[jtinto]

That's cool, thanks
I was just wondering if differences might show up at higher bit or sampling rates

 

[AFWannabe]

Quote:

[...]  
There are any plans from NAD to implement DSD over HDMI or USB?

Have you tried emailing NAD about this?

 

[preproman]

Quote:

That's cool, thanks
I was just wondering if differences might show up at higher bit or sampling rates

I've noticed with the NAD m51 that it really shines with high res files..  I have the m51 and the PWD2 the NAD comes really really close to the PWD2.  In fact they sound the same on 44k and 48k files It's when I get to 96k and 192k is where the PWD2 starts to pull away, but not by much.
 
I'm also interested in the Mytek because it has analog, bypass and digital volume controls and the Saber chip.  I want to connect it straight to my amp and use the analog volume control.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CkyrDIGzOE

 

[olor1n]

I thought the M51 was very well regarded as a preamp. Its digital volume control is meant to be very good as its 35bit and there's no truncation of data until -66dB.

 

[preproman]

So at -66dB can we even hear that? 

 
The Mytek has DSD as well.  No that I'll ever have any DSD files.  It'll be good to play with.

 

[kocl]

Quote:

Have you tried emailing NAD about this?

Yes, no plans.

 

[ehlarson]

Quote:

I've noticed with the NAD m51 that it really shines with high res files..  I have the m51 and the PWD2 the NAD comes really really close to the PWD2.  In fact they sound the same on 44k and 48k files It's when I get to 96k and 192k is where the PWD2 starts to pull away, but not by much.
 
I'm also interested in the Mytek because it has analog, bypass and digital volume controls and the Saber chip.  I want to connect it straight to my amp and use the analog volume control.
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1CkyrDIGzOE

 
The Mytek has a lesser Sabre chip though.

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 
The Mytek has a lesser Sabre chip though.

 
 
So what does that mean? 

 

[woodcans]

It's extraordinarily well regarded by me as a preamp. The volume control/preamp function is excellent. As a matter of fact, it truly shines when used as dac AND preamp.

I thought the M51 was very well regarded as a preamp. Its digital volume control is meant to be very good as its 35bit and there's no truncation of data until -66dB.

 

[Kclone]

I got mine form the Fed Ex guy.   In the system now.  Question on burn in.  Does the sound change that much with this unit and if so how long before it comes into it's own?  Thanks.

 

[danik97]

Quote:

I got mine form the Fed Ex guy.   In the system now.  Question on burn in.  Does the sound change that much with this unit and if so how long before it comes into it's own?  Thanks.

Congrat's.
Sure, burn-in notable always. After 100-200hrs sound will be more lively. 

 

[The Monkey]

Quote:

I got mine form the Fed Ex guy.   In the system now.  Question on burn in.  Does the sound change that much with this unit and if so how long before it comes into it's own?  Thanks.

 
No, it doesn't.

 

[Kclone]

Quote:

 
No, it doesn't.

Oh, so no really change with burn in?  This DAC is good, but I guess I don't see it worth all the praise it has received so far.  That is why I was asking if perhaps there was improvement ahead.  I am playing mine in a two channel speaker system setup.  I am running it from my Wryed4Sound Music server to the NAD and then direct to my power amp.  Speakers are Elac FS 249 Black Edition.  Prior to the NAD I was using a Primare Pre32 preamp with a built in media module (DAC).  The Primare was more lively sounding, more air and space.  Better dynamics too.  The NAD seems to put all the intruments on an even level.  In other words, on songs with multiple guitar tracks, the ones that normally faint in the back ground are more up front in the presentation.  It is interesting to listen to. So the lead guitars are the ones that are normarlly more prominent in the song are not as up front and more balaced with the other guitar lines.  In that sense, details are better with the NAD, you can hear everything better.  Also, the NAD is not offensive, not grating at all, which is a big plus.  I would like to see more space, air, and the vocals could be more up front and airy as well.  I will run the NAD through the Primare Preamp to see if the preamp combined with it can improve things. 

 

[mcullinan]

Yah I would use it strictly as a DAC. With the preamp things should improve greatly. It's a great Dac with oodles of detail and its very fast. I felt the bottom end had less bloom which gave way to appreciating the mids more. Which is not necessarily a bad thing. Maybe it's more accurate? But as a pre it's good but not great.

 

[HumanMedia]

I got mine form the Fed Ex guy.   In the system now.  Question on burn in.  Does the sound change that much with this unit and if so how long before it comes into it's own?  Thanks.

As mine was burning in, I thought there was very little burn-in change compared to some DACs I've had. After about 300 hours I noticed that it was more relaxed and that it had changed character. But again it wasn't as big a change as with other equipment.

I've also found it sounds better through my external tubed preamp than using the built in digital attenuation. (!?)

Also found its susceptible to incoming noise on the USB and spdif inputs (getting rid of electrical noise before it arrives improves it a lot). its also susceptible to noisy power (likes shielded power cords and up front passive filtration).