NAD M51 just got demoted - to the NAD C510

[scintilla]

I have thoroughly enjoyed my M51 since the day it landed about 18 months ago. The only complaints that I have had are the slow initialization/power-up sequence and the tendency to shut itself off between songs. I was convinced that PDM-->PWM transcoding could be implemented in firmware, but it is either not possible with the hardware or NAD has no interest in diverting engineering resources at the present time. The XMOS receiver certainly could be flashed to receive a DSD stream, but if there's nowhere to send it for transcoding, then it isn't going to happen. I suppose someone clever could come up with a transcoding scheme for implementation external to the unit that could be paired with a flash to the XMOS receiver, but again, why? At this point, I have been more than happy with 24/192 performance with PCM and decimated 24/88.2 for DSD titles. And since my goal is Acourate room/speaker correction, PCM makes more sense anyway. Where I see a hole in the NAD line is a 7-channel implementation of the XETEX DAC architecture. The new multi-channel pre-amp does not indicate that it shares that architecture with it's new 2-channel M12 brethren and I am sure it would if it did, but it is too expensive to implement vs. an integrated one-chip solution from TI, etc. But given a choice between a Zetex-based PCM-only NAD multi-channel digital preamp and the Exasound, I know I wouldn't think twice, DSD be damned.

[wgscott]

the tendency to shut itself off between songs.

 

That is troubling. What's the story, and it is it a known issue?

 

I have to say the one thing that keeps me from pulling the trigger is the reliability/quality control issue that Bob mentioned above. (Sadly, no one seemed to appreciate my accompanying illustration.)

[Miska]

Here is a link I just found:

 

Why DSD is a terrible idea in 2013

 

In that, they conveniently forget that even the 192/24 studio master originates from decimation filtered SDM, so it is not natively recorded in PCM. And that their DAC, as far as I know is based on SDM chip that again generates SDM from the PCM input, so it is not native PCM either... It doesn't change the fact, if the SDM is 1-bit or 6-bit (none of the multi-bit SDM DACs I'm aware have more than six bits).

 

Common mistake even many manufacturers do, is to not consider what happens inside the ADC or DAC chip.

[Paul R]

My BADA2 already upsamples CD, but to 176 kHz PCM. Why would I convert to another format on the fly with all the losses in fidelity that this should bring?

 

Here is a link I just found:

 

Why DSD is a terrible idea in 2013

 

It's from a Linn staffer. Perhaps you disagree, but he does make technical points to be considered.

 

Sure, from what I have repeatedly heard DSD may sound sweeter and warmer than PCM, but while this may be attractive, is it more realistic?

 

Misinformation. You do not loose fidelity or anything else when converting from PCM to DSD. I think that paper is more rationalization than rational reasoning.

 

As for the sound, the only way to know is to listen. Those are pretty harsh judgments to make without any DSD listening experience behind them. Not to say some folks do prefer PCM, but you will definitely never know without listening.

[scintilla]

It is just a consequence of using the auto-shutoff feature. Apparently the voltage threshold and timer for no-signal was not well chosen, but the feature need not be turned on. I used it because I often stream Pandora while we are gone and it will shut off when the Squeezebox goes into sleep-mode. My unit was a factory refurb and I have had no issues, electrically or mechanically. And if you are considering and the WAF will matter, just go with the M51. It is very attractive and passed the living room test with my very opinionated, decoration-controlling artist-wife.

[wwaldmanfan]

I have thoroughly enjoyed my M51 since the day it landed about 18 months ago. The only complaints that I have had are the slow initialization/power-up sequence and the tendency to shut itself off between songs.

 

I've had my M51 for about a year. If you keep the power switched on in standby mode, the unit consumes less than 1/2 watt of power, and also keeps the DAC chip stablized. It takes 16-17 seconds to lock onto the input signal when switched to full power mode. My NAD power amp takes about 10-12 sec to switch from standby to full power anyway, so I switch the DAC on first. No big deal.

