Messages 51-100

	1.00	Price of CDX	Ron Toolsie	23/3/99
	1.00	Power amp interconnects	Ron Toolsie	19/3/99
	1.00	Feedback vs no feedback	Ron Toolsie	19/3/99
	1.00	52 inputs	Ron Toolsie	17/3/99
	1.00	82 vs 52	Ron Toolsie	16/3/99
	1.00	Underperforming 52	Ron Toolsie	16/3/99
	1.00	52 Uber alles	Ron Toolsie	14/3/99
	1.00	volume with DBLs	Ron Toolsie	4/3/99
	1.00	Maxell Advertisment	Ron Toolsie	18/2/99
	1.00	Sterling Service	Ron Toolsie	16/2/99
	1.00	A plenitude of Burndys	Ron Toolsie	13/2/99
	1.00	Burndys that fell off the back of a lorry	Ron Toolsie	12/2/99
	1.00	Which boards for the Dynavector 10X?	Ron Toolsie	9/2/99
	1.00	to supercap a snaxo.. or not	Ron Toolsie	9/2/99
	1.00	Power cords	Ron Toolsie	9/2/99
	1.00	snaxo with hi/supercap	Ron Toolsie	9/2/99
	1.00	passive DBLs	Ron Toolsie	5/2/99
	1.00	Vox dei ex orator...	Ron Toolsie	5/2/99
	1.00	old naims	Ron Toolsie	1/2/99
	1.00	active vs passive	Ron Toolsie	30/1/99
	1.00	180 powering pre-amps	Ron Toolsie	29/1/99
	1.00	Fingerlifts, cueing devices and sound quality	Ron Toolsie	27/1/99
	1.00	Front end uber alles?	Ron Toolsie	14/1/99
	1.00	Break in after recap	Ron Toolsie	12/1/99
	1.00	nomenclature	Ron Toolsie	12/1/99
	1.00	More Rusholme and NHS dining.	Ron Toolsie	11/1/99
	1.00	Rusholme Audio Dealers...	Ron Toolsie	7/1/99
	1.00	Best University Student Kit...	Ron Toolsie	6/1/99
	1.00	Options and thoughts...	Ron Toolsie	5/1/99
	1.00	Isolation plinths for DBLs	Ron Toolsie	4/1/99
	1.00	250 vs 125 vs 135	Ron Toolsie	27/12/98
	1.00	250 as monoblock amp... a follow up	Ron Toolsie	19/12/98
	1.00	250s as monoblocks	Ron Toolsie	17/12/98
	1.00	Multiamping with a Hicap/Supercap	Ron Toolsie	2/12/98
	1.00	ESL sensitivity	Ron Toolsie	18/11/98
	1.00	Re: NAC 52	Ron Toolsie	13/11/98
	1.00	Prefix?	Ron Toolsie	12/11/98
	1.00	Phono cards... in or out?	Ron Toolsie	12/11/98
	1.00	Geddon Lights	Ron Toolsie	6/11/98
	1.00	Extra-mural activities	Ron Toolsie	18/10/98
	1.00	Microphonic pre-amps	Ron Toolsie	17/10/98
	1.00	Booze and hifi...	Ron Toolsie	9/8/98
	1.00	Exposure Amps.. and audio nostalgia.	Ron Toolsie	5/8/98
	1.00	Breaking silence	Ron Toolsie	28/7/98
	1.00	Turn off the 52??? NEVER!!	Ron Toolsie	29/6/98
	1.00	New SNAIC 5 to 52 ... you just gotta get it!	Ron Toolsie	29/6/98
	1.00	Snaic charmers	Ron Toolsie	24/6/98
	1.00	Visitors Welcome	Ron Toolsie	3/6/98
	1.00	The Loon Tweaker... moi?	Ron Toolsie	3/6/98
	1.00	First rate second hand gear	Ron Toolsie	27/5/98

Date: 23-Mar-99 08:50
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Price of CDX

"Never quite understood why, in that case, the CDX/XPS is more expensive than the old CDS? "

Well, although the CDS1 does have a quite elaborate and finely tuned floating suspension, it has not got an indwelling power supply for either the digital or the analog stages as those are all resident within the CDSPS. By virtue of being a stand-alone player, the CDX has these extra costing components, which are rendered redundant by the XPS. Not too suprising then that the CDX/XPS is roughly equivalent in price to the CDS1.

Ron

Date: 19-Mar-99 06:53
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Power amp interconnects

"You'll really scream when you realise that the interconnects for 250s and 135s consist of mains cable."

It is probably more important what these cables are NOT...

1. They are not shielded and as such are free to radiate (as well as unfortunately pick up unwanted RF).

2. They have no thick fancy dialectric around them, which can only serve to slur the response and truncate off the upper registers (subjectively and empirically, although I am not to sure that this is actually measurable).

3. They are not solid core or Litz.

4. They are not some arbitrary length... they work best at exactly the lengths they are... indeed for many applications they are too short, but increasing their length can greatly impact upon performance. The maxim to use long interconnects from pre-to-power and short speaker cables is exactly opposite to the naim way.

5. They are not an extra cost.. they come 'free' with the power amps you buy.

6. Need I mention that in my prior years, the amount of dosh I sank on various interconnects would have purchased an entry level naim system.

Ron

3. T

Date: 19-Mar-99 06:41
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Feedback vs no feedback

"Would it be possible that you post the reference to the article from Matti Otala? "

Matti Otala was one of the first (?the first?) proponents of the newly applied entity TIM (transient intermodulation distortion), believing it to be a previously unmeasured parameter that is correlated to subjective quality. He later on went to design the Electrocompaniet series of amplifiers, that did have a nice liquid smooth sound at the expense of pace and a relatively high burnout rate.

Ron

Date: 17-Mar-99 08:58
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: 52 inputs

"Ron, Thanks for your insight. One part I didn't understand was "try input 2 instead of input 3"; would you care to elaborate? "

Well, if the problem IS a blob of solder across an input pin, it will present a problem when that input is used. And not when another input (such as #2) is being used. Heck, in the time we spend talking about this.. you can be trying it out yourself. Let me know.

Ron

Date: 16-Mar-99 22:22
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: 82 vs 52

"IMHO The '82 is a dogs' bollocks pre-amp. The '52 is better, but not by as much as one might have thought originally"

References to canine gentialia aside, I respectfully beg to differ. The 52 is in quite a different league than the 82. Many of the improvements that Dave noted when upgrading from the 102, I too noted when I moved up to the 52. Compared to the 82, not only does it have a more dynamic presentation with bags more inner detail (the macrodynamics) but the careful shape of notes.. their rise time and varying rates of decay (the envelopes and microdynamics) becomes a part of the performance, not just the tone and the tempo. This for me is what makes the 52 so much more realistic than the 82. Its not the notes it plays, it is the WAY it plays them. Any half ass guitar player can render the introductory lick to Claptons 'Wonderful Tonight'.. but almost everybody sounds pitifully amateurish and wildly out of control, letting the swell and decay of the notes take on a mind of their own. Clapton and the 52 take the same notes, with the same tempo, and through artistic shaping of the notes render even the simplest lick into a thing of beauty. This degree of finesse is only hinted at with the 82- even when juiced with a double snaiced supercap. The 52, sir, is the tyranosauran testicles.

Oh a cold, straight out of the box, brand new 52 just *slaughters* a well warmed up and burned in 82 with great room to spare. I still maintain that Graham Jackson may unfortunately have a 52 that is quite out of tune if he perceives the 82 to be only a small way behind it. My opinion is not based on empirics... I owned an 82/supercap for several months before I moved up the the 52/supercap. I can well remember that incredulous feeling that overwhelmed me within the firsts few notes of the 52s debut performance. I may be wrong.. but I am never in doubt :-)

Ron

Date: 16-Mar-99 08:25
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Underperforming 52

" For the second time in six months, I'm evaluating a 52, and for the second time I'm disappointed with the marginal improvement. I suspected the transition between an 82/supercap was a small step to take in terms of performance: a theory disproven by your input. "

I too once took over my 52/supercap to a friend who was using an 82. Actually I have done this on about four occasions. On one occassion however the 52 sounded quite a bit WORSE than his 82, being somewhat flat and compressed sounding, and quite unengaging. Something was not right. The 52 was returned to naim, who found that there was a slight spot of solder on one of the input din receptacles that was causing an intermittent short to earth which would still allow the preamp to work and produce undistored sound, but at a great sacrifice to its ultimate performance. This was corrected within a very short time and sent back to me on the same day they received it. Apparently this is the commonest cause of the 52 being below par- it does not happen very often, and when it does the 52 still sounds OK.. but the magic is gone. I suggest you try another input for your 52 (try input 2 instead of input 3) as this may circumvent this problem. Regardless, the 52 has got to be checked out by the factory, as this is likely the problem within it. I can assure you that a fully functional 52 is an immense improvement over a supercapped 82. Not a 'maybe it is, maybe it isn't'. And if it isn't, then there is something wrong. And now you may know what that may be.

