Just bought a NAD D 3020 along with Martin-Logan Motion XL16 bookshelf speakers.
I am currently using an older Sony DVP-NS72HP DVD player as my source for playing CDs.
The DVD player is connected to the D 3020 via Digital optical, thus using the NAD's DAC. Everything sounds excellent, very clean and natural; however:
Question- If I upgrade the CD source to a NAD C 516BEE and connect it to the D 3020 via analog RCA, thus using the C 516 DAC, will I get an even better sound?
In other words, Which unit has the better DAC and/or which connection method is better if there is no difference in the quality of the DACs ?
Question- If I upgrade the CD source to a NAD C 516BEE and connect it to the D 3020 via analog RCA, thus using the C 516 DAC, will I get an even better sound?
Based on your response regarding DACs and connection options, is there any benefit to upgrading (from old Sony DVD player using optical digital) to a new dedicated CD player (such as NAD C 516BEE) which, I assume, would send the exact same digital signal to D 3020?
Of course, this assumes the Sony continues to operate correctly vs. a new unit. Example, any other benefit, either mechanical or sonic?
Based on your response regarding DACs and connection options, is there any benefit to upgrading (from old Sony DVD player using optical digital) to a new dedicated CD player (such as NAD C 516BEE) which, I assume, would send the exact same digital signal to D 3020?
If DAC is not the best route to better sound, do you think a more powerful amp than the D 3020's 30 watts is needed?
I did forget to mention that I bought a small sub to go with the M/L XL16s, the M/L Dynamo 300 which really adds clean foundation to the 16's lower end.
As info, as to my music taste, I primarily listen to Jazz, light classical, big band, male and female vocals, standards and show tunes, most of whom are via CD collection over many years. As an aside- Telarc (sadly no longer in operation) has always give me wonderful sound and performances under their label.
My current setup sounds quite good- clean and dynamic.
I just want to max my opportunities, as I am still within the return/exchange period at Crutchfield for the D3020 and the M/L speakers.
Anything you or others can add would be appreciated.
If you don't put a blanket on top of your loudspeakers I don't see why not.
...It all depends of the implementation and their fine tuning "sound" by the people who build them machines with them DACs inside.
Lets go one further if I may. You can buy a piece of electronic twice the same and they will sound both different. ...Just a small tolerance factor in some parts can alter the overall sound from the same model DAC or CD player. ...A power amplifier or preamplifier the same. ...Cars too.
The value of the crossover parts in loudspeakers can have a considerable difference between the two from the same pair; by as much as couple decibels.
Tolerance differs from one manufacturer to another; the parts they use, their origin, the time the batches were made, etc., etc., etc.
Some parts are hand-made, hand-picked, others are not. ...Humans aren't perfect, and machines made by humans cannot. ...The material content to make the parts can vary in micron composition and in chemical/heat reaction. Every small particles of imperfection can infiltrate the precise mathematical value and alter its overall tolerance.
Can the human ear discern those varied tolerance values? ...It may or it may not, but they do exist nonetheless. ...And some ears are better than others.
Sure, we can call all these very small complexities and imperfections having no importance in the sound's differentiation, but would that be a fair call of true implication?
Just a small tolerance factor in some parts can alter the overall sound from the same model DAC or CD player. ...A power amplifier or preamplifier the same.
@nvidio - I think it would be a great idea to take FMW up on his challenge but would suggest a few modifications:
a) the test should be run at your location. FMW has noted (accurately I believe) that different speakers and room acoustics can effect large difference on the sound. Unfortunately that also renders test results at FMW’s location, to be relevant only at his/her location. The goal is to determine ifyourplayers sound different at your speaker/room combination.
b) the test should definitely be administered by a neutral third party with no stake in the outcome.
@nvidio - I think it would be a great idea to take FMW up on his challenge but would suggest a few modifications:
a) the test should be run at your location. FMW has noted (accurately I believe) that different speakers and room acoustics can effect large difference on the sound. Unfortunately that also renders test results at FMW’s location, to be relevant only at his/her location. The goal is to determine ifyourplayers sound different at your speaker/room combination.
b) the test should definitely be administered by a neutral third party with no stake in the outcome.
The reason why I see very little to no point in doing this is because it is both very time consuming and impractical to do. In order to eliminate all stress factors that will inevitably bias the test, it (the test) should be designed such that the test subject is totally unaware of being in a controlled environment, so not only would that be unethical, but also it would make it very difficult to ask relevant questions about the sound.
