NAD M51 just got demoted - to the NAD C510

[k6davis]

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 my friend's Vega alongside the Matrix X-Sabre, the Oppo HA-1, the NAD M51 and the Lamipzator and with no other modifications to the system, the Vega was the least engaging of them all. My friend didn't enjoy it in his system either and wound up returning it. Neither of us knows why that would be because we know that the Vega is is very highly regarded. Maybe there was something off about that particular unit.

 

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.

 

... in your system, with your server configuration, with the type of music you like, according to your preferences. There are far too many variables in play to make such a declarative statement. I love the M51 and enjoyed it thoroughly for a couple of years, but in my system (Windows Server 2012 - Optimized, JRiver DSDx2 upsampling, balanced output) and in my opinion, the X-Sabre came in second to the Lampizator, and ahead of the M51.

 

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.)

 

It's definitely a homegrown operation, and yes the Lampizator company tinkers endlessly, which you seem to see as a negative. I didn't have to tinker with it. I ordered the DAC and plugged it in. I thank them for their "endless tinkering"/innovation. It led to the amazing sound I'm getting now - sound I haven't yet heard from the companies that design & build their products in the more conventional way.

 

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

 

I invested time, money and energy into improving my system. I'm very happy with the music it makes. For now, I too have "just let go". In the future, I will likely make adjustments to see if they will further enhance my enjoyment of the music. To me, that's what being an audiophile is about... and this is a site for audiophiles.

 

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

 

I find your suggestion that people who strive to improve their systems care more about audio than they care about music to be both odd and presumptuous. That may be true of your friends (as you previously stated), but it's my passion for music that drives my interest in audio.

 

Perhaps you might consider presenting your opinions as... your opinions... instead of as declarations of great truths ("you're the only person who's ever said that", "convincingly bests", "total mess of a product line", "no end goal in mind"). Perhaps, yours is not the sole valid perspective.

[Shortcuttomonctonthe]

... in your system, with your server configuration, with the type of music you like, according to your preferences. There are far too many variables in play to make such a declarative statement.

It was implied that this was in my system.....I'm recounting my experience after all

 

 

I invested time, money and energy into improving my system. I'm very happy with the music it makes. For now, I too have "just let go". In the future, I will likely make adjustments to see if they will further enhance my enjoyment of the music. To me, that's what being an audiophile is about... and this is a site for audiophiles.

Sure....like you I found what I was happy with, and I like to think it's a very nice system, but in my case it was a step back from the highest possible level of fidelity

 

 

I find your suggestion that people who strive to improve their systems care more about audio than they care about music to be both odd and presumptuous. That may be true of your friends (as you previously stated), but it's my passion for music that drives my interest in audio.

no....that was a comment on the state of music. As in, it's a great time to be an audiophile; but the music scene is arguably as bad as it's been IMO; and that includes a continued lack of importance placed on recording/mastering audio quality, oddly enough in the inverse of the audio scene.

 

Perhaps you might consider presenting your opinions as... your opinions... instead of as declarations of great truths ("you're the only person who's ever said that", "convincingly bests", "total mess of a product line", "no end goal in mind"). Perhaps, yours is not the sole valid perspective.

Well other than the first three being factually correct however tongue in cheek ,

My final point is that you're extrapolating a statement I made about myself to be about you. As I specifically mentioned, there's nothing wrong with tinkering for the sake of tinkering if that floats your boat; doesn't matter if you love or hate music. But the endless rat race and worry about whether I was missing something by not listening to the next level of DSD or properly powering my USB eventually made me realize that I didn't enjoy keeping up with the joneses....but anyone who does is certainly welcome to fill their boots.

[k6davis]

Okay. I apologize for totally misreading your statement about the quality of music today and I generally agree with it. Thankfully, there is an ocean of great music out there (from all eras/genres) to listen to.

 

There are many posters here that go much further than I'd ever dream of going with tweaks and mods, but there is a continuum between plugging in a DAC and stopping there and "endless levels of endless tinkering". I wondered what I might be missing by not traveling a certain distance down that road. Far from "tinkering for the sake of tinkering" or "keeping up with the joneses", I dramatically improved my system and therefore my experience of listening to music.