Regards, Ron

Date: 14-Mar-99 11:51
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: 52 Uber alles

I find myself much in the same camp as Dave. I have spent some time comparing the unadorned CDX with the CDX/XPS and the CDS1. The differences between these three very fine playback systems were nowhere like the planetary leap I took when moving from the 82/supercap to the 52/supercap. The only other leap I made of similar magnitude was back in the early 80s when I traded in my 110 for a 250.

As Julian pointed out in the design of power amps.. it is not as important how good your best components are.. its how bad the worst ones are. And there appears to be a much wider range of disparity between the naim line of preamps than there is between their line of CD players.

I have (because I can) assembled *wildly* mismatched systems at home just to see which component is most critical within an entire system. So I have gone through the full spectrum of running a $120 Pioneer CD player through my DBL/sixpack system to running a pair of linn Tukans with a fourpack of 135s and a Snaxo 2-4 powered by a supercap with the trusty 52/CDS upstream. As well as slotting in at various points different power amps, different CD players,and 82/hicap, an 82/supercap, a 42/snaps, a 42.5/hicap, a 42/5 supercap etc etc. And I found that the 52 based systems were the ones that had some magical quality in them. Even when using a homebrew CD player, the 52, an old Eagle2 power amp and the Tukans the music still was compelling. It is my opinion that the 52 is so far in advance of all other preamps, it can dig the deepest into the strengths of an even otherwise flawed source component. It allows something to happen even that the 82/supercap does not transmit, even with a CDX/XPS upstream. I cannot imagine anybody with a decent (albeit less than a CDS2) source being less than flabbergasted within the first few notes when a 52 is inserted into their system. If I had to own just a single naim component, this is the one I would get. So congratulations to Dave for flying in the face of conventional 'wisdom' (aka dogma) and allowing himself to max out something that was not a source component.

Ron

Date: 4-Mar-99 15:51
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: volume with DBLs

"With my passive DBLs through 135's the earth moves at 10pm on the dial. I think at higher volumes the 135's run out of steam (11:30 ->12pm on the dial). they start to sound a bit shouty like NAP140's."

When juiced by a sixpack of 135s, the DBLs can be ran up to about 2-3 o'clock on the 52s volume pot. Without any sense of strain. Nothing like a few horsepower of amps to REALLY get them to move the earth.

Ron

Date: 18-Feb-99 08:25
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Maxell Advertisment

"That's a bloke in the Maxell ad's (Le Corbusier)chair. Although he's a bloke with long hair, admittedly. I think he may be someone famous. "

Well that is one of the guys from Bauhaus, a band of some success. But I think that he is more iconoclastic for the advertisment than he was for his music.

Ron

Date: 16-Feb-99 14:43
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Sterling Service

"Have my amp back in less than eight total days that same Wednesday. Cleaner sound, much better separation and presentation. Chris West and his crew perform to Naim's high standard in the USA. "

I too have had nothing but the most expedient service from NANA. There have been two occasions when I have had the serviced unit back in my possession within FOUR days of me sending it off. Which is to say the problems were fixed on the day of receipt and the unit dispatched the same day.

The only time I had a unit serviced in Salisbury (circa 1983) it took a full nine weeks to get back to me... but this was due to several extenuating circumstances. Securicor misplaced the package and it eventually showed up in Salisbury the week before they closed down for the 2 week Christmas break.

Regardless, I think us American-based Naim users are extremely privileged to have access to such a high level of after-sales service. Maybe only the Maytag Man could do better :-)

Ron

Date: 13-Feb-99 08:30
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: A plenitude of Burndys

"Unfortunately, as I found out the hard way, there are diferent burndy(s) for the 52, xps & snaic. "

Actually there are four FatBoy Burndy 17 cables.... the 52, the xps, the CDSmk1 and the Snaxo. I'm not sure if the Snaxo 2-4 burdy is different from the snaxo 3-6 one. My snaxo burndy cable is just labelled S-Naxo, so they are probably the same, even though the 3-6 snaxo allows access to an additional 2 pairs of regulated voltage rails over the 2-4, which are probably ingnored at the socket indwelling to the 2-4.

I hear that Naim custom makes Black Snaic-17s for the original CDS, and that they offer a VERY significant improvement over the gray one. Looks like I am going to have a third useless gray burndy-17 interred in my audio graveyard. Any takers??

Ron

Date: 12-Feb-99 16:18
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Burndys that fell off the back of a lorry

"Anyone got any good ideas for what to do with a spare grey Burndy? "

Well, there MAY be an altruistic use of the gray Burndys that feed into the SNAXO. As you are aware, Burndy come 'free' with the purchase of an XPS and the 52 head unit. However if you wish to use a snaxo with a supercap, you need to purchase a burndy cable ontop of the already impressive expense of the snaxo/s-cap. Surely there are a few folks out there who can JUST about stretch to the snaxo/scap, but just can't quite find the extra $500 for the Burndy (although you can use a regular snaic between s-cap and snaxo, but it is counterintuitive to come so close, and yet stay so far away. So, it would be nice if these folks could have a freebie gray Burndy cable through generous donations while they saved towards the acquisition of a current black one.

I also wonder what is the raw cost of the plugs to be found on either end of those burndys. Surely they could be reused, although as far as man-hour expenses go, it may be cheaper to buy them new, than to unsolder the many connections and clean the pins off, before resoldering them. Hey... maybe this is a way for us to 'homebrew' burndys of our own. Although to be honest, if I had no interest in brewing my own snaic 4/5s, there is no WAY I would consider the onerous task of a burndy 17. BTW... what do you think those burndy sockets are used for in real life.... CT scanners? pro-equipment??? certainly not home audio equipment.

Regards Ron

Date: 9-Feb-99 16:15
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Which boards for the Dynavector 10X?

">>>>One suggestion a dealer made recently was to try using 'K' boards. This stuck me as mad as the 10x4 produces 2.0mV and the board has a sensitivity of 0.1mV (or 20 times less). He reckons that this is no problem and overload will not occur. <<<<<<

He is wrong. (Is he a Naim dealer?) "

Well, my last experience with this cartridge was in its original mark1 form circa 1981. I had a friend who was using this into a MM compatible Nytech tuner/amp (the CTA 252XD for those of you who may remember it.) The guy I was sharing a student house with had the same Nytech, but with the MC (an additional 10-plus dB of gain) boards. Even though these were on paper way too sensitive for the 10X, when I brought my mates MC boarded Nytech to his place there was a very sigificant increase in dynamics and 'swing factor'over the technically more compatible boards. Needless to say, he swapped his boards over to the MC ones in short order. I don't know how much headroom the Nytech MC boards had over the current Naim ones, but running the 10X4 into an input that may be on paper technically incompatible is at least worth trying. If there is an overt mismatch, you will hear a very distorted, clipped sound within the first few notes. In which case revert back to the ones that are more technically compatible. But if for some reason audible distortion is not a problem, you may gain extra dynamics and sheer funkiness by using the higher gain boards.

Try before you buy, and then you have nothing to lose.

Ron

Date: 9-Feb-99 13:23
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: to supercap a snaxo.. or not

Cliff,

"The real problem is doing the dem. If I hear the CDX/XPS vs CDS2/XPS then the 82/Scap vs 52/Scap then the Hicap'd SNAXO vs the Supercap'd SNAXO all in the same demo. I'm sure by the end I'll just say sod it where's my Amex card!"

The best dem is the HOME dem... and one of those at a time. At this level of price, I would expect a dealer either to provide you with a loaner, or to cheerfully refund your money should you, in a reasonably prompt time, think that your purchases did not offer value for money. I have opined privately before, and publically now that naims greatest value for money is in their top-or-the-range components. Which is to say, there is a much greater difference between the 82 and the 52, than there is between the 72 and 102, or even the 62 and the 82. You will never upgrade to a 52, a supercap, a pair of 135s and fail to be absolutely delighted. But just because you would be delighted with moving from the snaxo/hicap to a snaxo/supercap within your system, does not mean that you would be even MORE delighted with the move from an 82/supercap to the 52/supercap. If you were moving to the CDS2,135s, 52, supercap-for-your-snaxo all within short order, it would hardly matter which one you did first. But you are not. And the value for money lies in which of the equivalently priced upgrades stands head-and-shouders above the others. And this I am confident in saying is the 82-to-52 transition, not the snaxo-hicap to snaxo-supercap move. In fact, I could play you my CDS/52/supercap/snaxo/hicap/6x135/DBL system and BLOW you away.... with a mere hicap powering the snaxo. But if I substituted the 82 for the 52, and powered the snaxo with a supercap, you would ask where had all the magic gone? The answer is away with the 52-for that component has a magical hallmark on it like no other piece of Naim equipment. Note well that I have NOT heard as yet the CDS2.

Oh.. an active pair of SBLs driven with a pair of 250s handily outperforms the same pair of SBLs driven passively by a pair of 135s. But from my own (fairly large) experience.. the two biggest upgrades I have EVER made within the naim line were the NAP110 to the NAP250 circa 1984 and the 82 to 52 circa 1995. By those standards the snaxo/hicap vs snaxo/supercap differences pale to near insignicance, especially if you are not using a 52 upstream.

Until I hear the CDS2 in MY SYSTEM (which should be within the next month) my recommendation is order of preference is to...

