NAD M50, M51, M52

Kenneth Patchen · « **on:** 13 Jan 2014, 05:33 pm »

I've been looking for a digital management system and have been reading reviews and asking around. A friend in CA, having established an impressive tenure in audiophilia with a strong foundation in all things analogue (and having the resources available to dabble and upgrade as necessary) he's always had bragging rights for owning the latest/greatest TT, arm and styli. In short, he's not at all embarrassed by bling and conspicuous consumption, just as long as the bling delivers.

He now assures me that he's reached the audio end game as he is happily ensconced in digital nirvana. Surprisingly, nirvana was reached via an all NAD digital management system and whereas he might have sniffed at NAD before this as being something of an unwashed cousin, this system, he assures me, is the answer, wrap it up daddy-o, game over, he's done. Done, done, done.

How can this be? Unless I've missed it, there's been little or no mention of the M50 or M52 on AC and just slight conversation about the M51. So what to think of his claims? Is he in his cups? Has time and Merlot rattled him senseless? Too much Wagnerian bombast, perhaps?

Does anyone have any experience with the M50, M51, M52? Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Basic descriptions of the NAD components can be found here; I have no connections with either NAD or Crutchfield.

http://www.crutchfield.com/S-4LelUIQXPPZ/p_745M50/NAD-Masters-Series-M50.html

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_745M52/NAD-Masters-Series-M52.html

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_745M51/NAD-Masters-Series-M51.htm

mr_bill · « **Reply #1 on:** 13 Jan 2014, 06:31 pm »

I have the NAD M51 and it is outstanding.
I have no experience with the other pieces, but should check them out,

wilsynet · « **Reply #2 on:** 14 Jan 2014, 06:58 am »

I have a NAD M51 as well and I also agree that it is outstanding.

I have zero interest in the M50 and M52. You'd be better off in the long run with a computer and an iPad. The USB input on the M51 is excellent, but if you want to kick it up a notch, nothing beats an Empirical Audio Off Ramp 5.

k6davis · « **Reply #3 on:** 14 Jan 2014, 07:16 am »

I can offer another strong recommendation for the M51 and I also have no interest in the other pieces. The operation and unusual flexibility of the DAC is great and its sonic performance is outstanding.

As an alternative to the Offramp, I've had great success running the Channel Islands Audio Transient MKII as a USB-to-SPDIF converter with it. Its XMOS based clock provides an output with extremely low-jitter (< 1.0psec) and it's very well made and reasonably priced. Channel Islands runs a circle here. They offer a money back guarantee so you can try it without risk if you like.

Kenneth Patchen · « **Reply #4 on:** 14 Jan 2014, 08:19 pm »

Thanks for the input K6, wt, and mr.b, very helpful. I'll take a closer look at the M51. I also now want to read reviews of the recommended Channel Islands Audio Transient MKII and the Empirical Audio Off Ramp 5.

Cheers,
KP

k6davis · « **Reply #5 on:** 14 Jan 2014, 09:18 pm »

ROFL....

I just noticed that all three of us used the word "outstanding" to describe how it sounds.

nickd · « **Reply #6 on:** 14 Jan 2014, 11:34 pm »

The computer and I pad will work and USB is sounding better than ever. However, poor user interface can be an issue with computers when you are in your listening chair. Soolos, Sonos, NAD, PS Audio, NAIM and others have been working hard to get good sound AND ease of use. The NAD is worth looking into in my opinion.

prvngrnd · « **Reply #7 on:** 15 Jan 2014, 01:00 am »

+1 on the M51

I absolutely love the sound! It replaced a Boulder Analog modded SB Touch (which was no slouch).Someone on this board described it as the swiss army knife of dacs, which is all too apt. It can handle any input you throw at it and also functions as a digital preamp. I currently have a AVA T8+ preamp and I rather like the sound of tubes so I don't use the preamp function but it is nice to know that if I want to build a second system I already have a second, solid preamp in place to do so.

Oh yeah and the sound is outstanding, too.

wilsynet · « **Reply #8 on:** 15 Jan 2014, 01:53 am »

To the OP: You don't need to buy an Off Ramp or CIAudio Transient right now. The M51 USB input is actually pretty good.

To start with, I'd buy the NAD M51, a Mac Mini or CAPS server, Audirvana or JRiver, and an iPad, iPhone, or iPod Touch.

Ceasar · « **Reply #9 on:** 23 Jan 2014, 07:50 pm »

I own the m50 & m51 (RSE Edition): works absolutely perfect! An excellent hardware but allo the user interface on the iPad is great!

