Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 44
  1. #1
    AR Newbie Registered Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    3

    Is DACMAGIC an upgrade for the NAD C525BEE ?

    Do you think we can get a big improvement to get a DACMAGIC joint to the NAD C525 ?
    (so getting rid of the NAD C525 DAC section)


    I read somewhere that there is no differences between the DACMAGIC and the NAD 525 DAC section... so I'm not sure..

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    Forum Regular luvtolisten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    526
    Hi & Welcome!
    Strictly my opinion, for what it's worth, I wouldn't call it an upgrade, but you may hear a different sound, which may, or may not be to your liking, a matter of taste I would say. Within the past 2 years I bought the Dac Magic, a NAD T754 receiver, a Cambridge Audio A640-V2A (integrated amp) and a Marantz CD4001 (5 disc CD changer).

    I compared the Dac Magic with the DAC in the NAD, using the digital output of the Marantz 4001. I could hear , just a slight difference. The NAD has what is described as a "dark sound". Perhaps the bass is a bit more noticeable. The Dac Magic seemed a little brighter, but not harsh, maybe extended, the low end was good, but not as pronounced to me as the NAD, yet still pleasant.

    I compared the Dac Magic with the Marantz 4001,using the digital output to the Dac Magic, and the analog output of the Marantz to the Cambridge A640-V2. To me the difference was even less o slight. So much so that I use the Marantz for playing CD's, (using the analog output) and the Dac Magic (because the 640 has no DAC) for playing iTunes from my laptop connected to the 640.

    The salesman told me I would hear a "night and day" difference,when I first inquired about the Dac Magic, which I found to be an exaggeration.I think your NAD is new enough, I wouldn't call it an upgrade, but a slight change in sound. Better or worse depends on your taste.

    To be honest, I like both sounds, which would I pick? I really don't know. I like having the option, even though I think (just my own opinion mind you) the difference is slight.

  3. #3
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    I tend to agree, the difference would be more of a change in sound opposed to upgrade. You'll have to travel up the food chain a bit to achieve an actual upgrade.

  4. #4
    Retro Modernist 02audionoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,908
    Another agreement here. It seems like the real quality DACs start at around $1,000...although I've always been intrigued by the Grant Fidelity DAC-09, which is apparently a re-badged Xiang Sheng model.

  5. #5
    Forum Regular blackraven's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    St. Paul, Minnesota
    Posts
    5,421
    Go with a PS Audio Digilink III DAC. You can usually find them used on Audiogon for around $600.
    Pass Labs X250 amp, BAT Vk-51se Preamp,
    Thorens TD-145 TT, Bellari phono preamp, Nagaoka MP-200 Cartridge
    Magnepan QR1.6 speakers
    Luxman DA-06 DAC
    Van Alstine Ultra Plus Hybrid Tube DAC
    Dual Martin Logan Original Dynamo Subs
    Parasound A21 amp
    Vintage Luxman T-110 tuner
    Magnepan MMG's, Grant Fidelity DAC-11, Class D CDA254 amp
    Monitor Audio S1 speakers, PSB B6 speakers
    Vintage Technic's Integrated amp
    Music Hall 25.2 CDP
    Adcom GFR 700 AVR
    Cables- Cardas, Silnote, BJC
    Velodyne CHT 8 sub

  6. #6
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Even the older PSA Digilinks, V1 and 2 are great DAC's. The first version only does 16/44.1 but believe me, it does it extremely well.

    I have heard the DACMagic several times and have never been impressed with it. IMO, it's overpriced. Cambridge junkies love to talk about how great it is and that it performs past it's price point. I don't feel that's true at all. My basic and "cheap" 4 x TDA 1543 DAC sounds just as good IMO for a 1/4 the cost.

  7. #7
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    Unless just wanting a DAC you might consider trying the Emotiva ERC-1. I put it side by side against the NAD 545 and I thought the ERC-1 was better in every aspect except bottom end weight, not necessarily bottom end detail or accuracy but if wanting a big bass sound the NAD would have been a better choice. The ERC-1's sound stage was massive in comparison and much more air around instruments. If you are in the U.S. you can pick up an ERC on a deal right now.