 

What we seem to have in common is that we both got our systems to a point where we enjoy them.

[Mike Mcsweeney]

Your head scratching might stop if you heard the sound of 16/44 Redbook content upsampled (in real time by JRiver/HQPlayer) to double, or quad-rate DSD and fed to a high quality DSD DAC.

 

ditto!

 

listening to pcm anything upsampled to to 5.6mhz via audiogate enters a whole new world of soundstage even on this $300 Korg DAC.

[Shortcuttomonctonthe]

Okay. I apologize for totally misreading your statement about the quality of music today and I generally agree with it. Thankfully, there is an ocean of great music out there (from all eras/genres) to listen to.

 

There are many posters here that go much further than I'd ever dream of going with tweaks and mods, but there is a continuum between plugging in a DAC and stopping there and "endless levels of endless tinkering". I wondered what I might be missing by not traveling a certain distance down that road. Far from "tinkering for the sake of tinkering" or "keeping up with the joneses", I dramatically improved my system and therefore my experience of listening to music.

 

What we seem to have in common is that we both got our systems to a point where we enjoy them.

Agreed...good luck to you on that, I'm already tinkering a little. But more looking to simplify this time, not complicate...hence my interest in re-inserting something like the M51, which I had for a couple years and sold to a friend to fund the Vega upgrade. But I also added a turntable in the meantime...so...combining both technologies into a streamlined system while taking a little money back out for other non-audio toys is proving to be more challenging than I had anticipated. The fun begins.

[Biku Toru]

Your head scratching might stop if you heard the sound of 16/44 Redbook content upsampled (in real time by JRiver/HQPlayer) to double, or quad-rate DSD and fed to a high quality DSD DAC.

Did jRiver upconversion to DSD feeding it to Micro-iDSD - sounds the same to my ears.

Real DSD files do sound different, can't really say they sounds better, more like different to me. My ears are probably aren't tuned to it.

Just like Al M. - I'm "I am a music lover first, and audiophile second."

 

When it comes to DSD vs. PCM, I think there is a lot to process here: Q&A with Thorsten Loesch of AMR/iFi Addendum: PCM vs DSD | AudioStream

[wwaldmanfan]

My NAD dealer retails the M51 for $1,999, and the C510 for $1,299. On paper, there is very little difference. The S/N ratio of the M51 is 125dB, and the C510 is 123dB. Other specs are identical. The C510 is about an inch taller, about 1/2" deeper, and weighs 2.4 lbs less than the M51. The factory warranty on the M51 is 3 years, and 2 years on the C510. My dealer will sell you an as-new factory-refurbished M51 for $1,499 shipped, but with only a 2-year warranty. That's how I got mine about a year ago.

 

The volume control knob on the C510 is a nice add. Although the remote is still more convenient when sitting on the couch, you'll never have to worry about losing it.

[wgscott]

Does the C510 also have a remote?

[Biku Toru]

Does the C510 also have a remote?

 

"...and the supplied IR remote..." taken from http://nadelectronics.com/products/dac/C-510-Direct-Digital-Preamp-DAC

[wgscott]

Yeah, it even has a picture. I mis-understood the post just before mine.

[unsleepable]

If someone knows of a review of the C510 is a magazine or somewhere, I'd appreciate it if they posted it here.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[PewterTA]

Riffle over at Head-Fi had both at the same time. Here's what he had to say...

 

"Well the C510 went back in the box today. It isn't bad, the M51 is just better. I only wish the M51's display turned off like C510. I paid $1759 for my demo M51 and it is worth the extra $460 over the C510 or easily the $200 for the Spearit Sound refurbs in my opinion.

