[coklatua]

@coklatua

No master but anyway..

You should add TCXO if choosing the 11.28. That said the price for them (R2R-11 and 11.28) are equal (350 US$).

Both will serve You very well, crisp and clean (.28) or more "true and soulful" (R2R).

/Jan

Sorry noob here, what is TCXO?

 

[tauceti]

I couldn't resist and ordered now also the r2r. I am excited if I will notice any difference. My ears are not the best
Nevertheless the NFB-11 is great.

 

[JaMo]

TCXO stand for Temperature Compensated Crystal Oscillator. It is the "heart" of the dac if You like.. It is very important to have a stable XO to acheive high quality performance from a digital circuit. The TCXO can give a slight clearer background and more "air" in the presentation. The difference is small but it is fully noticeable in A-B tests under some conditions. I think 20US$ are peanuts to save for holding back the performance of the ES9028 pro-chip.

/Jan

 

[coklatua]

TCXO stand for Temperature Compensated Crystal Oscillator. It is the "heart" of the dac if You like.. It is very important to have a stable XO to acheive high quality performance from a digital circuit. The TCXO can give a slight clearer background and more "air" in the presentation. The difference is small but it is fully noticeable in A-B tests under some conditions. I think 20US$ are peanuts to save for holding back the performance of the ES9028 pro-chip.

/Jan

Okay, thanks for the info.
I think I've made my mind.
I'm going to pull the trigger on the R2R 11.

 

[givemetacos]

Fixed mode is line level mode where you only use the DAC section, bypassing the amp section all together. Or at least that's what I thought.

@givemetacos has both (NFB11 & R2R11) or used to have both, and he said he is struggling to notice a difference between both using Vahalla 2 as amp. Maybe you can chime in, @givemetacos ?

Ah, I've been summoned. Sorry for the delay, I have been out of town for a bit. But I thought I would share my thoughts. So I currently own an NFB-11 (pre-11.28, I believe the 9018 Sabre chip) and the R2R 11. Both have TCXO upgrade. I have not heard an NFB-11.28. I want to preface that I approach sonic differences from a more conservative stand-point than most people in this forum. I do a ton of volume-matched listening, probably a few hours every week on most my gear. I use a multi-meter and sound level meter for careful matching. It is tedious and I really don't enjoy it, but I do it to keep myself in check as well as practice critical listening and learn to temper expectations. For headphones, I will usually test source differences on HD800, but sometimes I will use my Auteur, Atticus or HD6XX as well. That said, here are my impressions:

When I compare NFB-11 vs R2R 11 DACs only, I run both line outs to my Magni 3 and/or Valhalla 2. I have a Macbook that can output multiple audio sources simultaneously and I have an A/B switch to I can listen to the same headphone off one amp that is connect to both DACs and flip back and forth with no disruption in music. When I do this, I can't tell the 2 DACs apart. I would absolutely fail a blind test. Now, in purely subjective experience, I think maybe I feel like R2R 11 is a little smoother than NFB-11, but again, I know I would fail a blind test. I know people tend to say R2R 11 is warmer than NFB-11, but that is not something I hear from the DACs alone.

When I compraed NFB-11 and R2R 11's DAC+amp sections, there are more noticeable differences. In this case, the R2R 11 sounds more full and warm compared to NFB-11. Because I can't tell the DACs apart, I attribute the differences to the amp sections. I know both NFB-11.28 and R2R 11 both got a significant power transformer upgrade when they released in the summer, and I have heard from others that they believe that alone made a bigger upgrade difference over the DAC chips themselves. I would tend to agree with this assessment. Therefore, I would deduce that the NFB-11.28 and R2R 11 would be nearly equivalent to each other, with perhaps a slight and subtle change in sound presentation due to DAC implementations, but not enough that I would think one would be "better" than the other. I also think many people would fail a blind test telling them apart. Though I personally don't consider blind tests to be the final word in sonic differences and think there are subjective experiences that are real but hard to pick out in blind testing. But I also think failing blind testing puts into perspective how small sonic differences should be considered.

