[pcfranco]

It's not just one person, at least one other person has said that, as well as a number of people noting its warmth.

I'm not so sure I would trust a review that doesn't seem to be true. Especially with "funny" stuff going on, like a member with only 1 post chiming in out of the blue to say "thanks Larry for stating the truth," and that we shouldn't criticize anything. That seems a little fishy to me, but whatever.

Despite being my first message, I have used some hi-end equipment, such
Esoteric D-05 and Wadia 781i. The uDAc is for my 14 year old son (How old you are?). He is very
glad. Having a single message does not mean being inexperienced in the subject matter.
I participate in other forums, but the review of Larry is quite correct.

 

[userlander]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcfranco /img/forum/go_quote.gif Despite being my first message, I have used some hi-end equipment, such Esoteric D-05 and Wadia 781i. The uDAc is for my 14 year old son (How old you are?). He is very glad. Having a single message does not mean being inexperienced in the subject matter. I participate in other forums, but the review of Larry is quite correct.

What is "correct?" What are you referring to, exactly?

If it's different from what I said, then I guess all these other people are also wrong?

Quote:

Originally Posted by soulrider4ever /img/forum/go_quote.gif OK. So after just an hour or so of listening and comparing back and forth with my EMU 0404USB w/ modded PSU & Belkin Gold USB cable, the presentation is really the biggest change. My subjective opinions below Listening to Dave Matthews - Say Goodbye much more foward presentation, but still 'deep' more relaxed than edgy (0404) more engaging with udac It's not more detailed than the 0404USB but easier to hear subtle details due to the foward presentation - the uDac the details just 'grab' your attention, where as the 0404USB you have to pay attention to hear the same details. enjoy it more than 0404 for musicality reasons less fatiguing more bass, but not unnatural amount better instrument seperation I would say the 0404USB produces a larger soundstage and or more 'air' around the music, but for me that makes it less enjoyable as I'm not hearing as much of the music clearly. small background noises that are still in the 0404usb require more 'paying attention' to hear, where as they stickout with the udac. more body / fuller sound to the music, the 0404usb sounded slightly 'thinner' very slight but noticable enough.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roker /img/forum/go_quote.gif I ordered a red uDac and got a black one. I just don't know if I care enough to swap it out. I like the quality so far. The hp amp isn't as powerful as my LDI+ but I never expected it to be. The dac itself sounds nice. I like the forward presentation of it. This will make a perfect companion to my 125s when I'm traveling. I need more time to thoroughly compare it to my Keces. Suprisingly it didn't sound good with my NE-M7s. But maybe because I choose to listen to it first with my Grados and Denons first.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stuckonsound /img/forum/go_quote.gif I got a black uDac last Thursday. It's being paired with a Highfiman EF2 via RCA. I'm loving the combo, but I had to scale back the volume on the uDac. Has anyone else felt that they got optimal sound with the volume at less than 100%? I've got mine set at about 70%. At full volume it seemed like there was a minute amount of grainy distortion in the mid to upper treble ranges.

Quote:

Originally Posted by roker /img/forum/go_quote.gif I did an A/B with my Keces vs. the uDac using my Active Monitors (NHT M-00) and my impression once again is that the Keces sounds fuller and more musical (pleasing to my ears) while the uDac sounds more forward yet still pleasing. For my ears, the Keces still sounds better, but like I said before, for the price you can't beat the uDac. It has great synergy with my Grados straight out of the HP amp section. My next test will be with my LDI+ A/B'ing those two dacs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Absorbine_Sr /img/forum/go_quote.gif Received my uDAC yesterday. I bought it due to the glowing comments in this thread, especially those of Headphone Addict, as I will be using it eventually in an EF5/HE-5 system. Last night I ran it off of my Acer Aspire One into the Zana Deux and then to the HE-5's and I must say I am impressed. Warm and wonderful sound, yet plenty of detail to keep me happy. I did notice what others are mentioning though - it does appear able to overdrive the Zana's inputs so it took a few minutes to find the correct volume setting on the uDAC. This morning I tried the built in amp with my ESW9's and again, I am duly impressed. I think I now have a new work desktop rig with this combo. Those of you contemplating a uDAC, go for it. I do not think you will regret the purchase. A_Sr.