I have never had the unit shut off unexpectedly or misbehave in any way. I run Audirvana Plus via USB from a MBP. If there is an "auto-shutoff" function, I am not even aware of it. Perhaps I should read the owner's manual!

[scintilla]

It became available with 1.41 firmware. I do use the unit in standby mode, but 17 seconds to lock to the source feels like waiting for Win95 to load... I will be running some software players at some point, likely Audirvana and Purevinyl. I am very curious about the HQ player and regret that I cannot play with that at its potential. But the most important aspect of D/A for me is going to be the RC to mitigate acoustic problems in my living room, which cannot be ameliorated by passive means due to the Mrs. Perhaps someone will introduce a multi-channel DAC based on Miska's open hardware design. If I didn't need to use my time to make a living, I might even try to build one. But that unfinished Krell KSA-50 clone is still waiting for me...

[Kelly]

I feel a little odd, in that, normally I would agree with you. But the audiophile part of me - the part I usually repress in an attempt to at least maintain a fiction of keeping to a budget - tells me that I content is not always the king. Sometimes is it just the content you really love, and want to hear in the best possible quality. That's probably the reason a lot of people still stick with vinyl - the music we grew up loving doesn't always sound right in digital format. (The reasons are arguable.

 

I think it is just NADs typical reluctance to buy into the new technologies- they specialize in making mature technologies sound really good at a reasonable, almost mass market, price point.

 

-Paul

 

Misinformation. You do not loose fidelity or anything else when converting from PCM to DSD. I think that paper is more rationalization than rational reasoning.

 

As for the sound, the only way to know is to listen. Those are pretty harsh judgments to make without any DSD listening experience behind them. Not to say some folks do prefer PCM, but you will definitely never know without listening.

 

I agree with you in practical terms, its just about skinning the cat in the best way you know how. But strictly speaking, is the process from PCM->DSD reversible? Can I go PCM->DSD->PCM and get the same thing I started with? That would seem to me to be a requirement to claim you don't lose anything.

 

NAD uses their proprietary dac chip that they essentially developed with what is now Zetex. That is actually a pretty radical step for a company that is conservative and uses "proven technology." Give them a little credit for initiative! (While the M2 was not the first amp of its species, it is still a bit of an usual beast in the market.) Anyway, that dac chip is a huge investment and not one easily repeated. The whole scheme and volume control is digital from the beginning. So if the current chip requires PCM input then any DSD "support" would require a DSD->PCM conversion anyway. I imagine any DSD implementation would sound pretty much like DSD->PCM in JRiver.

[mayhem13]

Sometimes is it just the content you really love, and want to hear in the best possible quality. That's probably the reason a lot of people still stick with vinyl - the music we grew up loving doesn't always sound right in digital format. (The reasons are arguable.

 

-Paul

 

Agreed 100%. I've got some Japanese vinyl that I would never part with as the digital remasters don't come close. Amazing how an inferior technology can sound better than a poor remaster. Gotta admit though that as of late, nostalgia is getting the better of me and the turntable is getting a lot more use!

[Shortcuttomonctonthe]

Agreed. I have come to terms with the fact that I do this to listen to great music. A lot of my friends seem to be caught up with obsessing over their sound quality...that's the ultimate goal, and they haven't listened to a full album in ages (or even a full song for some of them) - too busy critically listening for whether they're getting the best attack and decay on certain reference tracks. Nothing really wrong with it if it floats their boat, but it's not why I do it.

 

I borrowed a DSD Dac (Auralic Vega) and just couldn't justify the cost when I enjoyed playing music from my non-Dsd DAC just as much, at half the price.

[Kelly]

That is troubling. What's the story, and it is it a known issue?

 

I have to say the one thing that keeps me from pulling the trigger is the reliability/quality control issue that Bob mentioned above. (Sadly, no one seemed to appreciate my accompanying illustration.)

