No problem Stan - I wouldn't want to queue-jump either. I just read it as you having the new PSU's available for sale with new Caimen..Quote:
Originally Posted by StanleyB
I return to the bottom of the queue and wait impatiently.!
Printable View
No problem Stan - I wouldn't want to queue-jump either. I just read it as you having the new PSU's available for sale with new Caimen..Quote:
Originally Posted by StanleyB
I return to the bottom of the queue and wait impatiently.!
If your amplifier allows it, try some A/B tests between the two.Quote:
Originally Posted by sum1
Also, could you please detail what you mean "slow" and "veiled" ? This doesn't sound like the Caiman at all.
Normally, the NAD is a good player, though its dac is no better than the Caiman. If I remember properly (I had listened to the 542 some time ago) they should be roughly equivalent, with a slight advantage of the Caiman.
No, no point in trying a coax instead of the XQ Toslink. Unless the latter is faulty, what you describe has nothing to do with it.
And no point in trying a no-75ohm-cable (an average cable) as a digital coax: the result will be anything-but-accurate.
Well the amplifier has multiple input so it is possible to do a/b comparison but in order to do that i would need to have 2 sets of the same interconnect and currently while i have multiple sets of interconnect they are from different brand and have their own particular sound so in the end i can only do the comparison one after another for a fair comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Themis
As for the slow and veiled, to me currently the NAD sounded sharper and gives more punchy toe tapping sound while the caiman is smooth but dull in comparison to the NAD . To me the NAD is already leaning on the warm side of the road and currently the non burned-in caiman seems a tad warmer/darker than the NAD which surprises me as i was expecting a neutral sound. But its still too early for the caiman so i hope the caiman will become more neutral and more punchy once its burned-in.
You can try all the same :Quote:
Originally Posted by sum1
Take 2 interconnects, carefully level the output level of the NAD and the Caiman, then check the differences.
Permute the interconnects, then check again.
Levelling the output is essential to compare the two. Take your time. :)
(if you have difficulties to level the output of the two, and the Caiman is too loud, use the variable output of the Caiman, instead of the fixed).
You have become accustomed to your NAD. Send the Caiman back and stick to your NAD:). Email me for the return address.Quote:
Originally Posted by sum1
In my system the Caiman is fast and transparent just like my Transporter and just like a good £2k - £3k CD player.
If asked to describe budget NAD gear, 'slow' and 'veiled' are certainly words that would spring to mind from my personal experience of the brand. To my ears NAD has always sounded safe, smoothed over, rounded off, designed to sound inoffensive but missing much in the process. But that's just my experience. YMMV.
IMHO: sum1 needs some time to objectively decide which dac/setup fits him the best.
Habit is certainly a serious factor, but: very few people have the habit of trying/changing dacs often enough. This makes it very hard to decide which one is which in such a short period (of a few hours).
I tried to understand what he means about slow and veiled. I have an idea about it, but I'll wait for his A/B comparison feedback before getting further in explaining my point of view.
Moreover, I don't think at all that the C542 is a slow and/or veiled CD player. A tad simplifying, probably, but no less (and certainly no more to many) than other players in its price tag.
Hmm... the differences between the cables is not volume difference, its more like tonality differences so its impossible to balance it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Themis
Yes you are right. I basically need more time to evaluate the caiman further once its burned-in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Themis
Wow thanks for the generous offer Stan but yeah i'm not giving up on it yet since its not fully burned-in.Quote:
Originally Posted by StanleyB
C542 output is at 2.2V, typically 0.2V louder than most sources (2V). I'm not saying that the cable differences are volume differences, I simply state that it is is very hard (almost impossible) to compare two different sources which have a volume difference: if the sources' sound is near enough (no "enormous" differences) , then louder will always sound "better".Quote:
Originally Posted by sum1
Hello, my name is Ron
Caiman came in today, well packed. it's burning in now
Out of the box sound: wide stage, more detail, firm bass,
so all the things reviewed in this thread are there, this first impressions make you believe, you bought something special. i'm very curious about it's development.