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_19 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just got the uDAC... this was perhaps my fastest shipment ever, it took less than 24 hours for it to get here. Granted, it's only from Ottawa to Toronto, but I'm still impressed. Kudos to themacgroup... if any Canadians here wants to get the uDAC, they're definitely the people to look to. Out of the box... yup, as everyone said, it's much smaller than what I anticipated. Yet the build quality is top notch... it's built very solidly. No problems with the volume pot being overly stiff or anything. Love that little intro in the manual about "beginner's guide to good audio" by the way. I haven't had the chance for it to replace the Pico DAC on my main rig yet, but I've hooked it up to my secondary desktop rig (which is what I'll be using it for mainly, on its own), and I can already tell this is one fantastic piece of audio equipment. Three things that jumped out at me is 1) soundstage (huge), 2) detail (very detailed; mids are definitely on the upfront side), and 3) warmness. I first tried my lower end gear on it first, such as KSC75 (excellent, and warmness complimented its cold nature well), AD700 (again, the extra warmness was good, and it brought its recessed mids more forward), and ES7 (only one that didn't sound that great; it got overly warm and boomy)... then for fun, I tried it out with my higher end gear, and was surprised at how much power these little beasts can pack. They power the K701 to exceptional levels, with the warmness and added midbass complimenting it exceptionally well (now, they don't hold a candle to my main rig of course, but if I hadn't heard my main rig I'd be more than happy with this combo). HD650 was easily powered to ear-splitting volumes as well, but I felt that the warmness and bottom end made it too boomy for my liking. RS1 with flats sounded very good through it as well, just missing the organicness that my WA6 usually provides (and perhaps bit too much midbass boost) but great otherwise. For now, the only real "flaw" I can see with this is that it's not totally neutral (mid/bass oriented; some may find upper mids too peaky, and top end treble seems a bit rolled off), but if you match it well I see real potential in it. The soundstage and midrange detail this DAC/amp provides is simply amazing. Funny, I'm floored by this so far, and I haven't even used it as a DAC yet! I'll try to hook it up to my main rig as soon as I can, but I have no doubts that it'll stand toe-to-toe with my Pico DAC. Yes, at $99 USD, this is a steal. Wow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zombi /img/forum/go_quote.gif Having been using it and getting acclimated to its sound, its definitely a fine product. A little punchy for my taste, but certainly not bad. If youre low on cash, space, or if you move around much its great.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrosenth /img/forum/go_quote.gif My quick two cents. I've done a head to head with a d4 with topflight kit and the udac now on a host of cans (grado black 325, MS-1, SR-60, Yuin Pk1, denon 751, Beyer 231) using WAV via foobar and the general theme has held up across them all for the money both are great. but for the d4 vs. the udac when both serve as an amp/dac combo the d4 top flight, IMHO, trounces the udac. Better highs, separation, controlled lower bass, detail, instrument placement, etc. This is apparent to me even with the earbuds and the cheaper grados. This was both when the d4 was powered off of a 9v as well as off of the usb when the udac is fed into the d4's amp section (zu pivot cable) it's closer but to my ears the d4 still has the edge (same phenomenon as above but to a lesser degree). the udac is slightly warmer as well - perhaps a touch more organic but less revealing so for the price the udac is great - i'm keeping it and will use it to feed an icon speaker amp as it's a noticeable upgrade to the icon's dac. but for the extra money the d4 gives you amplification of a different class (again caveat that this is with the topflight kit) and what i would consider slightly better dac head to head for whatever reason (maybe extra cable connection) compared to a valab for the extra $100 for just the dac functionality I think i would take the valab and i'd be very interested to hear a udac head to head with a gamma 1 regardless i love the udac for the money also the volume control is great for using with a pure amplifier (not integrated so no volume control) in a speaker context (gainclone, classic hafler, dynaco, etc.) as always, your mileage may vary

So please tell me how any of that is any different from anything I have been saying? Warm, punchy, forward, powerful, organic, thick, slightly rolled off highs, slightly boosted lower mids, better with grados, not so great with phones like HD650 (or in my case DT880)?

And these are the majority of the reviews. If you go through the thread you'll find people here and there saying "this is great, I really love it!" but not really providing any details. The more in depth reviews *all* seem to say exactly what I have said, while none of them say anything different, like that the uDAC is bright instead of warm, recessed instead of forward, or thin instead of thick/punchy. Because it isn't. There was also a comment from someone saying it was *really* forward, and apparently that got deleted. So that is kind of strange, also.