1. First the 82 to 52.

2. Next the 2x250 to 4x135

3. FINALLY the snaxo/hicap to snaxo/supercap. Even/especially in an active system, the extra degree of refinement/control of the 135s over the 250 I believe is greater than the hicap-to-supercap upgrade when powering a snaxo. This however is contingent that you have a supercap powering your pre-amp. For the preamp seems to benefit far more than does a snaxo using the supercap, and the latter should be reserved until EVERYTHING else is just right.

I may be wrong, but I am never in doubt....

Ron

Date: 9-Feb-99 12:47
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Power cords

First of all.... power cords, like mains distribution/plugs/receptacles DO make a difference. I have noticed this since the mid 80's when I tried homebrew 'twin and earth' Romex wire as power cords. Replacing duplex receptacles in walls from old, crusty ones to new shiny ones make a far bigger difference than some may think. Ditto having a dedicated 50A spur compared to a 15A one that is shared with lighting etc.

As far as the physics of power cords, well I am as much in the dark as most other people. But what is probably important is the frequency-dependent output impedence of the plug/receptacle/power cord unit. Even the most puny looking power cord will pass without much difficulty quite a few amps at 50/60 Hz. But a mains supply has more than just a 50/60 Hz AC sinewave on it. The entire house's wiring acts as an antenna (and can be used quite effectively as such) to RF. Now the question is.. what happens to this RF that is resident on the mains??? Well it can be filtered at several levels.

1. A mains 'conditioner'... while this may reject a certain amount of RF, it probably also significantly increases the output impedence of the 50/60 Hz current. Not by a huge amount, necessarily, but enough to truncate 'rhythm and pace' that is so endemic within Naim gear. Probably the most benign form of mains conditioning is through an isolation transformer, which has little effect on the passage of 50/60 Hz (assuming that it has a sufficiently high- in the order of 1 KVA or more- rating), but rejects to a certain extent RF. Although this rejection is not as high as those complex conditioners, it is more benign to the 50/60 Hz current. No point throwing the baby away with the bathwater here.

2. RF filtering between AC receptacle and powered (naim) component. Yes, this may make techincal sense. But remember, many of the FatBoy thick-as-a-hose power cords are extravagantly screened. While this may serve to lessen the amount of RF picked up by the power cord, it also minimizes the amount of RF *radiated* by it.. and in so doing keeps the RF within the cord, instead of letting some of it dissapate into the Great Ether. Not always a good thing, for sometimes excessive RF may need a safety release valve, and to contain it through screening serves only to faithfully transmit it to the subsequent component.

3. RF rejection by the power supply- this is beyond our control, as we are not the designers of the audio equipment. This is a complicated subject (by which I mean that I do not understand it) and partially involves the bandwidth of the equipment. The naim preamps have a 'time aligned' filter or something that shuts out much of the transmitted RF.. whereas their poweramps can faithfully reproduce it. How many of us have at one time or another heard CB or commercial radio breakthrough in our naim systems? Many, if not most I bet. Largely due to (I believe) the combination of the high bandwidth power amps and the unscreened pre-to-power cables used in the 250/135.

I personally cannot rationalize or predict which power cables sound better than others within a naim system. But I can tell you that aftermarket power cords that have worked very well (and I mean VERY well) in other systems- and I am thinking about the Tiffany $100+ powercables here- make for a dark, uninvolving sound within the context of a naim system.

By the time Mr Neil adds 3 of the $1200 powercables to his Blue Circle pre-amp based system, he could have almost gone from the BC preamp with all of these power cords, to an 82/Supercap system without them. A comparison I believe he owes to himself. Cartainly the cost-of-parts perceived value is MUCH higher in the latter. I should imagine that the $1200 power cord has much, MUCH lower parts, R&D and repair-under-warranty cost than say an equivalently priced IXO. I fear it is priced instead as 'what the market will tolerate' rather than a 'reasonable multiple of production cost'.

Of course it is arguable if a $1200 power cord (or even three of them) allows a bigger improvement than moving from a hi- to a super-cap... then they offer better value for money. I suggest howerver that they do NOT. Having said that, I would be very eager to try these withing the context of my system. After all, I just spent quite a bit of dosh upgrading my gray Snaic-17s to the Black ones. And the same mystique could apply to them as to power cords. With the one exception that these are made and sanctioned by naim.

Impartially yours ;-) Ron

Date: 9-Feb-99 11:21
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: snaxo with hi/supercap

"I would like for aesthetic reasons to get a newer PSU for the SNAXO. I assume a new HiCAP would sound the same, and therefore would be £720 worth of cosmetics. However if the Supercap with a SNAIC 17 would be a lot better then I would contemplate going this route. What are the sonic benefits of the Supercap driving the SNAXO and why? "

I have tried three different types of power supplies to my SNAXO 3-6 resident in my DBL/sixpack. A hicap, a supercap linked to the Snaxo with a standard SNAIC, and a supercap linked to the Snaxo with a Snaic-17 FatBoy cable.

Using the Snaic 17 allows each of the channels HF, MF and LF (hi, mids and lows)circuitry within the Snaxo to access its own individually regulated voltage. So, configured this way, you could say that the Supercap is the equivalent of 6 Hicaps in a Snaxo3-6 (and four Hicaps within a Snaxo2-4). These empirics alone suggest that the Supercap will allow for a significantly better performance than just a single Hicap. And it does... offering rather more insight, inflection and articulation, with considerably more purity and lack of edge. But wait.... even using a Snaic 5 from the supercap to the Snaxo works much better than using a Hicap, even though each are providing just 2 pairs of regulated voltage rails- and in this case the superiority of the Supercap is attributable to being an order of magnitude less noisy as well as more rigid and probably of also of a lower output impedence. In much the same way that a Supercap represents a very large improvement over a hicap when powering a 102 or lower pre-amp as compared to a Hicap.

BUT let me point out to you that there is a MUCH larger difference between the 52 and the 82 (when both are powered by Supercaps) then there is between a snaxo/hicap and a snaxo/supercap. I know because I had an 82 before the 52, so I am speaking out of experience, not just reciting dogma. I know that replacing your 82 with a 52 changes the aesthetics not one bit, for externally (on the front panel anyway) they are identical. But VIVE LE DIFFERENCE!!!! If you love music, keep the old-style Hicap to power the Snaxo and make the move from the 82 to a 52. You will never look back. Oh, unless you have a new black snaic between your hicap and snaxo, you are depriving yourself of a large part of the hicaps abilities.

Besides my impressions of the differences between the snaxo/hicap and the snaxo/supercap were acquired listening through a 52. With an 82 upstream I would put it to you that those differences would be considerably minimized.

Hopefully my advice is worth more than the customary tuppence.

Regards,

Ron

Date: 5-Feb-99 16:41
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: passive DBLs

"I'm curious to know if DBL's can 'practically' be driven passive. I know there's a passive xover for them, but do they really 'need' the six pack? Or would a pair of 135s be sufficient.

Even driven passively, the DBLs are over 90dB efficient. Which means they can produce LOUD levels with even a NAIT. Or course volume and refinement do not always (?seldom??) go hand in hand. Most of the time, I bet that I do not listen to levels as loud as can be achieved with a nait... but at those levels I am sure the 52/sixpack/snaxo/supercap allow a wealth of other volume-independant finesse.

Ron

Date: 5-Feb-99 06:51
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Vox dei ex orator...

The Voice of God from a Speaker...

Yes, the DBL experience is simply unparalleled, although I have no idea how a six pack based around a non-DBL speaker would perform, or indeed how the DBLs work with anything less than a sixpack. Regardless when so configured they do something special and intangible that no other electric-to-sound transducer does.

Last night I had two visitors, who stopped by for a swift Bloody Mary or two prior to us going out for a spot of fine dining. We ventured up to the music room for a quick tune (or two) while our BMs were being consumed. About two hours later, one of them (who had never even seen a stick of naim before) opined that maybe we should forego the fine dining, order in a pizza and listen to music instead. Not.... 'listen to that BASS', or 'what about that midrange detail'...for those are not what makes the DBLs special, although they deal aces in all of those departments too.

Oh, I nixed the pizza and insisted that we follow through on the dining. Of course I was maybe being a bit selfish, because I could come back and resume my listening, whereas they could not ;-)

The dinner was remarkable, but I bet the story they recount today will probably not be about the food (a very rare rack of lamb) but instead about the music they had listened to before dinner. Yes, they are that special.

I have no opinion of the latest B&W speakers, nor have I much interest in acquiring one. And besides my dealer does not carry B&W and there is no real way for me to even inconveniently audition the 801/802 on the sharp end of an all-naim system.

Regards, Ron

Date: 1-Feb-99 08:28
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: old naims

"... but have you ever heard a 32.5/Supercap/Active 6 pack (or even active 2 pack with 250s and SBLS) compared to one with a 102 (c/w Supercap but without an NAPSC and is it better with one?) or 72/Supercap or even 82/supercap? I suspect if you had you'd not be so quick to damn what was once Naims top of the line pre-amp. It was quite good! "

Until last week I had my DBL sixpack system running off a supercapped 42.5 (I won,t go into why) and the results were way above my expectations. This is one sweet pre-amp for the $100 that I gave for it second hand. When I did replace it with the 52 (using the latest black Burndy) the improvements though were staggering. The 42.5 captures quite a bit of the music, but very little of the 'gestalt' that the 52 allows.

