[arnaud]

I feel like a Jolida sales rep ;o). But well, I doubt the NAD will sound to your taste stymie miasma. I should not be posting on some product I did not even hear once. But still, I believe many have found it a little lean and dry, if not bright. It could bring some peps to a sleepy system, but if you're still in the market for an analog sounding source (at least, you were at the beginning of the thread!!!), I am not sure the NAD will be your answer.

Please note also you can have the Jolida for a little over $700 new under warranty...

And oh, I might be a little biased toward the Jolida

.

Arnaud.

 

[bluesaint]

Well, there is another way to introduce warmth into your setup by buying say a Cardas golden cross Interconnects. Just an idea.

 

[stymie miasma]

Quote:

Originally posted by arnaud I feel like a Jolida sales rep ;o). But well, I doubt the NAD will sound to your taste stymie miasma. I should not be posting on some product I did not even hear once. But still, I believe many have found it a little lean and dry, if not bright. It could bring some peps to a sleepy system, but if you're still in the market for an analog sounding source (at least, you were at the beginning of the thread!!!), I am not sure the NAD will be your answer. Please note also you can have the Jolida for a little over $700 new under warranty... And oh, I might be a little biased toward the Jolida . Arnaud.

Damn you Arnaud!!

The Jolida does look great, and the way you describe its impact on your system still keeps me awake at night

Regarding the NAD - I have read about the dryness of the C541i, but what do you think would be the end result if the NAD were feeding into the Ear++??
I would imagine that you would get the advantages of having a great, albeit a little dry, source which is quite capable of extracting all the goodness from your CDs, but is then made a little more 'musical' by the Ear++. How would this compare to the Jolida - I wish I knew!!

And Bluesaint - I was hoping not to have to open the interconnect can of worms! I think I will deal with those once the source is sorted

 

[kuma]

Quote:

Originally posted by stymie miasma As you alluded to, many people - including Mr. Jude - have commented favourably on the C541i, and it appears to compete very favourably with many player in and above its price range. Given that the Jolida would set me back about $700 (used), I can probably buy the NAD for around $400 new, and then put the money I save towards the Ear++ a bit further down the track.

Supposedly, NAD fixed the old phillips transport problem on the previous version.
A friend of mine bought it, then within less than 2 years its transport went dead.
He called NAD and they basically told him that the transport is discontinued and advised him to get a new unit!

I realise these days, electonics are considered as disposable items but, this was the last time I recommend NAD gear to anyone. With Jolida, i'd assume at least you would get a personal attention from the staff since they are smaller and don't really want to piss off their already small customer base. ( but, I see your concern on the unit, since I have heard JD100 also had transport problems )

As far as sound goes, I was never a fan of NAD CD player. ( I dunno about 541i, but I think they make better integrated for the price )

 

[stymie miasma]

Hi Kuma,

Of all the components that I can purchase new, the CD player is on the top of my list for this very reason! I have read that the older NAD player (C541) did have some problems with skipping amonsgt other things. These were corrected in the new model (C541i). I have since heard of a couple of small problems with the C541i, but in both situations, the warrenties were honoured. Like you said, Jolida is a small company and should look after their customers, and the dealers that sell Jolida appear to be very honourable also.

Decisions decisions...

 

[arnaud]

Quote:

Originally posted by stymie miasma Damn you Arnaud!! The Jolida does look great, and the way you describe its impact on your system still keeps me awake at night Regarding the NAD - I have read about the dryness of the C541i, but what do you think would be the end result if the NAD were feeding into the Ear++?? I would imagine that you would get the advantages of having a great, albeit a little dry, source which is quite capable of extracting all the goodness from your CDs, but is then made a little more 'musical' by the Ear++. How would this compare to the Jolida - I wish I knew!! And Bluesaint - I was hoping not to have to open the interconnect can of worms! I think I will deal with those once the source is sorted

Ok, I'll stop here! In the end, if you are going to use a good tube preamp after the source, getting an analytical one seems indeed the best bet. Unfortunately, I have so little experience with tube gear that my opinion is pretty much worthless here... All I can say is that I had some very pleasant experience with tube headphone amps (SinglePower), regardless of the source quality (last head-fi meet in Detroit).

Also, I want to warn you that the Jolida with the upgraded tubes is probably far from neutral. I love it in my system. If I were to use it with a different headphone amp or different cans (speakers in your case), the source coloration might be a problem.

That's it, I've given you my cons! Now, you can hesitate in peace ;o).

 

[stymie miasma]

Quote:

Originally posted by arnaud Ok, I'll stop here! In the end, if you are going to use a good tube preamp after the source, getting an analytical one seems indeed the best bet. Unfortunately, I have so little experience with tube gear that my opinion is pretty much worthless here... All I can say is that I had some very pleasant experience with tube headphone amps (SinglePower), regardless of the source quality (last head-fi meet in Detroit). Also, I want to warn you that the Jolida with the upgraded tubes is probably far from neutral. I love it in my system. If I were to use it with a different headphone amp or different cans (speakers in your case), the source coloration might be a problem. That's it, I've given you my cons! Now, you can hesitate in peace ;o).

Thanks again Arnaud - this is all good to know!

If I may, I would like to think aloud for just a moment

With regard to the following:

Quote:

If you don't have it to start with, you can never get it back

...I wonder how that relates to musicality? I have always assumed that the tubes will add musicality to the music (

), but should the musicality be there before that - perhaps at the level of the DAC? The NAD is said to be dry, which to me implies a certain lack of musicality. Is that the fault of the DAC, or something else?? Can a good preamp make up for this deficit, or is it a case of too-little, too late??

 

[Sean H]

Quote:

Originally posted by stymie miasma ...I wonder how that relates to musicality? I have always assumed that the tubes will add musicality to the music ( ), but should the musicality be there before that - perhaps at the level of the DAC? The NAD is said to be dry, which to me implies a certain lack of musicality. Is that the fault of the DAC, or something else?? Can a good preamp make up for this deficit, or is it a case of too-little, too late?? [/B]

Interesting thread. From what I gather the Ear++ is not the most "tubey" sounding piece and in fact is to sound very neutral. Yes, tubes can bring more warmth and add more color to the sound. However, there's a lot of tube gear out there that sounds quite neutral where the tube(s) add little of what people would be looking for from the tubes. I once owned the Wheatfield HA-1 tube headphone amp which used three tubes in it's design and it sounded very little like a tube amp but perhaps more like a solid state amp in many ways. From what I gather the Ear++ is more like this. In your case I still think the Ear++ would be an excellent way to go because it likely offers awesome amplification with good tone and musicality.

I would not look into getting a really hyper detailed source because this amp is said to sound more neutral. If this amp is indeed very neutral then it's just going to let the sound of that source right through and do little to round it off or warm it up. As to your point about whether the musicality should be there at the source I would say, yes, no doubt about it. A tubed amp, tubed preamp, whatever, will be a good thing but as a lot of people say: garbage in --> garbage out. The source is very important. If a source is really detailed and really dry that character is going to be present throughout to some significant degree regardless of what's down the chain.

Anyway, some things to think about. I personally think you should go for the Ear++ for sure. Adding a Jolida tube CDP on down the road would be great too. Exhaust your search and find a CDP that is not bright. The Ah! Tjoeb is another great tubed CDP indeed. Myself I have a Cal Sigma II tube DAC with an MG Head OTL Mk2 tube amp. This sounds pretty warm and tubey.