But regardless, what exactly in the "review of Larry" that you mention is "correct" that everyone else got wrong?

 

[pcfranco]

Larry says .. "The mids are slightly more forward with uDAC/Triple.fi than I'd like, but I could live with it." ...

And , "I think the main difference between the sound of the uDAC and the D4 is that the uDAC is a little warmer and forward sounding, "

This is not correct?

 

[userlander]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcfranco /img/forum/go_quote.gif Larry says .. "The mids are slightly more forward with uDAC/Triple.fi than I'd like, but I could live with it." ... And , "I think the main difference between the sound of the uDAC and the D4 is that the uDAC is a little warmer and forward sounding, " This is not correct?

But that's what everyone else said, including me. But you and MacedonianHero seemed to say that I was somehow wrong for saying it was forward. MH in fact said I was the only one who said that, when in fact it seems like almost everyone has said it, including Larry. So it's kind of like: what are you even talking about?

For the record, does anyone who owns this DAC want to say:

1) that it's bright?
2) that it's thin sounding?
3) that it's recessed?
4) that it's very laid back or "polite" instead of punchy and aggressive?

If anyone does, please post and say so. I would be very interested to hear from anyone who would agree with any one of those items. I would know at least who not to take audio advice from.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by userlander /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's not just one person, at least one other person has said that, as well as a number of people noting its warmth. I'm not so sure I would trust a review that doesn't seem to be true. Especially with "funny" stuff going on, like a member with only 1 post chiming in out of the blue to say "thanks Larry for stating the truth," and that we shouldn't criticize anything. That seems a little fishy to me, but whatever. I don't know why people act like describing the characteristics of a product honestly means it's a bad product. This is an awesome DAC for rock and related genres, I have always said so. In my opinion it is not as well suited to classical and those kinds of genres, because it is definitely a punchy DAC with some forward energy. I know that because I have compared it against a very neutral DAC, the MF V-DAC, as well as a very neutral but lesser dac, the hotusb1 dac. The uDAC is in a different class than that dac, but it's still warmer, punchier and more forward, there is no question about that. That means this dac is on the warm side of neutral and has some forward energy. You can dispute that all you want, but it doesn't magically change the characteristics of the DAC just because you want it not to be true. What's important to keep in mind is that what Larry or anyone says comparing it with *their* gear is just as valid as me or anyone else comparing with our gear. So you have to take that into account rather than saying one person has the "truth" of the dac, or amp, or whatever is being considered. It's all information that goes into the "database" describing the item, and if someone says something that you don't like, or take the wrong way, you shouldn't just discount it because you want to push a FOTM.

Right, we just both tell it like we hear it with the gear we have. And things will sound very different depending on our gear and our preferences. As individuals with different tastes, we will have different opinions or points of view, and I appreciate that. I will still posit that the majority of owners would say uDAC is warm, punchy, slightly forward but not aggressive nor necessarily laid back either. I try to use more descriptors and less labels. What is too forward to one person may not be to another, and what is just right to one person may seem recessed to another. What is recessed to one person I might find to sound "sucked out". So, I try to compare and provide examples how how it might compare to other pieces of gear, so people have a more solid frame of reference (like you did).

That's why I wanted to understand what you meant by aggressive. I just don't consider "warmer, punchy and slightly forward" to be enough qualities to label something as aggressive. But, I wont disagree with many of your other descriptions unless you still want to call the uDAC extremely forward. Another way to describe the sound is as being "full and present" but that doesn't make it sound too forward or aggressive to my ears. It may be more aggressive than something else, but that doesn't make it aggressive on it's own. For example, the uDAC is more aggressive than the iBasso D2 Boa or D2 Viper, but less aggressive than Predator, P-51 or opamp rolled D4.

I relish the differences we have in how gear sounds, and if I challenge someone about their statements, it's not to say that you don't hear what you hear, but rather to understand what you really mean by it and what frame of reference you are using.

 

[userlander]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif I relish the differences we have in how gear sounds, and if I challenge someone about their statements, it's not to say that you don't hear what you hear, but rather to understand what you really mean by it and what frame of reference you are using.