Ron

Date: 30-Jan-99 18:07
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: active vs passive

It has long been my belief that a(ny) passive crossover not only greatly increases the demand of the power amplifier, it is never as linear as an active one, and always strips some low level detail from the incoming signal.

I have listened to a pair of Linn Kabers, powered passively with a single 250 and then actively with one 250 and two additional 180s, with a Supernaxo/hicap doing the splitting. And although the tonal balance was very close, there was an enormous wealth of communication and articulation that was unmasked by going active.

I have also listened to the SBLs driven passively by a pair of 135s and then quickly changed over to being actively driven by a pair of 250s with the SNAXO/Supercap doing its job. Again the active configuration was the one of preference. And believe me.. the 250s are quite some way behind the performance of the 135s... its just that and the difference between an active crossover and a passive one is quite a bit larger than that between the 135s and the 250.

As all naim poweramps have identical gain, it is quite possible to mix and match.. although beware.. for 2-way speakers they are vertically bi-amped... which is to say one amp does the left speaker, and another does the right. It would be counterintutive to have a 250 driving one speaker and a 180 driving the other. And I concur that if you can multiamp horizontally (instead of vertically) then the better amps (which in naims case are the more powerful ones too) should be used on the tweeters, even though the their requirements in terms of raw power are much less, in terms of refinement it is much higher.

But I still cannot imagine you would be any less than delighted if you replaced a 250 by a pair of 135s, even passively. And yes.. the source does need to be the dogs bollocks. In my earlier days I tried a system out based around the LP12/LVX front end... with the 250 in place I could quite easily hear the mistracking of the stylus within the LVX and that was detrimental to the music. But with a 110, that unpleasant detail was stripped, along with some of the music- but at least it did not have you on edge. Replacing the LVX armed LP12 with an Ittoked one made the 250ed system vastly better in ALL ways.

Regards, Ron

Date: 29-Jan-99 14:28
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: 180 powering pre-amps

To be brief... it works, but not particulary well. An acquaintance of mine started off a few months ago with a CDX/82/180/Tukans. After a brief honeymoon period he found it strident and very strained, with wallowing bass and absolutely no refinement. I had a spare hicap lying around, so I took it over.Sure enough the Tukans sounded like scalpels being dropped on a hard tile floor. Even at relatively low levels there was a leading edge that was sharp enough to lacerate ones cochlea. But with the Hicap.... Voila. The 82 was no longer being current starved and modulated by the basic DC rail available within the 180. And the sound improved far more than you would imagine, considering the 180s DC output is anectodally 'roughly equivalent' to a Flatcap.... NOT. I guarantee you will be thrilled how musical and involving your system will sound once a Hicap is resident. You may actaully be at a point where you enjoy sitting down and listening for hours on end. I know that is frustrating to spend a goodly sum of money and find out that the end results are intolerable. The Hicap should really be considered an essential part of the 102 and not an option that may or may not be added later. While there are some members of this forum who may prefer the CDX without the XPS, I cannot imagine that there is a single person who would not prefer a hicapped 102 over an unadorned unit by a very large margin, and within a very short order too. These levels of improvements can literally be appreciated within the first two notes of a piece of music. Considering how much you have already spent on your system, the Hicap will be the best $1500 you have spent in a LONG time. And should keep you happy unless you have the misfortune to hear a supercap without being able to afford one.

Regards, Ron

Date: 27-Jan-99 08:30
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Fingerlifts, cueing devices and sound quality

There is no doubt that these extraneous bits of 'convenience' hardware detract- and sometimes significantly- from the overall performance. The first arm that I dug into was an Ittok LVII back in 1984. I removed the cueing device with a small but musically significant improvement. Later on when I got a Zeta arm I removed the arm rest.... a tuning fork shaped device that the arm clipped into. Suddenly that big, fat Zeta bass became quite a bit more nimble. Next I turned my attention to the fingerlift. I clipped of (with a pair of pliars) about 50% of the length... WOW..... much better. I then clipped of another 1/2 of what was left.. yet another improvement. Then I shore off the damn thing completely. Better again yet. The cueing device was the next to go with further gains. But without a finger lift or a cueing device it required new motor skills to operate, but heck, it sounded SSSOOOOO much better it was worth it.

The final coup de grace came later.... the cueing device was initially inserted to a moulded aluminum flange that projected out from the arm base. This I could not resist.. so I took a hacksaw to the bastard and sawed it off. The aluminium filings generated however got into the bearings and caused them to foul in short order. So back the arm went to the distributor (RCS at the time, I believe) who did a sterling job cleaning it up and when I got it back a few days later... bugger me if it was not sounding EVEN better.

Moral: Extraneous devices on an arm is like putting a cup-holder onto a javelin. It may make life more convenient, but comes at expense of the original design. Caveat emptor.

I just rejoined the vinyl fold by adding a 1979 vintage LP12 replete with an 1984 vintage Syrinx PU3 tonearm and equal vintage Dynavector Ruby cartridge (hey.. I got the whole thing for just $500), and already am looking at the 'unecessary' bits of the PU-3 with temptation...........

I will spare you (for now) the stories of how I managed to destroy TWO Syrinx PU2 arms and one additional Ittok.

Regards, Ron

Date: 14-Jan-99 07:11
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Front end uber alles?

"The original flat earth society dogma used to say that a LP12, Ittok, ASAK, 32, 250 with a pair of Kans would out perform (musically) a rega3, Basik, 32, 250 with a pair of Isobariks. I listened to both. They were both silly systems, and much as some people liked Kans I thought they were crap. "

Hmmmm..... let me tell you about my first audio epiphany. The London HiFi show in the summer of 1978. The Linn room had 2 systems setup.

1. LP12/Lustre arm/ADC XLM mov mag cartridge

NAC12/NAP120 amps

Mordaunt Short Carnival speakers (the cheapest Kan-sized ones in their product line).

2. Rega3/Grace 707 arm/Supex 900 cartridge

NAC32/SNAPS/NAXO/ 3*NAP 250 amps

Linn Active Isobariks PMS speakers

For those in the know, the latter was the 'ultimate' triamped Barik system of the time, with the exception of the substitution of the LP12 for the Rega 3. The other system had the LP12 with a cheap arm, a cheap cartridge and naims entry level pre and power playing into shoe-box sized (or even a little smaller) speakers.

And guess which one EVERYBODY in the room preferred. Yes, it was the LP12 based system. By a LONG way too. And guess which one had a seemingly more extended and tuneful bass response. YES.... the LP12 based system with those teeny-tiny speakers. When the Isobariks were fed with the Rega upstream, they lost a good octave and a half of subjective bass response. At the end of the demo, the bearded gentleman running the demo (Julian somebody.. I forget his name ;-) then inserted a LP12/Syrinx PU1/Supex for the Rega/Grace/Supex. And suddenly the triamp system was transformed into something that have not forgotten 20 years later.

I see that this thread had been attempting to reduce the importance of a splendid source to absurdity. Except that with a superb source the sound does not reduce to absurdity... it reduces to music. This is not opinion, this is fact. And that is THAT.

Ron

Date: 12-Jan-99 10:58
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Break in after recap

"Do the amps have to break in again after a recap ? I just got my 7 year old 4x135 recaped and am curious."

A friend of mine recently bought an old cosmetic 250, already owning a several month old new 250. The older unit he had recapped, and upon return, it was obvious to him that the older recapped unit was quite some way behind the newer one. During the next three weeks he heard the older unit bloom and become closer and closer to the newer one.I personally did not compare the two units until after several weeks, and indeed they were almost indistinguishable sonically. So I imagine that the recapped 135 too would take 2-3 weeks to reach their maximum potential. I have 4 old comsetic recapped 135s and two new cosmetic ones.. and playing through a CDS/52/Tukans the old and broken in 135s sound essentially identical to the newer ones. I did not attempt to compare them when the recapped ones were not broken it.

Ron

Date: 12-Jan-99 05:26
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: nomenclature

"I think it is the name of the connector, they often seem to be named after the pervert that designed them. The Quad II power amps and certain EMS synths had a 'Jones' conector. "

And, not to forget the BNC connector, its name being the initials of the three guys that came up with it.

Ron

Date: 11-Jan-99 07:45
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: More Rusholme and NHS dining.

"For anyone finding Rusholme dining a bit too upmarket there was always the Plaza and their infamous "suicide" curries. Although I also recall pretending to be a medical student and getting decent NHS-subsidised lunches in St. Mary's Hospital. Lucky I didn't bump into Ron Toolsie... "

Rusholme 'upmarket"....??? hah.. my weekly rent there was only 10 quid- although I did initially have to tolerate an 'outhouse' instead of an all-mod-con indoor bog. Yes, I have supped quite a few times at the Plaza... but the Suicide there was a little to MILD for my taste. For the real incendiarly afficionados such as myself, the Charlies Special was in order. The nosh in St. Mary's was probably the best hospital food available in Manchester, although Hope Hospital was not too bad. Best NHS curries I had though were to be found at the Blackburn Infirmary. I was once almost ejected from the cafeteria at MRI as the cashier thought I was some indigent unqualified for dining there. As a medical student who had allotted all of his grant on Naim gear, I used to absolutely GORGE of the prix fixe buffet bar (one trip only allowed) they had there, for the princely sum of about 60p. When the cashier saw that not only was my plate piled to the ceiling with food, the the entire serving tray also, she summoned security. You had no chance of encountering me during your food raids at St. Marys- I left there in 82. My claim to fame there was setting up an electric guitar for an evening in the physicans 'mess' located exactly one floor beneath Labour and Delivery. All patients delivered that night to the strident tones of a badly played cheap guitar. Some even commented on the strange shaking and wailing sounds that were coming from beneath.

