Sounds great,then I don’t have to buy an NSS333👍
The NSS333 replacing the NDX2 ,I’ve heard,the ND555 is still the top streamer,but many like the NDS.
A naked NSS 333 is about the same cost (used) as NDS + 555PSDR. Then factor in an external streamer and cables for the NDS and service cost for 555PSDR and the NSS 333 is better value 
NSS 333 design also better match Nait 50. But there are many roads to audio nirvana for sure
1 Like
Reasonable but if it performs better than NDX2 (which everyone claims and I agree on) it can be on NDS level naked and better with a PS.
I haven’t compared with the NSS333,but I have compared ND 555 and NDS and they are pretty close on local streaming and I have not heard of many who have switched to NSS333 from ND555.
Super that you are happy with your system,that’s what matters 
1 Like
I paid 4000 EUR for NDS + 555 PS,and you know
for me the LP12 and the Tandberg 3001A /NAT05 XS are my most used sources.
2 Likes
Yes and I’m not done evaluating It was just my first impression related to tonality. There is more to performance than that of course. More to come when I have a better picture
2 Likes
Yes, ns333 is replacing ndx2. In my world it is upside down again 
(Reminds me that I need to watch last episode of stranger things today ).
Even with fixed fw I think that nds and nd555 are not miles away. Hard to believe that an nss333 / 555ps could fit in between. Maybe I can’t compare as I am listening with 2x 555ps. And also I am a fan of the old naim sound - and this could be a (better) match with nds (as it is with 3.8).
1 Like
Better than ndx2 - yes. But with local streaming (what nds was designed for) things could be different. But in the end, it’s all our own liking. I remember myself preferring prefix over SL and hdx over melco n10
Replacing a product is not the same as sounding the same. The evolution normally is that the new generation climb one level in performance otherwise sales will get tough. I also have NSS 333 and PS here so first hand experience with no guessing
1 Like
Yes they are - with wav files. But with Qobuz nd555 is a beast. And overall he is better because he adds without taking away.
1 Like
Correct - and there will and must be a sideways step included as the no had a different signature which a fraction of listeners might like more.
I still need to give nc300 a chance. Would like to test t box full setup grinst my 500. 
1 Like
I will be interested to hear your opinion on NSS333 with NDS as DAC, with 555 level power supplies and high quality BNC S/PDIF cable. There is a lot to be gained with a dedicated, high level DAC.
1 Like
I agree, though my preference was for the bare NSS 333. I think it shares some of the qualities with the N50, speed, an open and detailed sound. Though I don’t think there is a lot in it if all else is equal - which as you point out it’s not. For me a reduction in box count was very welcome.
1 Like
Hmmm, since the digital board is a separate entity is there a good reason why Naim couldn’t issue a Mk2 retrofit board which included the additional buffering required to support hi-res streaming from the internet? Memory chips are hardly expensive. I confess to being somewhat miffed that the lack of this support was not clearly set out prior to purchase (I bought mine new just a few weeks before the ND555 was announced) but regardless of my feelings is there a technical reason why this was not viable as opposed to simply creating marketing differentiation that penalised loyal Naim customers?
You could buy a streaming bridge, which is basically a streaming card in a box. The NDS would just be used as a DAC.
You would get improved functionality and possible improved SQ, although SQ is always subjective.
I believe the interface from the streaming board was changed, in terms of how the I2S signal is handled and processed. This makes a swap out of the streaming board harder, plus the physical positioning of the sockets & connections is different requiring case work changes.
The BridgeCo board was selected, and optimised for best SQ by Naim for local file playback over a LAN, before the introduction of internet-based streaming services, which has the requirement for an increased buffer on the frames ‘data packets’ coming over the internet.
As long as you continue to present an Ethernet stream to the BridgeCo from a local server, the issue does not manifest and the BridgeCo board works very well.
Hence, the UPnP bridge or UPnP proxy solutions identified preserve a ‘localised’ UPnP stream for both local and internet service-sourced music, such as HiRes Tidal Max & Qobuz.
See all my posts on my use of the SonoreUPnP bridge within a Roon environment - here the Roon server has the internet connection, sends it as a local stream on the LAN and then is converted to a UPnP feed for the Ethernet input.
Having an offboard streaming board as a source is the other type of solution, but using S/PDIF on the digital input is not the same as the internal I2S signal, and comes with its own limitations.
2 Likes
Not disputing that in theory that’s true (if you say so) but I got improved SQ when local streaming from an inexpensive streaming bridge into NDS via SPDIF.
2 Likes
I didn’t find that, when I used the RoonReady implementation in the UltraRendu with UltraCap LPS, converting USB → S/PDIF as a digital feed into my NDS, for local and internet service based streams.
But then I have the EtherREGEN ‘B’ port isolated feed to the NDS Ethernet input, using the Chord Sarum Array streaming cable, which I believe is contributing here. Certainly upgrading power supply to the EtherREGEN made improvements across all connections, even the quality of the picture from an Apple TV. Then the external OXCO feed into the EtherREGEN.
The UltraRendu is on the ‘A’ ports, with a Chord Anthem streaming cable, a CuriousCable USB link and then a Harmonic Tech Digital RCA-BNC to the NDS.
Qobuz Connect has recently been introduced onto the UltraRendu OS, I must try that and see if that is better than the Roon based approach, and there has been some software updates to Roon and the UltraRendu OS & RoonReady implementation - so will try again some time.
My fallback for local files, is the Asset UPnP server, running on a RPi, also on the ‘A’ ports with a Audioquest Vodka streaming cable. But not having the Roon interface and convience of this, is a problem now, after 10 years of Roon.
It would very much depend on the Streaming bridge and its power, network connectivity and digital cable vs how local files were served directly.
All needs careful listening to determine what is what, and what is better.
1 Like
I use an expensive PhoenixNet switch and a Transparent Audio interconnect, but in my comparison both implementations had the same chance to shine and in A versus B tests, B was better.
1 Like
Ah, I hadn’t realised that the board was not a Naim in-house design. Even so, I wonder if a case could have been made, working with the original manufacturer, to provide an updated board with the same connection architecture for a swap out/swap in replacement service (at a cost of course). Assuming that there would still be a performance and price differential with the ND555 of this ‘mk2’ version. I guess we’ll never know unless one of the team one day writes their memoirs!
As for the oft quoted line that the NDS was designed prior to internet streaming services, that should not have prevented Naim updating the documentation and advising their dealers of the newly discovered constraint on the published 24/192 support. (Maybe they did and my dealer did not disclose this fact but I think this unlikely given my relationship with the dealer.) This would have been fairer on those people who purchased late in the NDS life some of whom may not have made that decision armed with this knowledge.
Having said all this, I’ve enjoyed the sound produced by my NDS even with this restriction and even with its near complete inability to stay connected on my network (wired or WiFi) for any significant length of time. When I come to replace it though I’m not sure I’ll be looking in the direction of Naim sadly.