How about ND5XS2 - DC1 - NDS/555DR?
2 Likes
if you can live with only using under iOS or Android device control it should work well.
I personally find myself using the remote and display more and more on my NDX2 for some of the time - its just more immediate that way - but that might be me
Can you search your library and Qobuz quickly and easily using the remote and display to find a range of options of music to suit your mood?
I usually donât know exactly what music I want to listen to until I see it in my Qobuz favourites on the Naim app, or by browsing YT on my TV.
No - I tend to put my favourite albums/tracks in my favourite list and access those directly from the display/remote. I rotate my selection from time to time - I use an iPad for that. it works for me âŚ
a decade ago I had an NDAC/XPS2 fronting a 252/300 system. Digital feed was Audirvana on a 2012 Mac mini with a wire world toslink cable. it was very good and much much better than the CDX2 the DAC replaced. I tried an NDX both instead of and feeding the DAC. Wasnât impressed with either TBH.
Although youâre talking about the NDX2 and streaming, it doesnât get away from the fact that the NDAC is a very nice sounding DAC, and excellent value at present. It needs a good source and the XPS2/555PS. I bet it would sound good with a relatively inexpensive digital streamer feeding it.
3 Likes
I found the ND5XS2 greatly preferable in SQ to a BS Node and even to a good Auralic streamer in my system when used as digital transports to feed my nDAC.
4 Likes
I found this a very interesting thread, particularly Simon-in-Suffolkâs comments. I use a Naim DAC with a 555PS, the source is a Uniti Core and they feed in to 252/Supercap-2/250-2 and a pair of SBLs Mk2 with custom cross overs. To mine, my wifeâs and friends ears it sounds splendid. Non of the components have been upgrade to DR level and although I missed the boat on that, I could exchange them. My thinking is that the Supercap should come first, but Iâd be interested in other views.
9 Likes
Welcome Mike, nice system you have there.
1 Like
Most would agree that the 250DR is a huge step up over the 250.2. Itâs a totally different amplifier. If you shop the secondary market, the upgrade from the 250.2 to 250DR would cost very little.
2 Likes
Thanks for your comments gents. Iâve also heard that the 250DR is quite a different kettle of fish, so I think that will become my task for the year. Thanks again.
2 Likes
Perhaps many but not all. I for one preferred the 250.2 with my 552DR compared to the 250 DR. I found the former more organic and natural sounding. Perhaps it does depend on taste and speakers. I really wouldnât call it a huge step up⌠it is certainly a different presentation though which I can understand some/many preferring. I guess the 250 DR is more classically hifi sounding (as in music production terms) that accentuates detail and air and bass tightness⌠perhaps more V shaped audio compared to the 250.2.
1 Like
Hi Simon, I donât understand what you saying, can you try to explain in a more simple term please. As far as nDac white paper says, it does not use the external sourceâs clock, but instead has internal memory, it buffers there the music and then uses its own internal clock. I am not aware of an option to work otherwise.
Yes, perhaps you are conflating sample conversion clocks with asynchronous transport clocks. The two are very different - or at least they have been for most of the last forty years.
So the transport clock is recovered by the receiver, and the data is then clocked into essentially a buffer. From there it is re read and sent to the DAC/DSP but this time using an internal prevision clock - we are not talking about this internal precision clock directly.
So letâs focus on the initial transport clock, although theoretically this should be completely separate to the sample clock, and in simplified block diagrams it is shown as separate, but in real life it is not in terms of system coupling. Digital switching noise in recovering the transport clock is created. This noise will have power across its frequency or phase distribution of variation or jitter from that received transport clock (think FM transmitter). This noise can modulate (subtly) power lines, ground planes which in turn can modulate or couple noise/intermodulation noise into audio circuitry and precision as well as digital conversion clocks unless very very carefully decoupled. This decoupling has improved with each generation of Naim digital DAC/streamer. The NDAC was the first down this path of the current architecture.
Hopefully that makes some sense for you
S
2 Likes
If I may resume in one sentence:
The level of accuracy of the transport clock will affect the dac/ clock connected to it.
Thank you for explaining, I was talking for the ram buffer jitter removal on page 4, but I think I understand what you mean. However I wander how the transports could have different PLL digital noise coming through the S/PDIF from page 3, or perhaps this is not what you say⌠in which case I understood nothing.
Thatâs what I was trying to gather in the other thread, I had a cheap upgrade available through inproving clocks of the usb to spdif converter. I was unsure the ndac would be sensitive to that as it sermed to rely on internal clocks, but if I understand correctly, it still tries to recover the transport clock and therefore a better transport clock should make things easier to the ndac.
Whether I can pick up the difference is a different question, but at least Iâll have peace of mind the ndac is well fed.
Thanks
No not really. The stability of the transport clock can determine the stability of the DAC clock and the noise in analogue circuitry.
Yes they are different things. The PLL clock adjusts the DAC clock to match the average data rate input so as not run out of or over run of data if the data rate is sufficiently different from the DAC clock for the given sample rate.
Stability doesnât mean accuracy. If itâs not stable, it canât be accurate. Not?
Exactly ⌠precision and stability are two different things. Fundamental DSP engineering.
You can be accurately in precise but totally stable 
But stability wonât drive noise power in phase or frequency variation. Nâest-ce pas ?
2 Likes