[rajacat]

Indeed! But then again, would the people who refuse to believe audio and electronics professionals suddenly believe an app?

But then again even the "audio and electronics professionals" often disagree.

[Julf]

But then again even the "audio and electronics professionals" often disagree.

Not that much if you look at stuff actually published in peer-reviewed professional publications. There are some cowboys out there, but there is also a pretty well established and accepted professional consensus.

[guest61169]

PS: I forgot to mention - the DAC is Benchmark's DAC2HGC. I feed it FLACs from a Squeezebox Touch. The Benchmark also acts as a very capable little preamp.

Have you tried running it balanced with the NAD (and trying the different jumper settings for balanced connections in the Benchmark)?

[pablolie]

Have you tried running it balanced with the NAD (and trying the different jumper settings for balanced connections in the Benchmark)?

Yes I run it balanced with XLR (with Analysis Plus Crystal Oval). I also did change the jumper settings to -20dB (instead of the standard -10), which allows the volume on the DAC2 to hover around 12 o'clock (normal listening level), compared to it being stuck at 10 o'clock with the -10 setting (all for normal listening). Total rotation is from 7 to 5 o'clock, for those who are not familiar with the DAC2. I had a bit of heartburn about the change of output impedance [from 425 (at -10dB) to 135 (-20)], but none of my amps seems to care.

[Julf]

I had a bit of heartburn about the change of output impedance [from 425 (at -10dB) to 135 (-20)], but none of my amps seems to care.

Wouldn't lower be better anyway?

[pablolie]

Wouldn't lower be better anyway?

in theory, yes. but i liked what i heard at -10, so i simply was worried about changing stuff. but i changed it and stuck with it.

[Julf]

in theory, yes. but i liked what i heard at -10, so i simply was worried about changing stuff. but i changed it and stuck with it.

Louder sounds better...

[lynhnn]

I want to build a pair of NC400 myself but I got a new NAD M22 and it immediately replaced the Channel Islands E-200S which was better than the ARC 150.2.
So this is what I know  entering the "Class D" world:
 NAD M22 (ncore) >> CI E-200S (hypex udc400) >> ARC 150.2 (class T?)

My pre was BC DAC 2.5.

My next steps would be the D-Sonic M3-800S (Pascal) and then the DIY ncore400 (do I really need to have them?)

Cheers

[lynhnn]

Ok, I got an upgrade bug in my 2nd system and I got the Channel Islands stereo amp to compare with the ARC 150.2 and I quickly sold the ARC. Then I got the NAD M22 to compare with the CI amp and the M22 is much better than the CI in all departments.
So in my system:
M22 is much better than CI 200S and the CI 200S is much better than the ARC. This make sense as the cost goes 3K >> 2K >> 1K ...
YMMV

Cheers

[Julf]

So this is what I know  entering the "Class D" world:
 NAD M22 (ncore) >> CI E-200S (hypex udc400) >> ARC 150.2 (class T?)

You might have to explain what you mean with that line. Does the ">>" imply "much better" or something like that?

[edit: Ah, you seem to have addressed that already - thanks!]

[srb]

M22 is much better than CI 200S and the CI 200S is much better than the ARC. This make sense as the cost goes 3K >> 2K >> 1K ...

I understand your order of preference, but I don't follow the cost comparison.  I'm assuming that the CI Audio is the model E-200S and that the ARC 150.2 is not a current model, but a model from 2003 - 2006?

NAD M22:  $2995
CI Audio E-200S:  $2495
ARC 150.2:  $2495 (2003-2004)  /  $2995 (2005 -2006)

Steve

[Julf]

M22 is much better than CI 200S and the CI 200S is much better than the ARC.

I guess "much better" is a rather relative term with regards to the nc400 vs. ucd400. Do you think you could tell them apart in a blind test?

[lynhnn]

Yes I could tell the difference immediately.
Here is how I test. I have a 10 random songs and play them repeatedly in a few days so I get use to each of the songs. Then I swap the amp and play them the same way and look for improvements in each of the songs.







The ARC 150.2 is a very old amp and current market price is about 1K. It sound good after a long warm up and at higher volume. I also had PS audio stereo and Wyred 4 sound 7-ch in the past and none of them impressed me.

The question is should I invest in a DIY pair of monos ncore 400 (available from hypex late February?) to see if I can get better sound than the NAD M22 or should I not?
I'll have a chance to compare the D-sonic M3-800S as well.

[Julf]

The question is should I invest in a DIY pair of monos ncore 400 (available from hypex late February?) to see if I can get better sound than the NAD M22 or should I not?

Why would the DIY nc400's sound better than the M22? OK, let me rephrase that - what would you do differently than NAD?

[jtsnead]

The question is should I invest in a DIY pair of monos ncore 400 (available from hypex late February?) to see if I can get better sound than the NAD M22 or should I not?
I'll have a chance to compare the D-sonic M3-800S as well.
[/quote]

I would compare it to the D Sonic, I have a pair of M3-800M amps and they were a very good step up from mu ClassD single chassis mono amp (500W p/c), the D Sonic amps are 800W p/c which along the different design greatly improve bass definition and range, depth and smoother treble. Never got a chance to listen to N core but would like to compare to my amps

[lynhnn]

Initial audition of the M3-800S in the system show that it produces a warmer sound and it favors the vocals. It also pump more bass overall. However, the stereo separation of the two channels may be less and with less clarity.

[Phil]

Initial audition of the M3-800S in the system show that it produces a warmer sound and it favors the vocals. It also pump more bass overall. However, the stereo separation of the two channels may be less and with less clarity.

One professional review states that it starts to sing at higher volumes.  Do you find that is the case?  One of the great features of the Ncore is its ability to sound good at very low volume.

[Julf]

One professional review states that it starts to sing at higher volumes

That sounds like a poorly damped enclosure.

[Phil]

I have a NAD on order and have 60 days to compare it to my DIY Ncore 400.   

The NAD is larger and heavier (including internal heat sinks, which mine does not have) and includes the NAD special sauce.  Will be interesting to hear if there is a difference that I prefer. 

[lynhnn]

This forum made me to give Crown XLS 1500 a try and I did. Sorry the XLS fan, it's nothing close to the others I tested above. It pumps lots of power but nothing special. In fact, it produces great amount of listen fatigue at higher volume. So for $350, it can't compete with the other I've tried for a month ....


I use XLR input and speakon out