First Naim Experience

[keiron99]

Quote:

Originally Posted by braillediver PRAT is also lovingly referred to as Boogie Factor. Gives you happy feet.

For me, it comes from the music, whether it's a portable mono tranny radio or £10k Linn/Naim. No amount of hi-fi can turn music I don't connect with into music I do connect with, and vice-versa.

And who are you calling a prat?

 

[Oink1]

<-- Looks lovingly at his CD3, NAC72, HiCap, NAP250 setup!

 

[memepool]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpr703 I've never heard a digital player that sounded so much like vinyl

The Naim sounds so different primarily because it is a Multi-bit player. Look for an old high-end machine pre 1992 with a TDA 1541 chipset and a Philips swing arm die-cast transport like the Philips CD960, the Marantz CD94, Revox B226 / Studer A727 or Bang and Olufsen Beogram 5500/6500/7000. These will not sound quite like the Naim, or cost as much either but will give you a more "analogue" flavour than modern bitstream machines.

The apocryphal Tieffenbrun yarn is priceless. I love the stuff about the digital watch. The man is a marketing genius.

Still hard to beleive he couln't hear the difference between the LP12 through the Sony PCM-F1, especially looped through a famously unforgiving 80's Naim pre....

 

[jpr703]

That's the first time I've heard of a "multi-bit" player and I'd love to learn more about them--the sound is just sooo good. Anyone have any more info on this type of technology or a link to where I might read up on it?

 

[Garbz]

It depends on the DAC involved and how it processes the bitstream. Advanced Segment and Delta Sigma DACs are not true multi-bit DACs.

Incidently I believe the fact it is a multi-bit DAC has little to do with the actual analogueness and PRAT of the Naim cdplayers. Case in point the Roksan Caspian CDplayer which swings wonderfully and was a very lively player used a PCM1730 Advanced Segment DAC. On the other extreme the Shanling CDT-100 while an awesome player with fantastic detail depth presentation really fails to present any sence of rythm and pace. Same PCM1704 Multi-bit DAC is used as in the NAIM which seems to sugest that they are doing something more.

Could be something in the digital filter?

 

[memepool]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpr703 That's the first time I've heard of a "multi-bit" player and I'd love to learn more about them--the sound is just sooo good. Anyone have any more info on this type of technology or a link to where I might read up on it?

Get hold of this months Hi-Fi World, which is a UK magazine, as there is a whole article on the history of CD comparing a first generation Marantz CD63 with an early 90's CD52SE and a contemporary model.

The Marantz CD63 dates from 1983 and is basically a tweaked Philips CD100 sporting a 14bit 4x oversampling chipset. The equivalent Sony CDP 101 was 16 bit 2x oversampling machine but most people at the time regarded the Philips as more "natural sounding". The standard for the next 10 years was 16bit 4x oversampling which is now called "multi-bit" to distinguish it from "bitstream" which came along in the early 90's and is the basis of most CD players today.

There is an article on the famous Naim CDX here which you will find interesting
http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/hfw/olde...aimcdsxps.html

By todays standards Hi-Fi world characterise the sound of the early machines as "fluffy" but with excellent bass and a greater sense of solidity than many modern players which they attribute to the use of the early Philips Die-cast metal transport mechanism.

Many manufacturers today still beleive that mechanisms designed purely for CD replay like those still made by Philips and Teac are superior, and still rate the Philips TDA 1541 chipset as one of the best ever designed. It is still used in many really expensive players today like the top of the range Shanling and Naim machines.

However if you can live with lack of remote control, slow track access and lack of spdif on many of the first generation players then you can pick up something which sounds similar this for a fraction of the cost.
For slightly more money you can get a late 80's machine like the ones I mentioned above which are as user friendly as modern machines but have this transport/chipset combination.

These players are often expensive to repair and maintain however as many of the parts arn't available anymore so you have to find other machines to canibalise for parts. Rather like running a vintage car...

 

[memepool]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garbz On the other extreme the Shanling CDT-100 while an awesome player with fantastic detail depth presentation really fails to present any sence of rythm and pace?

I would say this is more down to the valves in the signal path? Havn't heard that particular Roksan but the Naim players have always had a signature sound, a lot of which can be put down to the fact they havn't changed all that much from the CDX...

 

[cfo]

I don't think it is a good idea to get too hung up on "multi-bit" vs bitstream technology.
I have heard good examples of both technologies and when they are properly implemented a musically satisfying result can be obtained.
I have 2 fairly old (Mid 1980's) bitstream dacs that displaced more expensive multibit dacs and an Oracle TT. They have also beaten out some of the more recent "dac du jours" that I have tried and I prefer them over the sound of SACDs played on a Sony SCD-C555es player that I use as a transport for one of them.
They are not the last word in clarity, dynamics or inner detail but they do have the ability to put "body" with the music and make voices sound like real voices and acoustic instruments sound natural. They do this as well or better than the Oracle/Syrinx TT I had, which was even tweaked with custom made parts.
I have heard a multi bit dac that is much better than them, but it cost multiples of what I paid for them.

 

[memepool]

Quote:

Originally Posted by cfo I don't think it is a good idea to get too hung up on "multi-bit" vs bitstream technology. I have heard good examples of both technologies and when they are properly implemented a musically satisfying result can be obtained.

