If it's anything like the even more expensive M2 direct digital amp (and I've read that it is), its a winner. This DAC and the C390DD sprung from the M2.
NAD Master Series M-51 DAC/preamp
- Thread starter JohnVF
- Start date
If it's anything like the even more expensive M2 direct digital amp (and I've read that it is), its a winner. This DAC and the C390DD sprung from the M2.
Catcher10
Prog-tastic!
The biggest problem I have with the C390DD is since it also has no analog inputs, I have to rely on the AP-1 Analog Phono module being my only option for vinyl. The PP375 MDC module I have now is pretty nice, very very quiet.....But I know I can do better. The Phonomena II phonoamp is $600, that probably urinates all over the $300 AP-1 module.....
I still would like to hear the combo.
I still would like to hear the combo.
estreeter
Super Member
Guys, it is a Digital-to-Analog converter (NAD do *not* market it as a preamp), not an amplifier - I'm a little gobsmacked by the two comments above decrying the lack of analog inputs - what would you be trying to achieve exactly ?? If you want a dedicated analog preamp, NAD will happily sell you one for less than the asking price of the M51 (albeit in a much less attractive case than their Masters series components):
http://nadelectronics.com/products/hifi-amplifiers/C-165BEE-Stereo-Preamplifier
fwiw, the reviews on that preamp are mostly positive - obviously an audition would be the only way to know for sure if its what you want.
In the case of the C390DD, I could understand such comments - you have to shell out extra money for one of their analog MDC modules to use these 'digital direct' amps with an analog source - but it makes no sense to make that criticism of a DAC. Am I missing something here ? :scratch2:
Edit : NAD dont promote the M51 as an *traditional* preamp -
M51 is a fully functional digital preamp with seven digital inputs and one of the world's best volume controls. As a 'preamp' it is totally noise and distortion free because all switching and volume control is done in the digital domain. There are no analogue circuits except for the Class A buffer at the output of the DAC. While input selection is available from a front panel control, volume can only be selected via remote control. The supplied IR remote also features controls for NAD's matching M50 Digital Music Player. Serial control is available via RS-232 IR and 12V trigger inputs allow the M51 to fully integrate with advanced automation systems.
Last edited:
Yes, I am not auditioning it for use with any analog components, I just said that if I needed them, I'd just use it as a DAC and run it, and the analog components, through my passive MccCormack. But it is marketed as a preamp, just not one with analog capability. And in that digital-pre role, it is magnificent. This whole system has always been digital (and a record player that collected dust, no longer needed.)
On their site it is subtitled "35-bit 844kHz DAC and Digital Preamp".
The preamp part is what I hadn't really known about until Saturday, when I ran across it. That is basically exactly what I had been looking for, as it handles HDMI...which is my preferred method of digital out for two of my three sources in that system. Though I might use my McCormack CD transport via coax if I can get it repaired. It has an AES/EBU output...I've never had a chance to try it.
On their site it is subtitled "35-bit 844kHz DAC and Digital Preamp".
The preamp part is what I hadn't really known about until Saturday, when I ran across it. That is basically exactly what I had been looking for, as it handles HDMI...which is my preferred method of digital out for two of my three sources in that system. Though I might use my McCormack CD transport via coax if I can get it repaired. It has an AES/EBU output...I've never had a chance to try it.
240sx4u
Lunatic Member
You're missing nothing. It's not a preamp that will work in my system, which I found a bit disappointing. I don't want a dedicated analog preamp necessarily. I have ONE analog audio source, everything else is digital.
Catcher10
Prog-tastic!
We are all on the same page, the M51 is a DAC preamp, I don't think anyone said it was an amp....At least I did not read it that way. If I did more digital listening that M51 DAC would be nice.....That is the reason though I am interested in the C390DD since it is a DAC integrated amp, but my comments on the analog part still stand.
I do believe it is a cutting edge pc of gear, so I would have to be content with the AP-1 Analog module.