The strange thing is that no one really seems to have many differences. I seem to be getting jumped all over for some reason for having said it's "forward," when going through the thread, it turns out that at least 5 or 6 other people -- including you -- have said the same exact thing. Same for its warmth, and everything else. So that is more like a consensus than having differences.

So I guess people just aren't reading very carefully, either what I said, or what everyone else has said. Because everyone seems to say it's characterized by by being warm and forward, and that's also what I said. Unless - like I just asked - someone wants to tell us that they think it's bright, recessed, or polite?

Which would actually go against the majority of impressions, if not all of them.

 

[Blackwheel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcfranco /img/forum/go_quote.gif I want to thank Larry for the truth about the uDAC. It delivers what it promises and we should not criticize the equipment that costs only one hundred U.S. dollars. Very cheap for the performance.

pcfranco, are you or are you not a sentient robot delivered by Nuforce to convince us of this product. Yes or no? Because that is how it seems at the moment. On an unrelated note, this dac actually seems very nice.

-

 

[iDriveAGTI]

Nuforce uDac is an awesome piece of kit for the money. I've owned a LOT of amps, it's hard to beat for $99. Is it the be all end all? Hell no. Its a nice little amp, especially at $99. And it looks cool to boot! (main reason I got this instead of the bithead - lol).

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by userlander /img/forum/go_quote.gif The strange thing is that no one really seems to have many differences. I seem to be getting jumped all over for some reason for having said it's "forward," when going through the thread, it turns out that at least 5 or 6 other people -- including you -- have said the same exact thing. Same for its warmth, and everything else. So that is more like a consensus than having differences. So I guess people just aren't reading very carefully, either what I said, or what everyone else has said. Because everyone seems to say it's characterized by by being warm and forward, and that's also what I said. Unless - like I just asked - someone wants to tell us that they think it's bright, recessed, or polite? Which would actually go against the majority of impressions, if not all of them.

I understand, but you didn't just say it was "forward", you said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by userlander /img/forum/go_quote.gif I *think* you might be disappointed. I've never heard the ibasso DACs so I can't comment on them. But the uDAC is a very forward and "thick" sounding DAC. I wouldn't use it for classical, there is way too much coloration, imo, and I would want a more neutral dac for that. But your tastes may differ, everything is very individualistic, and who knows how it synergizes with senns - I don't recall reading anything on that in the thread, or else I missed it.

I think that many people didn't agree at all with that, and then sune canceled his order and people reacted, because it appeared that he made his decision partly based on your strong comments. He assumed your description did not fit his needs where he posted his needs here:

Quote:

Originally Posted by sune /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hi, I ordered the uDac today.. But then I found this thread and it made me cancel my order. The mention of the uDac being very forward and agressive sounding scares me.. I'm looking for something, not harsh at all, that I can listen to for a long time, with minimal fatigue. Maybe I should shell out for the iBasso D4 instead? (I have Sennheiser HD-380's and Goldring ns-1000's and listen mainly at low to medium sound levels)

I don't recall anybody else was calling the uDAC "very forward, thick, or aggressive."

 

[barbes]

Ordered mine from Amazon yesterday, got it today, works like a charm. This solves two problems for me. I wanted to run my desktop amp off my laptop - I'd been using my iMod as a source - and my amp (Burson HA-160) has volume adjustments that are far too gross, and mostly far too loud, for my JH13s. The volume control on the uDAC is a really good secondary control, and doesn't seem to degrade SQ like the volume attenuators I'd tried.

I'm not going to try for any fine SQ judgments - the amp is still burning in, I just changed cables on the JH13s, and this is my first stand-alone DAC. But it sounds great - not at all like a 100 dollar piece of gear.

(If I also run a USB cable from my laptop to my Aura Note, I get hum through the uDAC. I may be able to manage that by playing with wall outlets, I don't know, but I don't hold it against the Nuforce.)

And it's so SMALL. The amp section isn't bad at all. I can see this replacing a lot of big gear on an office desk.

 

[userlander]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif I understand, but you didn't just say it was "forward", you said: I think that many people didn't agree at all with that, and then sune canceled his order and people reacted, because it appeared that he made his decision partly based on your strong comments. He assumed your description did not fit his needs where he posted his needs here: I don't recall anybody else was calling the uDAC "very forward, thick, or aggressive."

Sure they did. I just posted the comments where just about everyone said it was forward, including you.

