Originally Posted by Musica Amantem
Since you were there and the device was yours, could you kindly elaborate in different words these statements about the new NFB 3 made by J. Darko, and did you wholly agree with him on this? I mean, how bad could it be to have better resolution?... 'In your face' sound is a different issue, independent of the level of data-mining involved. Did it sound too clinical? Thanks for any clarification.
"The control DAC, an Audio-gd NFB-3 (2014 version, US$499), bested both rivals in communicating finer details with greater energy and caffeination. The Audio-gd was also better extended at both ends of the frequency spectrum – more air, bigger bass.That said, the Audio-gd might prove to be too in-yr-face for already highly resolving systems, for which the Essence HDACC (or Resonessence Labs) unit would be preferable."(Of course, the other rival Darko refers to here is the Resonessence Concero HD)
Re: John's comments, I do agree! As always, system synergy comes into play. If you have an incredibly detailed system bordering on bright, adding the wrong DAC can easily push things too far in the wrong direction. This is the case with all audio gear - some people chase ultra-hi-fi where detail and resolution is king, whereas others chase a better balance of detail, warmth and overall musicality. John's observations are astute in this regard. As always, there are no absolutes when it comes to audio - personal preference reigns supreme!
I subjectively preferrred the NFB-3 to the Concero HD based upon the improved detail retrieval and wider and deeper sound stage. It certainly synergises well with my system, and I note that the WM8805 SPDIF receiver board tones things down a bit. I had the DIR9001 installed that the time of the comparison and I reckon the warmer, smoother WM8805 could be more to John's liking.