 

I did most of my listening direct to amp using the units as a preamplifier at between -15 and -30 dB. I couldn't tell much of a difference through my entry level headphones, but through the speakers the M51 produced a large stereo image that made the speakers disappear. With the C510 all the detail was there but it was a smaller, less full image that was lacking a little energy in the first octave. The C510's detail seemed to be locked relative to the speaker locations, while the M51's detail was relative to the other details in the wonderful musical space it created. The M51 also had more of the "smooth/analog" sound that I love in the Havana DAC, but with much better detail and soundstage. Having used my Squeezebox Touch for volume control I hadn't realized the compression in dynamic range that was happening below 90 on the Touch volume. On a few familiar recordings it felt like someone was turning up and down the volume on me, so much so I had to pull out my Radio Shack SPL meter to confirm that this new unusual thing was the dynamic range I had been missing. Happy listening."

[unsleepable]

Thanks for sharing! I would have thought that the lesser unit would be comparable to the M51, and this would get upgraded soon to something better. But that doesn't seem to be the case. Pity!

 

It really seems so difficult to find a DAC that does all I'm looking for.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[wgscott]

What is the physical difference between the C510 and the M51, apart from the case and volume knob?

[Audio_ELF]

What is the physical difference between the C510 and the M51, apart from the case and volume knob?

I was going to ask the same...

[ronwills]

WOW the title of this thread just threw me for a loop. You can imagine how I felt reading the title just after just purchasing a M51. The last thing I needed was to read that a cheaper model (NAD C510) has come out within a week or two of my purchase and may be the replacement for the M51. Thanks goes to PewterTA for sharing with us his impressions of the C510. You have relieved my suffering!

 

I will say that the M51 is a very interesting DAC. It is at the center of my all-digital system fed by a very inexpensive DUNE HD 3D music (and Video) server via HDMI, COAX and OPTICAL. This is the first DAC that I have ever heard were the differences between HDMI, COAX and OPTICAL are as small as they are. My guess is that it has excellent jitter rejection in the way it processes the digital signal.

 

I previously had the Wyred 4 Sound DAC 1 and, later, DAC 2 and I actually liked the OPTICAL input the best compared to COAX. I then had a Nuforce AVP-18 and the HDMI sounded bleached out, no life with the OPTICAL being the second best and COAX sounding the best.

 

The NAD M51 makes the distinctions between the inputs so minor, I am not sure I could tell in a blind listening. In fact, the M51 has had another unusual property in that it needed no burn in to sound good. It started sounding very good within a day and surprises me every day with its naturalness, dynamics and clarity.

 

I have a pair of Magnepan 1.7s and Odyssey Khartago/Kismet mono blocks all connected by WireWorld Series 7 interconnects, coax and speaker cables. As much as I liked the Nuforce AVP-18 which still may match or exceed the M51 in bass clarity and depth, the M51 is a significant leap ahead in all other ways. I have read every article on the unit I could find and there is a consistency in the way the unit is described: non-fatiguing, detailed (I will address this shortly), natural, fast and musical.

 

I think a better word for the M51 than detailed is clarity. Detail to me is getting down to the microscopic changes in sound. Like a photograph that was taken with a high resolution camera. As you get ever further down to the detail you begin to see the parts of the picture instead of the picture. Go further you end up seeing pixels that make up the picture.

 

Clarity is different but similar. The M51 has clarity in abundance. I was listening to Sophie Mutter playing the Sarasate Carmen Fantasy. The M51 provides all the amazingly fast movements of the bow on the violin and never loses composure. You always see in the mind’s eye the instrument and rapid movement of the bow on the strings. The M51 has amazing clarity which I feel most people would equate with detail but to me clarity is always seeing the whole object (musical instrument, singer, etc.) with great precision and not losing sight of the music as a whole.

 

My final issue with the M51 is one that I am not sure to put blame on it or other parts of my system. The issue is that while I hear each instrument or singer with amazing clarity, I am not hearing the ambiance around the instrument. With the Nuforce AVP-18 I could distinguish between someone who recorded in a small sound booth from one that was in a more open environment. With the M51 so far, I do not hear the “space” around the instruments or singer and get no sense of the recording environment.

 

Part of the problem could be the enormous break-in required by the Odyssey mono blocks. I had them unplugged for at least a month while arguing with Nuforce to replace or refund my dead AVP-18. Klaus Bunge is adamant that the Odyssey amps need 400+ hours of break-in if they are new or have been turned off for a long period of time. I am at best at 100 hours and this may be the issue.

