Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › NAD M51 Direct Digital DAC Impressions
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NAD M51 Direct Digital DAC Impressions - Page 66

post #976 of 1150
Regarding the standby mode in V1.41, they made a change as compared to V1.39. I am now on V1.39, so might test it if I reinstall V1.41. Anybody on V1.42?
 
This is from another site.
 
"- added Auto Off option. With Auto Off set to On, DAC goes standby after some time where there's no signal.
   You can set it by pressing Setup (you see Volume Setup), then press down"

Edited by heisoktoday - 12/23/13 at 1:03pm
post #977 of 1150

Need more feedback on functionality. I am thinking if using this with the HDMI in feature to run a mini cinema 2.0 at my desktop.

post #978 of 1150

I love how the M51 as a pre, remembers the volume it was originally on, saved me from blowing up my headphones if I played anything accidentally.

 

Since the arrival of my JOB amp I have been enjoy two excellent pairings between JOB/LS50s and JOB/HE6s with M51 as DAC/pre.

post #979 of 1150

Have there been any A/B comparisons of the balanced vs. unbalanced outputs by anybody to see if there is any sonic difference?  In theory the only difference should be the small increase in gain, but it's never that simple.  I've done a lot of reading on this subject but there is a lot of contradicting information.

 

I'm planning to get an M51 to run direct to a pair of monoblock amps and have the option of doing either RCA or XLR.  This is a whole new system so cables will have to be bought either way.

 

Can I ask which output type other owners are using/favoring?

 

Thanks.

post #980 of 1150

I wish it is cheaper. If you look at the internal the NAD M51 seems to be devoid of substantial electronics. 

You should look at the internal Naim DAC or even Audiolab 8200CDQ

 

NAD M51:

 

Audiolab 8200CDQ :

 

Audiolab designers seem to favor using capacitors. I mean

there are rows and rows of them, look at those ! And look

at the "bare bone" design of the NAD...?

 

 

 

And this is the internal of Naim DAC with the supersize

torroidal :

 

post #981 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xcalibur255 View Post
 

Have there been any A/B comparisons of the balanced vs. unbalanced outputs by anybody to see if there is any sonic difference?  In theory the only difference should be the small increase in gain, but it's never that simple.  I've done a lot of reading on this subject but there is a lot of contradicting information.

 

I'm planning to get an M51 to run direct to a pair of monoblock amps and have the option of doing either RCA or XLR.  This is a whole new system so cables will have to be bought either way.

 

Can I ask which output type other owners are using/favoring?

 

Thanks.

 

I haven't tried the unbalanced - I have Event Opals connected via XLR to the balanced outputs as I'm just used to using that connection for active monitors (should be better in theory anyway). Actually I have a couple of those XLR attenuators connected between the NAD and the cables because without them I have to cut major dbs on the NAD before the Opals give me a relatively low listening volume for times when I can't blare them out, and even as a very fancy digital volume control, I don't want to have to cut it to like -70db or something. 

post #982 of 1150

Yes, too much gain was the other concern.  The tentative plan is to drive a pair of Wyred4Sound mAmps directly off the M51, but their gain and sensitivity combined with XLR might be too much.

 

In your opinion, Somnambulist, are the line attenuators transparent to SQ?

 

The other near dealbreaker is the lack of 12V trigger out on the M51, a rather curious omission for something claiming to be a full feature pre-amp.  I find the idea of skipping the pre-amp appealing, both financially and space wise, but some compromises remain.  Still I see no other options out there.  The M51 is the only DAC on the market with enough inputs to serve my purpose.  In fact I would have every single input used the moment I first got it.

 

I figured somebody would make a little black box that consists of several 12V trigger outs paired to a remote control, but after spending a truly exhausting amount of time looking there literally doesn't seem to be such a thing in existence.  I honestly would have thought there would be substantial demand for such a product myself.


Edited by Xcalibur255 - 12/29/13 at 10:59pm
post #983 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by zackzack View Post
 

I wish it is cheaper. If you look at the internal the NAD M51 seems to be devoid of substantial electronics. 

You should look at the internal Naim DAC or even Audiolab 8200CDQ

 

Like you I was initially worried at first but having rows & rows of caps can also smear the sound.  One listening to the M51 and you will understand that this is one really really good sounding DAP.  Heck, I'm using mine as a primary source for my BHSE & SR009 combo.

post #984 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xcalibur255 View Post

Yes, too much gain was the other concern.  The tentative plan is to drive a pair of Wyred4Sound mAmps directly off the M51, but their gain and sensitivity combined with XLR might be too much.


 


In your opinion, Somnambulist, are the line attenuators transparent to SQ?


 


The other near dealbreaker is the lack of 12V trigger out on the M51, a rather curious omission for something claiming to be a full feature pre-amp.  I find the idea of skipping the pre-amp appealing, both financially and space wise, but some compromises remain.  Still I see no other options out there.  The M51 is the only DAC on the market with enough inputs to serve my purpose.  In fact I would have every single input used the moment I first got it.