Cheers,
Etienne

Jonathan · « **Reply #10 on:** 8 Feb 2014, 12:56 am »

Are any of you guys are using the M51 without an active preamp? Did you try it with one as well? Thanks.

Jon

wilsynet · « **Reply #11 on:** 8 Feb 2014, 03:59 am »

I have used the M51 without a preamp and also with the Coincident Statement Linestage, one of the finer preamps out there.

I've had the CSL out of the chain in the past few months and while I won't say it's indistinguishable, I would say I could be happy long term with the DAC direct to amp. Depending on the rest of your equipment, you might be perfectly happy with the NAD M51 direct, and I'd even argue that the M51 direct is better than most preamps. It doesn't at all sound harsh or edgy or sterile like many DAC direct pairings do. You might want an active anyway, but it'll most likely come down to preference rather than inherent and obvious inferiority.

audio.bill · « **Reply #12 on:** 8 Feb 2014, 01:57 pm »

Quote from: Jonathan on 8 Feb 2014, 12:56 am

Are any of you guys are using the M51 without an active preamp? Did you try it with one as well? Thanks.

Jon

It often comes down to a subjective choice whether one will prefer the M51 directly driving a power amp compared to its sound through an active preamp. I find that with a very high quality preamp I prefer the active approach, but with a lesser preamp direct drive may be the better choice. One thing to note is that the NAD M51 has an unusually well implemented 35 bit volume control which does not lose resolution at lower settings like most other digital volume controls do.

Jonathan · « **Reply #13 on:** 15 Feb 2014, 08:31 pm »

Quote from: audio.bill on 8 Feb 2014, 01:57 pm

I find that with a very high quality preamp I prefer the active approach, but with a lesser preamp direct drive may be the better choice.

I have an Audio Research SP-16. Not sure if that qualifies as a "very high quality preamp" or not. Would hate to sell it only to discover I had thrown out the baby with the bathwater. On the other hand, I would likely need to sell the preamp to afford the M51.

wilsynet · « **Reply #14 on:** 15 Feb 2014, 09:08 pm »

I have owned the ARC LS26, and (from memory only, not by direct comparison) I think you won't miss the ARC. My guess is the M51 by itself is better.

wilsynet · « **Reply #15 on:** 15 Feb 2014, 09:18 pm »

Great price, just posted:

http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=123747.msg1304077

budy55 · « **Reply #16 on:** 27 Apr 2014, 05:44 am »

I have been running the M51 through a Creek Evolution 50A & an old Rotel RB 990BX. The Creek is a great little integrated but I am shifting it. The NAD straight to the Rotel power amp sounds sublime. The NAD really is outstanding. Recently introduced the Ifi IUSB and Gemini USB cable. Took it up another level. Waiting to introduce the Ifi IDSD Nano to the equation. Should arrive in about a week. I get back with a review. Back to the music.

djcamilleon · « **Reply #17 on:** 28 Apr 2014, 05:32 am »

I ring an endorsement for the NAD M51. It's ability to be used as a pre and it's included HDMI input/output stage is amazing. My buddy owned one for 1.5+ years and it was a hard piece to let go of. It's only Achilles heel is its inability to accept DSD input. My buddy and I both just upgraded to DACs that have DSD functionality (AND because J River Media Center can now up-sample any format into DSD128) and had to spend at a considerably higher price point to parallel and beat out the sound of the NAD. An amazing piece that would be in my rig RIGHT NOW if it was able to DSD!!

djcamilleon · « **Reply #18 on:** 28 Apr 2014, 05:40 am »

Quote from: Ceasar on 23 Jan 2014, 07:50 pm

I own the m50 & m51 (RSE Edition): works absolutely perfect! An excellent hardware but allo the user interface on the iPad is great!

Cheers,
Etienne

What is the NAD M51 RSE Edition? I can see it around online in a few places but little to no explanation as to what it is. Please advise.

vsteiger · « **Reply #19 on:** 15 May 2014, 03:30 pm »

Quote from: djcamilleon on 28 Apr 2014, 05:40 am

What is the NAD M51 RSE Edition? I can see it around online in a few places but little to no explanation as to what it is. Please advise.

RSE stands for "Rowen Swiss Edition". Rowen is a small brand founded by Anton Aebischer specializing in high-end speakers and amps, see www.rowen.ch, or www.dynavox.ch. They also work on improving NAD gear, e.g. by replacing the capacitors with Mundorf pieces and the like, claiming a significant improvement in sound quality. In the case of the M51 I can't tell myself because I haven't run a double blind test. However I own an RSE-improved NAD Classic Series amp and CD player on Rowen speakers for many years and like them very much.

Disclaimer: I have no connection to either Rowen or Dynavox.