 

I got it, Chinese junk?

 

Wasn't he referring to the C390DD, a completely different kind of component? Maybe I have just been lucky, but I have had the M51 since it first came out in early 2012, I think I got one from the first shipment Audio Advisor received. I have had zero functional issues. Then again, my sample size is only 1. But I haven't really heard of many problems with reliability of this particular component.

[wgscott]

Glad to hear. I think they are more or less the same thing in terms of direct digital amplification, except instead of a pre-amp boost, the C390DD gives the full amplification. I was actually quite impressed by the C390DD.

[unsleepable]

Has anyone had the chance to audition the new C510, and can share some impressions?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[wgscott]

It says it will be available as of August 22nd.

[k6davis]

Agreed. I have come to terms with the fact that I do this to listen to great music. A lot of my friends seem to be caught up with obsessing over their sound quality...that's the ultimate goal, and they haven't listened to a full album in ages (or even a full song for some of them) - too busy critically listening for whether they're getting the best attack and decay on certain reference tracks. Nothing really wrong with it if it floats their boat, but it's not why I do it.

 

I borrowed a DSD Dac (Auralic Vega) and just couldn't justify the cost when I enjoyed playing music from my non-Dsd DAC just as much, at half the price.

 

I tried the Auralic Vega and one I'm of the very few that did not care for its sound at all.

 

My dislike of it wasn't even a matter of degree in comparison to other DAC's. I found it to be dull and lifeless - which is exactly the opposite of how it's usually described. I don't wish to insult or demean the vast majority who have a very high opinion of it. I only bring it up to say that if I'd formed my opinion of the sound of DSD DAC's on that one experience, it would have been a negative one.

 

I tried a few other DSD DAC's, including the Matrix X-Sabre and the Oppo HDA-1 and the Schiit Loki - all of which cost less than the Vega and the Lampizator DSD DAC/Preamp which costs more. I chose the Lampi. It is certainly not necessary to spend that much to get great sound, but the Lampizator sounds better than anything else I've ever heard. At more reasonable prices, the Matrix X-Sabre is fantastic (and deserves more attention around here IMO) and I'd love to hear the iDSD Micro.

 

So, my point (and I do have one!) is that I dedicated about 7 months to revamping my entire system, where I literally "obsessed over sound quality" as you say. There was a lot of trial & error, learning & trying new things, buying things and returning them when they didn't improve the sound, etc. It was a lot of work and not much enjoying music during that period, but the results are extraordinary. Far from listening for transients, etc, the improvements I've made to my system have made it far more musical. I'm so happy with my sound that I'm careful about turning on my system when my time is limited, because it's hard to stop listening to it.

 

There are several recent technological developments, many available at very reasonable prices, that have elevated sound to unprecedented levels IMO. I learned about all of them on this site. It's a great time to be an audiophile.

[Hiro]

In that, they conveniently forget that even the 192/24 studio master originates from decimation filtered SDM, so it is not natively recorded in PCM. And that their DAC, as far as I know is based on SDM chip that again generates SDM from the PCM input, so it is not native PCM either... It doesn't change the fact, if the SDM is 1-bit or 6-bit (none of the multi-bit SDM DACs I'm aware have more than six bits).

 

Common mistake even many manufacturers do, is to not consider what happens inside the ADC or DAC chip.

 

It's funny how 99.9% of audio devices are based around SDM/PDM/PWM and some still act as if PCM were the main thing, isn't it?

[k6davis]

It's funny how 99.9% of audio devices are based around SDM/PDM/PWM and some still act as if PCM were the main thing, isn't it?

 

^^^ This !!!

[unsleepable]

It says it will be available as of August 22nd.

 

It's already being sold in eBay! [emoji15]

 

http://www.ebay.at/itm/161392974136

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[k6davis]

It's already being sold in eBay! [emoji15]

 

NAD C 510 Direct Digital Pre Amplifier / DAC C510 | eBay

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

That's a nice looking unit!

