[tubesound]

Audio gd is gonna stop producing PCM1704 based DACs. As a matter of fact, that chip is still in production. My interpretation is that Kingwa finally found capable Delta Sigma DAC chips to replace it (WM8741/Sabre ES9018?). So it will be very interesting to see how NFB-3 compares to DAC-19 DSP.

 

[HeatFan12]

Quote:

I hate to prod, but any more on this?  I am still quite interested to hear how you think the NFB-3 and DAC-19 DSP compare.

 
Quote:

Ditto

Quote:

Audio gd is gonna stop producing PCM1704 based DACs. As a matter of fact, that chip is still in production. My interpretation is that Kingwa finally found capable Delta Sigma DAC chips to replace it (WM8741/Sabre ES9018?). So it will be very interesting to see how NFB-3 compares to DAC-19 DSP.

tubesound, how's that NFB-3 treating you?
 
 
Sorry guys, work, work work and not too much time lately.  Going to spend some time today and the next couple of days focusing on these two.  The delivery of the DI as well sidetracked me a bit.
 
Well, to say that the NFB-3 even compares to the DAC-19DSP in terms of sound, is a great thing IMO, given their different characteristics.  For the NFB-3, I went with the 96k (DIR9001) instead of 192k (CS8416) receiver.
 
In reference to the 19DSP, I have not changed any of the settings yet.  You have options with these DACs whether it's before or after purchase, so I am trying to keep it somewhat of an even keel.  Some settings appeal to others and some will not, which I think is great, to achieve different flavors if you will.
 
The NFB-3 does hold its own against the 19DSP.  Both are clear, crisp, and achieve a very clean sound without fatigue.  I plugged in my SR225s as well to check the balance between bass and treble energy and again, the highs are kept in check, which is a great thing, while still detailed.  Later today, I'm going to go in the other direction with the Denon AH-D5000 (very different from Grados, to say the least).  I'm trying to see if different pairings muddle anything in the sound and so far that has not been the case with several phones and amps.
 
Both these DACs let the chain be complimented accordingly with their individual traits.  They don't try to impose their "presence", if you will.  For example, I love tubes, so why would I want something to detract from what they offer.  I want something to "compliment" them and add synergy. 
 
There are many variables involved in comparing gear.  I'm trying to use different amps and phones to get a different feel, keeping the DACs in place, hence taking a bit long, so I try to post when I connect something different and get a feel for it.
 
On those interested in the head to head, what are qualities of interest to you?  What differences would you be interested in between the two?  I would love to run specific "tests" if anyone is interested, then maybe compile a chart between the two.  It would be a joint effort.......

 

[Epoch]

The main thing I would be interested in hearing is how the treble compares between the two.  I find that the DAC-19 DSP has very nice treble, not too smooth, but not harsh.

 

[HeatFan12]

Well, finally moved the gear to its final destination upstairs.  Wanted to eventually connect the NFB-3 to my speaker rig / entertainment center downstairs, but the TE7022 would be better served upstairs.
 
 
Epoch,
 
In reference to the treble action with both DACs----
 
The setup is the same as it was before.  RCAs from both DACs to C-2, with the only difference being, I connected my A5 speakers to the pre-out on the C-2 for a little speaker action as well.
 
The highs on both DACs are smooth like butta on a piece of warm sourdough bread.  They extend just right without being harsh or fatiguing, like you stated.  In this department the edge goes to the 19DSP.  It has a bit more "peak" and refinement on that last burst, if you will.  It never goes into the too "metallic" realm and it maintains control throughout.  Both high ends are crisp, especially noticed on guitars and cymbals.
 
This difference was not immediate and I did have to change back and forth several times and listen for good periods before I noticed it.  I listened with both headphones and speakers.  This was done via usb input on both.  I threw in some 24/96 as well, however, the DAC-19 was connected to the Musiland 01USD for this.  Even with that setup, I noticed the "peak" as well.
 

 
 

 

[Epoch]

That is good to hear, and I guess that does back up Kingwa's statement that there is only a slight difference between the two DACs, but that the NFB-3 was the best value he offered.
 
Its just very nice to know that the DAC-19 may be gone soon, but there is a great replacement for it.  Especially since you are comparing the DSP version, which is an upgrade from the DF1704 version.