Ron

Date: 7-Jan-99 09:20
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Rusholme Audio Dealers...

"I'll bet it was a long time ago. A dealer wouldn't have lasted long in Rusholme when I was there. "

Well I lived in Rusholme for over a year, and in Longsight for a year while I was a student. During that time (early 80s) there was a great Linn/Naim/Meridian/Quad dealer, Eulipion Audio-right on Wilmslow Road. Indeed when I took my LP12 there for a tuneup, I *carried* it back to where I was "living" at the time (in St. Mary's Hospital). Sometime circa the mid 80s this dealership closed and relocated further south under the name of Eu-2 Audio. Through Eulipion I bought my first LP12, a LV-X, and Ittok, an Asas, a 250 and a SNAPS... the 42/110 I bought at Doug Brady's in Liverpool. During the time I was dealing with Eulipion I believe their business was booming and break-ins were fortunately a non-occurrence. Of course I've not been to Rusholme since 1985 and am willing to concede that things may be MUCH different now than they were then. Is the New Sweet Mart and the Afshan still standing???

Regards, Ron

Date: 6-Jan-99 18:54
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Best University Student Kit...

"Now I understand. But I've just realised...you're a university student aren't you? When I was in university, all I could afford (and not even that really) was a Sansui tape deck and Sansui receiver with B&W DM10 speakers (total cost £330 in 1983)."

This is almost worthy of a new thread. Now let me see, what kit did I leave University (Manchester University) with. LP12/Ittok/Karma/42/Hicap/135s/pair of Tangent RS4- this being the end of 1984 when the Karma and Hicap were just introduced- replacing my Asak and Snaps. Yes the Tangent speakers were the odd man out.. but they sounded absolutely superb at the end of all that kit. I once tried swapping them for a pair of original Kans, but after 2 weeks I took the Kans back and had my money refunded. Then I had to convince the friend of mine who I sold my RS4s to let me give him HIS money back and return my speakers.

So,gentle readers.. what kit did YOU have in University (thats 'college' for you American readers ;-)

Ron

Date: 5-Jan-99 10:21
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Options and thoughts...

"My personal experience suggests that any movement of the speaker relative to the floor is bad."

Ideally the only movement should be from the drivers... the cabinet, stand and floors should not move with respect to each other. Rigid stands, spikes and plinths can only help, not eliminate the problem. The very first pair of seriously rigid stands I had (the ones made for the HB1 Heybrook speakers) lent an ENORMOUS improvement with the sudden appearance of a sculpted soundstage, treble purity and real tunefullness on the bass notes. Since then I have pursued support stands to the maximum, using lead shot, cross head screws and even crawling under the foundation and supporting the joists with floor jacks...Everything short of cutting out the floorboards, putting up a footing and pouring a concrete foundation to lie flush with the carpet.

Now my music room will be upstairs, so I no longer have the option of buttressing the joists or pouring concrete. So I am left only with mass loading. Hence my consideration of granite plinths. And yes, it is true that I could get slabs of granite a LOT cheaper than the equivalently sized HNE ones.. but they have been drilled out twice.. once for the spike mounting of the DBLs, which would then be bolted on to the plinths.. and then again at the corners for the downward facing spikes that go from the plinths to the floor. The footprint area of the spikes is also increased a full 30% lending additional stability. I will check around the local stonemasons and see if they could equip me with granite slabs. Right now I've got the electricians in running a dedicated 50A line to my music room. Looks like I will be up and running again with the week. Without the HNE plinths for now, as they will take at least 5 weeks between ordering them and getting them freighted over here. I just wonder how much better yet the DBLs could be if their supports are given every opportunity. I was just hoping that somebody out there had some experience in after-market isolation plinths/stands for DBLs on suspended floors..

Regards, Ron

But now

Date: 4-Jan-99 05:42
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Isolation plinths for DBLs

Greetings,

I am about ready to install the DBLs into my new listening room, and I have been entertanining the idea of getting a set of granite plinths that would reside under their bases and rest upon my suspended wooden floor. I have been in contact with a company (HNE, advertisments seen in HFN&RR) that will fashion a pair (at 52 lb a piece) for the not inexpensive price of $790 US- freight included. They recommend that the spike bearing base frame of the DBLs is removed and the speakers then coupled to the granite plinths via mastic. I know that various (well a FEW) other contributors to this forum have tried with varying success plinths from Mana... but has anybody tried these ones from HNE. I'm not too sure if the frame under the base of the DBLs are even removeable, or if they are integral to the main rear frame. As you can imagine, due to the unwieldiness of the DBLs I am disinclined to do many- if any- comparisons with and without the plinths. HNE does offer an unconditional money-back guarantee though. Comments?

Regards, Ron

Date: 27-Dec-98 12:09
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: 250 vs 125 vs 135

Yes, you are correct.. I did NOT disconnect one of the internal boards within the 250s to make them truly mono amps. One tweak that I should have done (but did not do) is to use the L and R mono XLR cables a la 135 instead of the stereo cables that come with the 250. This way the unused board will not be required to provide any voltage gain. This may be a halfway house to disconnecting the internal unused board.

But even with one of the boards disconnected within, due to the different voltage rails and different points of reference ground (between the speaker terminals in the 250, next to the filter caps in the 135) the 250 so configured can only approximate but never equal a 135. Indeed I much preferred a pair of 135s over 2 250 used driven only on one channel each.

I still feel that a pair of 250s would still be best used with all 4 channels driven (passive bi-amped or actively amped) vs using just 1/2 of each. Which would be a moot point if you were using speakers that were 3-way or only allowed single wiring/amping.

Still waiting for the 325 monoblock amp.......... Ron

Date: 19-Dec-98 04:54
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: 250 as monoblock amp... a follow up

Greetings, Pursuant to my last posting here are the results of my 5 hour listening session yesterday evening.

Equipment: Source- CDX/XPS

Preamp- 82/Hicap (with black snaic)

Power amps: circa 1985 250

1998 250

Pair of Exposure XVI monoblocks

Speakers: Linn Tukans with NACA5 cables.

First up to the plate/wicket was the older model 250. Previously the owner had commented that he felt this differed from the newer model by virtue of a less transparent, delicate and controlled presentation. This was confirmed by his wife who had no difficulty in telling them apart (without knowing which was the one that was plugged in) within 5 seconds. However he relayed that he heard the post-rebuild unit improve on a daily basis for about three weeks after he got it back. Anyway..... the sound was to my ears excellent, exhibiting the drive, precision and timing that 250s can do so well. After about 10 minutes of listening to sundry music we then replaced it with...

.... the 1998 vintage 250. I braced myself for a markedly better presentation. And....... it sounded almost identical to the older unit, giving up to it only very incrementally in terms of bass timing and a slight lack of articulation of female vocals. But I would be very, VERY hard pressed to reliably tell them apart in blind testing. We swapped the old vs. the new 250 about 5 times. I would guestimate that if the older unit offers 95%+ of the performance of the newer unit. I have heard much bigger differences between different cables than between these two amplifiers of such widely varying vintages.

Now time for the '125' monoblock presentation. Each 250 was plugged into the 82s Hicap. One was then plugged into the left speaker, and the other into the right speaker. We settled back upon the leather sofa and 'cued' up the Heather Nova album. After a few minutes we looked at each other rather quizzically. I thought that maybe, just maybe I could hear a slight improvement in the refinement of the upper registers at the expense of a paradoxically slower sounding subjective tempo. These were not the gains I was expecting. For in the same system just a few weeks ago I had inserted a pair of my rebuilt vintage 135s, and the improvements were immeadiately and convincingly apparent within seconds. We swapped a single 250 for two '125s' out for maybe four or five times.. and I never really could convince myself that the 250s configured for mono usuage really outperformed the single 250. At least not with the relatively easy to drive Tukans. Stick on a pair of, say, Thiel speakers and the results may have been a lot less equivocal.

But wait there's more........... Next we tried using the 250s in a true passive biamp system. With both of them again plugged into the 82s Hicap, the older unit supplied the L and R channels of bass to the Tukans, while the newer unit supplied the L and R tweeters. This configuration I gather is NOT recommended under current Naim dogma (although personally I have had tremendous success using this method with the much harder to drive Sonus Faber Extremas.) NOW there was no doubt as to the merits of using both of the 250s. Everything sort of snapped into focus. There were significant gains in purity, articulation as well as a newfound iron grip (if the Tukans kan really do that) on the bass registers which took on a lovely texturee to them. In a nutshell... colour me impressed!! I would say that the performance of bi-amped 250s lend another 30% as compared to using a single 250.

