[phandrew]

What do you mean by "blacker background"?

 

[IndieScent]

Quote:

What do you mean by "blacker background"?

less background noise

 

[petemac110]

 
Quote:

1) Does anyone know how a Squeezebox Touch DAC compares to a NFB-3.1? (I know of one person on the Head-Fi product review page who commented that in a blindfold test he was unable to discern a difference)
 
2) How about a Headroom Micro DAC compared to a NFB-3.1?
 
3) There were a few posts some pages back in this thread that the NFB-3.1 uses inferior components to the NFB-3 but that the overall sound is not impacted. Has this been confirmed?
 
I'm trying to decide whether to finally upgrade my Headroom Micro DAC now that I've got a Squeezebox Touch. The Micro DAC seems to have the edge on the Touch internal DAC. I'm wondering whether the Audio-GD NFB-3.1 would be better still? Does anyone have any experience with comparing these various components?
 
 

I much prefer my NFB3 over the Touch. There is greater depth to the sound stage and more natural timbre. 
 

 

[davidvanderbilt]

Has anyone compared the NFB-2/NFB-3 to the Yulong D100 (using as DAC only) using strictly USB input?

 

[LostChild1]

Hi everyone,

About a year ago I was looking into buying the NFB-2, and I'm now back looking at it again (Although now it's the NFB-2.1)

I remember from my research into the NFB-2 that it was recommended to get the DIR9001, but I also seem to recall an option for an alternate clock chip that was preferred over the stock chip that you could request, does this option still exist? If so, what exactly was it and the cost?

I also remmeber that an outboard PSU was available for around $50? But now I can't seem to locate the option. HAs this been discontinued? Or is it now bundled with the NFB-2.1?

Thanks for your replies!

EDIT: It appears the external PSU was for the Digital Interface, which I was also looking into purchasing.
EDIT 2: It appears the clock upgrade was also for the DI. However this prompts a second question, on the Audio-gd website it says:

"The clock only active while setting at upsampling output."

So if I'm listening at 44.1/48khz all the time (No 96/192) the clock will effectively do nothing, correct?

 

[ninjikiran]

The NFB-2 is pitch silent, just like the BiFrost I own now.  The NFB-3 should be silent as well, as in no real audible noise but some are more sensitive than others.
 
Noise really seems to come into play with the amp imo, for example the D1 amp was a very tiny slightly audible noise.  The effects on SQ were DRASTIC though.  Same with my Lyr which has actual audible noise with the GE tubes.  Tbh its what I hate about the GE tubes~ even if I prefer their signature the noise levels seem to be INSANE and it gets really annoying after a while.*(A reason I am thinking of going with the Taboo still or back to solid state)

 

[aspenx]

Quote:

So if I'm listening at 44.1/48khz all the time (No 96/192) the clock will effectively do nothing, correct?

Let's say your source is a redbook CD.
 
What goes into the DI will be 44.1kHz if you don't do any software or otherwise tempering of the signal.
 
At the DI, you may configure the oversampling to 96kHz etc, hence making better use of the clock.
 

 

[aspenx]

 
Quote:

I've got a C-2 on the way so I can test out ACSS with my NFB2. ^_^

Please let us know your impressions! There is too little information on the C2...

Oops, you're getting the C2 and not the C2.2? Don't know what's the difference, but impressions will still be very helpful!

 

[HaVoC-28]

C2 si former version , C2.1 / C2.2 are improved versions (C2.1 better caps , C2.2 a bit more power) .
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/515859/how-is-the-audio-gd-c2-amp 
 
(there is some impressions here , if you didn't allready read this) .
 
C2 family are a great amps for the price a clear improvement over my former M-Stage for my C2.1 

 

[khaine1711]

Can anyone comment on the musicality of NFB2/3?
 
I'm looking for an upgrade and naturally the 1st choice is NFB2 or even DAC19 as Im currently using NFB12.
 
Recently I had the chance to listen to another setup with a Digital Audio Lab CardDeluxe as an DAC. And while my NFB12 seems to have better detail retrieval; CardDeluxe wins in term of musicality i.e. each song seems to have better "coherence", everything in harmony while my NFB12 lack that "coherence".
 
The comparison is a bit unfair since CardDeluxe's MSRP is ~$600 when it was released =p. Also I found the difference is quite subtle, and my nfb12 held its own quite well. However that subtleness makes my music much more enjoyable to listen to, and if possible I'd like to include that in my next upgrade.
 
As I browse through 96 pages of this thread, I've also notice one member also prefer his DACmagic to the NFB3/2 maybe for the same reason as mine. Also most seems to comment on the superb detail retrieval and other sonic characters of the nfb2/3; but few comment on the musicality.
 
So, former and current owners of Nfb2/3; I'd very much appreciate your opinions on this aspect 

 

[aspenx]

Quote:

Can anyone comment on the musicality of NFB2/3?
 