  8. #8
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by ygg-it
    Do you think we can get a big improvement to get a DACMAGIC joint to the NAD C525 ?
    (so getting rid of the NAD C525 DAC section)


    I read somewhere that there is no differences between the DACMAGIC and the NAD 525 DAC section... so I'm not sure..

    Thanks!
    Just because something is more expensive or is a dedicated DAC does not mean it will be better - or more to the point better enough to justify the expense.

    If you have a relatively budget system I would hold off on upgrades until you have the money to really make significant worthwhile changes.

    On the digital front for CD replay I would probably make the jump to something like the Audio Note DAC kit 2.1 as it's a major step up over the Dac 1. This would be about $1500 and you have to build it. http://www.audionotekits.com/dac2_1.html

    This is about as cheap as I would go and the reason I say this is because most audiophiles with budget systems eventually intend to upgrade all their other components at some point. You don't want to be wasting money on $700-$1k components only to then want to get rid of those shortly. The Tube DAC-09 from Grant Fidelity is a great little unit but it's nowhere remotely in league with the AN DAC - it's more for people who have no tubes in their system, or DAC or perhaps a preamp (it does all three). It's a terrific little unit but it's more for a beginner.

    Even with Audio Note I would probably skip their level zero and one gear because while good it too will not stave off the upgrade desires.

    I attempt and would suggest you try and purchase gear that you think you will happy with for at least a decade. I am on a teacher salary so I can't afford "end of the road" products but I can afford to find gear that doesn't present that feeling of upgraditus. I would choose musicality and enjoyment where possible even if it slightly lies by ommission.

  9. #9
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    RGA, although I don't totally disagree, $399.00 to $1,500.00 is quite a jump. I'm sure there is something in between that would satisfy for some time. You can pick up a NAD Master series SACD for $999.00. Or, a single box Arcam.

  10. #10
    Shostakovich fan Feanor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    London, Ontario
    Posts
    8,127
    Quote Originally Posted by RGA
    ....

    On the digital front for CD replay I would probably make the jump to something like the Audio Note DAC kit 2.1 as it's a major step up over the Dac 1. This would be about $1500 and you have to build it. http://www.audionotekits.com/dac2_1.html

    This is about as cheap as I would go and the reason I say this is because most audiophiles with budget systems eventually intend to upgrade all their other components at some point. You don't want to be wasting money on $700-$1k components only to then want to get rid of those shortly. The Tube DAC-09 from Grant Fidelity is a great little unit but it's nowhere remotely in league with the AN DAC - it's more for people who have no tubes in their system, or DAC or perhaps a preamp (it does all three). It's a terrific little unit but it's more for a beginner.
    ...
    Without discussing the particular merits of the Audio Note DAC, I disagree strongly with this advice for a person getting into hifi with a small budget. To wit the extra $1000 spend on a DAC will deliver a very small increment of sound quality compared to the same amount spent on speakers or amplfier.

    Furthermore it's unwarranted to assume that a given individual is about to embark on a long trail of upgrades.

  11. #11
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    I know where Rich is coming from, he always assumes the most from a poster. In this case, he assumes the poster will want to take his interests and hobby to the best it can be. Where it comes off as crass is when the dollar figures are attached.

    To the OP, you should investigate the TDA 1543 and non oversampling applications. They tend to be very basic electronically, and therefore cost effective. Soundwise very smooth, detailed and well, musical. I would reccomend just punching the subject into your browser, and away you go.

    I have compared my modest little DAC to several and although it doesn't always blow them away, second thoughts/listens are generally needed. You would have to spend quite a bit of cash to defeat it, and I can assure you the DACmagic doesn't have the goods.