[Ned Kelly]

Agreed. I have come to terms with the fact that I do this to listen to great music. A lot of my friends seem to be caught up with obsessing over their sound quality...that's the ultimate goal, and they haven't listened to a full album in ages (or even a full song for some of them) - too busy critically listening for whether they're getting the best attack and decay on certain reference tracks. Nothing really wrong with it if it floats their boat, but it's not why I do it.

 

I borrowed a DSD Dac (Auralic Vega) and just couldn't justify the cost when I enjoyed playing music from my non-Dsd DAC just as much, at half the price.

 

I agree with the thrust of what you are saying, but I still have niggling desire to hear a 'real' DSD128 download of music I'm -

 

a. intimately familiar with

b. know has been recorded and mastered by people who actually give a damn

AND

b. adore despite having heard it over a period of many years

 

To date, there appear to be DSD64 releases of two classic Steely Dan albums, but they never quite made it into group 3 even when I could have bought the brand new vinyl for 5AUD back in the day. I'm also told that DSD64 isnt where it's at - we need DSD128. I've downloaded the same samples many here undoubtedly have and - like my small SACD collection - I dont deny that there is a difference but is it a difference that justifies the massive file sizes and the bandwidth requirement, not to mention the cost of purchasing music you already own.

 

For many here, all of these will seem like petty considerations - particularly file sizes and bandwidth - but right now I'd be happy with 24/96 versions of the music I treasure as long as it's properly re-mastered where appropriate. Horses for courses, I guess, but when I read that the Harmon Kardon edition of the highly regarded HTC One M8 smartphone only sounds good with properly recorded 24/96 tracks, I fear some sections of the industry may have strayed off the reservation in the headlong rush to embrace the 'hi-res' buzzword. It's great that an audiophile from Sprint got the ball rolling on this, but someone at HK has clearly lost the plot when the majority of mainstream reviewers returned a verdict of 'Not worth the money' based on their assessment of the sonics. Throw in a set of IEMs that look like the were designed by the same old guy who designs the HK on-ear phones and you've got a recipe for clearance sales right there.

 

HTC One (M8) Harman Kardon Edition Review: The Sound of Sprint

 

Compare that reviewer's very level-headed discussion of the relatively small difference between 96K and 192K downloads vs this review from Mark Waldrep:

 

Is the HTC One M8 Harman Kardon Edition the World’s Best Sounding Cell Phone? | Real HD-Audio

 

Basically Mr Waldrep would have us believe that the sound quality of the HKE edition 'rivals the best source components I own' when he uploaded quality hi-res material but sounded like something akin to AM radio with the supplied files. That's the equivalent of saying that the engineers who did the hard yards to give the phone its sonic capabilities handed over the selection of tracks critical for showing off the HKE's musical chops to the intern who delivers the mail at HTC. Not sure in what kind of alternate universe you would create a phone which only plays nice with perfectly recorded and mastered tracks, even if there WAS a sufficiently large market out there for such a device, but it may have been the proverbial horse-designed-by-a-committe. Throw in the fact that the stock M8 already decodes 24/96 FLAC and it starts to look more like a tragic marketing exercise than a genuine attempt to broaden the appeal of hi-res music.

 

Apologies for the somewhat OT rant and the length of this post, but I had to get that off my chest

[Kelly]

It's funny how 99.9% of audio devices are based around SDM/PDM/PWM and some still act as if PCM were the main thing, isn't it?

 

Perhaps we are devolving into another DSD vs PCM thread ... Anyway, relevant to the NAD devices, they depend on a digital volume control at minimum, and some of the their other devices like the coming M12 offer a flexible digital subwoofer crossover, and there are rumors of room correction DSP. They seem to have fully embraced incorporating DSP into their features, doesn't this make DSD implementation either impossible or at best of questionable value if the system is supposed to operatie in a consistent manner (with subwoofer outputs, etc) with all material?