Finally was the Exposures turn. We tried them both single and biwired (they each have 2 pairs of speaker outlets to facilitate bi-wiring). There was no doubt that the bi-wired way was the way to go. Still even when bi-wired they did not match the pair of the passively bi-amped 250s, but still they were VERY enjoyable to listen to. Subjectively they had a firmer, punchier bass presentation, but lacking the texture that the 2x250s allowed. They were slighly darker sounding on the top with a marginally reduced sense of timeing. The voices however did sound glorious and true. I could live with that if I had to.

At the end of the evening I reconfigured the system to use the two 250s passively bi-amped and took my Exposures away. The owners wife came down and listened intently and she too agreed that the pair of bi-amped 250s made the system sound better than ever before.

So a mixed bag of results. I am quite certain of the validity of them using this particular pair of speakers. With any other speaaker I suspect that your naimage will vary. Empirically I can understand why using all 4 channels of the 2 250s would produce a better sound, as it distributes the power drain across all four sets of output boards rather than just the 2 that a single 250 or a pair of '125' would.

So now Jawed et all... what say you?

Ron

Date: 17-Dec-98 15:46
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: 250s as monoblocks

Hi Jawed et al, It is true that my friend preferred a single 250 over two 250 run mono... BUT, BUT, BUT... one of them was a rebuilt unit circa 1985 and the other of 1998 vintage. When using just one of the 250s he noted quite a difference between the units with the older one offering (in his estimation) only 90% of the performance of the newer one; sounding purer, sweeter and more tuneful. So, using one of the 250 for the left channel and the other for the right probably led to an unbalanced sound presentation.. and hence worse than using a single one. When he tried using the older unit to run the L+R bass and the newer one to run L+R treble he was very impressed. This was into the amazing Tukan speakers.

I will be paying him a visit tomorrow (Friday) evening.. and I shall hear all of these permutations myself. I shall report my findings back to the group. BTW... a 250 run on only one channel can NEVER be quite the equivalent of a 135. Not only does the power supply have to feed another output board (even if the speaker is not connected to that side sometning must get diverted to that unused side) but also the voltage rails on the 135 are a couple of volts higher than on the 250. And I suspect that the 135 also may use higher spec parts (such as selected lower noise voltage regulators and the like). If the 135 was just a 250 less one of the output boards (but with the extra cooling fan and two XLR input jacks on the back) then it would probably sell for less than a 250, but as it is it sells for EXACTLY the same price. So maybe there is some extra cost going into the 135 that balances out the loss of one of the output boads.

Four out of my six 135s are rebuilt older units (circa 1984). I have not yet compared the newer 135s with the older ones.. but at my friends house I have compared a pair of the older 135s with his new 250 and there is not much comparison. The 15 year old 135s (albeit recapped and brought largely up to date) walks all over the new 250.

Regards, Ron

Date: 2-Dec-98 17:43
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Multiamping with a Hicap/Supercap

". He said the 180 can easily drive the ES22s, but added that with a HICAP I could tri-amp the ES22s with three 180s. When he saw the look of panic cross my face as I contemplated the negotiations with my wife, he was very sensitive!"

Ahem..... the Hicap has TWO stereo power-amp outputs (although two 135 work off it as well as each of their cables is dedicated to a single channel). As such, without contriving custom split cables, you can only expect to BIAMP using the Hicap as a power supply. It is true however that the SUPERCAP has THREE sets of L+R poweramp outputs and will allow you to passively tri-amp. I personaly have experience biamping passively with both a Hicap and a Supercap, which in the face of Naims recommendations have proved to offer quite large improvements. For all of you who clamour for higher power naim amps (sometimes myself included) the best way to go for now is to passively multi-amp,which not only increases the available power reserve, but also removes the power intermodulation between channels/drive units.

FYI the multiamp setups tried have been a fourpack 135 setup with a pair of the glorious Sonus Faber Extremas (the 135s proved woefully inadequate in coaxing them into any sort of musical performance when single-amped, but when passively bi-amped they transformed into a very tuneful, articulate and holographic transducer) and a pair of Tukans bi-amped with a pair of 250s through a Hicap which lent a crisper, more dynamic and inflective performance with the additional benefit of even greater textures of the lower registers. Oh BTW to use a 4-pack passively with the Supercap, one has to use the custom made Y-connectors (each is is terminated in the DIN that goes into the supercap and TWO XLRs, one L and one R) so running a 4 pack requires only two out of the three outputs of the supercap. With three such cables it is possible to passively hex-amp a pair of three way speakers.

Regards, Ron

Date: 18-Nov-98 09:17
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: ESL sensitivity

"I think the ESLs are more like 83. Don't know how to find out for sure, though."

Well this may be true, but ESL speakers act as a line rather than a point source, so the dB attenuation with distance follows the inverse rather than the inverse square law that the more conventional box speakers are governed by. So a low sensitivity line source speaker may sound louder from a distance than a higher sensitivity point source one.

Ron

Date: 13-Nov-98 17:31
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)

Colin,

"My LP12 is vintage 1980 but with newish subchassis and bearing courtesy of my brother when he fitted the Cirkus upgrade kit to his 2 year old LP12. "

My LP12 when received had a damaged bearing, a warped subchassis and a torn off armboard (shipping damage; thank you UPS). These were ALL replaced free-of-charge by my dealer (kudos to Music Audio in Atlanta and Richard, their LP12-guru). The requisite parts were obtained from previous Cirkus upgrades they had done. Even though I had not bought this LP12 from them!!!

The reason I got this LP12 (which is the THIRD LP12 I've owned) was its very reasonable price ($500, including the great Syrinx PU3 tonearm and Dynavector Ruby Karat cartridge), which makes it considerably less then the lesser Planar 3/Elys combo priced as new. This way I have a cost effective route to play my 400-ish album collection on without spending an arm-and-a-leg, or sacrifing too much in the way of quality.

But before considering the Prefix, I may look into the (Gasp, Choke) Lingo, as I have a few GREAT 12" 45rpm discs (such as New Orders 'Blue Monday', Animotions "Obsession", Frankie Goes to Hollywoods "Relax" the Fine Young Cannibals "Johnny Come on Home" and Marc Almonds "Tainted Love" (and lots more too).

Anybody out there has experience with the Armageddon vs the Lingo on a DBL sixpack???

Ron

Date: 12-Nov-98 07:48
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Prefix?

"Time for you to get a Prefix, Ron! Then you could take out the phono cards. "

My LP12 has not got the corner braces in the plinth where the Prefix conventionally attatches to. So the Prefix is not an option as-is. Besides, I would be unwilling to get a Prefix without a shiny new Supercap, and then I would be obliged to take the Vallhalla/Syrinx up to the lofty standards of the Armageddon/Aro, and the Dynavector Ruby Karat (which still sounds GREAT inspite of being 16 years old) up the a Archiv2.... and my $500 LP12 will then end up costing me another $9000!! So for now I will be using the LP12 in less than the maxxed out configuration. With the K boards in situ. And without paranoia about them either.

Ron

Date: 12-Nov-98 05:52
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Phono cards... in or out?

"The 52 without the "K" cards opened up the soundstage, however it seemed to have lost its bite the the music was not so involving, especially with female vocals where some of the intimacy was lost. I honestly prefered the music with the "K" cards. "

I did the very same thing on my DBL/sixpack system. And to be honest, I thought that maybe, just maybe, the sound was a hair better without the cards in place. But the subjective changes are FAR smaller than going from a gray to a black SNAIC on the Logical/Digital feed on the 52. Since I recently acquired a 1979 vintage LP12 the phono cards are back in, and will remain there without causing me too much paranoia. It would, after all, be a major inconvenience to open up the 52 and drop in the cards each time you listened to phono, and to remove them every time you listened to a line-level source.

Ron

Date: 6-Nov-98 10:19
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Geddon Lights

"Actually, when the Armeggedon was first introduced to the public, its face lit up when I like a hicap. At some point, Naim removed the light. I'm not sure the reason for this change. "

The Armageddon is the only naim unit that does not either input or output regulated DC... it is afterall a stepdown transformer with a phase capacitor (and probably a bit more electronic wizardry). The backlighting in all the other chasses is run off the the DC feed, and as there is no purpose for having DC out in the Geddon (apart from using it to power backlighting) this cosmetic feature is simply not available. Now, if naim were to make a power supply for a turntable requiring a DC source (such as the earlier Oracles) then that would probably have such backlighting built in. The ultimate tweakery for the current Geddons would be an external powersupply (the NAPSC??) just to power any front panel lights!!

So for now this box will not glow in the dark, unless heated to maybe 1200K:-). But then again neither do any of my 4 1984-vintage NAP135s- their neon switch lights blow on almost a monthy basis and I'll be buggered if I'm changing/replacing any of them.

Regards, Ron

Date: 18-Oct-98 10:17
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Extra-mural activities

Yes Joel, my system IS CD based, and I have positioned the CDS player on the floor where if I open the closet door just a tiny chink and carefully aim my remote, I can activate it. Sometimes I leave the door wider open and then can even change volume on the 52. The disadvantage of keeping the doors completely closed (apart from loss of remote activity- which can be addressed with an IR repeater) is heat. Having 6 NAP135, a CDS PS, 2 supercaps, the NAT01PS and a cassette deck powered up makes the walk in closet, shall we say a trifle warm, and the fans on the 135 run continuously, even when no music is playing. Opening the door allows some ventilation as well as a functioning remote control, and still offers the majority of acoustic isolation- this may be the best compromise.