 

[tubesound]

I went to an audio buddy's place today for some listening of NFB-3. His system is composed of an old Mission DAD5 (as the CD transport; coaxial out), an old Sansui integrated amp (1980s stuff; forgot the model number) and a pair of B&W 805 Matrix. The edge goes to Softone - better mid-range and better dynamics. I also brought my trusty Genesis Digital Lens and after this thing was added in between, NFB-3 came on top; much more musical than by itself alone.
 
Like any equipment review, it's very system dependent. From my experience, it's always benficial to introduce a dejitter device in your all digital system; In NFB-3's case, Genesis Digital Lens made it really shine.
 
Since this is my first time to try Audio gd's product, I decided on the cheaper model. If you're choosing between NFB-2 and NFB-3 right now, my advice is to go for the NFB-2; it should sound better than NFB-3.
 
HeatFan12: I believe NFB-3 USB in would have no chance to win over 19DSP because DAC-19 has the DSP-1 dejitter circuit. I guess DI (dejittering) + NFB-3 should come very close to 19DSP. Can't wait for your report!
 
As for Softone, It didn't lose that much to NFB-3. I will try some tube rolling to see whether Softone's sound can be improved.

 

[tim3320070]

The Sabre DAC's don't require the DSP-1 as they are inherently low jitter- that's why it's not in any of his ESS dac's.

 

[tubesound]

Quote:

The Sabre DAC's don't require the DSP-1 as they are inherently low jitter- that's why it's not in any of his ESS dac's.

Well, NFB-2/NFB-3 use WM8741 chips. DIR9001 is not good enough.
 

 

[vrln]

More specifically the Sabre32 chip has a built-in receiver, and the PCM1704 is a mono-chip without one. The ESS chip as a complete package is inherently low jitter because of the complex oversampling it does, the actual DAC part itself is not. The Sabre chips are more of a complete package, and the PCM1704 leaves a lot of decisions for the designer and is more expensive to implement. Both are fine

 

[regal]

Quote:

More specifically the Sabre32 chip has a built-in receiver, and the PCM1704 is a mono-chip without one. The ESS chip as a complete package is inherently low jitter because of the complex oversampling it does, the actual DAC part itself is not.

The issue is the DAC portion of the chip,  with sigma delta there is jitter introduced right at the end of the process from the modulator,  how much and how it sound in comparison to the PCM1704 is up in the air,   but it isn't proven that there is less jitter distorion in the analog output of the ESS than a well implemented PCM1704.  

 

[.Sup]

Anybody can comment about musicality? I have my Ref5( in single ended mode its supposedly just like the DAC19) which I don't find musical enough if any dusting on the shelf and DacMagic (Dual Wolfson WM8740) on 24/7. I assume the WM8741 is the upgrade of what I have in my DM so theoretically it should be perfect for me. Cheers

 

[Sp0rkG0d]

I'm most interested in how this dac compares to others in its price range such as the amb gamma-2, music fidelity v-dac, little dot dac_1 or similarly priced products since at the moment thats about the maximum I'd consider spending on a dac so something like the dac19 isn't really in the running as I have way to many other things I want to buy. So if anyone who's heard the nfb3 had any insight into those comparisons was willing to share their knowledge I'd appreciate it.

 

[tubesound]

I had a Dacmagic briefly and it even lost to my Zhaolu D3 (opamps bypassed) at the time. According to my memory (which is unreliable), NFB-3 is better than Dacmagic. The biggest problem with Dacmagic is its wall wart type power supply. If you upgrade the power supply for Dacmagic, it'll bring the price much higher than NFB-3's. People say WM8741 is very analog sounding and that's the reason why I went with NFB-3 rather than NFB-1 which has a Sabre chip in it.

 

[FauDrei]

According to my memory (which is unreliable), NFB-3 is better than Dacmagic.

 
NFB-3 has better PSU, receiver, DAC chips, gain stage and output stage. We can debate on filters and DacMagic's upsampling. Beside that - there really is no contest.

 

[tubesound]

Did some USB vs. Coaxial listening again tonight. The hum returns while connected through USB although the volume of the hum is much lower than that of the first time when I hooked up the DAC with my laptop. Since my speakers (Focal Chorus 714V) have a sensitivity of 91dB, they're quite revealing. On the other hand, the coaxial input is dead quiet. The USB implementation in NFB-3 (or Tenor chip in general) is a disappointment; I guess it's inferior to asynchronous applications.