Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Lil Caesar

NAD M51 Listening Impressions...

Recommended Posts

I've read your opening post and apologise as it does cover off my second question although I did assume it was specific to using it with power amps rather than my integrated amp.

And my first question isn't about reclockers, it's whether coax is better than optical or USB. I still can't see anything that draws any conclusions on this comparison.

As to the whole single box idea, I still would posit that various people get close but it is always just out of reach. I also don't understand why it's not a reasonable line of discussion or are we only allowed to talk separates?

And I probably did overreact to your post but the previous post that DAC can't possibly be discussed in the same sentence as Ethernet was pretty condescending and plain wrong. That got me off on the wrong foot...

Anyway I wasted enough of everyone's time including my own so will leave you to it.

I think the reaction you got was based on the fact that you were resisting what IS in favour of what could be. NAD has their Corp. strategy and at the moment it does not jive with your combo box theory. perhaps it will in the future. In the meantime, the folks here are discussing what IS and how to get the best our of it.

Your suggestion was not wrong, but if it got no traction, just move on. Interest waxes and wanes here from time to time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"And my first question isn't about reclockers, it's whether coax is better than optical or USB. I still can't see anything that draws any conclusions on this comparison"

Glockers ... I think the consensus on this forum is that going via a USB/SPDIF converter into the coax port of the M51 produces the best result, followed by a straight USB connection. Either is superior to optical which is limited to 96/24 anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What are U talking about??? Lil Caesar is one of the most helpful and pleasant posters around...gentleman and a scholar!

My response including the quote I was responding to which questioned whether it was "that time of month", nothing to do with Lil Caesars posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I get that but what's the problem with suggesting that it's time someone took a big jump forward and try and come up with a single solution to the digital music pathway. ...

Somebody already has, it's called Kaleidescape. A one-box solution to networked digital music (and video) front end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name=:) al' timestamp='1338461142' post='712138]

its not a media player. want acess to nas etc, grab a media player for $100 or upwards.

Having had a high-end DAC in my system that has built-in ethernet and a media renderer I couldn't go back to something that doesn't. However at it's price point I'm not complaining about lack of ethernet support in M51. What I am saying is in todays networked environment NAD should have embedded these features into it and upped the price by $500.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Ethernet" support is too vague a concept in digital audio. There are so many different implementations of that I applaud NAD for sticking to the core thing they could do well, maximising the flexibility of their box and minimising the cost.

Remember too, this is a Masters Series product and they do have a network streaming companion box in the works, complete with an Ethernet port. M50. Google it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the reaction you got was based on the fact that you were resisting what IS in favour of what could be. NAD has their Corp. strategy and at the moment it does not jive with your combo box theory. perhaps it will in the future. In the meantime, the folks here are discussing what IS and how to get the best our of it.

Your suggestion was not wrong, but if it got no traction, just move on. Interest waxes and wanes here from time to time.

I get that I wasnt agreeing with people (hanging offence obviously) but I would argue that many of the posts are related to how to overcome shortcomings in the m51 - for instance lots of posts about jitter/synchromesh etc - if that's ok why aren't my posts?

I also get the point about moving on but a bit of a sad indictment on the forum.

I clearly remember posting about digital a few years back and being howled down by the must be analogue crowd. Deja vu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Having had a high-end DAC in my system that has built-in ethernet and a media renderer I couldn't go back to something that doesn't. However at it's price point I'm not complaining about lack of ethernet support in M51. What I am saying is in todays networked environment NAD should have embedded these features into it and upped the price by $500.

Highend dac is it Kaleidescape??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having had a high-end DAC in my system that has built-in ethernet and a media renderer I couldn't go back to something that doesn't. However at it's price point I'm not complaining about lack of ethernet support in M51. What I am saying is in todays networked environment NAD should have embedded these features into it and upped the price by $500.

I'm sort of with you on this. I actually come from a computer hardware background and know that the additional chips, circuits etc would add maybe $50-100 to the cost of parts for the m51. It is certainly not a case of the technology being available as several companies have been delivering it for several years. So it strikes me as being a deliberate tactic on the part of vendors to maximize sales. Shock horror that they would do this...

What is really sad is that most on this forum seem to accept this as quite acceptable. And worse, attack anyone that suggests the emperor has no clothes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get that but what's the problem with suggesting that it's time someone took a big jump forward and try and come up with a single solution to the digital music pathway. These guys are coming so close but I still need a Sonos ZP90, a Synchromesh and a DAC to get great results unless I want to park a PC or MAC in my living room. It's not the money as I am buying all those things - just wish someone could get it together in one box...

There are solutions like you want, check for example a Naim Unity all you want + power amp

Others as well

So now, go google that and get out of the M51 thread, this is a DAC !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glockers, it's a bit aggressive of you to talk about "what is really sad" like that.

Please understand this: the $50-$100 bucks worth of parts which would translate to at least $200 extra retail price would likely be completely wasted on many of us, because we have come to know that those parts sound no good compared to other things we can buy. I would personally like to buy one of these NAD products without paying for even the USB interface, because my battery powered Audiophilleo 2 USB to SPDIF converter sounds significantly better in a direct comparison on the back of a C390DD.

I understand that you prefer fully integrated solutions. Fair enough. But for me, adding a mediocre network streamer and bumping the price would make this product worse, not better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Fellas, Leave Glockers alone. Have sorted it all out via PM. Give the guy a chance and respect his view for an all-in-one device.

Cheers,

Lil C.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are solutions like you want, check for example a Naim Unity all you want + power amp

Others as well

So now, go google that and get out of the M51 thread, this is a DAC !

Chill3 - so you are both a nitwit and rude. Good combination and usually a refuge of the ignorant. "DACs cant have Internet" - do some research before you make foolish statements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Glockers, it's a bit aggressive of you to talk about "what is really sad" like that.

Please understand this: the $50-$100 bucks worth of parts which would translate to at least $200 extra retail price would likely be completely wasted on many of us, because we have come to know that those parts sound no good compared to other things we can buy. I would personally like to buy one of these NAD products without paying for even the USB interface, because my battery powered Audiophilleo 2 USB to SPDIF converter sounds significantly better in a direct comparison on the back of a C390DD.

I understand that you prefer fully integrated solutions. Fair enough. But for me, adding a mediocre network streamer and bumping the price would make this product worse, not better.

Fair enough I guess but I don't plan to accept second best without some kind of noise

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chill3 - so you are both a nitwit and rude. Good combination and usually a refuge of the ignorant. "DACs cant have Internet" - do some research before you make foolish statements.

Whoops. Misquoted chille - dacs can't have Ethernet...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...