Merging Technologies NADAC

N

nicoludio

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2014
Messages
477
Does anyone have any impression of the Merging Technologies NADAC (network attached DAC)? Surprised that no one has mentioned this yet.

See http://nadac.merging.com/nadac

Accepts 44.1kHz – 384kHz PCM, DXD, DSD 64, DSD128, DSD256. Main USP appears to be the use of the RAVENNA protocol to connect to a network or computer. Nothing exotic in the mix, using ESS Sabre ES9008S D/A converter and summing the 8-channels into 2 for the 2-channel version. Even uses the on-chip volume control - horrors! Yet, from two fairly seasoned reviewers, quite incredible results.

From the website:

===

This open and published IP network technology had been created to meet the demands of national broadcasters and focused on essential requirements of extremely accurate clocking, high resistance to packet loss and very low latency. Initially it did not encompass high PCM sampling rates and certainly not DSD. However, it was not difficult to make changes to allow that, so Merging worked closely with the developers to make sure that sufficient channels at up to DSD256 could be handled with an accuracy that exceeded anything previously available. It remains the only logical choice for the professional and the audiophile and is now available in MERGING+NADAC. The added bonus to using an advanced networking solution is being able to send and receive control information as well as audio data. This opened up exciting possibilities in the studio and now you can enjoy these same benefits in your own home.

The RAVENNA protocol comes with absolutely standard drivers for any computer operating system. ASIO for Windows, CoreAudio with DoP support for MacOS. As easily installed and configured as any other driver for USB or Firewire, the MERGING+NADAC RAVENNA driver allows use of any application of your choice to playback your music files, Emotion, JRiver, Audirvana, iTunes, etc... as well as any music server or streamer able to communicate through those standard ASIO or CoreAudio drivers.g able to send and receive control information as well as audio data. This opened up exciting possibilities in the studio and now you can enjoy these same benefits in your own home.

===

Rave review from David Robinson from PFO (even bought the review sample). Key highlights were transparency, accuracy (hard to tell difference between Quad DSD and 15 IPS half-track quarter inch tapes in direct comparison), soundstaging (especially depth) and imaging. He is going to do a comparison with the Lampizator Golden Gate at some stage. Wonder what he will have to say?

http://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/impressions-the-merging-technology-nadac-mc-8-dsd-dac/

Hi Fi Plus (Alan Sircom) also reviewed it, and praised its accuracy and precision. Looks to be a rave in a very restrained, stiff upper lip, way.

http://nadac.merging.com/assets/images/HiFi_129_MergingNADAC_LR.PDF
 
nfnc said:
Rave review from David Robinson from PFO (even bought the review sample). Key highlights were transparency, accuracy (hard to tell difference between Quad DSD and 15 IPS half-track quarter inch tapes in direct comparison), soundstaging (especially depth) and imaging. He is going to do a comparison with the Lampizator Golden Gate at some stage. Wonder what he will have to say?
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to know what valves David Robinson is using for his Lampi audition. Whenever I have read Lampi reviews they have mostly been on stock valves. Lampi is like a TT that the tonearm and cartridge matters a lot to the set up. Though stock valves sound great, I still have to see professional reviewers write mentioning replicas vs original WE vs other quality 300b, etc.
 
bonzo said:
It will be interesting to know what valves David Robinson is using for his Lampi audition. Whenever I have read Lampi reviews they have mostly been on stock valves. Lampi is like a TT that the tonearm and cartridge matters a lot to the set up. Though stock valves sound great, I still have to see professional reviewers write mentioning replicas vs original WE vs other quality 300b, etc.
Click to expand...

They typically can't afford an array of tubes to try on a review unit or don't hoard NOS tubes like some people I know....ahem, me.....or can't find the good exotic stuff, including rectifiers.
 
Mike said:
They typically can't afford an array of tubes to try on a review unit or don't hoard NOS tubes like some people I know....ahem, me.....or can't find the good exotic stuff, including rectifiers.
Click to expand...

I understand. But then readers should know how limited these reviews are (well all reviews are limited but this more so)
 
The PFO reviewer of the GG SE w/o volume control did not just use the stock 101Ds but tried the EML 45 mesh + various rectifiers too, but not 300Bs. I appears that he owns it and will be trying out other tubes. So, until the PFO second opinion comes out, we would not know if this would be unit used or the loaner from Gopher (?).

http://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/lampizator-golden-gate-dac/

It goes back then to the old conundrum as to whether a unit should be reviewed as stock or if the reviewer should experiment with all possible/reasonable means of extracting the best performance.