 


I figured somebody would make a little black box that consists of several 12V trigger outs paired to a remote control, but after spending a truly exhausting amount of time looking there literally doesn't seem to be such a thing in existence.  I honestly would have thought there would be substantial demand for such a product myself.


 



Can't say I've noticed any difference - the monitors themselves have some gain adjustment controls but it's only something tiny like +/- 6db - I'm not too paranoid about it!
post #985 of 1150

Need some help from the NAD M51 experts here: 

 

I've just got myself a (used) NAD M51 and I have to say it is beginning to sound spectacular  - I still think there is some way to go in terms of break in.

 

The issue however is that last night, the remote suddenly stopped working or if I put it in another way, the DAC stopped responding to its remote completely meaning no volume adjustment and no source selection. I replaced batteries on the remote too but no luck. I checked the unit this morning and it is working again but I did power cycle several times last night with no success.

 

Has this ever happened to anyone here ? And should I be worried ?

 

Any thoughts, suggestions would be very welcome.

post #986 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by purk View Post
 

Like you I was initially worried at first but having rows & rows of caps can also smear the sound.  One listening to the M51 and you will understand that this is one really really good sounding DAP.  Heck, I'm using mine as a primary source for my BHSE & SR009 combo.

 

Too bad the ND M51 doesn't have a headphone out. I am looking at McIntosh recently lauded D100. It is a DAC, a preamp, a digital volume controller, and a headphone amp all in one. And it is one of the cheapest McIntosh gears if not the cheapest. The McIntosh functionality is a dream. I have been eyeing the NAD for a long time and now for $500 more you can get your hands on a McIntosh

post #987 of 1150

I've moved my consideration over from the M51 to the D100 for the same reasons.  Only nitpicks are reports that the NAD is actually a bit better sounding when used as a pre-amp (the D100's analog variable output stage seems to leave just a little of something on the table), and the remote control is absurd.  All those buttons on that big remote and exactly 7 of them perform a function on the D100.   A product at this price range should have a remote made specifically for it, not some cheap looking generic piece that also comes with $99 Bluray players from some OEM provider.  Wyred4Sound gets it right with their mPre and mInt.

 

The headphone jack and 12V trigger out to turn on power amps downstream are major features the M51 lacks as a pre-amp and I think having those features is worth the possibly minor performance difference.


Edited by Xcalibur255 - 1/29/14 at 4:11pm
post #988 of 1150

does this upsample coax pcm,16/44.1 to 35 844khz or is that only on usb?

I am also concerned with lack/quality of components,made in china and reported issues for 2 grand. nonetheless if it does the above that is impressive.

 

edit:i just saw it does upsample. the specs are great but the looks of the guts from china make me weary at this price.


Edited by music_man - 1/30/14 at 3:47am
post #989 of 1150

If anyone has a NAD M51 thay are looking to sell , please PM me as im looking to get one .

post #990 of 1150
Quote:
Originally Posted by music_man View Post
 

does this upsample coax pcm,16/44.1 to 35 844khz or is that only on usb?

I am also concerned with lack/quality of components,made in china and reported issues for 2 grand. nonetheless if it does the above that is impressive.

 

edit:i just saw it does upsample. the specs are great but the looks of the guts from china make me weary at this price.


Fortunately, lack of components doesn't mean lack of quality. Here's the USD7k Weiss DAC202, which looks like a 'lack' of components to most people, but it has a solid reputation.

 

 

The M51 is not on that level, in terms of build quality, of course. But it has been reviewed, measured and it performs like a champ in every area. So what's the issue here? It's so funny that audio engineers work hard to minimize the amount of unnecessary parts, not always because of cost reduction reasons (Weiss for example). Sound engineering is using just the right amount of parts so that the product works well. Charles Hansen of Ayre once said something like this, they try their best to minimize the amount of parts they use (NOT because of cost reduction), but to reduce the amount of change to the signal, for maximum fidelity. Look at their Ayre AX7 circuit board to see what i mean. I'm not saying a bare pcb is always a good thing, but when the product measures well, sounds good to many people, it must be doing something right.

 

Besides, the M51 is not a conventional DAC, with a very unique technology. I don't know of any other commercial DACs using this technology. Maybe less than 5 in the whole world. So it's not fair to judge the way the guts looks, as compared to other conventional DACs. It's like comparing tube amps to solid state amps, and saying the tube amp is lousy because the circuit is so simple compared to the solid state. If  you don't trust the way it looks to you, then at least trust the measurements. See the stereophile review of the m51. World-class, by any standards. And yes, i love my M51 :)


Edited by sorue - 2/1/14 at 5:48pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › NAD M51 Direct Digital DAC Impressions