Naim Uniti Atom vs NAD M10

[Beershaun]

A measurable differences is not necessarily an audible one. But, if you can hear it, you can measure it. Nothing hidden in there...

Exactly. I just want to figure out how to substitute in a microphone and some software for people's ears and brains. In my experience using humans as measurement devices or arbiters of the ground truth, is noisy and painful.

 

[Chromatischism]

If you can't measure the speaker terminals of the amp, nearfield measurements of a (quality) speaker should also show what you need to know.

 

[BDWoody]

Exactly. I just want to figure out how to substitute in a microphone and some software for people's ears and brains. In my experience using humans as measurement devices or arbiters of the ground truth, is noisy and painful.

For the solid state stuff, the existing measurement suite does just fine.
For speakers, the Klippel system used by Amir is about the best currently available in terms of leveling the 'playing' field (heh heh) for speaker measurements, but that's nowhere near as definitive as the solid state stuff. So much depends on the room once the actual pressure wave is involved.

 

[Kachda]

If you can't measure the preouts of the amp, nearfield measurements of a (quality) speaker should also show what you need to know.

Shouldn’t one measure the speaker level output to test the amplifier?

 

[Chromatischism]

Shouldn’t one measure the speaker level output to test the amplifier?

Whoops, you are correct. Will edit.

 

[CDMC]

It seems like the same red herrings and all or nothing arguments repeat themselves in objective v. subjective arguments. A few points:

• There has been a lot of research about the limits of human hearing. We know from that:
  • If comparing two items with the same music, a person will almost always chose the louder one, even by .5 db as better.
  • Our auditory memory is very short.
  • We know that in our most sensitive hearing range (500-2000hz) we can hear distortion to about .1% with test tones.
  • We know that someone with perfect hearing, can hear 0db in the midrange and that most audio systems do not exceed 110 db. We also know that even quiet rooms typically have a 30-40db noise floor. CD has a 96db dynamic range.
• We can conclude from the above, that outside of very rare cases, any components that have less than .1% distortion and a better than a 96db SN ratio will sound the same. Once you hit that point, anything better is audibly transparent.
• Any competently designed, digital component, preamp, or amplifier should be able to exceed those numbers. This has been shown time and time again in double blind tests, where as long as an amplifier is not clipped (which would massively increase distortion), listeners cannot distinguish between competently designed front end components. The differences that people "hear" are imaginary, either from bias or mismatched levels.
• We also know that speakers have far higher distortion levels, as well as variable frequency, phase, and off axis responses. These massively change the sound of different speakers, almost as much as the room, which has the same if not a larger affect on the sound. What we can conclude from that it that subjective perceptions of speakers are valid IF: 1) they are level matched, 2) done in the same room, 3) done close in time, and 4) blind. Even getting rid of the blind requirement, people can still make valid subjective comparisons, as they contrasting two items with audibly different sound outputs in a comparable environment. The difficulty is that even when doing that, you are dependent on the listeners skills and knowledge to translate those subjective comparisons into correlated measurements.
  
  A perfect example of the foregoing is I received my new Philharmonic Minis from Dennis Murphy and was comparing them in the same setup as my Salk Surrounds (which are also designed by Dennis). The Philharmonics sounded much brighter. I measured them, they were not, in fact they were more linear than the Salks. Why did they sound brighter? The Salks have a small rise from 2,000 - 4,000 hz which then drops to the same level as the Philharmonics above and below. My ear doesn't hear that rise, instead it hears the treble above that range as sounding brighter or more laid back.

At the end of the day, it is really important that we are all conscious of what the limitations are of measurements and subjective interpretations. Both belong in audio and in good science, but they both need to applied where appropriate.

 

[Beershaun]

It sounds like the advice from the community is to buy the NAIM unity Atom because it makes you happy. Any difference is in your mind and not real regardless of your perception.

 

[mafelba]

It is really quite simple. All an amplifier has to do is accept an electrical signal and make it larger without otherwise changing it in any way (i.e. a straight wire with gain). So all we have to do is compare the electrical output signal with the electrical input signal. There is no need to measure sound waves. The tools to compare those electrical signals have improved a lot over the years, and current audio analyzers have a far better resolution than human hearing.
If anyone is still interested in listening tests, the truth is that over the last few decades in controled listening tests nobody has been able to distinguish properly designed amplifiers used within their specification.
The audiophile agony over amplifiers is really quite pathetic. If you want a decent amplifier with digital inputs and enough power for small to medium sized rooms, get something like the Yamaha AS501/701/801 (the AS501 is only 360 euro). If you want more power for a larger room, get a big Hypex based power amplifier with a DAC/preamp of your choice. An RME ADI-2 DAC/preamp and a 2x350 watt March P502 will set you back some 2000 euro. Choose either option depending on your situation, and you are done. Problem solved, and no need to worry for the next twenty years or more.

