Are you trolling, or it’s not ironic humor ?
Sorry if I misunderstood.
1 Like
Sometimes recordings sounding great do not sound so great when the equipment becomes better. My question: is putting particular emphasis on a detail really helping to judge the quality of the new firmware?
I haven’t heard 3.10.0 and .1, my equipment is on 5.2.1, so perhaps I better do not comment.
1 Like
I’m still confused on this aspect folks. It would suggest that any tweaking of different inputs and transports into the ND555 wouldn’t make a difference, as the signal goes through this digital board that is tuned by the firmware.
But is there a possibility that this is coming from the naim DAC? AFAIK there has been no changes the last time the fw was updated. Don’t know how it was this time. I think not.
My burndies on 552 are also very strong fixed - a cloth and a tool can do - very carefully!
I know about pixel peeking!
But that is only an example for an overall sound signature you can hear in every song.
The recording is not the factor - it is one of my test tracks I know so much that i can tell every detail in it. And therefore I know that something is not as it should be.
No, you are right. But if this problem occurs with many recordings, and it’s the case, then the unhappiness is understandable.
2 Likes
I’m still wondering what is the ratio of unhappy people because of factual and measurable hearing of a change with the latest firmwares over the ones unhappy because convinced by others (contagion). I however will never have a scientifically proven answer to this.
Please do not think I deny or minimize the first ones.
I think it’s more about how sensitive people are to micro changes in sound quality. How they are perceived by the listener. I am still really enjoying Streaming and like the improved resolution from the latest FW. But there is a small but perceivable character change that might be improved upon in the future. It wasn’t there with 3.8.8 which was a great update IMO. It may be that finding a perfect balance is impossible for the tuning guys.
Drago obviously doesn’t like this 3.10 “characteristic” to the point where it’s ruining his enjoyment. He has my sympathies. I believe him. It’s not a contagion thing IMO. Hopefully he can find harmony again soon.
4 Likes
I feel for the unhappy as well. Hope in the end everyone will enjoy music with their set up to the fullest soon.
At this point I am very happy again. Listening this morning to my own Christmas playlist on Qobuz and I really like the sound. The piano on Auld Lang Syne by Cara Dillon sounds awesome and her voice as well. Whereas with 3.10.0 I found her voice somewhat annoying from time to time.
But I am streaming with Audirvāna and that brings another experience sound wise. And it’s a different proces as well as the computer running Audirvāna is the transport.
It’s therefore hard for me (or maybe better said impossible) to tell al the actual differences between 3.8.8, 3.10.0 and 3.10.1 fw.
I have always liked the sound with Audirvāna more, so I only listened using the ND5 XS 2 with the Naim app sparsely. And therefore I am in no position to tell if 3.8.8 had something that 3.10.1 is missing. I absolutely believe those who say so that they are missing an essential thing to enjoy it to the fullest. I had troubles with 3.10.0 so I know how disappointed one can get over the experience.
The only suggestion I can do is that maybe Audirvāna or another solution may fit the current situation for the unhappy people better. It may be worth a shot.
Anyway, fingers crossed that all will be well again.
2 Likes
I never really realized that a firmware update could have an audible impact on the sound signature. But I noticed it first hand when the 3.10.0 and 3.10.1 versions were installed. I always install updates immediately (also on computers, tablets etc.), but it makes you wonder if that is such a good idea. I am happy with 3.10.1, but I can imagine that it is very annoying if a software update ruins your listening experience.
Last week I also experiences how sensitive things can be. I had to move one speaker to clean the carpet. When I placed it back, the sounds was all wrong. The base was very ‘boomy’ and not nice at all. Turns out the position was wrong by ± 5 centimeters and the toe-in was also a little bit wrong. Small changes can have a big effect, apparently.
4 Likes
Hi 
…
Absolutely,.and down to between 1 to 1.5 mm.
Here we are really talking about “Attention To Detail”,.to wring out the last drops of sound quality from the music system.
2 Likes
I may or may not be pouring more fuel on the fire but going to my second room where I have a Nova and Neats iotas with a T-Zero sub. A mini set up if you will. I found the Nova to be on 3.8 and so I decided to listen to a few tracks and the upgrade and re-listen….
O to the M to the G!
I thought it was just my more sensitive, as described by others, 500 series system that picked up the differences but no it’s not.
It’s not bad or good but it is different - the key difference was shown on my son’s fave Coldplay Shiver (tidal max). Martin’s vocal is almost shrill even on the 3.10.1 update in comparison to the 3.8.x (can’t remember the number). It was almost painful - I frowned with too much volume.
The rest is all much more detailed which is super attention grabbing but maybe too much…. Hmmmmm am I going mad or am I hearing this. I listened back to back.
Having been a distant unbeliever I am now a super interested convert to the firmware making a difference.
5 Likes
I wish an engineer from Naim could shed some light. I just wonder if and how this can be explained.
3 Likes
I am not sure we need an engineer to tell us how firmware changes the sound signature @whatu1tme2b - that, if you really think about, it is obvious (more below). What I would like to know what have they changed and why they changed it? It would be helpful to know their intentions. Software plays a MAJOR role in our technology there is NO doubt of that.