    Check these machines out, WAY moremusical than the Cambridge unit...

    http://www.pacificvalve.us/LITEDACAH.html

    http://www.pacificvalve.us/TDACCHAMELEON.html

    http://www.pacificvalve.us/MusilandMD10.html

  12. #12
    Forum Regular luvtolisten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by poppachubby
    I know where Rich is coming from, he always assumes the most from a poster. In this case, he assumes the poster will want to take his interests and hobby to the best it can be. Where it comes off as crass is when the dollar figures are attached.

    To the OP, you should investigate the TDA 1543 and non oversampling applications. They tend to be very basic electronically, and therefore cost effective. Soundwise very smooth, detailed and well, musical. I would reccomend just punching the subject into your browser, and away you go.

    I have compared my modest little DAC to several and although it doesn't always blow them away, second thoughts/listens are generally needed. You would have to spend quite a bit of cash to defeat it, and I can assure you the DACmagic doesn't have the goods.

    Check these machines out, WAY moremusical than the Cambridge unit...

    http://www.pacificvalve.us/LITEDACAH.html

    http://www.pacificvalve.us/TDACCHAMELEON.html

    http://www.pacificvalve.us/MusilandMD10.html
    Interesting, and reasonable! Good info PoppaC.! May I add if you do look for a DAC, you may want lean toward the option of having one with a USB input as well, to use with your PC .

  13. #13
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by luvtolisten
    Interesting, and reasonable! Good info PoppaC.! May I add if you do look for a DAC, you may want lean toward the option of having one with a USB input as well, to use with your PC .
    I have an Audigy Soundblaster soundcard with toslink and coax outputs. I tend to shy away from USB. I had a USB dac for sometime and found I enjoy my current set up better.

    This unit contains 4 - TDA1543 chips and a DIR 9001 receiver. I can tell you that there is no digital voicing even on things like cymbals, which usually suffer at the hands of digital. This design is employed by the DIY crowd.



    The only dud in the TDA 15xx line up was the 1547. It was a 1-bit bitstream dac and sounded like azz.

    It's a good idea for anyone who can't afford big cash but wants some decent sound. I know I am a broken record when it comes to this subject, but if I can convert even one person to digital happiness, it's worth it.

  14. #14
    Forum Regular luvtolisten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    526
    I am enlighten. I must play 90% of my music from my PC, because it's convenient more than anything and I like a variety of songs. Is that a DYI kit that can be bought you have pictured?

  15. #15
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Quote Originally Posted by luvtolisten
    Is that a DYI kit that can be bought you have pictured?
    Yes and no. I bought it like this, if that's what you mean. However, you can buy the board naked or even dissasembled, and put it into your own box. I've seen pics where guys put them into clear acrylic and neat stuff like that.

    If you want an affordable way to try it out, Ebay is your best option. Keep in mind you're dealing with Asian sellers.

    http://cgi.ebay.ca/HI-FI-DIR9001-4X-...item1c12622419

    Like I said this design is popular with the DIY crowd, mostly because it's simple and uses very few parts. This means you can put more money into the parts you need, and have a real quality item. It's price and size are more a bi product of it's design, than an indicator of it's performance.

  16. #16
    Forum Regular luvtolisten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    526
    Thank you. Now I'd like to find a sound card with digital coax/toslink for my laptop.

  17. #17
    frenchmon frenchmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    St. Charles Mo
    Posts
    3,271
    Quote Originally Posted by ygg-it
    Do you think we can get a big improvement to get a DACMAGIC joint to the NAD C525 ?
    (so getting rid of the NAD C525 DAC section)


    I read somewhere that there is no differences between the DACMAGIC and the NAD 525 DAC section... so I'm not sure..

    Thanks!
    while I have never heard the C525 I have had 30 days with the D-Magic and my Rotel RCC 1055 CDP. Now from what I do know about this NAD series in general, they have a more darker laid back sound. Not as much sparkle in its presentation. I did hear a NAD CDP but cant remember which model, at an audio store connected with a NAD integrad amp and DALI speakers and it did sound good, but did not have the top end sparkle I like from the tweeters. Some audio hobbyist dont mind the more laid back sound that this NAD series offers but I like a little more livelier sound. (But I do like Marantz which has a little more sparkle than NAD in my opinion) And if some one gave me one or I just could not refuse a great deal on one, I would try and liven it up a bit with brighter cables like silver cbles and brighter speakers. IF the brighter components would not do the trick, I would have to sell it.

