Advanced search

****ed acronyms - and other interesting questions!!

Posted by: Engelbert on 09 January 2001

Out of curiosity, does SBL stand for 'Single Box Loudspeaker' or 'Separate Box Loudspeaker"? (I happen to own a pair.)

Does NBL stand for 'No Box Loudspeaker' or 'Nested Box Loudspeaker"? (I may aspire to a pair one day.)

Do Naim suggest a minimum amplifier (eg 180 or 250) for powering SBLs? If so, what is it?

N.B. The above three questions are intended to prompt an answer, rather than a debate!!


Now, one other question:


My new CDS2 arrived the week before Christmas and sounded great 2 hours out of the box. Since then, it has averaged about 5-6 hours playing per day (and always remains switched on). However, I have not noticed a significant change in sonic quality over this three weeks or so. Could it infact be run-in already, or is it suddenly going to deliver me 'more music'? I am not expressing concern - just interested in other people's running-in experiences with CDS2s.

Cheers,
Rob

PS My system = CDS2, 52, 250, SBLs (with dedicated mains and spur, plus 'Soundstyle' tripod).

Posted on: 09 January 2001 by Paul Stephenson
SBLr 'Separate Box Loudspeaker"
NBL 'Nested Box Loudspeaker"
Do Naim suggest a minimum amplifier (eg 180 or 250) for powering SBLs?.

150 should be fine, but source fisrt!

Posted on: 09 January 2001 by Former member
There was a prototype electrostatic speaker called the FBL. I believe the B stood for big.

Tom

Posted on: 09 January 2001 by Former member
DBL Double box loudspeaker

could be

Damn Big Loudspeaker

Divorce By Letter (this is what you could get when they are installed!)

Trevor cool

Posted on: 09 January 2001 by Martin M
Decoupled Box Loudspeaker.

Trevor, how are you getting along with the DBLs (they were mentioned in your old profile) I'm going to make the same move soon.

Any advice other than buy the wife some flowers when they arrive?

Posted on: 09 January 2001 by Andrew L. Weekes
Oh, I thought it was Dogs Bo***cks Loudspeaker

big grin

Andrew L. Weekes
alweekes@audiophile.com

Posted on: 09 January 2001 by Former member
Rob
I ran in my CDS2/xps and 82 together so its not possible to separate the two influences completely.

The system had quite significant "mood swings" over the first 4-5 days and then settled into a steady gain over the second week when it more or less plateaued. I felt the CDS2 was very "polite" dynamically to begin with. Two weeks in the CDS2 was doing everything very well in a hifi sense (bass, treble, information) but still had a sense of reserve, like it wasn't really letting go of the notes and flying. I wasn't particularly perturbed because I'd expected a long break-in from Mike Simpson's experience. I only experienced Mike's "up and down" effect during the first couple of weeks, seemingly as the player moved forward incrementally in different dimensions

About 6 1/2 weeks in I put a familiar CD on one day and "wow" it hit me - the notes were just flowing free with an overwhelming sense of music rather than merely excellend sound reproduction. Somehow a magical transformation - it had finally arrived!

I have mine on a spiked topframe on my tripods, and found the cds2 and the xps both quite sensitive to airborne energy. I have "sidecheeks" of foam blu-tacked onto the boxes which seems to help the naturalness and flow *a lot* - pending upgrade to a better support system. I'm very sceptical of the tripods now.

Please feel free to give me a ring if you want.

Mike Simpson's experience (saved from the old forum):

Be Patient
Running the CDS2 in is nothing if not a frustrating process, just when you think its sorted itself out it slips backwards and you wish you'd kept your money in your pocket, and kept your in my case CD2. It will however finally run in and you'll have no regrets. I feel it took mine 5 to 6 weeks to settle in, but it kept inproving for a long time afterwards, and sometimes slipping backwards. I'm not sure how long it took (I got one in the first shipment to this country) but all I remember is sitting down to play it one night and being absolutely gob smacked and its never looked back since.

Posted on: 10 January 2001 by Former member
Martin


I upgraded from SBL (old drivers) to DBL's.

The first thing that strikes you is the sheer size of these beasts.

Once installed you have this urge to really wind them up , but you can't due to the mastic? connecting the bass unit to the main body of the speaker.

At this early stage you will receive a lot of stick from your other half - I would suggest flowers plus some other treat to make her feel wanted. She may think you have transferred your affections to the speakers.