Anyway, my six-pack is now stripped down and on loan to my dealer until my new house is complete. Anybody close to Atlanta who would like to hear this 6pak/DBL should contact me and I will give the specifics. My music room to be (another 2-3 weeks to go!!) also has a walk in closet... but I had the contractors duct an air-conditioning vent to that closet so I can keep the gear cool. A 30A dedicated power feed has also been installed in said closet. Right now I am in a hotel room with a lowly boombox- quite a goodly step down from what I have become used to, and almost began to take for granted!

Oh, you may find that once removed from the main listening room, paraphenelia such as Mana racks become less important as they are are then the solution to a problem that no longer exists. I empathize with vinyl listeners about the added inconvenience of taking a few more paces to change records.. but it is the turntable that probably improves the most by removing it from the listening room. Think about it..... and DO IT!!

Ron

Date: 17-Oct-98 19:02
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Microphonic pre-amps

". I know that my little old 32-5 is very susceptible to where it is stood. I suspect that the 32 and 72 (very similar) will be one of the more microphonic of Naim products as they each contain many relatively loosely mounted boards, and do not have the sophisticated internal damping systems of the 52."

The first naim preamp that I bought (a 42 circa 1982) originally suffered from intense microphony- to the point of howl-around feedback! When I tapped on its casing I could hear 'thunk, thunk' sounds coming out of the speakers. And no.. it was not the turntable that was feeding back (it was a similiar vintage LP12). My dealer suspected a dodgy board and shipped it back to Naim, and upon its return it was no longer audibly microphonic. The dealer did recount one of his customers who placed his 32 preamp on a silk pillow, finding that to produce a better sound than placing it on a sideboard. This in the days before dedicated equipment supports.

When I first got my 6pack, I had all of the equipment installed between the speakers. And believe you me, the bass output of the DBLs is quite prodigous enough to rattle the cages of any piece of audio gear. Shortly thereafter I moved the entire kit (apart from the DBLs of course)into the walk-in closet adjacent to the room and isolated from about 80% of the DBL's bass output (which was still quite evident when listening in the closet even with the door closed). This produced a commensurate improvement in performance. Even the best of support racks cannot effect some of the vibration...the conducted type yes.. but the radiated type NO. Oh, I did have the 52/supercap/CDSPS within the death jaws of a RoomTunes ClampRack, and found that even small changes in compression strain produced significant *differences* in the sound reproduction. But none of them came close to having the unclamped components in a room away from the DBLs. I even tried the 42.5/supercap combo in the sixpack with the 42.5 in the same closet and got VERY respectable sound bearing in mind the acquisition cost of the 42.5 ($150 on the used market). However I never listened to the 42.5 when sited between the speakers- I suspect that it would have suffered greater from vibrational assaults than did the 52. But even the 42.5 has some sort of anti-vibrational design in it.. the phono-boards (like those of any other naim gear) snap rather than solder into place, and this itself allows a certain degree of mechanical (and hopefully not electrical) decoupling from the motherboard. Who knows.. my original howl-around feedback phonoboards may have been too *tight* a fit to the pins........

To tangentalize somewhat, I remember the story of one dealer who used to place an LP12 on TOP of one of the Isobariks to show how impervious to feedback it was (yes, I know that the 'bariks had top-firing tweets).

Regards, Ron

Date: 9-Aug-98 08:15
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Booze and hifi...

". It also involved a visit from the local environmental health officers with a turn if down or face the consequences order. I guess my neighbours aren't big Husker Du fans."

My one and only experience with the local constabulary regarding 'noise pollution' was a day back in May 1984, the day when the final results of our Medical College class were posted, and all those in our clique had (suprisingly) been awarded the appelation of 'Dr.' So an impromptu celebration commenced, involving extreme volumes pumped out by my NAP 250- which was more than the neighbours in the adjacent terraced house could tolerate, especially after living next to 4 boisterous medical students for the last year. The constabulary were summoned and attempted to enter through the front glass door- which was locked. So with the creative use of a truncheon, they created a portal just above the door handle through which one of their hands could be inserted to let themselves in. But once they had met us and understood the circumstances behind such revelry, they were quite sympathetic, and even informed us on their departure that there appeared to be a problem with the front door. Nowadays things are of course much more tempered. Cheap pints of draft sherry dispensed into milkbottles have been replaced with Cabernet and Chianti. As I type I am supping on a Weihenstephaner Hefeweissbier, my breakfast ale of preference. And now its off to the music room.... Ron

Date: 5-Aug-98 09:29
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Exposure Amps.. and audio nostalgia.

I have a pair of their top of the line XVI monoblocks that I purchased 2-3 years ago, just before I went the full monte Naim route. These beasties weigh a ton and are rated twice the output of the 135s (1000 VA vs 500 VA). I have compared the XVI to the 135 using Tukans, Sonus Faber Extremas and within the DBL sixpack. First of all the gain of the Exposures is lower than that of the Naim, so with the volume at the same setting the naim kit sounds more immediate. It is especially important to adjust the trim pot within the SNAXO6 when using one pair of the Exposures in conjunction with 2 pairs of 135s.

My impressions are as follows.

Tukans- The Exposures have a warmer and more guilded presentation than the 135. There is a certain warmth and resonance to vocals that seems subliminally missing within the 135s. The bass appears to lack a smidgen of control compared to the 135, but has more heft and sock (both of which the Tukans cry out for). The upper registers of the 135 are naturally more extended and informative, stirring up the rhythm a bit more. In all honesty, I could live with either the XVI or the 135s with the Tukans. At the time I purchased the XVIs though they were more expensive than a pair of 135s ($7000 vs $6250).

Sonus Faber Extremas- These speakers are notoriously power hungry and sap the life out of many if not most power amps. Both the Exposures and the 135 gave a compressed and somewhat lifeless and boring presentation when used conventionally. However adding another pair of 135 and running them passively bi-amped (requiring some custom split leads to affix the 4 135s to 2 of the supercaps sockets made an ENORMOUS difference... when passively bi-amped with 4 135s the Extremas are the second best speaker I have ever heard. I did not try using a quartet of Exposure amps, for to do so would have set me back another $7,000.

Active DBL- I tried a Exposures driving the bass units as well as driving the mid units. They were a huge disappointment when used as a bass amp... the bass becoming very flabby and entirely tuneless. And no amount of tweaking with the SNAXO could rectify that. When driving the midrange units of the DBLs the Exposures sounded very nice indeed. The midrange now had a more burnished, holistic presentation that made the 135s sound very (and I mean VERY) slightly thin and lacking in presence. This was pretty much obvious regardless of how the trim pots for these amps were set, so is more a product of the tonal differences between them than their differing gain characteristics. But the price of this spectral balance was a somewhat less informative portrayal. I did not try using the Exposures as tweeter amps for the DBLs.

In summary the more expensive Exposures are, in some applications, in the same league as the 135s. I can see users of small, bass-shy box speakers (admittedly not the the type of speakers that would be typically used with these monoliths) preferring the Exposures over the 135s. And even in an otherwise all-naim setting, they are when used within a limited bandwidth (midrange amps) of superb capabilities.

Oh, the Exposures replaced a Classe 10 (rated as powerful as the XVI). The Classe sounded boxy, compressed, lifeless and rhythmically incoherent next to the Exposures (but cost 'only' $2000). Yes, the Classe was probably the most musically incompetent amp I have ever owned. It did not stir me the same way my 1978-vintage A&R Cambridge (now Arcam) A60 integrated did at maybe 1/5 of the price.

That reminds me... anybody out there wants to buy a pair of Exposure XVI's??

Regards Ron

Date: 28-Jul-98 20:58
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Breaking silence

OK guys... its time to interject in this CDX/XPS vs the CDS (mk 1) debate. As Jawed already knows (via personal e-mail exchange) I have had the opportunity to on two separate occasions insert the CDX into my CDS/52/Supercap/SNAXO/Supercap/ 6*135/DBL system. One time was for several hours without the XPS followed three weeks later by the full monte CDX/XPS combo. I am VERY familiar with the DBL sixpack when fronted by the CDS, so the relative strengths of the CDX were quite apparent in those few hours.

Without the XPS the CDX was notably less grainy than the CDS with a smoother and more informative presentation of the upper registers. The soundstage was broader and somewhat deeper. However the CDS had more swagger and panache than the naked CDX, having greater dynamics throughout the frequency spectrum with more 'balls-to-the-wall' clout. The midrange of the CDS sounded quite 'peaky' and coloured with an edge that once heard is not readily forgotten. This was even more apparent on HDCD disks (try the audiophile remastering of Patricia Barbers 'Cafe Blue' and this becomes immediately obvious). My overall impression was that the unadorned CDX was a DAMN good player for half of the price of the CDS, but there was no player that bested the other in all ways, and a listener would choose one over the other based on personal tastes and on the supporting system.