With tube based units, wouldn't taste come into play as well? If, for example, NOS WE 300Bs produce the best sound, wouldn't cost, availability and reproducibility be an issue too?
 
Hi EML 45 mesh are stock level tubes. In fact, they were offered as option for stock along with 101d and KR PX4 at one point. I like the EML 45 solid plate the least, and when I first auditioned the Big 7, I preferred the 101d replicas to the 45 mesh.

Even with various rectis, he didn't really try a WE or a Tak.

The cost of tubes increases the cost of the product, but if you prefer the GG to another dac, you will pefer the Big 7 too, so save on costs there. If you like any of the dacs you audition over a Big 7, I doubt GG will sway you. Both are same designs with GG just having better parts. In fact a Big 7 with better tubes can sound better than a GG with lower quality tubes.

As for your point on preference, yes, some of it is preference, but some is quality that is easily discernible. It is just like a cartridge/tonearm

ps: I don't want to divert this thread from a Merging thread. Apologies. We can discuss Lampi on the Lampi threads
 
No worries. Both Merging and Lampi are contenders at "roughly" similar price points but with different design philosophies and approaches - no right or wrong either way.

As it is, the Merging NADAC sounded better with Kubala-Sosna or Synergistic Active LAN cables. Makes one wonder sometimes how robust or tweak proof the Ravenna protocol is.
 
I disagree about pricepoints because the Big 7 is priced lower. There is no reason for GG to figure here. Big 7 plus a good quality tube and recti vs Nadac
 
It would be interesting then to see how the PFO comparison between the NADAC and the GG pans out :)
 
I have just set up my mch NADAC. I looked at the Lampi, but no mch, so it was out for me. I did (still do) have the only commercial competitor for the mch NADAC, the Exasound E28, an excellent machine, but the NADAC (at close to 3 times the price) beat it (during a test I did over several days with a demo mch NADAC a couple of months ago).

Larry
 
nfnc said:
The PFO reviewer of the GG SE w/o volume control did not just use the stock 101Ds but tried the EML 45 mesh + various rectifiers too, but not 300Bs. I appears that he owns it and will be trying out other tubes. So, until the PFO second opinion comes out, we would not know if this would be unit used or the loaner from Gopher (?).
Click to expand...

No, these are two different units which were reviewed. Bill in Europe purchased his unit and David Robinson actually purchased the review unit as well for the PFO reference room. I just got formal notice last night of that Dr. Robinson will be awarding the GG a Brutus award actually and the review should be out shortly! :)
 
Hi Bill has just become PFO reviewer. He is otherwise an enthusiastic audiophile. He had just bought the GG, he has just started demoing valves. He has some way to go to experience full potential of his GG - upgrades to PCM, better valves, and better streamers. So all reviews should be read accordingly. Like I said, Lampi is a TT compared to other SS dacs. The stock sounds great but it is a also a tweakophile's wet dream.
 
astrotoy said:
I have just set up my mch NADAC. I looked at the Lampi, but no mch, so it was out for me. I did (still do) have the only commercial competitor for the mch NADAC, the Exasound E28, an excellent machine, but the NADAC (at close to 3 times the price) beat it (during a test I did over several days with a demo mch NADAC a couple of months ago).

Larry
Click to expand...

Look forward to your comments once it breaks in. I know you bought it for the MCH ability but were you able to compare it with other DACs besides the Exasound, at least on 2CH? Thanks.
 
nfnc said:
Look forward to your comments once it breaks in. I know you bought it for the MCH ability but were you able to compare it with other DACs besides the Exasound, at least on 2CH? Thanks.
Click to expand...

When I had the demo, I also compared it in 2 ch mode against the Exasound and my two other DAC's. Those were my BADA2 and my Pacific Microsonics Model 2. The Model 2 came in first, closely followed by NADAC, and then a little separation to the BADA2 (with the BADA USB) and Exasound E28 (with the Regen) which were very close. I was listening to several rips I did from R2R tape and vinyl, all at 192/24. The BADA2 and PM Model 2 only do PCM, not DSD.

I am keeping my Model 2 to do rips (BTW, the rips were all done with Merging's Pyramix Software and Mykerinos Card) and to playback the occasional file. For me, for my PCM files, the Model 2 is my gold standard, but it is not designed as a consumer friendly playback DAC. It is a pro machine, and much more complex to use. Aurender is planning to build a network server that will work with the Model 2 (two wire), like their W20. I have seen and heard a prototype and that would help with the consumer interface for the Model Two.

Larry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top