This is the kind of post I like

 

[mafelba]

It is really quite simple. All an amplifier has to do is accept an electrical signal and make it larger without otherwise changing it in any way (i.e. a straight wire with gain). So all we have to do is compare the electrical output signal with the electrical input signal. There is no need to measure sound waves. The tools to compare those electrical signals have improved a lot over the years, and current audio analyzers have a far better resolution than human hearing.
If anyone is still interested in listening tests, the truth is that over the last few decades in controled listening tests nobody has been able to distinguish properly designed amplifiers used within their specification.
The audiophile agony over amplifiers is really quite pathetic. If you want a decent amplifier with digital inputs and enough power for small to medium sized rooms, get something like the Yamaha AS501/701/801 (the AS501 is only 360 euro). If you want more power for a larger room, get a big Hypex based power amplifier with a DAC/preamp of your choice. An RME ADI-2 DAC/preamp and a 2x350 watt March P502 will set you back some 2000 euro. Choose either option depending on your situation, and you are done. Problem solved, and no need to worry for the next twenty years or more.

What would your take be on speakers?

 

[panther]

One feature I really like on the M10 is the ability to send the sounds to a bluetooth headphone. After 8pm or so, I can switch to headphones for watching movies etc.

Do you find there is any delay in matching sound to what you see on screen. I like the idea of BT headphones but last time I tried with a NAD D3045 the delay in movies and gaming was noticeable.

 

[SIY]

Do you find there is any delay in matching sound to what you see on screen. I like the idea of BT headphones but last time I tried with a NAD D3045 the delay in movies and gaming was noticeable.

There's a poorly documented feature buried in the menus- you can actually adjust that delay to get picture and sound synced.

Settings -> Player -> Customize Sources -> Source -> Lip-Sync Delay

 

[panther]

There's a poorly documented feature buried in the menus- you can actually adjust that delay to get picture and sound synced.

Settings -> Player -> Customize Sources -> Source -> Lip-Sync Delay

Nice thanks for that, I couldn’t find any mention of it. I guess it works regardless of the source being optical or HDMI?

 

[SIY]

Nice thanks for that, I couldn’t find any mention of it. I guess it works regardless of the source being optical or HDMI?

You choose it by source. So it can apply differently for, say, analog and HDMI.

 

[panther]

You choose it by source. So it can apply differently for, say, analog and HDMI.

Excellent, thanks again for informing me of this.

 

[Deleted member 27254]

Today I went down to a dealer to have a listen to the NAD M10. I wasn't all to impressed with the sound. Tracks like Massive Attack's Angel and the Telarc version of the 1812 Overture sounded harsh and uncomfortable (speakers were Dynaudio 40 and Wilson Sasha DAW). The bass sounded 'fluttery', the synth drums and cannon notes just seemed jarring.

He played the same tracks (using Tidal for both) on a NAIM Uniti Atom (which is 40W/ch). I wasn't prepared to by impressed due to the lower wattage numbers, but everything just sounded better. The tracks suddenly sounded more pleasant, and the bass really hit hard. When the cannon's went off in 1812, I could feel it on my chest, which never happened with the NAD.

Another interesting thing is that with the NAD I was playing around 70-80% volume to test it, while the NAIM felt about equally loud at 55%. I am talking loud as in I had to shout to make myself heard to the dealer.

Has anybody else had an experience with these two amps side by side ? I wanted to like the NAD for all it's features and the Hypex UCD amps, but a puny 40w/ch class AB amp just sounded so much better. What explains that ?

P.S - I also had a quick listen to the NAD M33. To my it sounded a bit better than the M10, but not significantly so.

I had the NAIM Uniti Atom in my system alongside the NAD M33 for about a month. I vastly preferred the former. The NAD's sound was very good, and I could happily live with it, but the NAIM sounded just a touch more effortless and "right" to my ears.

And then there's ergonomics. Whoa boy. That NAD was buggy as hell. Al kinds of annoying weirdnesses with the screen, the sub outputs, the ridiculously overcomplicated remote control... By contrast, the NAIM's user experience is literally second to none in my book. So easy to use, so beautifully and thoughtfully designed, so pleasing to interact with.

It's just a glorious piece of kit in every way.

 

[bigLP]

My unitiqute2 always sounded fuller than my mac integrated at a fraction of the watts at equal dBs as determined by my phone app.. We have to be honest with ourselves though. Naim are not neutral amps. If you believe reviews new hp atom is more neutral, and theyve even gone balanced. That alone is tempting me to go back to naim.

 

[SIY]

Naim are not neutral amps.

Any data on that?

 

[bigLP]

Any data on that?

I hereby stand corrected. My naim unitiqute2, at more or less the same dB subjectively seemed to have more mid and bass than the mac 6500 or my ati ncore amp that I compared it to. That happened to align with other subjective opinions mentioned. It was a summary of informal observations, not objectively deduced. Whatever it is. I liked it. Naim/focal NA not so fond of.

 

[bigLP]

I think I just proved myself wrong.
Are external references ok? Delete if needed. But hi fi news did publish tests for last naim amp I owned.

Naim Nait XS 3 Integrated Amplifier Lab Report

Lab Report Since I last tested Naim's evergreen Nait – the XS 2 in HFN Jun '14 – the most fundamental update must surely be the inclusion of a very capable MM phono stage. Retaining the ALPS volume control, reed relays and ceramic insulators for the power transistors, there seems very little...

www.hifinews.com

 

[facefirst]

I have a Uniti Nova and it’s a lovely thing. I strongly suspect that Naim have a ‘house sound’ EQ’d into their products, as they often do well on (totally unscientific) listening tests. My hunch is that their stuff is loud early in the volume range and that they roll off the highs. I like the sound. Others may not.