Yes, perhaps, and maybe it is the NAD-designed buffer boards (and might they be possibly out-sourced for production)? You guys are the experts, but isn't this likely where the M33 could take a slightly unwelcomed dive from the Purifi amps as far as measurements?We could look to that for performance differences. If the modules are the same, then the issue is elsewhere.
Yes. It is my guess that the buffer is at fault.Yes, perhaps, and maybe it is the NAD-designed buffer boards (and might they be possibly out-sourced for production)? You guys are the experts, but isn't this likely where the M33 could take a slightly unwelcomed dive from the Purifi amps as far as measurements?
My guess is that the buffer is fine. First, we actually have at the DAC level, at 48kHZ, performance already a bit below Purifi specs when looking at high frequency THD+N , and it looks like In your tests the analog inputs digitized at 44.1, so we are already bottlenecked before even reaching the buffer. second, There is a LOT more stuff in the box, it is totally expected to have a raised noise floor, and in this case actually not that bad. They can't make miracles, there are just more power lines travelling arround the chassis. Third, the channel difference, it is obviously the same circuitry for both channels, so it has to come from physical layout and compromise based on real estate. The fact that both are not the same confirm my second point.Yes. It is my guess that the buffer is at fault.
I could easily imagine the early units had bought in modules whilst production of in house modules was de-bugged.What is disturbing is that the modules don't have the usual blue pcb seen on Nad stuff, in opposition to what is licensed from Hypex.
The first time I saw the green pcb, my reaction was that they were not ready at launch and bought a few samples to Purifi for start of production. A tear down would be interesting.
not to say this in a negative way for this engineering-dominated forum) marketing and product management innovation than technical innovation.
All this is true, but in this particular case all evidences point the other way. I am not sure why people want so much to believe NAD are modyfying the modules. It's the most accomplished class D tech around. They couldn't improve on this. Now we've got a tear down of the m28 from NAD, that appears to be using the stock Purifi module, we got pictures of he m33 wher the modules are obviously green and look just the same.... NAD can twist that marketing wise how they want, but when it looks like a duck, swim like a duck and quacks like a duck... It’s probably a duck...I could easily imagine the early units had bought in modules whilst production of in house modules was de-bugged.
Production engineering items often go through under-the-skin mods particularly early in the production run.
I can see how people expect an item they buy to be the same as all the others with the same model number but it often isn't so.
Where have you seen people believing that NAD would modify the modules?All this is true, but in this particular case all evidences point the other way. I am not sure why people want so much to believe NAD are modyfying the modules. It's the most accomplished class D tech around. They couldn't improve on this. Now we've got a tear down of the m28 from NAD, that appears to be using the stock Purifi module, we got pictures of he m33 wher the modules are obviously green and look just the same.... NAD can twist that marketing wise how they want, but when it looks like a duck, swim like a duck and quacks like a duck... It’s probably a duck...
@amirm already said somewhere that the integrated amp have already been sent back to the owner. With all respect to our host, it is part of the dynamic of this forum. We get granted with new gear measured almost daily, anybody can sent out any type of gear to be measured, but the compromise is that they are not always fully torough, you won't find all the options/inputs measured.I looked at the measurement curves again and came to the conclusion that the measurements involving the analog input section were carried out with the lowest quality level possible at the NAD M33 (ADC sample rate 48kHz). For that they seem to be good to very good.
There are no measurement data of the full potential of the NAD M33, if the analog input stage is used at 192kHz ADC sample rate. Please measure again, if possible!
To make matters worse, the sample rate settings only work correctly since the following FW-version and have previously reset themselves to the default value of 48kHz:
BluOS 3.12.9. Released November 4, 2020:
- Update for inputs and settings on NAD M33. This release applies to the NAD M33 only.
They said the "amplifiers" are by built by NAD. They didn't say the modules, but why would it matter then if they are the same? "Manufacturing" is a vague term... I am about 99% sure that NAD don't "manufacture" their own PCBs, that would not do any sense... literally EVERYBODY outsource unpopulated boards, and even the pick and place/assembly of smd centric boards, that would be very, very very, very... well you get the idea... very rare. Even Purifi themselves, I'd be very surprised if they have the facility to populate their board, and EXTREMELY surprised if they made their own PCBs. So bottom line, you have somewhere a PCB manufacturer that push tens of tousands, if not hundreds of thousands of these green PCBs, and instead of just grabbing them, NAD would insist on going trough the tooling process with an other manufacturer, for maybe one thousand pcbs, just for the sake of having em Blue? Come on...Where have you seen people believing that NAD would modify the modules?
NAD tell that the modules are built by themselves under Purifi license. We wonder why they don't have the NAD blue PCB (which is not a modification). One hypothesis is that manufacturing is not ready. Another one is that they have decided to use green PCB for whatever reason.
What would be the point for NAD to tell that they manufacture the modules while they don't intent to do so?
They said the "amplifiers" are by built by NAD. They didn't say the modules, but why would it matter then if they are the same? "Manufacturing" is a vague term... I am about 99% sure that NAD don't "manufacture" their own PCBs, that would not do any sense... literally EVERYBODY outsource unpopulated boards, and even the pick and place/assembly of smd centric boards, that would be very, very very, very... well you get the idea... very rare. Even Purifi themselves, I'd be very surprised if they have the facility to populate their board, and EXTREMELY surprised if they made their own PCBs. So bottom line, you have somewhere a PCB manufacturer that push tens of tousands, if not hundreds of thousands of these green PCBs, and instead of just grabbing them, NAD would insist on going trough the tooling process with an other manufacturer, for maybe one thousand pcbs, just for the sake of having em Blue? Come on...
My view on this, and that was my point, NAD is an amp manufacturer, and they are very consious of their wording to not mess with the IDEA in their customers mind, that they are buying an NAD amp, not a rebranded Purifi amp, that's all there is to it, and it's not inacurate. The module is not an amp, the final product is designed and manufactured by them, and their team has to stick to this mantra. At the end of the day, a part of their design is made by someone else, and there is nothing wrong with that, who on earth would refuse to buy a product just because one of the pcb is green instead of blue? What if nad would comme to a second revision and say in a very brute honest way. Well, we tought blue is nicer, so we'll increase the price to distribute the fixed cost it involved to our customers, just because... Well... NAD is Blue...
NAD Intros C 298 Power Amplifier With Purifi Eigentakt AmplificationThe Eigentakt modules are manufactured by NAD under license from Purifi, allowing NAD to optimise these specifically in combination with the custom designed power supply and input stages of the C 298.
Fair enough, but inside pictures of the c298 shows green PCB's too. You realise that this sentence could literally mean changing the value of one resistor or part right? Nobody wants to reinvent the wheel. Manufacturing the modules, OK, I believe that, but it by no way means that they can't buy the unpopulated pcb board from them, or even Populated ones if the modifications are not on the SMD parts it's still a manufacturing process. Plus, it's a lower cost product, so "optimize" can mean in this case, pull back on actual available power.
This relate to this discussion how? The fact that we don't know what "manufactured" and "optimize" mean for NAD where people with less expertise on the subject would think they do?