Many people said in so many words that it's thick, like when one person said, "more body / fuller sound to the music." That's thick, not thin.

Many people have said in so many words that it's powerful, like in talking about "overdriving" the inputs, scaling back the volume, etc. Together with it's forwardness, that's aggressive. It's not polite. The opposite of polite is aggression.

Some people even said it had grainy and distorted highs and midrange. Someone else said the highs were rolled off. For all we know, that's what turned someone who is into classical off to the DAC. As it should!

So please just lay off. Nothing that I have said about the DAC is inaccurate. It's not bright, it's not thin, it's not recessed, and it's not polite. It's RELATIVELY warm, thick, forward, and aggressive. Again, relative to neutral.

Anyone who was serious about classical music -- which most people strongly prefer very neutral gear for -- in my opinion would not be happy with this DAC, RELATIVE to others that are better suited for classical. No way would I recommend this DAC to someone who wanted a DAC for classical. This DAC has other strengths, like being a kick-ass rock DAC. If you would recommend it for classical, or say it's not forward, warm, etc. that's your credibility on the line, not mine.

 

[Blackwheel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by userlander /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sure they did. I just posted the comments where just about everyone said it was forward, including you. Many people said in so many words that it's thick, like when one person said, "more body / fuller sound to the music." That's thick, not thin. Many people have said in so many words that it's powerful, like in talking about "overdriving" the inputs, scaling back the volume, etc. Together with it's forwardness, that's aggressive. It's not polite. The opposite of polite is aggression. Some people even said it had grainy and distorted highs and midrange. Someone else said the highs were rolled off. For all we know, that's what turned someone who is into classical off to the DAC. As it should! So please just lay off. Nothing that I have said about the DAC is inaccurate. It's not bright, it's not thin, it's not recessed, and it's not polite. It's RELATIVELY warm, thick, forward, and aggressive. Again, relative to neutral. Anyone who was serious about classical music -- which most people strongly prefer very neutral gear for -- in my opinion would not be happy with this DAC, RELATIVE to others that are better suited for classical. No way would I recommend this DAC to someone who wanted a DAC for classical. This DAC has other strengths, like being a kick-ass rock DAC. If you would recommend it for classical, or say it's not forward, warm, etc. that's your credibility on the line, not mine.

-

In all honesty, when I read your description of the uDac, it sounds negative. I'm not saying you are right or wrong because I've never heard it... but you do put a damper on the consistently positive compliments the device has been getting for the last 50-something pages. (maybe that is a good thing)

There is a subtle, but powerful, difference between describing sound as "more body / fuller sound to the music" as opposed to "thick."

You know that distinction very well, and I really think you should drop the he/she/I said business. Everybody knows what they said, and the only words you should be clarifying are your own.

Didn't mean to go schoolteacher on you, but hey, what the hell... why not.

-

 

[donunus]

I just want to say... One thing I'm really disappointed about with nuforce is that when my udac hasnt arrived in a month since I ordered, JasonL told me that they should change the shipping method to make sure it arrives for the second time they ship me one. I suggested using Express Mail since Ive never had problems with it (and my items never get taxed using that method). Now, I guess nuforce decides that they know better than me about shipping to the Philippines and uses Fedex... Everything is great and tracked.... til the moment it reaches Manila... It gets Taxed! Without my say in the matter since I don't actually get to speak to customs this way.

Bottom Line in the end I'm paying more money for the uDac that got to me wayy freakin long. If it was shipped via EMS in the first place, I would have gotten it last month and tax free. waaahhh

 

[Blackwheel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by donunus /img/forum/go_quote.gif I just want to say... One thing I'm really disappointed about with nuforce is that when my udac hasnt arrived in a month since I ordered, JasonL told me that they should change the shipping method to make sure it arrives for the second time they ship me one. I suggested using Express Mail since Ive never had problems with it (and my items never get taxed using that method). Now, I guess nuforce decides that they know better than me about shipping to the Philippines and uses Fedex... Everything is great and tracked.... til the moment it reaches Manila... It gets Taxed! Without my say in the matter since I don't actually get to speak to customs this way. Bottom Line in the end I'm paying more money for the uDac that got to me wayy freakin long. If it was shipped via EMS in the first place, I would have gotten it last month and tax free. waaahhh

You should get some form of compensation for your troubles.

 

[donunus]

I hope I do