FIRST IMPRESSIONS: Nuforce uDAC USB DAC AMP with line out and S/PDIF out - Page 100

It's not an "over-exaggeration" at all to say the highs are sizzly, thin and grainy. I compared the uDAC extensively to other, better DACs using Georg Friedrich Handl's Water Music suites, Archangelo Corelli complete op. 6 Concerto Grossi, and the Bach Brandenburg Concertos - both the Trevor Pinnnock and the Orchestra of the Age of Enlightenment versions -- and the uDAC high end is simply awful. Thin, fizzy, grainy - I could almost hear the dropouts in random high frequencies. The other two dacs I tested with - the Hotaudio DAC-Extasy and the Musical Fidelity V-DAC did not exhibit those weaknesses at all. Listening to classical on the uDAC is not an experience I would like to repeat. If you can't hear that, you either have not heard any other DACs that are better, or you're just not being honest.

The presentation of the uDAC *is* aggressive and forward -- it's voiced that way intentionally to give a "wow" factor instead of being neutral -- and there is also a recession in the upper mids that is part of that "U" shaped sound and contributes to it. You can hear it especially on vocals, where I compared Pearl Jam, REM, Stereolab, the Jam, and others on the uDAC with the DAC-Extasy and the V-DAC, and vocals on the uDAC are definitely more recessed, thin and distant. I explicitly even mentioned in it my notes for Eddie Vedder and the Jam's That's Entertainment specifically. Again, if you can't hear that, you either have not compared the uDAC properly to other, better and more neutral dacs, or you are not being honest for some reason.

Pearl Jam - Even Flow - udac: midboost, vocals sound a little hollow; ex: much more "even" sounding, vocals more natural and prominent, less midbass, overall better balance
The Jam - That's Entertainment - vocals more recessed, midbass boosted, hotter high end; extasy more natural sounding

The same goes for the mid-bass hump, which makes the uDAC virtually unlistenable on DT880s, and by the reports on HD650s, too. Other, better and more neutral DACs don't have that problem. They present that frequency more accurately and neutrally.

The uDAC is a mediocre, mass market DAC at best, in the same league as bose or skullcandy. It has a bloated midbass, thin and sizzly highs and recessed upper mids to give a "U" shaped "wow factor" sound. Some people might like that sound, like with Ultrasone headphones, which is fine. However, with the uDAC it goes beyond just the sound signature to being actual defects in the high frequencies.

You can say "but it's good for the money." I say it's a waste of money at virtually any price. There are much better DACs out there for the money, or even less, including the Bit Perfect and others. Those don't have the sexy marketing behind them, though, and that seems to be what people here are more interested in than sound quality.

I challenge ANYONE with a decent set of headphones to compare the uDAC to better dacs like the ones I mentioned, listening to classical music, midrange vocals, etc. and say they don't hear the flaws I outlined. If you say you don't hear them, you either don't know what you're talking about, or you're just not being honest. And that's no exaggeration.

The sad fact is that it is you who have actually exaggerated the sound quality of the uDAC, which in reality is mediocre at best, and unfortunately have misled a lot of people in the process who could have gotten better DACs for less money. And that is what is really too bad, not to mention newbies getting into the hobby who will think the uDAC is some kind of benchmark when in reality it's not even audiophile grade, but more like skullcandy and bose.

How about this: everyone who's heard this Nuforce uDAC has an opinion of it, and all the opinions of it are equally valid. No one has another person's ears after all. If all the opinions are equally valid, it would probably be foolish to criticize someone else's opinion. In the end, multiple opinions of a certain product are what's most helpful anyway, not a single person's opinion.

Probably true to some extent. The problem is that when anyone expresses a minority opinion, all we hear from the uDAC fanatics is "oh boy" and "I give up." Like the uDAC is god's gift to the audio world and any other opinion is invalid and has no right to be expressed. Like I didn't hear the sound dropouts with my own ears. I mean - what reason would there be to make that up, or about the recessed mids, or about the mid-bass hump? I bought one, and I only lost money on it. I had no motive to say anything but good things about it. Instead, I was honest.

On the other hand, there is a LOT of motive for someone to ignore any faults of a $99 dac and brush those criticisms under the rug with an "oh boy " or a condescending and patronizing comment like "I give up." Namely, lots of money at stake. When marketing forces like that are involved, and when people seem to be more interested in jumping on a FOTM bandwagon than in getting to the truth of something, it might not be so accurate to say that everyone's opinion is equally valid.

Deja vu anyone?

Another snide comment from the bose/skullcandy/udac contigent.

I notice you can't refute my observations, though. That's why you have to resort to making snide comments.

userlander, It must be an awful burden being the sole arbiter of what is good and what is not. You are more than entitled to your own opinion. What hasn't drilled its way into your empty skull is the fact that other peoples opinions are every bit as valid as your own. You're basically calling anyone who has liked the uDac either deaf or lying is offensive.

No I have not compared the uDac to the other DAC's that you mention. To be honest I don't own any of the Low-Fi DAC's that you mention. Since none of my significantly more expensive DAC's are USB powered very portable DAC/amp units comparing the $99 uDac to them would be silly. What I can say is that what I hear from the uDac is almost 180 degrees different from what you describe. I find the uDac's faults primarily faults of omission. It's top end is soft and overall its presentation is soft and veiled. Overall its presentation is innocuous. It is what it is; a $99 USB powered USB DAC/Amp. I would agree that the uDac is not exactly an Audiophile quality source, except for the fact that I am an Audiophile and I find the uDac acceptable for use with my laptop while I'm traveling.

You should get off your high horse and realize that yours is only one opinion.

I encourage you, or anyone to voice their opinions, especially when the opinions differ with the accepted norm. What I object to is your insistence that anyone with a differing opinion is deaf, lying or both.