While I do realize the obvious fact that all sighted listening comparisons are inevitably subjected to the effects of expectation bias, it is also true that listening to a thing and then another thing without knowing what it is you are listening to comes with its own set of problems. Am I better able to hear what the instruments are? Did it bring me closer to what the artist originally intended? These are questions that very strongly connect us to the reason why we listen to music in the first place. They directly relate to those specific qualities that separate good audio products from mediocre ones. You cannot always find correct answers to these kinds of questions if you are not somehow in control of the parameters. This is also why I listen critically to everything.
I hope everyone who reads this realizes that you are one of the main antagonists in this war against good audio and can't answer any pointed substantive question to back up your parroted intrusions.
I have read (on some other ultra hi-end audiophile audio forums) that the Trinity DAC is one of the very bests, if not the best.
It is separate from the transport, it's just the DAC, and it retails for $30,000 (the CD Transport is an additional $20,000 or more).
But if you want the best; just goggle Trinity DAC. :nerd: ...The DACs chosen and their implementation inside is unique as unique it could be.
If you're into DACs (like me), you would love reading all about it, read the owner's comments, and even start saving your money.
I could give you links, but it's easy for truly interested parties to find out, search, discover, learn, and even meet people who are truly serious about it, and to the limit.
* And if anyone truly insist and want to learn more, just ask me and I will provide direct links with its designer and with people who use it in their own rigs.
But that too is easily accessible with the right searches.
I have read (on some other ultra hi-end audiophile audio forums) that the Trinity DAC is one of the very bests, if not the best.
It is separate from the transport, it's just the DAC, and it retails for $30,000 (the CD Transport is an additional $20,000 or more).
what's certainly not true is that not everybody is happy with the exact same DAC. the law of supply and demand proves that conclusively.
it's the same as saying "all watches are the same" or "all cars are the same". if one goes for minimalist functional reductionism, sure. but most goods that are consumed in our society are not minimalist functional tools. hence for a large number or reasons many people are happier with many different DACs.
i incidentally don't think they all (insert CD/DAC/Solid State Amp etc) sound the same, but could not care less if i convince anyone of that personal opinion. i also know that one can put an extremely satisfying audio system with little money these days, just as one can waste a lot of money on a crappy sounding one. and there are many flavors in the middle, and i respect the power of choice.
I don't think it proves this at all. There are many reasons why there are so many brands of DACs or other audio components or anything else in consumerland.
Just poor analogy here. Perhaps all watches tell time pretty much the same and plenty accurate for out needs. And why would cars come into this analogy?
How are they so precision built that their performances are identical to not matter??? They are not.
You should have perhaps used speakers but then sameness claims are not made for them, just like cars.
Wow to the non believers just buy a playstation one and your done. How simple was that. You are so lucky to not hear a difference that your wallet will thank you.
and would that simulate a normal listening condition?
honest, these posts are getting silly
let's face it, we have a band of completely closed mind troubadours galloping about determined to slay anyone who raises a question not in the mores of the cult
I would like to take a step back from the religious wars over moderns DACs and take a look at the original question. Unless there is some documentation that I am missing, I don't think the NAD 3020 has an analog bypass mode. The OP could switch sources to one with a purportedly better DAC, but the 3020 is going to convert the incoming analog signal to digital for bass processing and volume control, and then convert back to analog using the same DACs as in the original setup.
Usually the difference you hear between different DACs is the different output levels of different sources. One source might be 3dB louder than another at same level on the volume knob - this is percieved as an imporvement in sound clarity. Once you level match the different sources the difference is extremely small and you will not detect the difference. But as I understand it there have been CD players from the 80s that had pretty poor DACs. As long as you have a newer source it shouldn't be a problem. I haven't tested myself but it seems that some manufacturers color the sound in some fashaion with opamps which I guess could be a problem.
But even if there was a small difference the speakers and room interfere with the sound on a scale like 1 miljon times more so unless you have a dedicated room that's immaculate and super high end speakers crossed over to 4 or more subwoofers I wouldn't even start thinking about what potential difference there could be in changing a DAC.
People talking about DACs have usually never heard a really good room with really dynamic speaker setup. After the first time I heard this with the system being played back using only an old 100W Denon receiver and a Pioneer DVD player I was OK! electronics do **** all lol. The room makes a GIGANTIC difference.
Audio is part science, part subjectiveness, and the subjectiveness part means different people have different preferences. Heck, even the shape of our ears is different, and, if the part of our brain that lets us perceive sounds hadn't been different, we wouldn't even be needing this conversation anyway in the first place, would we?
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
AVS Forum
34M posts
1.5M members
Since 1999
A forum community dedicated to home theater owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about home audio/video, TVs, projectors, screens, receivers, speakers, projects, DIY’s, product reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!