That said, I actually ended up buying a vintage Theta DSPro basic II R2R DAC. It is much older than the R2R 11, but I tend to prefer it as a DAC more than R2R 11. I think I can hear more subtle differences in A/B testing and think it does better with staging and instrument separation. Not a huge difference, but there's something about it that I keep preferring. From all the other Theta owners I have talked to, we all tend to really like the value you get out of them. I know they were like $2k+ brand new, but they go for similar prices as NFB-11 and R2R 11 these days. I would tend to recommend a used Theta for people that are interested in hearing the R2R sound, but these are DACs only, no amp so that's a consideration. However, many of them like mine are also balanced DACs in case you ever want to consider balanced options in the future.

Hope that helps. For people that already own an NFB-11, I personally don't think the R2R 11 is a pure upgrade and more just sidegrade. I don't think it is worth owning both. I only bought both for comparisons reasons and am planning on selling at least one or both soon. I definitely think if you are settled in your headphones and you are focusing on DAC/amp upgrades, it would be better to make a bigger tier jump up to something like Amethyst, Soekris, Gumby, etc. if you already have an NFB-11.

 

[JaMo]

Hi @givemetacos,

I think You are a bit beside track here. It's hard to compare a specific design ..and test another. I know You was asked.. The NFB-11 was/is based on the ES9018 as You correctly mensioned in Your review. It is also equipped with a completely different USB interface (VIA Envy chip based called USB32). The NFB-11.28 is based on the ES9028 Pro chip and has the Amanero Combo384 USB interface. Both the AmaneroCombo and the ES9028 has higher specs than their predecessors. The -11 and 11.28 are different animals in some way. I wonder what music material You tested with and how You fed the dacs. (USB, Toslink, SPDIF?)

The quality of the tested material is essential to push the performance to its limits where You really can give verdicts. If played material is of average/mediocre quality it will never get to those boundaries. Most people are listening to compressed more or less lossy material and it can sound good though. To get the real (highest) performance from the gear, feed it to with DSD and higher resolutions of PCM with known excellent recordings.

Well if Your listening is mainly on mid or low res material, You should get a forgiving chain for reproduction. The dilemma is to get a highend gear to handle it all.. Both HQ-material, of course, and still behave decent/forgiving with lower res material.

I appreciate Your review. Most the: ..."but there's something about it that I keep preferring." . All in all, it's subtle and hard to define whats making us like the stuff.

Thanks.

/Jan

 

[givemetacos]

Hi @givemetacos,

I think You are a bit beside track here. It's hard to compare a specific design ..and test another. I know You was asked.. The NFB-11 was/is based on the ES9018 as You correctly mensioned in Your review. It is also equipped with a completely different USB interface (VIA Envy chip based called USB32). The NFB-11.28 is based on the ES9028 Pro chip and has the Amanero Combo384 USB interface. Both the AmaneroCombo and the ES9028 has higher specs than their predecessors. The -11 and 11.28 are different animals in some way. I wonder what music material You tested with and how You fed the dacs. (USB, Toslink, SPDIF?)

The quality of the tested material is essential to push the performance to its limits where You really can give verdicts. If played material is average/mediocre quality it will never get to that. Most people are listening to compressed more or less lossy material and it can sound good though.
To get the real performance from the gear, feed it to with DSD and higher resolutions of PCM with known excellent recordings.

Well if Your listening is mainly on mid or low res material, You should get a forgiving chain for reproduction. The dilemma is to get a highend gear to handle it all.. Both HQ-material, of course, and still behave decent/forgiving with lower res material.

I appreciate Your review. Most the: ..."but there's something about it that I keep preferring." . All in all, it's subtle and hard to define whats making us like the stuff.

Thanks.

/Jan

I completely agree that I can't deduce the exact source components that contribute to the sonic differences I do or do not hear. My point was that testing DACs alone showed very little sonic changes, whereas with using each respective amps it was more clear. So I can only deduce that the amp section has more of an impact to me than the DAC implementation.

Like I said, I am a more conservative reviewer than most on here. But I will try and give you more of my background so you can judge for yourself. I can tell you testing was done with a combination of 16/44 FLAC or Spotify Premium streaming. And I test from a variety of well regarded mastered material like Radiohead - In Rainbows, Fleetwood Mac - Rumors, Daft Punk - Random Access Memories, Beck - Morning Phase, etc. I listen to most major genres including rock, metal, indie, pop electronic, jazz, classical, OST, hip hop, singer songwriter, acapella, blues, country, etc. I can assure you I take my testing very seriously and start with the highest quality sources I can find. And I use tracks that I listen to extensively for years and have heard across many different systems. Regarding input source connections, I have tested them all. I own a Schiit Eitr as well so I am able to convert USB to spdif and coax and compare different connection types. I have a grad degree in electrical engineering so I often treat these tests like science and am obsessive about getting what I consider to be valid results.

