Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Audio-GD NFB-3 (2014) ES9018 DAC
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Audio-GD NFB-3 (2014) ES9018 DAC - Page 6

post #76 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asound View Post
 

I know that it is a connection, but what the difference between this and xlr is for example, I have no idea. But there does seem to be a some.

 

 

XLR is for balanced connections (balanced amp to balanced dac)(male and female).  The NFB-3 is a single ended unit and does not have XLR connections.  It has 4 inputs (looks like BNC, COAX, USB and optical) and 2 outputs.  One output is RCA, the other is ACSS.  If you don't have an amp that has ACSS connection then you would not be able to use that connection.

 

In the pic I posted I use the NFB-3 with ACSS to the C2 amp.  I also connect my DAC19DSP to the C2 amp via RCA as well.

 

 

post #77 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by HeatFan12 View Post
 

 

 

ACSS connection on NFB-3 (2010)

 

Oooh, old school ACSS pink cables!

Let me know if you want more of these plugs, I have several I think.

post #78 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by tim3320070 View Post
 

Oooh, old school ACSS pink cables!

Let me know if you want more of these plugs, I have several I think.

 

 

Thanks!!!  Waz up Tim????  Long time!  We've been down in the trenches with Kingwa for years.  I love A-GD products.  Still have my FUN (A) with all three HDAMs and the original DI.

 

Good times!!!!!!!

post #79 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musica Amantem View Post

Petemac110,

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.
post #80 of 206

Great, thanks for the feedback! I agree, is all about synergy. In my case, I hope my slightly warmer than neutral (though quite resolving) tube-based system would be improved by a more detail-retrieving DAC, which is part of the reason I went with the NFB 3 (2014). Right now mine is seating somewhere in customs and should be released soon.


Edited by Musica Amantem - 5/16/14 at 4:43am
post #81 of 206

HeatFan12: Sorry, we are talking at cross-purposes. I know that acss is different from a physical perspective. BrainFood was merely asking if it made a difference for him using acss, when the dac is balanced or not. The NFB-3 is not advertised as being balanced, which may matter or not.

 

Audio GD says that acss is the best way of connecting the hardware and I only wonder what exactly is different and better? Compared to xlr, they both have 3 pins. But the data that goes through these connections does seem to a bit different. One some dacs you are able to change the voltage on the xlr and rca outputs, while acss is not effected and fixed. Those with acss have a non feddback accs output stage and a specific circuit on the input. I guess that the voltage and ampere on this output is always the same, so that the input knows what to expect. As if it were a norm. While those values vary on the other connections.

post #82 of 206

Just placed my order for a NFB-3 myself!  The free 2x TCXO upgrade is too good to pass up.  Plus Kingwa is a great person to deal with.  He is always very quick to respond to any questions and doesn't try to upsell his higher priced products.  I asked recommendations between this and others (which were more expensive) and, for my situation, he recommended the lower priced option.

 

The fact that he is looking out for customers best interest and not trying to just make more money really won me over.  This is my first Audio-GD product and I can't wait!

post #83 of 206

I don't imagine any AGD DAC will add brightness or any other coloration to a highly resolving system or otherwise. Coloring your system to your desired signature should be done via speakers (plus setup) or headphones (or tubes if you like that).

post #84 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by tim3320070 View Post
 

I don't imagine any AGD DAC will add brightness or any other coloration to a highly resolving system or otherwise. Coloring your system to your desired signature should be done via speakers (plus setup) or headphones (or tubes if you like that).

Yet every Audio-gd DAC lines sound different. There's no mistaking a SA-2 for a M-7 or NFB-7.32.

 

It's just a different flavor of awesomeness, can't hurt!

post #85 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clemmaster View Post
 

Yet every Audio-gd DAC lines sound different. There's no mistaking a SA-2 for a M-7 or NFB-7.32.

 

It's just a different flavor of awesomeness, can't hurt!

Not disagreeing but I feel the differences are much more subtle than any speaker/headphone change offers.

Maybe that Van Halen concert in 1984 did some damage.

post #86 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by tim3320070 View Post
 

Not disagreeing but I feel the differences are much more subtle than any speaker/headphone change offers.

Maybe that Van Halen concert in 1984 did some damage.

It probably didn't: difference are indeed subtle in the grand scheme of things.

 

Yet it sometimes breaks the barrier limiting the connection to the music and becomes more than just a subtle change in tonality.

And there's still a big technical difference between a NFB-3 and NFB-7, but that could be related to the output stages more than the actual digital implementation - that would explain why all the TOTL DACs (3x r-cores) have similar traits that make them standout from the lesser DACs: bigger soundstage, better dynamics (SLAM) and extension. 

post #87 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clemmaster View Post

Yet every Audio-gd DAC lines sound different. There's no mistaking a SA-2 for a M-7 or NFB-7.32.

It's just a different flavor of awesomeness, can't hurt!

I agree 100% - there is a clear and distinct difference in sonic character between Kingwa's WM8741, PCM1704UK and ES9018 implementations. I'm onto my fifth audio-gd DAC now. The NFB-3(2014) is more detailed and highly resolving than any of the others that I've owned (or heard for that matter, including the Ref 7.1) but it has a different presentation overall. I wouldn't necessarily call it 'bright', but if you throw this DAC into an already bright or highly resolving system, the resulting 'hyper-detailed' presentation may not be what everyone is seeking. I've mentioned elsewhere in this thread that I love Kingwa's PCM1704UK DACs, but they err towards the darker side of the spectrum, and absolutely nail the timbre and tone IMHO. The NFB-3(2014) sounds different.

I do really like it though - I'm playing some of my favourite music and hearing little details that I've not previously noticed - and this is via speakers that are less highly resolving than my previous speakers!
post #88 of 206

So I have a La Figaro (DarkVoice) 339 tube amp. I've been looking to get the NFB-3 once I unload some gear. I think it would be perfect from the way you guys are describing it for a big ol' tube amp like the 339. Am I assuming correctly? It's either the NFB3 or the Yulong D200...

post #89 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by TooPoor View Post
 

So I have a La Figaro (DarkVoice) 339 tube amp. I've been looking to get the NFB-3 once I unload some gear. I think it would be perfect from the way you guys are describing it for a big ol' tube amp like the 339. Am I assuming correctly? It's either the NFB3 or the Yulong D200...

 

Oh yes, oh yes! This would be a match made in heaven. Very 'ying and yang'. :)

post #90 of 206

That's the plan.. but what is the sound signature of the WM chip included in the balanced 17.32? It is priced cheaper and is balanced... So many choices!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Dedicated Source Components
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Dedicated Source Components › Audio-GD NFB-3 (2014) ES9018 DAC