Berkeley DAC Series 1, anything better 2.5K$

I owned the Berkeley Series 1. The NAD M51 beats it hands down.

Soix and Essrand,

I have owned a lot of DACs. Most are overrated -- and overpriced. Harley makes you think you died and went to heaven with the Berkeley series 1. Don't believe everything you read. Reading between the lines is very useful. But letting your ears be the judge is the most important thing, of course.

The NAD M51 is a sleeper -- very much under the radar, IMO. It easily beats a lot of higher priced DACs. It beats the Berkeley in sheer musicality. If you want to break it down into parameters then that includes detail/definition, tonality, transparency, dynamics, sound stage and imaging. But you do need to get your cabling right. The sound can vary greatly depending on the cables you use. One might ascribe certain attributes to a component that actually belong to the cables that are attached to that component.

Essrand,

I'd be interesting in reading your impressions of the NAD M51.

Essrand and Soix,

The NAD M51 sounds great right out of the box. I would say a couple of hundred hours should do it. The NAD benefits greatly from system changes -- power conditioning and cabling in particular. You really need to optimize it to appreciate what it is capable of -- which is a lot more than I ever anticipated. I am still astonished at what it does after owning DACs from $5,000 to $12,000.

Essrand,

I don't do USB. I have a PS Audio transport. I spin discs. The old fashioned way.

Oddiofyl,

I second your observations.

Cerrot,

The NAD M51 easily beat the Berkeley series 1 in my system.

Essrand,

Yes, the NAD goes directly to the amplifier. I use the NAD as a pre-amp. It is interesting that the NAD suffered in your system when you introduced a pre-amp. I was thinking of doing the same thing in the future but I may put this idea on hold. The NAD as a pre-amp performs flawlessly in my system.

Charles1dad and Essrand, IMO the Berkeley series 1 did not merit Robert Harley's hype. The NAD M51 outperforms it by a country mile in my system.

Cerrot and Charles1dad,

Since reviews are often tainted by factors that have nothing to do with sonic parameters I discount their importance. The only thing that matters to me is what I hear.

Cerrot,

What you are describing cannot be attributed to the NAD because, in my system, the magic midrange is there and the sound is smooth as silk. Cabling and other components may be explain the differences here. It's all a matter of synergy.

Cerrot,

It is quite awesome -- and a great surprise. I was very dubious but the NAD M51 came highly recommended by friends and it has not disappointed. The key is the cabling and front end. It has taken time to optimize the NAD. It is capable of a lot more than you may realize.

Cerrot,

I use a transport to spin CDs -- the old fashioned way.