So, former and current owners of Nfb2/3; I'd very much appreciate your opinions on this aspect 

I'm not very good at describing so I'll just cut to the chase. I feel that the NFB2 (in my setup) is not very musical for around 70% of the music that I listen to. The degree of instrument separation also makes the music feel a little mechanical sometimes in my opinion.
 
I've only had the Musiland Monitor 02US as DAC before if you were wondering where I'm coming from.
 
I think the bulk of the problem might be from my amp and/or the recordings though.
 
HTH

 

[aspenx]

 
Quote:

C2 si former version , C2.1 / C2.2 are improved versions (C2.1 better caps , C2.2 a bit more power) .
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/515859/how-is-the-audio-gd-c2-amp 
 
(there is some impressions here , if you didn't allready read this) .
 
C2 family are a great amps for the price a clear improvement over my former M-Stage for my C2.1 

I figured that much from the Audio-Gd site.

I've also read that thread too. It's the comment with respect to the Violectric V200 that got me interested in the C2.2 again.

I'm using a Lovely Cube (which I presume is pretty similar to the M-Stage) so your comment has my interest piqued even further.
 
By the way, have you tried the C2.1 with the A2000X that you used to have? How did it go?

 

[khaine1711]

Well, I can't come to a conclusive decision that the mentioned "musicality" is caused by the CardDeluxe or the C2.2 (the setup I got to listen is CardDeluxe -> C2.2 (SUN Opa) -> my Dt990/the owner's Dx1000).
 
and I think the problem doesn't lie in the recordings. I've literally "live" with the track; remembering every details. And I didn't know it could sound better until I listen to the above setup

. Maybe I'll get a better answer once I get my hands on a C2.2 to try with my nfb12.
 
Quote:

I'm not very good at describing so I'll just cut to the chase. I feel that the NFB2 (in my setup) is not very musical for around 70% of the music that I listen to. The degree of instrument separation also makes the music feel a little mechanical sometimes in my opinion.
 
I've only had the Musiland Monitor 02US as DAC before if you were wondering where I'm coming from.
 
I think the bulk of the problem might be from my amp and/or the recordings though.
 
HTH

 

 

[HaVoC-28]

Quote:

 

I figured that much from the Audio-Gd site.

I've also read that thread too. It's the comment with respect to the Violectric V200 that got me interested in the C2.2 again.

I'm using a Lovely Cube (which I presume is pretty similar to the M-Stage) so your comment has my interest piqued even further.
 
By the way, have you tried the C2.1 with the A2000X that you used to have? How did it go?

Well , opa moon on C2.1 matured a lot , much more closer to ACSS than it was before , when i made my early comparison on how is c2 thread , difference was not so obvious (comparing M-stage and C2.1 both with moon , ACSS was the clear winner , now Moon is close to ACSS , i still have a slight preference to ACSS , wich i found very neutral , and liquid / effortless sounding.  Moon has improved but still sounding the same way , just better than in first run , it remains warmer , mellow sounding , a little bit more bodied in bass , a bit less transparent too , softer on highs , drums kicks a bit more forward etc  
 
So C2.1 / C2.2 is clearly a good upgrade from m-stage (and peraphs lovely cube) even using it on RCA mod (ACSS for me seams the best , but i didn't tryed soo many OPA ) .
 
A2000X sold it before getting my C2.1 i didn't liked at all 3D Wings and 3 days laters A2000X  was sold . Only used it through M-stage with Moon , and it sounded good to me  it's a nice headphone , a bright one , quite neutral for an AT (peraphs mediums are little colored , but worked wonderfully for voices as usual from AT)  soundstage and airness was really excellent for a closed headphone , not bass heavy , only what it is needed , highs crystal clear without beeing too harsh , good dynamique ) . If it was not 3D wings peraphs i would have keep them longer . 
 
I think that C2.1 with moon would drive them fine (not soo sure for ACSS) , in fact every headphone that i pluged to my C2.1 sounded really good to me . 
 
 
 

 

[LostChild1]

Let's say your source is a redbook CD.

What goes into the DI will be 44.1kHz if you don't do any software or otherwise tempering of the signal.

At the DI, you may configure the oversampling to 96kHz etc, hence making better use of the clock.

From what I understand here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oversampling

Oversampling basically just gives the filters and clock more "wiggle room" for imperfections, in the anti-aliasing and resolution, allowing for a higher S/N ratio.

This is different from Upsampling in that the signal isn't actually being changed? That's kind of where I get confused between the two.

I've always been told that the more that what is on the PC (FLAC) stays untouched by the time it gets to your headphones (No replay gain, no transcoding (Well from flac it doesn't matter but you know what I mean), no otherwise changing or colouring of the signal, the better.

Wouldn't using the DI to go from 44.1khz to 96khz be changing the signal and trying to put something where there was nothing? (Like trying to transcode from MP3 to FLAC... :mad: )