    Now I mentioned that I had a month with the DAC Magic in my own home with my Rotel CDP. While all three are in the same price class, and the Rotel being the most expensive at $699 when new, they are all very compatible in class and should be in fidelity. But the Rotel and the Magic have a more brighter sound than the NAD I suppose. So in fairness to the D-Magic I found that it offered a slightly more sweeter tone to music with a rounded sound than the Rotel CDP. The Rotel was not sweet sounding nor rounded in its presentation but brighter in detail. I did not find the sounds of the two DACs involved a night and day difference thus I could not justify keeping the Dmagic due to its pricing point. But for my laptop computer the DMagic would have been perfect.

    The Dmagic in my opinion would give this same sweetness but I dont know if the characteristics of the NAD house sound would come through. While you do get good advice from audio hobbyist, the sure way of knowing is to trust you own ears. Heres an example of what I mean.

    I had heard that a vintage table like Technics would sound just as good as my entry level MMF 2.1 turntable if not better than it.

    So I got a chance to buy a Technics vintage table in very good condition...I would give it a 8 out of 10, and I got it at a good price of $12 bucks. Here was my chance to see if the vintage was on par with the MMF 2.1 or even better. I wanted to know if good money was wasted. The 2.1 is mint and has the 2M RED cart and the Technices has the OM 10 cart. The Red is a better cart than the OM 10 but not by that much....they share many of the same characteristics. Fired up the Technics . Sounded really really good and I thought to myself, man it may even sound better than the MMF 2.1....So after the song, I quickly removed it from the Rotel phono and plugged in the 2.1...fired it up with the same song and instantly knew which was the better deck. The difference was not subtle but very noticeable....it was a wide margin of difference. One was louder, more transparent, seemed to give more detail and just had more fidelity than the other. The MMF 2.1 blew the Vintage Technices out of the water and after listening to both decks back to back for a while, I was glad I had not spent money on the wrong deck even if the 2.1 was given to me as a gift from the missus. The vintage Technics is good, so dont get me wrong, but the newer enty level 2.1 was just more of the right direction as far as getting to highend sound.

    The point is.....what audio hobbyist say, is not always true across the board. You just have to some times trust your gut and then go and see for your self if the opportunity affords itself. So try the DMagic and trust your ears.
    Last edited by frenchmon; 07-09-2010 at 11:25 AM.
    Music...let it into your soul and be moved....with Canton...Pure Music


    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    W10 i5 Quad core processor 8GB RAM/Jriver 20/ Fidelizer Optimizer/ iFI Micro DSD DAC-iUSB 3.0/Vincent SA - T1/Vincent SP-331 MK /MMF-7.1/2M BLACK/MS Phenomena ll+/Canton Vento 830.2

  18. #18
    RGA
    RGA is offline
    Forum Regular
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    5,539
    Quote Originally Posted by Feanor
    Without discussing the particular merits of the Audio Note DAC, I disagree strongly with this advice for a person getting into hifi with a small budget. To wit the extra $1000 spend on a DAC will deliver a very small increment of sound quality compared to the same amount spent on speakers or amplfier.

    Furthermore it's unwarranted to assume that a given individual is about to embark on a long trail of upgrades.
    This is not directed to you but the thread but partly responds to your point as well.

    The OP did not list his speakers or other gear. I am discussing the merits of having a few hundred dollar CD player and then adding a few hundred dollars" DAC and IMO that is a waste of time. I certainly agree that in the lower price realms I would put the money to very nice speakers - but I go by the premise that everyone who goes on an audio forum and didn't buy surround sound receivers and other rubbish from Wal-Mart is probably someone who has "some" interest in audiophile grade equipment. Buying NAD over a Sony Receiver for instance illustrates the person is interested in high fidelity reproduction.