It could also be possible that userlanders udac is defective or different from the one I have for example which to me is a clearly better dac than my valab or my old emu0404 usb

or the udacs faults might just be the stuff userlander happens to be very sensitive to. Whatever it is, I don't really care anymore because I am pretty happy with my udac and can live with this as my only source/amp for a while.

Hi, I must say at first that I admired your candid critique of the uDAC. I was quite happy to see someone indicate its shortcomings if any. Since then, however, you have been stating your opinions as absolute facts; act as if you're the victim when challenged; and make snide remarks that folks who post favorably about the product have some kind of a hidden agenda. This I think is the problem that some folks or at least myself have with your posts. It is not because of your somewhat negative impressions of the uDAC as that is only your experience.

Frankly speaking I am not convinced that the AMP/DAC costing 2 or 3 times the cost of the uDAC are better than my sony X1060 walkman and I was quite unimpressed with a few of them as I didn't hear much of an appreciable improvement with the IE8. When I first saw headphoneaddict's review of the uDAC I thought, sure it seems like a good value but I rather pay a bit more and get a better product. After spending my money on the relatively higher priced products like the ibasso D10 and D4, iQube V1, 3MOVE and auditioning a few others. The only one staying, at least for now is the uDAC. To my ears the uDAC certainly isn't put to shame by those that I tried and much of the touted ostensible qualities of the higher priced units weren't that evident to me (atleast with my IE8). If I've learned anything though, its that an AMP/DAC isn't necessarily/inherently bad. Its the combination or synergy with the headphone used that may determine that. I preferred the uDAC to the above Amp/DACs that I mentioned mainly because it allows me to get involved with the music without overly analyzing it and I found this to be special. It still isn't the perfect match for my IE8 as the bass is still as powerful but the uDAC seems to add a tad more extension to it and its seems to be a bit faster and defined. Its also slightly warm and my IE8 are very warm IEMs however, this tinged warmth coloration isn't as much as I was expecting. Though not the most extended, the treble detail is very good. It also has decent sound stage and transparency. Some of these differences are rather subtle to me and I'll admonish anyone looking for quantum leaps in sound quality. For a hundred bucks am contented and I don't think its overrated. If anything I'd say it makes some of the costlier products seem that way.

I'm not on any "high horse," w-t-h is that? Please go back and read post #1462, where I merely answered rymd's question. Here' I'll even post it for you with the link:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f7/fir...ml#post6497522

How is that being on any "high horse?" I simply stated my opinion. And then I was attacked for it. Apparently you are saying there is something wrong with stating my opinion because it doesn't agree with yours.

Now read some of the responses to what I said. Here, I'll post those for you, too:

Patronizing, condescending, dismissive, smug, sarcastic.

You tell me who is on the "high horse?"

The uDAC is a crappy DAC. That is my opinion, having extensively listened to it. It has bloated mid-bass, recessed upper mids, and crappy highs. There are much better products for the money, like the Bit Perfect Dac I mentioned before. Someone told me in a PM they got a DAC-Extasy for $139. That DAC blows the uDAC out of the water, for just a little more. No contest.

Now people are saying through their attacks that the uDAC sounds better than a Clip or Fuze. That is just absurd. For anyone considering a Clip or Fuze, rest assured: it is a good purchase. The uDAC does NOT sound better than a Clip or Fuze. That's ridiculous. The Clip/Fuze has very good sound quality and is very neutral. The uDAC does not.

My dedication and allegiance is to good sound, not any particular product. The $99 budget uDAC seems to have you all hypnotized somehow, but in reality it is not that great sounding of a DAC. If you want to persist in saying it is - go ahead. I don't really care what you listen to, it just ruins your credibility with the rest of the audio world who can hear it for what it is: a mass-produced, budget DAC with a sub-optimum, non-neutral sound, tweaked for "wow factor" like other non-audiophile consumer gear for people who don't know any better. The Emperor has no clothes.


P.S. Do any of you actually know what "neutrality" means? Have you ever heard of the Canadian Research Council and their acoustics work in the 70s/80s? Maybe that's the problem.

Again, you have it backwards, like the other guy. I merely stated my opinion in a one- or two-line post, and was attacked for it. Of course I am going to defend myself when attacked with smug and patronizing comments, as I have every right to do. If you don't want to see my responses to being attacked, then don't attack me for stating my opinion. Thanks.

Btw, you also make another mistake in your reasoning. The uDAC has sizzly, thin, and grainy highs compared to other DACs I compared it to. That is not an "opinion," that is a fact. It also has recessed mids and bloated mid-bass compared to those other dacs. If you then make a judgment on those facts, like "it still sounded good anyway," that is an opinion. So don't mix up opinion and fact. You might like thin and grainy highs, which is an opinion, but you can't change the fact that it has thin and grainy highs by saying it's just an "opinion." It's not an opinion, it's a fact, in the same way that it's a fact that an HD650 is a "darker" sounding heapdhone than an RS-325i. Your opinion might be that you like one or the other one more, but that doesn't change the fact of how it sounds.

userlander is a fantastic troll, just grab your choice of refreshing beverage, sit back, and enjoy the show.

Snide? I don't follow. Rather I was just speaking the truth...as this has happened before. Get your head out of your ass.

Right, anyone who doesn't agree with you is a "troll." Then you attack the person with your patronizing comments, and then when the person defends himself from your attacks, you attack him some more for that.

Just like how any cult operates.

Guys, there's that troll spray button in your UserCP: "Edit Ignore List"

BAM, done and ignored for eternity.

No, it was pretty snide. Uncalled for, too.

And lastly, I'm not the one with my head in my -ss. I'm the one who would be banned if I made such a comment to you, however. Interesting how that works.