 

But isn't it worth a try?

I'll receive my ND555 in a few days.

Considering the isolation/buffering work done by NaimI, I was planing to use a wired connection :

NUC(RoonRock)----[Catalyst 3560CX]----[Ethernet wall socket]----[ND555]

Our apartment is wired with cat.6A 

The last 1,5 meter connected to the ND555 will be a fancy Audio Quest Vodka.

But I'm now considering a WiFi connection.

So guys, isn't WiFi worth a try?

WiFi has its own issues. The connection between my music source and the player I do not want potentially contended with anything else in the house or a neighbor, which WiFi allows and a wired connection prevents. Also I found WiFi added a layer of low-level background noise which disappears when I turn it off - easy to hear but very inconvenient for most people to discover so we will ignore that aspect.

The wired connection is the way to go but just choosing the best type of wire is what I looked at - it is not as if I found a very expensive wire was required as typically this type is available new for under £5.

DB.

TomSer posted:

[@mention:1566878603876589] , [@mention:1566878603992423] ,

Silly suggestion perhaps, but why not feeding your NDX2/ND555 through WiFi ?

Problems related with Ethernet's galvanic connections would be solved.

Of course, WiFi has its own drawbacks. 

But isn't it worth a try?

I'll receive my ND555 in a few days.

Considering the isolation/buffering work done by NaimI, I was planing to use a wired connection :

NUC(RoonRock)----[Catalyst 3560CX]----[Ethernet wall socket]----[ND555]

Our apartment is wired with cat.6A 

The last 1,5 meter connected to the ND555 will be a fancy Audio Quest Vodka.

But I'm now considering a WiFi connection.

So guys, isn't WiFi worth a try?

Don’t use WiFi, for best results put a Melco in the chain have the ND555 connected directly to the Melco with a good Ethernet Cable and you will have an optimal result.

The Melco is a high quality all-in-one tool. In addition it has an internal little switch which isolates the streamer from the rest of the network. It’s indeed a nice solution.

Not sure the Melco is the perfect option in the context of my system. But I might be wrong.

I use Roon. And like it very much.

This means a need a Core running on a capable computer.

I use Roon Rock on a dedicated and beefy NUC, with a fast SSD for the database and a fast 2 To HD for the files (more details on my profile page)

The NUC is stored in a network cabinet, far from my listening room.

All the network cabling is cat.6A and checked myself the terminations after the technician finished his work. Everything was done according to the rules (we bought the apartment new, so we could choose what we wanted/needed)

My switch is a brand-new CISCO Catalyst 3560-CX.

This is a nearly optimum setup.

[RoonROCK]-----[ Catalyst 3560-CX]-----[ND555]

The question is : what could go wrong with that setup?

- Well, I guess the Catalyst switch solves the interframe timing issue as Simon-in-Sufolk pointed out.

- There is also the galvanic connection between the streamer and the switch. Is it that bad considering the isolation qualities of the ND555 network section?