Doing a bit of research over the last week helped me find out a lot!!!
Firmware can significantly impact the sound signature of a streaming device because it controls how the hardware processes digital and analog signals. Changes in the firmware can optimise or alter various aspects of the audio signal path, even when the hardware remains unchanged. Here’s how:
- Digital Signal Processing (DSP) Algorithm
Firmware updates often tweak the DSP algorithms, which handle tasks like upsampling, filtering, and decoding digital audio signals. For example:
A change in digital filter design (e.g., roll-off speed, phase response) can subtly alter the tonal balance, detail retrieval, and transient response.
Different upsampling strategies might make the sound warmer, brighter, or more precise.
- Jitter Management
Firmware can improve how the device handles clock synchronisation, reducing jitter (timing errors in digital signals).
Lower jitter results in more precise imaging, better soundstage depth, and a cleaner overall sound.
- DAC Optimisation
Many streaming devices include firmware that controls the digital-to-analog converter (DAC) chip. Changes to how the firmware manages the DAC can affect:
• Dynamics
• Noise floor
• Harmonic balance
• For instance, firmware might adjust the way the streamers’ DAC handles oversampling, impacting the smoothness or detail of playback.
- Noise Management
Firmware can optimise power distribution and the isolation of digital and analog circuits. Reducing internal noise improves clarity and preserves low-level details.
- Streaming and Networking
Updates might optimise the handling of network data (e.g., buffering, error correction), reducing artifacts like dropouts or subtle distortions that can degrade sound quality.
Improvements in decoding protocols (e.g., FLAC, WAV, or MQA) can enhance the fidelity of streamed content.
- User Feedback and Tuning
Manufacturers like Naim often release firmware updates based on user feedback or to reflect their evolving “NAIM sound.”
Subtle tweaks may aim to make the sound more engaging, neutral, warm, or detailed, depending on the feedback or Naim’s goals.
Example of Changes in Sound Signature - firmware update might:
Tighten the bass response by improving clock timing.
Increase perceived detail by adjusting the noise floor or DSP filters.
Smooth out high frequencies by refining digital filter roll-off characteristics.
Enhance dynamics by optimising power allocation or noise isolation.
Impact on High-End Systems like a system like the Naim ND555:
Even small firmware changes can be perceptible due to the system’s high resolution and transparency. Users often report subjective differences (e.g., more “organic” mids, a wider soundstage, or smoother highs) after updates.
5 Likes
I am not sure that is accurate or relevant for Naim. I don’t believe they cultivate a “Naim sound” other than the creation of new products and market demand. However I find there is quite a variance of sound signatures from different current Naim products.
The firmware ‘sound tuning’ with Naim is about minimising obvious sonic balance artefacts from the digital noise profile within the DAC/streamers… and this is achieved by changing certain parameters of the execution cycle on the ARM CPU.
3 Likes
That is a very nice summary of the potential impact of firmware changes on a system. There are many aspects that can influence the sound signature.
This year, I upgraded from a Bluesound Node streamer to the Naim ND5 XS 2 (connected to a Naim Nait 5si). That was a major step up for me. The firmware of the Bluesound was updated many times, but it never influenced the sound signature. So, this is new for me.
1 Like
I really rate your thinking so am interested by this - and I consider my self an amateur hobbyist at best - do you KNOW that to be true? Or are you hypothesising?
I work with A LOT of tech companies and have had decades of dealings with user research and observe all these companies ‘tweaking’ technology to attract and retain customers - it is a HUGE part of what they do. It’s a major part of any tech companies spend.
For Naim their sound IS their identity ultimately given how neutral their product is - that would seem to be the point - So I hypothesise that their signature must have been cultivated and created. I cannot believe they didn’t intentionally create their own sound signature at this level. It can’t be accidental.
I also agree that with the thought that it seems there is some variance across products and certainly my plays with NC over old classic show a new signature arriving. I am currently sticking in my main room with OC.
However, this is the first time I have really started to notice my products changing the sound signature so significantly, in a short space, in the 20 years (a relative short time compared to many here) I have been in the Naim system and seemingly through software. I cannot believe they only use the firmware to change the parameters of the execution when there are so many other tools in their kit.
They must also look at things like efficiency and effectiveness of the system as a whole:
*Operating System Optimisation to reduce background processes and system noise can lower the load on the processor and improve performance.
*DSP and Upsampling Algorithms - software impacts digital signal processing (DSP) and upsampling techniques to refine the audio output.
*Playing with the digital audio stream to ensure it is delivered without alteration to the DAC.
*Buffering and Latency Management - Fine-tuning buffer sizes and reducing network-induced latency ensures smooth playback.
Surely these things evolve with research and testing over time?
3 Likes
Thank you, this information, as in the firmware noise ‘tuning’, is stated in more detail by Naim in the closed user group beta volunteer forum.
I also was informed about this previously by an ex Naim director - but obviously at that time I had been selective to what I had previously shared - this was from an unofficial volunteering activity some time back.
If something is my supposition, I do usually hopefully try and make it clear that it is so.
1 Like