estreeter
Super Member
I havent read any specific impressions of either of the Digital Direct amps with the analog modules installed, but John Atkinson found the analog inputs on the M2 slightly less enjoyable than his experience from the 'default' digital inputs. JA openly admits to his skepticism at the start of the review and emerges an enthusiastic convert - like everyone else, I want to believe that the 390 is a 'baby M2' at less than half the price 
All of the above comments describe the sound of the M2 as driven from its digital inputs. The analog inputs are certainly of high quality, but feeding the dCS Puccini's balanced analog out to the M2's analog input gave a sound that, with CDs, wasn't quite as well resolved as when I used the Puccini's digital output to drive the M2. (Setting the balanced Input Offset to –9dB on the M2 resulted in a 0.4dB difference in level that could be compensated for by adjusting the Puccini's own volume control.) During the review period, I was auditioning the gold CD reissue of Arturo Delmoni's recital of works for solo violin by Ysaˇe, Kreisler, and Bach (John Marks JMR14; the gold edition is available exclusively from this website. Yes, this recording is an ambiencefest, and that came though via the M2's analog inputs—but the violin was a little more forward in the soundstage than via the NAD's digital input. And a brief reference back to the Simaudio pre/power combination I used for last December's review of the Puccini revealed that for SACD playback—in which, of course, the player's digital output is disabled—the dCS system provided the ultimate sound quality with the Aerial speakers, edging ahead of the sound of the M2 fed by the dCS's analog outputs.
All of the above comments describe the sound of the M2 as driven from its digital inputs. The analog inputs are certainly of high quality, but feeding the dCS Puccini's balanced analog out to the M2's analog input gave a sound that, with CDs, wasn't quite as well resolved as when I used the Puccini's digital output to drive the M2. (Setting the balanced Input Offset to –9dB on the M2 resulted in a 0.4dB difference in level that could be compensated for by adjusting the Puccini's own volume control.) During the review period, I was auditioning the gold CD reissue of Arturo Delmoni's recital of works for solo violin by Ysaˇe, Kreisler, and Bach (John Marks JMR14; the gold edition is available exclusively from this website. Yes, this recording is an ambiencefest, and that came though via the M2's analog inputs—but the violin was a little more forward in the soundstage than via the NAD's digital input. And a brief reference back to the Simaudio pre/power combination I used for last December's review of the Puccini revealed that for SACD playback—in which, of course, the player's digital output is disabled—the dCS system provided the ultimate sound quality with the Aerial speakers, edging ahead of the sound of the M2 fed by the dCS's analog outputs.
Last edited:
Because she's like freshly Windexed glass on every change! I spent about 2 hours yesterday listening to a hugely expensive Burmester amp and didn't feel underwhelmed when I got home. I actually think the Aleph is more fun to listen to, but the Burmester was really nice. Bass is fantastic on that amp. Better than the Aleph, but for the price difference it should be.
So I cycled through the 3 cables between the M51 and Aleph. Subtle differences but differences nonetheless. I preferred the cables that I already owned (Straightwire Crescendo) over the new contenders, but it was a fun experiment. It's fun living 30 stories above a stereo store.
It's official. The degree of improvement this brought to my 2nd system was such that I couldn't take it back after the in-home audition. The SC-27 and Marantz SC-11s2 were traded in. That was not a decision taken lightly, I loved those pieces. The SC-27 held the record for the longest stretch anything has stayed in one of my systems. Here's to you, giant HT amp that changed my entire perception of what an AV amp could be. You were a good amp. And will make somebody else very happy.
You're big shiny black mass will be missed. Until I listen to the M51. Then it will be missed a little bit less:
You're big shiny black mass will be missed. Until I listen to the M51. Then it will be missed a little bit less:
Last edited:
Art K.
The Voodoo You Do!
Interestingly my AVR's always stick around longer than other pieces. Probably because I can't see dumping money on another one just to get the latest AV doo dad. My Yamaha RX-V657 (which was the first budget AVR recommended by TAS) stuck around for 5 yrs (when it left it had the longest active tenure in the house)...I hated it for music though. I now have a Marantz SR5005 which works as well as can be expected for music. In fact it's playing right now in Pure Direct through my Quad's. With an engaging source it sounds far better than expected for an AVR. In some ways better, to my ears, than their budget integrated amps. That Pioneer is a beast, congrats on the NAD.
The limitations of my 2nd system kept it in use for so long. There's a projector in here, so I wanted HDMI (even though I have an external switcher) and being an apartment its nice to have remote volume control. Those Marantz AVRs look nice. I listened to a big one at Magnolia on Sonus Faber Liutos and it did a pretty good job all things considered. I listened to them run the Pioneer through its paces to make sure it all worked when I traded it in today, and probably shouldn't have...it has a very nice amp section. ICEpower, and very well executed. But it has been bettered here. The Marantz SC-11s2 was easier to say goodbye to. While it was my introduction to better CD playback, it was always a bit too laid back for my tastes. Too smooth, it rounded off the edges a bit too much.
MWalt
Super Member
NAD has certainly stepped up in the cutting edge category. If one isn't a big vinyl fan, the M51 would probably be the perfect answer; get a nice amp and everything else is contained in the M51. Plus, it has a remote and I have found that I like them with my gear. I love simplicity.
Last edited: