The explanation from NuForce was:
"We do not disclose anything internal and we wipe off the label on most critical chips. Disclosing what's inside could be misleading and confusing to many users. Two vendors could achieve very different result in audio quality even if they use the same DAC. There are so many other factors involved"
Steve
Let me first say thanks to Steve for these 2 responses. I appreciate you lending help where you can. I say that because I want to make it clear that what I will say next is not directed at you. Sometimes, the limitations of text communication on forums make aspects like tone, targeted audience, etc difficult to convey. What I say below is more personal commentary about what I know so far (and I do recognize that I could be very wrong, since I don't know and probably never will know all the details).
Sounds like a precursor to a rant huh?
Well, it's nothing all that dramatic. Basically, a company who makes products in this space but who takes a stance like the one Steve quotes makes me scratch my head and wonder. First, this is a subset of the audio world where companies aren't exactly selling to the mass market consumer. Most of the players are niche level folks that the average Joe has never heard of. We're not talking about widely known brands like Sony, Pioneer, Denon, etc. With all due respect to NuForce, they are one of the smaller niche players. Now, there's absolutely nothing wrong with being one of those guys. I have equipment from many companies just like it that I absolutely love and would never trade for gear sold by the "big boys". With that kind of niche though comes a certain kind of consumer. Certainly far from all, but but many customers of products like this are audiophiles. As such, many of us are interested in specs, details, etc.
Well, if Steve's quote is an accurate representation of NuForce's overall market strategy, then you could argue that they are trying to take a different approach. Let everyone else fight a war over components, we'll focus on the end result. That sounds good, except for a couple of problems. First, how do you achieve your goal if potential customers can't compare chipsets? It's well and good to try and shift the dialogue, but if so many other companies state clearly what chips they use and NuForce doesn't, it makes comparing NuForce products a little more difficult. Some of the folks in this niche won't even consider you if you won't tell them what chips you are using.
Let's assume then that NuForce has weighed this and is willing to lose that business in favor of trying to shift the conversation. That's good marketing speak, but are they really doing it? Seeing this on the HDP section of their website makes me question that:
"Note: Icon HDP uses the same DAC as the high-end CDP-8 (MSRP $1450.00) and similar preamp as P-8S (MSRP $1650.00). The following design features contributed to the performance of Icon HDP:
The digital input has no capacitors in its signal path. The analog input utilizes a single DC-decoupling capacitor.
Components along the signal path are minimized.
The host-powered USB interface is fully isolated with optical isolators.
The 24/96 USB interface outputs a I2S signal to a high-quality DAC
The digital circuit occupies a separate daughter board.
The DAC chip consists of four internal 24/192kHz DACs that provide a fully differential and balanced output. The differential signal's DC offset operates without a need for decoupling caps.
Digital and analog voltages each have separately isolated internal power regulations."So wait, they claim they are concerned about user confusion via the specification of a chipset yet they give all of the above? How exactly would the additional info of a chipset model suddenly mislead or confuse users? Seemingly, that additional information could help us better contrast NuForce's design form others. Sure, company A uses the same chipset, but their product doesn't offer this feature or that like the HDP does. You could say that once the chipset were known, people would forget everything else and only focus on that. In my view, many users who are that knitpicky will pass NuForce over specifically because they can't get the chipset info. And, most folks who aren't saavy enough to go beyond chipset probably aren't saavy enough to be looking at chipsets anyway. I mean, how many lost sales could you have by naming your chipset vs not? Or maybe they want to go with a mystique marketing approach...
Somehow though, I can't escape the gut feeling that not naming a chipset has everything to do with a supplier agreement than with a core belief or even marketing. The scenario where a company gets a well known part at a price below what other customers are paying in exchange for de-badging and lack of source acknowledgement seems likely. Beyond that, this scenario raises real concerns about the QC level of these de-badged chips. Why were they able to be acquired more cheaply?
This of course is all just my supposition. I have no knowledge of NuForce's business. That being said, I don't think what I've said above is all that outlandish. But hey, what do I know?
Just in case people think I was being a troll, I'll say why I came here asking in the first place. I have a Peachtree Nova that I'm happy with. Overall I think it's DAC capabilities are very good and I place some degree of credit to its ESS Sabre chipset. Now I'm looking into a headphone amp/DAC to use with my iMac. As such, I'd like to find a product that also uses an ESS Sabre chip. Hence, the original question.
Jeff