Completely agree with you. Many mass market manufacturers seem to just use whatever oem parts are around at any given time so you are also as likely to find TDA1541 chipsets and diecast CDM1 mechs in just about any non-Japanese machines from the 80's; everyone from Amstrad to Blaupunkt would have used them because Philips were the most convenient supplier. And of course many of them will sound terrible.
I'm just saying that now that the dust has pretty much settled on CD as a format, in the sense that not much R&D is going into standalone CD players anymore, there are certain components which have stood the test of time and achieved almost legendary status.

Of course its totally down the synergy of the designer, but in the right hands, like those of Ken Ishiwata at Marantz for instance these, some of these older vintages really make good music.

So therefore there are bargains to be had if you know where to look...

 

[Garbz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by memepool I would say this is more down to the valves in the signal path? Havn't heard that particular Roksan but the Naim players have always had a signature sound, a lot of which can be put down to the fact they havn't changed all that much from the CDX...

No I'm a solid state man and didn't use the valves when testing it. Or at least didn't use them as much as the solid state output. Reason being I tested it with my own amp which is already incredibly smooth. It sounds best with as much detail thrown at it as possible which the solid state and oversampled output provided.

Basically I agree with cfo. There are excellent examples and bad examples of both DAC formats. It really comes down to everything else combined with the DAC too. I've read the I/V conversion makes the biggest difference somewhere. Then there's jitter pre DAC, and output buffers.

 

[GoRedwings19]

Last year I had a wonderful opportunity to audition the CDS3 in my setup. The earlier naims never appealed to me while having the toe tapping fun they were famous for, I felt they lacked all round ability for the more refined stuff. This was dispelled when I hear the CDS3.

I look forward to hearing the new Naim cdp555 which is suppose to improve on the CDS3.

 

[memepool]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Garbz No I'm a solid state man and didn't use the valves when testing it. Or at least didn't use them as much as the solid state output. Reason being I tested it with my own amp which is already incredibly smooth. It sounds best with as much detail thrown at it as possible which the solid state and oversampled output provided. Basically I agree with cfo. There are excellent examples and bad examples of both DAC formats. It really comes down to everything else combined with the DAC too. I've read the I/V conversion makes the biggest difference somewhere. Then there's jitter pre DAC, and output buffers.

I wasn't that impressed by it in valve mode or in upsampling mode. I listened via a Musical Fidelity X80 and some Revolver R45 speakers at Walrus in London. To me it just sounded muddy in valve mode and wasn't great in upsampling mode either. It left me unconvinced but I know so many people who rave about it I thought it worth mentioning how much care Shanling obviously put into sourcing and tweaking every component, and the fact that they use a lot of classic bits like the philips CDM mechs in their more expensive stuff.

Am not disagreeing about the synergy argument. All manufacturers place emphasis on different aspects. Naim are obviously famous for using oversized powersupplies for everything which is a path that Cyrus are also following, arguing that having a dedicated power supply to the transport makes more difference than having one for the DAC.

My point is more along the lines that we are at a stage now with redbook CD where its become the preserve of the smaller companies like those mentioned to combine components from the entire history of the format, where available, in an effort to get every last ounce of fidelity from the medium.

Along the way there have been classic vintage machines like the Marantz CD63MKii Ki Sig, which stand out from so many other products they made at the time and since, to such a degree that Marantz still offer an upgrade programme where they can tweak the standard production machine up further.

Of course every time a new model is introduced the marketing dept is going to say its an improvment on everything that they've done before or how else are they going to sell the things? Reading between the lines though you see that there are some components that have improved and others which have got worse...

 

[kuma]

Quote:

The Naim sounds so different primarily because it is a Multi-bit player.

heh?

I don't think that's the reason that a Naim player sounds different.
My Krell plalyer actually uses the same Burr brown chip set as the CDS3 and they sound completely different from one another!

The analogue output section cct. design and power supplies proably make up variances in voicing amongst different players.

 

[kuma]

Quote:

At the store where I worked we had a pair of Allae that had been on the floor for 4 years and not a single pair was ever sold. I listened to them, and I can see why no one ever bought them. They really sound lifeless and dull, and have NO headroom whatsoever. You couldn't even drive them above 85 dB without them sounding hard and just really bad. Those were probably some of the worst high end speakers I've ever heard. I can see how they would be good for something like chamber music, but that's honestly the only application I can think of for them, LOL. Man, I hated those speakers.

The Allaes, as any other speakers, are finicky to set up.
For one thing what was the listening distance? ( they work better from far away. Minimum 9ft+ )

Lifeless and dull is not how I describe the Allaes. Quite opposite from my experience on the end of CDS3/552/300.
And I could crank them up all right to a silly level as well as their micro dynamics were excellent at a low level.

That said, they didn't quite work well in my room, but the room must have been totally wrong or set up incorrectly in your case for the Allaes to sound *lifeless*.

As you expect from the speakers under 4k, they don't do everything, and they do have a different voicing from what most audiophiles expect the speakers to sound. i.e. no soundstage or neutrality

But they are one of the more responsive dynamic speakers in the price range I have heard and clearly the speed was Naim's design goal for the Allaes.

BTW, I agree with Naim source working with other amplifiers. I am using a Nait 3R with 47Labs , Krell and Linn electronics and they sound fine together albeit Naim source sound much better when used with their own preamp.

 

[GoRedwings19]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kuma heh? I don't think that's the reason that a Naim player sounds different. My Krell plalyers actually uses the same Burr brown chip set as the CDS3 and they sound completely different! The analogue output section cct. design and power supplies proably make up variances in voicing amongst different players.

The cds3 uses a phillips transport? So what does the krell use if I may ask?