[Shortcuttomonctonthe]

I tried the Auralic Vega and one I'm of the very few that did not care for its sound at all.

 

My dislike of it wasn't even a matter of degree in comparison to other DAC's. I found it to be dull and lifeless - which is exactly the opposite of how it's usually described. I don't wish to insult or demean the vast majority who have a very high opinion of it. I only bring it up to say that if I'd formed my opinion of the sound of DSD DAC's on that one experience, it would have been a negative one.

Could have always been a system quirk, too...for the record I certainly did not find it dull and lifeless, so you're still the only person who's ever said that.

 

I tried a few other DSD DAC's, including the Matrix X-Sabre and the Oppo HDA-1 and the Schiit Loki - all of which cost less than the Vega and the Lampizator DSD DAC/Preamp which costs more. I chose the Lampi. It is certainly not necessary to spend that much to get great sound, but the Lampizator sounds better than anything else I've ever heard. At more reasonable prices, the Matrix X-Sabre is fantastic (and deserves more attention around here IMO) and I'd love to hear the iDSD Micro.

I actually have the X-Sabre; after trying the Vega, I figured I would try switching to something cheaper that also did DSD, to see the difference. After a couple months, I'm certainly impressed at its features and DSD capabilities at that price; but the M51 still convincingly bests it in enjoyable-ness.

 

As for the Lampizator...I did some research a few times and it's very interesting, but the total mess of a product line reflects the homegrown nature of his operation, and I think also really fits a lot of what I'm talking about - just endless levels of endless tinkering, without any end goal (in the sound or the product line, in his case). But I'm usually a big fan of tubes in source components so would love to hear one someday. (Modwright Instruments have a new tube DAC - no DSD yet, but look forward to someone comparing it to the Lampi.)

 

So, my point (and I do have one!) is that I dedicated about 7 months to revamping my entire system, where I literally "obsessed over sound quality" as you say. There was a lot of trial & error, learning & trying new things, buying things and returning them when they didn't improve the sound, etc. It was a lot of work and not much enjoying music during that period, but the results are extraordinary. Far from listening for transients, etc, the improvements I've made to my system have made it far more musical. I'm so happy with my sound that I'm careful about turning on my system when my time is limited, because it's hard to stop listening to it.

Yes, I also went through this period, and as you can tell have recently learned to just let go.

 

There are several recent technological developments, many available at very reasonable prices, that have elevated sound to unprecedented levels IMO. I learned about all of them on this site. It's a great time to be an audiophile.

Yes...not so great time to be a musicophile. Coincidence? Doubt it.

[Shortcuttomonctonthe]

I'm also told that DSD64 isnt where it's at - we need DSD128.

You might notice the mention of DSD256 somewhere in this very thread (forget who mentioned quad DSD but saw it somewhere).

 

Give it 8 months and DSD 128 won't be where it's at, either - you'll need 256 for your enjoyment. Because, you see...it's more.

[Hiro]

Perhaps we are devolving into another DSD vs PCM thread ... Anyway, relevant to the NAD devices, they depend on a digital volume control at minimum, and some of the their other devices like the coming M12 offer a flexible digital subwoofer crossover, and there are rumors of room correction DSP. They seem to have fully embraced incorporating DSP into their features, doesn't this make DSD implementation either impossible or at best of questionable value if the system is supposed to operatie in a consistent manner (with subwoofer outputs, etc) with all material?

 

Miska's HQ Player does DSP for DSD (SDM) sources in SDM domain. I believe that DSP could also be done in PWM.

[Shortcuttomonctonthe]

In any event, hopefully in the next week or so someone can confirm if the C510 is actually the M51 with a downgraded casing, a volume knob, and 12v remote trigger out. IMO that would be amazing value; no 12v trigger out was the single worst feature of the M51...it's just such a convenient feature once you start using it.