I do not know what amps you are using, I am using a 250.

The scale and weight of the sound is superb, but a 250 is a good place to start.

The sound is slightly harsh at higher volume levels , but it is very enjoyable .

The sound lacks delicacy, and can be slightly cold with poorly recorded CD's, this is down to the amp , which will be my next upgrade.


Any further queries, please ask

Hope this helps

Trevor

smile

Posted on: 10 January 2001 by Martin M
Thank you Trevor. I've got 135s.

How big is the room you've got the DBLs? I found that I needed a fair distance away from the speakers for the sound to coalesce when I demmed them. BTW I much prefered 135s/DBLs to 500/NBL. Maybe I'm weird or deaf, I don't know. I liked the scale of DBLS sound. Which dealer did you buy off. I live by Fareham but most dealers in the area looked at me as if were mad when I mentioned DBLs and tried to steer me in the direction of some other rather dull products.

Posted on: 10 January 2001 by Andy S
quote:
Any advice other than buy the wife some flowers when they arrive?

Take a couple of days off to rediscover your vinyl/CD collection again :-)

I upgraded from SBLs to DBLs (with a 250) and was gobsmacked at how much better the system was. It was just like when I got my first Naim kit, several hours of playing track after track - just to see how it sounded.

quote:

I do not know what amps you are using, I am using a 250.

The scale and weight of the sound is superb, but a 250 is a good place to start.


I started with a 250 but about 9 months into my "affair", I had some cash burning a hole in my pocket. I demmed a CDS2 vs my CDS1 and 2x135s vs my 250. Even after a week of warming up, the 2x135s was CLEARLY the better option over the CDS2. The 250 sounds dull and uncontrolled, especially in the bass department, in comparison to the 135s. The 250 doesn't have enough grunt (or could be separation) to keep the bass lines clear without the treble becoming a little overpowering (as you describe).

quote:
BTW I much prefered 135s/DBLs to 500/NBL. Maybe I'm weird or deaf, I don't know. I liked the scale of DBLS sound.

Same for me every time I hear NBLs (with or without 500s). I have always preferred my DBLs (even with the 250...).

Andy

Posted on: 10 January 2001 by Former member
Martin

The dimensions of my room is 28ft long but 12ft wide , with the speakers firing down the room.

They are 5ft apart , and I normally listen about 12ft away.

Dealer wise, I would see Phil at Phonography in Ringwood. Having spent a lot of money with him, I always find he gives good sound advice in an unpressurised environment.

Andy

Thanks very much for your input regarding DBL's.
I know my amp is the very weak link in my system, but I was interested to hear you prefer 135/DBL to 500/NBL.

Can you be a bit more specific as I have very little listening time with the 500.

Trevor

roll eyes

Posted on: 10 January 2001 by Andy S
quote:
Thanks very much for your input regarding DBL's. I know my amp is the very weak link in my system, but I was interested to hear you prefer
135/DBL to 500/NBL.

Can you be a bit more specific as I have very little listening time with the 500.


I've never demmed a 500/NBL system seriously in my own home but I have heard them on at least 3 occasions (once 6x135s, twice 1x500) and they have always struck me as very hi-fi. For me, they sound like a fairly full range hi-fi speaker but they have consistently failed to deliver that elusive magic that the DBLs can do (when I first heard DBLs, I KNEW I was listening to something special...). For me, this takes about 10 seconds every time I hear them.

Having heard CDS2/52/500/DBL a few minutes before CDS2/52/500/NBL, I am pretty confident that for me, DBLs are the way to go, even with lesser amps.

Of course 500/DBL is something pretty special ;-)

And

Posted on: 10 January 2001 by Andrew Randle
Andy,

Will you be joining Trevor, me and Jonathan Ribee on the front row at Bristol then?

Andrew

Andrew Randle
2B || !2B;
4 ^ = ?;

Posted on: 10 January 2001 by Andy S
I'll be there - I don't live far away from Bristol.

When are you going?

Andy

Posted on: 10 January 2001 by Andrew Randle
Andy,

I'm going Saturday. Probably arrive at the show just after lunch. A colleague is travelling with me and taking his daughter to check out Bristol (he's interested in the show and she may be checking out Bristol University).

Best do the university first or we may never get round to seeing it.

Andrew

Andrew Randle
2B || !2B;
4 ^ = ?;