16 replies to this topic

[andreasmaaan]

Anyone compared them yet? Should I pre-order an M51 or just relax and hold onto my Ref 7.1 until there's enough M51s around to have a proper listen?

Audio Nervosa+++

[A J]

Unless you want the specific functionality that the NAD provides, I would stick with yourf 7.1 - JD might chip in, he has definitely heard both, but I was seriously considering a 7.1 before I went for the NAD. I would wait and have a listen.

[jaspert]

Go easy there. Don't get swept away with the buzz.... Enjoy some music and may be someone can bring a M51 around for a comparison later.

[katattack74]

Go easy there. Don't get swept away with the buzz.... Enjoy some music and may be someone can bring a M51 around for a comparison later.

Well said, its so easy to get into all the hype of new products that promises quite a bit. Let the buzz settle down a bit and hopefully that an SNA'er will have near you thats willing to do a GTG.

[andreasmaaan]

Hi guys, thanks for the suggestions - you are all of course completely right. And I may have exaggerated my anxiety levels. But still really interested to hear if anyone's done the comparison?

A

[A J]

Hi guys, thanks for the suggestions - you are all of course completely right. And I may have exaggerated my anxiety levels. But still really interested to hear if anyone's done the comparison?

A

I would be too, it wouldn't surprise me to see the 7.1 rank ahead of the NAD with at least some people - from what I've heard of it, I think I could possibly be one of those. The main reason I plumped for the NAD was that in its application (running TV/Apple TV/Oppo) it provides perfect system integration including remote pre control. I was surprised at how good it sounded actually, didn't have massively high expectations. Without all that functionality, I reckon there would not be such a buzz. I look forward to the comparo - AJ

[Drizt]

The NAD sounds like a great unit with plenty of tech to be excited about.

[audiohifiaudio]

Anyone compared them yet? Should I pre-order an M51 or just relax and hold onto my Ref 7.1 until there's enough M51s around to have a proper listen?

Audio Nervosa+++

I have a audio gd 7.1 for sale if any one is interested.

[dralj]

Still wondering if any comparisons have been made between these two as yet.

[A J]

Well I've got a REF5.2 and a NAD
M51 - close to a Ref7.1 apparently. I love both.

[rocky500]

Were you from andreasmaaan
I can bring one around or lend it to you if you are local. W.A. - Tuart Hill

[dralj]

No from Brisbane sorry.

[audiohead]

anyone heard Burson 160D dac - in pre amp mode? I have one and am interested in the experiances of others.
Heard the M51 last week, it sounded decent but no match for the (7 x more expensive MSB) it was compared too

[joeyahoo1]

Anyone compared them yet? Should I pre-order an M51 or just relax and hold onto my Ref 7.1 until there's enough M51s around to have a proper listen?

Audio Nervosa+++

Hi Andreas. I've jst bougth the Audio-gd Ref 7.1. Im happy wth it. I know (not too deep) about electronics & DAC. Tht's why I chosed ths bcs it's affordable (my dream is MSB Diamond though) yet awoseme ! They make a good DAC in terms of 24/ 96 capacity: discretes components (in PSU, buffer O/P, no OPA opamp. More pricy)), 4 PCM1704/ chnl !!, no capacitor on audio paths (means operating in DC : more design & components : pricy), NFB (non feedback), good PSU (I believe they use constant current source (pricy) rather cheap & simple 3 pins regulator IC), precise clock (active clock : more design & pricy). I replaced my player (Shanling SCDT200) from its I/ V convertes (BB OPA 627) & dig filters (BB OPA 2604). Result: sound more open (lows to highs), better soundstage, more lows, sound comes closer. The results r very obvious. These r the merit of discrete components. Ths individuall components are assembled one-by-one consuming a lot of time, labor cost, more expsv (rather thn a cheap op amp IC or V regulator IC), more space. PCM1704 is famous for its sound naturality, out of production, and more expsv (retail around US 25-30 each eventgh 24/ 96) thn other new more modern DAC ICs (retail only around US 3-5 each eventhough 24/ 192).

Im so dissapointed aft reading all the 4 references none any of them (including Nad web also) telling, at least, wht sort of its DAC IC they use & how many per channel (one of a factor creating music more analog/ less digital sound). I suspect they jst use cheap PSU and probably only 2 DAC ICs/ chnl (standard).

My philosophy is off course every chef declares they make a very delicious & special foods BUT only few dare to expose their cooking quality of each ingredients, etc. These are very secret among other prestigious famous restaurants. If someone's confident wth his products & knowing others can't easily follow you (bcs it'll be very expensive) he'd declare its specs confidenty

[A J]

I thought my Ref 5.2 was tasty - and compared well with the NAD M51 - possibly the Ref 5.2 outdid the NAD - slightly more natural sound - and it uses the same multibit chips as the Ref7.1. If I had the option of hanging on to both I would have.

[techspurt]

Im so dissapointed aft reading all the 4 references none any of them (including Nad web also) telling, at least, wht sort of its DAC IC they use & how many per channel (one of a factor creating music more analog/ less digital sound). I suspect they jst use cheap PSU and probably only 2 DAC ICs/ chnl (standard).

They don't use a 'DAC IC' they use a custom designed system chip from Zetex (now Diodes) : http://www.diodes.co...90413235508.pdf

[andreasmaaan]

Hey all, didn't realise this thread was still going! In the end I had an M51 in my setup for a couple of months and did a lot of comparing the two. I ended up keeping the Ref 7.1 for it's better tonality, coherence and realism. The NAD had a more detailed and articulate top end though. Running in balanced mode the Ref 7.1 really delivers IMO.

Cheers,
Andreas