I'm not exaggerating when I say I do these types of volume-matched A/B testing on average of 3-5 hours a week every single week for about the last year. I often do this type of testing on a near daily basis. I'm also a classically trained musician in piano and guitar and have played in orchestras and symphonic bands throughout primary and secondary school so I am a careful listener and sensitive to things like timbre of instruments.

Hopefully, that clarifies where I am coming from. I want to emphasize that I am not a die hard objectivist. My PhD work involved a lot of perception neuroscience and neuroimaging. I specifically studied how the brain processes external stimuli like visual and audio cues and related that to behavior. I absolutely believe and have seen with my own eyes that our brains respond to auditory cues beyond what is currently accepted as "human audible threshold". I also think blind testing in research settings has its own confounding variables and flaws so I don't reference those as sources of "fact". But I also urge people to temper expectations and understand that there is a large amount of confirmation and expectation biases in this hobby. I encourage people to do as much volume-matched (and blind) A/B testing as possible. I think people would be surprised how much of subjective impressions don't pan out if forced to blind test them. But again, I don't believe blind testing is everything so I do think there are true and audible differences in source gear. I just think many of these differences are small and subtle. And it is important to remember that these are how I personally hear things with my ears. I have no idea how sensitive my ears are to source gear changes compared to others. I would absolutely believe that others have more sensitive hearing than myself. So if others have completely different experiences I would believe that too.

 

[JaMo]

Hi again @givemetacos,

You are a highly competent person, no doubt. One must take in the fact that this thread focuses on the 11.28 and the R2R-11. Both are high performers, for the money asked, very high performers. The fact that You compare to a much more expensive dac (Theta) sais alot. The 11.28 and R2R-11 are "teaser products", an invitation to explore the brand (Audio-gd) further...

I can not and will not even try to tell others what they can hear. I am sensitive, with poor sleep, even more so. I know that from testsituations among other listeners and maybe from the years of training with almost uncountable electronic circuit valuations after building them. I absolutely can hear the differences between the two (11.28 TCXO and the R2R11) I feel more with the later.

I think You nailed what it's about by the "..preferring"-phrase. It is subtle and not easy to understand why You feel strong by a certain setup and not with another. Psychoacoustics was a term for it in the late 80's pointing at this stimuli. Back then the research was aimed for "open up" severly autistic and demented patients. At that time they (mainly Japanese scientists) adjusted overtone-/undertone components and found positive reactions. Interesting area, indeed.

Thanks for coming back. Solid.

/Jan

 

[Renato Fury]

The R2R 11 is hot right, but how does this heat change the sound? Stronger bass? Tremble brighter? Larger soundstage? How would you describe it?

 

[givemetacos]

Hi again @givemetacos,

You are a highly competent person, no doubt. One must take in the fact that this thread focuses on the 11.28 and the R2R-11. Both are high performers, for the money asked, very high performers. The fact that You compare to a much more expensive dac (Theta) sais alot. The 11.28 and R2R-11 are "teaser products", an invitation to explore the brand (Audio-gd) further...

I can not and will not even try to tell others what they can hear. I am sensitive, with poor sleep, even more so. I know that from testsituations among other listeners and maybe from the years of training with almost uncountable electronic circuit valuations after building them. I absolutely can hear the differences between the two (11.28 TCXO and the R2R11) I feel more with the later.

I think You nailed what it's about by the "..preferring"-phrase. It is subtle and not easy to understand why You feel strong by a certain setup and not with another. Psychoacoustics was a term for it in the late 80's pointing at this stimuli. Back then the research was aimed for "open up" severly autistic and demented patients. At that time they (mainly Japanese scientists) adjusted overtone-/undertone components and found positive reactions. Interesting area, indeed.

Thanks for coming back. Solid.

/Jan

Yeah I definitely think you might be more sensitive to those changes than I am. I think lots of people are. I tend to have a very adaptable ear in that I don't have any sensitivities to specific frequencies, I can deal with sharp treble like Beyers and HD800, and even headphones I don't initially find pleasing I know if I listen to them extensively I can force myself to get used to them and over time start to enjoy them. I think that adaptability makes my ears less sensitive to small things that might annoy people or stand out as flaws.