WITH THE XPS....... the CDX became a completely different player. It was now supremely in control and made the CDS sound a little vague in control and timing, possibly even coarse and dare I say strident. Lower registers were transformed, becoming both more extended and more in control than those of the CDS, but only on disks with REAL bass.. on many disks the 'boomier' presentation of the CDS lent an air of greater power in ways that were not particularly consonant with the music. The three of us present for that comparison were all in agreement about these differences- each preferring the CDX/XPS by some margin over the CDS.

There, I've said it.... but remember in systems lesser than the DBL sixpack these differences may be not quite as great, but I think just as significant. And for those out there that STILL think the CDS is still rules the roost, then I will gladly offer mine for sale. Any takers ;-)

Regards, Ron

Date: 29-Jun-98 19:59
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Turn off the 52??? NEVER!!

"Ron, did you turn off you 52 before changing to the black snaic? If so, how long did you let the 52 warm up again until listening? "

Actually, I just pulled the plugs out with the supercap powered up.. and within 90 seconds had replaced the gray snaic with the black one (or vice versa).. at which point the 52 'boots up' with the mutes activated so there are no untoward squeals, hums or DC surges.

And I did not really do much in the way of warm up after that.. about the time it took for me to return to my seat... maybe 15 seconds.. And trust me,,, 15 seconds warm up is PLENTY when it comes to perceiving the much greater fidelity that the black snaics allow. The degree of improvement that these allow is substantially greater than the difference between a stone cold 52 and a well warmed one. Trust me on this one.

Regards, Ron

Date: 29-Jun-98 05:38
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: New SNAIC 5 to 52 ... you just gotta get it!

"Does a black snaic between a 52 and its Supercap (ie digital supply) improve the sound? "

Well, last night I purloined the new black Snaic5 that joins my NAT-01 and its P/S and tried it out on the logic/digital feed between the Supercap and the 52 head unit. Even though I have had these new SNAICS for a week, I had not tried this out before as I was quite sure that there would be no significant difference. So about 11 p.m. last night with a glass of 1992 Cabernet Reserve in hand, the gray and black SNAIC-5 traded strikes when used in this position.

And.... the results were quite similiar to the differences between the snaics when using them for a purely signal link between supercaps (in context of an active system with the extra supercap powering up a Snaxo). With the black snaics in situ there was a further reduction in a subjective peak in vocals, the bass players now were spot-on in their timing and their melodies became even more, er, melodic. The upper registers I believe became a tad airier with more ring and less spit to cymbals. The overall effect was a more relaxed yet more informative presentation- even on albums that I had thought were beyond redemption due to poor engineering.

Needless to say that I shall send out a cheque today for yet another of these black beauties. I really cannot wait to see what the new Burndy Snaic-17 will do.

Regards, Ron

Date: 24-Jun-98 03:05
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Snaic charmers

Just a brief note on the new 'Black' SNAICS. I got hold of a pair of these 2 days ago; one was inserted between the 2 supercaps (the 52 supercap and the SNAXO supercap in my 6-pack DBL system) and the other betwixt the NAT-01 and its hicap-sized power supply.

Bearing in mind that I had only powered up the entire system about 10 minutes before (I had turned it ALL off as there as a severe and very proximate lightening storm that afternoon and evening, and I wished not to assume the risk of toasting any/all of my hardware), the differences between the gray and the black snaics were quite apparent. But I chose not to spend too much time attempting to compare the two as the system was in the VERY early stages of warm up.

Last night/early hours this morning after the 24 hours warm up, I did some additional comparisons. There is no doubt that the black snaics GREATLY outperform their gray counterparts, lending improvements in almost any of the parameters in which you may wish to assess them. Probably the biggest improvement is in the 'timing'.... the black ones allow for a more articulate and time aligned presentation; the gray ones sound rhythmically 'smeared' by comparison, lacking the angular, spot-on-timing and a certain degree of 'bounce' to the lower registers. Vocal inflections and articulations are also resolved to a much higher standard. And tonally I dare say that a certain subliminal 'edge' to the midrange presentation in female vocals appears to have been banished.

To put things into perspective, the black snaics allow an additional improvement that could quantitatively be equated to about 1/3 the degree of improvement that a Supercap allows over a Hicap. Seeing that the Supercap runs about $3000 more than the Hicap, this is a princely $1000 value upgrade for a pauperly $110.

In the course of the week I shall insert a single of these black SNAICS in 2 lesser systems; firstly between a 42 and its SNAPS power supply, with a 140 residing downstream- and finally between an 82 and its Hicap, with a 250 awaiting their instructions. I anticipate that I both of these will show worthwhile improvements. I may append my impressions within this thread.

This is a case of 'run, do not walk' to your dealer and order up as many of these black beauties as your system will allow. I am yet to try one of these for the logic/digital feed between the supercap and the 52, although empirically I cannot see why this non-audio voltage supply would benefit from these higher-spec cables, unless they were less noisy or more impervious to RF. Still my theory shall soon be put to the test, when I eventually try it out.

Ron

Date: 3-Jun-98 08:32
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: Visitors Welcome

"Are you holding open days to your humble yet intoxicating abode. Me n the loons would like to visit :-) "

Yes, I would always be glad to entertain fellow afficionados. Beware, the last visitor I had was merely *thinking* of purchasing an entry-level Naim system (circa 3-4,000 US$). After spending 5 hours chez moi, he dropped $12,000 the next week, and less than a month later is already talking about upgrades. His eyes are glazed and words like 'Supercap', XPS and twofifty are oft used in conversations.

The wine runs freely (alas not for free)- although my tastes and modest reserves are all of the red variety.Ales of the house may include Shepherds Neame, Murphy's Irish Stout, Belgian Abbey Ales, Sam Smiths Pale Ale and whatever US microbrews happen to have caught my fancy at the time. I have even been known to stock Tennents lager. As yet Ace lager (last published price 10 pence per 8 pack) is domestically unavailable.

The biggest disadvantage for most readers of this forum is my location- I live in the South East of Tennessee, maybe about 2.5 hours drive north of Atlanta. Oh, my musical tastes are exceptional and quite eclectic :-)

So fellow loons, come on down! I'm sure that we could all have quite a time.

Ron

Date: 3-Jun-98 05:43
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: The Loon Tweaker... moi?

Joel Benford wrote "I want Ron Toolsie for my second, he seems pretty hepped on all this."

Thank you. I think :-) I have done a few somewhat extreme things to attempt to squeeze the last drop out of the DBL/sixpack system.

1. Had local electric company upgrade my home service from a 200 A to a 400 A service- new pole transformer and industrial thickness efferent cables to main junction box.

2. Had a dedicated 100 A 'clean feed' junction box installed just to feed the stereo. Both this and the main junction box are copper bused Siemens, instead of the cheaper aluminium bused ones.

3. Two metre copper-rod. ground piledriven in.

4. Dedicated 60A line ran from clean-feed junction box, then two of the naim-supplied power strips are hard-wired in parallel into it (each power strip has 'only' nine outputs, and with a six-pack of just power amps this is a little limiting).

5. Fortified floor joists under DBL with floor jacks.. this involves wriggling around the crawl space with a flashlight in your teeth, inhaling spider webs and other sorts of arachnoid detritus.

6. Installed all electronics in a converted walk-in closet adjacent to the listening room. The 6 speaker cables enter the listening room through a drilled hole connecting the rooms.

7. Room treating. The side walls proved to be a significant source of 'ringing' and slap-echo, which was mostly palliated by hanging large swatches of 'egg-crate' like foam. Not particulary cosmetic, but who cares? Not I. Corner treatment also very effective.

8. Lots of attention in cable dressing.

9. Usually listen to stereo with a glass of fine Cabernet in hand. Good wine adds to the music-related endorphin release. Having seen last months wine bill, I will either be cutting down on consumption, or (dare I say it) downgrading to something cheaper. From what I heard on the news today, Bordeaux prices may be in for a tumble :-)

This is merely a sampler of some of the extra steps I have taken in this journey to musical nirvana. No doubt the imminent aquistion of the new Snaics and the CDS mk 2 (or whatever it will be called) will place me that much closer. But until then, I can happily wait in the current status quo.

Regards, Ron

Date: 27-May-98 09:33
Author: Ron Toolsie (rontoolsie@aol.com)
Subject: First rate second hand gear

Regarding the price of a used 52: " around £ 3,000 for the 52/Supercap with latest spec. motherboard and including the leads."

Now, why would ANYBODY wish to sell a latest spec 52? To take a >2UKP loss and still have no chance of replacing it with something better? The ONLY 52's I have seen on the second hand market here in the US have been older versions, where the owners are without fail upgrading to the latest and greatest version. If I could own just ONE piece of naim gear, it would be the 52, as it is so far ahead of ALL other pre-amps that the differences between a very good non-Naim CD player (and there are actually several of these) and a CDS are rendered almost insignificant. Actually there is just one exception.... one owner of a 6 pack/Isobarik system let the entire system go for next to nothing to 'upgrade' to an all-Linn Keltik system. The idea of replacing even an old 52 with the Kairn is, politely put, counterintuitive. As this is not a thread dedicated to Linn-bashing, I will reserve any comments on the Keltiks until my opinion becomes appropriate.

Ron