 

I would like to hear from other M51 owners. Are you getting the air and space around instruments? What I hear and visualize in my mind’s eye while listing to music is this terrific clarity of the instruments and/or signer(s) with pinpoint accuracy as to location. At times it feels like each instrument has the microphone attached right on the body of the instrument – you hear the bow on the strings in a way I have never experienced previously.

 

[wgscott]

What is the physical difference between the C510 and the M51, apart from the case and volume knob?

 

Anyone?

[wwaldmanfan]

Anyone?

 

The physical differences are self-evident. See my post #57, or consult the NAD website. The performance differences are more subjective, I would think. But, PewterTA (post #62) gave his impressions.

The technology of the M51 is already a couple years old, but the C510 is obviously a slightly dumbed-down version to fit the price point. I see that as a good thing, but, like anything else, you probably get what you pay for.

[wgscott]

On paper, there is very little difference. The S/N ratio of the M51 is 125dB, and the C510 is 123dB. Other specs are identical. .

 

Apart from the trivially different S/N ratio, it sounds like it is the same thing, which is what I am asking.

[Flo2984]

Few european DAC manufacturers support DSD in their products. It could indeed be that they are looking at the importance of DSD as music release format (official DSD downloads, not SACD rips), which is currently negligeable and might never really take off compared to PCM, because DSD releases are narrowly linked to previous SACD releases of the same albums.

 

What would really make DSD support interesting with the NAD DACs is the rare presence of HDMI inputs. A Blu-ray/SACD player with DSD output over HDMI (Oppo, Sony, etc) could be connected, so that the NAD could become an external DAC for SACD playback (stereo), without the PCM conversion that is currently necessary.

 

So if I stream the Data via HDMI from my Oppo 105 to the NAD, DSD would also work?

[mordante]

Is PCM (16/44.)1---->DSD256 bit perfect? I mean when you resample again to 16/44.1 and do a bit for bit comparison will you get the same as the original?

[dadonred]

Apart from the trivially different S/N ratio, it sounds like it is the same thing, which is what I am asking.

 

I too am interested in this as one online review identified the same DAC chip in the C 510 as was used in the M51.

 

It seems odd that there are no reviews available, nearly 9 months after launch (of the C 510). And a single review on a single forum causes everyone to just give up on the C 510? I'm doubtful, given what I've read about variations due to firmware differences in the M51. Who knows if the C 510 suffers similar issues? I'd like to hear a side-by-side but do not have the possibility of doing that in my locations.

[Audio_ELF]

I too am interested in this as one online review identified the same DAC chip in the C 510 as was used in the M51.

 

It seems odd that there are no reviews available, nearly 9 months after launch (of the C 510). And a single review on a single forum causes everyone to just give up on the C 510? I'm doubtful, given what I've read about variations due to firmware differences in the M51. Who knows if the C 510 suffers similar issues? I'd like to hear a side-by-side but do not have the possibility of doing that in my locations.

There was a review of the C510 in UK HiFi Choice magazine.

[dadonred]

There was a review of the C510 in UK HiFi Choice magazine.

 

Yes, I read that. It too was disappointing. Too much on physicality of i/o and not enough on sound. At any rate, that seemed mostly like a sponsored review, given the sidebar and did not compare/contrast with M51. Would still like to see a side-by-side.

[dadonred]

So I caved! I posted in the speaker forum here just now that I decided to try an in-home with a Raven Audio Blackhawk tube amp this week (and took delivery of it yesterday - absolutely stunning sound!) And Wednesday I decided to buy an M51 refurb from Spearit Sound - haven't received it yet, but am looking forward to it between the amp and my Panasonic 536 CD.

 

The soundstage of the Blackhawk is just amazing (vs. my Denon 3802 receiver/amp). I just feel so lucky to be able to get this right now.

 

Although my gut feels like the one review on M51 vs. C 510 (on another site) may not do either justice (due to unspecified firmware and operational details), I decided that the M51 from Spearit was nearly the same price as C 510 and may as well get it - I really don't care about the volume control (at this point). I hope I've chosen wisely. (I'm not sure that it really matters since the same DAC IC is used in both...)