What is it about the R2R 11's sound make you "feel more" than 11.28? Do you have a way of describing that sound? I think I know what you mean, but it is hard to put it into words.

One of my favorite thoughts on these types of source gear subjective impressions comes from Tyll at the end of his Big Sound experiment. He really summarizes up the the point that blind testing helps you realize how small changes you thought you heard are, but that even if you can't pick them apart blindly they all add up in small ways to your overall experience and together they affect and influence your impressions.

Anyways, merry Christmas and happy holidays to everyone!

 

[Renato Fury]

Yeah I definitely think you might be more sensitive to those changes than I am. I think lots of people are. I tend to have a very adaptable ear in that I don't have any sensitivities to specific frequencies, I can deal with sharp treble like Beyers and HD800, and even headphones I don't initially find pleasing I know if I listen to them extensively I can force myself to get used to them and over time start to enjoy them. I think that adaptability makes my ears less sensitive to small things that might annoy people or stand out as flaws.

What is it about the R2R 11's sound make you "feel more" than 11.28? Do you have a way of describing that sound? I think I know what you mean, but it is hard to put it into words.

One of my favorite thoughts on these types of source gear subjective impressions comes from Tyll at the end of his Big Sound experiment. He really summarizes up the the point that blind testing helps you realize how small changes you thought you heard are, but that even if you can't pick them apart blindly they all add up in small ways to your overall experience and together they affect and influence your impressions.

Anyways, merry Christmas and happy holidays to everyone!

So are the differences in sound from one to the other not so great? I read comments from people who said the sound of the R2R 11 looked like that of a tube amp.

 

[givemetacos]

So are the differences in sound from one to the other not so great? I read comments from people who said the sound of the R2R 11 looked like that of a tube amp.

They use that analogy because the R2R 11 is noted to sound smoother compared to NFB-11.28. But if you go back and read my full testing review, I said I can hear that when I compare NFB-11 vs R2R 11 using both DAC+amp together. I personally don't feel the "smooth" feeling comes from the DACs alone because I don't really hear that when I output each DAC to the same amp (Magni 3 or Valhalla 2). Either way, I still stand by my statement that these change are small and subtle and down to preference. I really don't consider R2R 11 to be an "upgrade" to NFB-11.

 

[Renato Fury]

They use that analogy because the R2R 11 is noted to sound smoother compared to NFB-11.28. But if you go back and read my full testing review, I said I can hear that when I compare NFB-11 vs R2R 11 using both DAC+amp together. I personally don't feel the "smooth" feeling comes from the DACs alone because I don't really hear that when I output each DAC to the same amp (Magni 3 or Valhalla 2). Either way, I still stand by my statement that these change are small and subtle and down to preference. I really don't consider R2R 11 to be an "upgrade" to NFB-11.

I did not refer only to the dac but to the whole of the work as a whole, but which of the two do you prefer and why?

 

[Anaz]

Hi. Right now my HD6XX is on their way to me.
Right now I'm deciding between NFB 11.28 or R2R 11.
This is my first dac/amp so Im very noob about the sound sounding. Lol..
Along with HD6XX that is coming, I also have KZ ZS5 which I considered it as very bright Iems.
My taste in music is very wide.
I listen from rock, pop, alternative, edm/hip hop, acoustic, soundtracks to some orchestra music like Joe Hisaishi.
Anything I find it good I'll listen to them.
So which I should choose?
Ive emailed Kingwa and he said if I don't know to choose he recommends the NFB 11 because it is cheaper and have more options to adjust the sound.
But, after reading this thread, more people prefer the R2R11 I guess..
So, help me master..

I listen to an HD 6XX on an R2R 11 and it's wonderful. (I haven't tried the NFB 11.28). The general consensus is that the HD 6XX sounds better through a warmer DAC, so that would be the R2R 11rather than the NFB11.28.

 

[Renato Fury]

I listen to an HD 6XX on an R2R 11 and it's wonderful. (I haven't tried the NFB 11.28). The general consensus is that the HD 6XX sounds better through a warmer DAC, so that would be the R2R 11rather than the NFB11.28.

What about bloody pops, does not that upset you ?