    I think most experienced audiophiles have bought and sold and lost money on gear at some point over the years. The point for me is to try and save some people from such mistakes by offering experiential advice. They can choose to follow it or not. I agree with Feaner that a budget system probably won't make the best use out of the $1500 DAC but again it is going to be an upgrade in the now and in the future it will likely not be a weak link depending how far the OP goes.

    Source first people should like the idea. The speaker first people will recommend keeping the NAD and upgrading speakers - I would certainly upgrade speakers or something else over buying a cheap non tube DAC or non tube one box or any upsampling CD player.

    I think it's poor advice to assume that people who post here will never spend more than $5K on a system. Most people start with cheap stuff and usually regret that they didn;t wait and get the better model. Back when I was buying Arcam was a step up over NAD and Rotel but it was not a good upgrade. It was better but it wasn't "keeper" quality (and it still isn't). Everybody I know who bought Arcam sold it or traded it. It's certainly good for the money but it is a stepping stone that is easy to jump over for something a lot better and would have been better to keep the lower end stuff a little longer and put some money in a Stereo Savings account ( I have one for this purpose) and get something that truly is a significant move.

    My initial point was to either make a big major improvement to something like the DAC 2.1 or don't bother because the $1k players just are not going to be a significant move. I would sooner upgrade something else such as speakers - a $1500 speaker will likely be a LOT better than any $500 speaker (although it depends on the speakers)

  19. #19
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    St. Louis, MO, USA
    Posts
    10,176
    You definitely have to start with a good source. The rest of the chain is important but if the information isn't there in the first place you are wasting your time with the rest of the chain. As an example playing a mp3 through a $50k system will be a pretty good sounding mp3 but it won't sound as good as an equivalent CD player for the system. With that being said I also think you can find a significant upgrade from $400.00 without going to $1500.00. Besides that who says a person would even like Audio Note, not every one, hardly any one, hears the way you do RGA.

    I also, feel some what vendicated by the fact that many on the board have upgraded their sources and have come to find out what I have been saying about the importance of source is true.

  20. #20
    Retro Modernist 02audionoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,908
    Quote Originally Posted by poppachubby
    I have an Audigy Soundblaster soundcard with toslink and coax outputs. I tend to shy away from USB. I had a USB dac for sometime and found I enjoy my current set up better.
    The PS Audio DLIII that blackraven recommended has a USB connection and I would say it's a worthwhile addition. It would be great for a laptop loaded up with FLAC files.

    Quote Originally Posted by luvtolisten
    Thank you. Now I'd like to find a sound card with digital coax/toslink for my laptop.
    Sounds like a Creative SoundBlaster Live! USB.

  21. #21
    Vinyl Fundamentalist Forums Moderator poppachubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Analog Synagogue
    Posts
    4,363
    Ya for laptop USB is just about non-optional. I think you can buy a unit that will convert USB to digital, but why bother?

  22. #22
    Retro Modernist 02audionoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,908
    Quote Originally Posted by poppachubby
    Ya for laptop USB is just about non-optional. I think you can buy a unit that will convert USB to digital, but why bother?
    Those vinyl-to-MP3 recordings I've sent you go through one.

  23. #23
    Forum Regular luvtolisten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by 02audionoob
    Those vinyl-to-MP3 recordings I've sent you go through one.
    Hey noob, if you don't mind me asking, which one do you have?

  24. #24
    Retro Modernist 02audionoob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    2,908
    Quote Originally Posted by luvtolisten
    Hey noob, if you don't mind me asking, which one do you have?
    I have a Creative SoundBlaster Live USB. It has RCA plugs in and out, as well as an optical out, optical in, mic in and headphones out with volume control.

  25. #25
    Forum Regular luvtolisten's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Posts
    526
    Quote Originally Posted by 02audionoob
    I have a Creative SoundBlaster Live USB. It has RCA plugs in and out, as well as an optical out, optical in, mic in and headphones out with volume control.
    Thank you kind sir, I will have to check it out.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •