What makes a preamp "better"?

Patrick

When I talk about attn to detail I am not reffering to every company on the planet simply the ones I have had direct experience working with.

No I am not an electronics designer, I have a degree in mechanical engineering and an MSc in Engineering product design.

As regards to what I pay for naim gear well thats really none of your business and is entirely independent to this debate which is focussed on the VFM of Pre amps verses other electronics.

OK?

Paul -

"But, I stand by my assertion that a pre should cost less than a CDP, all else being roughly equivalent."

This is SO problematic as to be unarguable, in my view.

What does 'all else being equivalent' mean in the context of the design of CD players v. preamps?

Should a 552 cost less than a CDS3? A CDX2? The CD5? My $369 Sony?

I have no idea what the basis for comparison between CDPs and preamps would be.

- GregB

Insert Witty Signature Line Here

compared the sound of a non-preamped system to that of a 552ed system

There is no system without a preamp. If you use a CDP with volume control, the preamp is inside the CDP...

- Jun

quote:

---

This is SO problematic as to be unarguable, in my view.

---

Only if you immediately relate it to a real product range, which is affected by history and market reality.

Look at my assertion another way, it implies that there is a gap in the Naim range for a CDP at (say) £20000. Market reality may determine that a £12000 pre is viable but a £20000 CDP isn't. This doesn't change the 'ideal world' situation.

Paul

Simon.

quote:

---

Sorry, tell me if I missed something?

---

Yes you have i.e. the point of my posts.

You assert things to me that I have not stated, my points here solely present a factual enginnering-based perspective to the often coloured, awe-inspired views presented here, based upon my own experiences.

I'm quite happy to have them corrected, or discussed by Naim or anyone with sufficient knowledge to argue their point of view.

Having re-read my own posts, it's obvious to me I have not stated that Naim's preamps represent poor VFM when compared to CD players, but simply that the engineering complexity of a CD player is greater.

It seems that you have attributed those VFM comparisons to me. I no longer argue such things publicly (apart from occasionally very obvious examples) as VFM is in the eye of the purchaser, and varies dramatically from person to person.

It is often the case that those with more knowledge and experience of actually doing design work will have diametrically opposed views to those that have no detailed understanding of the technical issues.

Just because I feel the price of a NAC552 to be out of proportion to a CD3, for example, does not imply that I think the former is poor VFM.

I may think that, but have not stated it.

quote:

---

As regards to what I pay for naim gear well thats really none of your business and is entirely independent to this debate which is focussed on the VFM of Pre amps verses other electronics.

---

Actually this thread was about what made a preamp "better" and has gone a little off-topic, partly due to the fact that some seem to have a problem with the views presented here about the final market price of the product, which is irrelevant to the discussion.

Paul,

quote:

---

I find the need to mount electronics on some form of suspension hard to understand. I've never thought of solid state electronics as being microphonic.

---

As an RF engineer, working in aerospace, the sensitivity of electronics to vibration is a problem I have frequently experienced in the design process. Phase locked loops in transmitters / receivers are one of the worst culprits, being very obviously vibration sensitive.

Some components are very obviously more sensitive than others, e.g. crystals and ceramic capacitors.

Audio is an area where difficult to resolve measurements are often clearly audible in my experience and as a consequence even relatively minor vibration sensitivities can be heard.

JV asserted that integrated circuits were orders of magnitude more sensitive than discrete circuitry in this regard, and Naim's Roy George has publicly stated that these sensitivities are measurable, given sufficient resolution.

As a consequence the effects of the suspension systems are clearly identifiable, audibly and measurably.

Andy.

It's interesting that Naim chose to superceed the CDS2 with the CDS3 rather than keeping the 2 and pricing the 3 much higher as a CDS500

Then they had had to modify the CDS2 so that it can be released in the new-style case...!

- Jun

I got here late but...

quote:

---

Perception is one thing. Reality can be quite another. Thank goodness for relativity.

---

At last! Someone has got it.

Objects exist in relation with one another; they cannot be perceived as discrete entities.

A 552 is of significance in relation to a 52 or a 252.

A 552 is not a 52. A 552 is not a 252.

Is a 52 a 252?

quote:

---

You're talking nonsense.

---

Only if you fail to understand the implications of what I say.



Regards,

Steve.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steven Toy:

Only if you fail to understand the implications of what I say.

---

This sounds serious. Are these "implications" strictly on a need to know basis ? Are we talking aliens here ?

The solution to this conundrum is: yes, we all fail to see the implications of this piece of philosophy Mr T rather autistically is attempting to share with us.

So perhaps there are no implications. Or if there are, they are only relevant to Mr T, which virtually automatically renders them irrelevant.

Fortunately the thread has substance nonetheless. So let's continue the preamp discussion!

Herman

Although Steven Toy's Skoda Favorit is a familiar sight around the lanes and byways of the Heart of England only the most avid Top Gear viewer would notice that, despite the 2002 registration and body shape, the rear light clusters are from a pre-2001 model.

This odd detail arose as Steven's Skoda was constructed not by friendly Czechs in Mladá Boleslav but by evil CIA black ops scientists in Area 51. Sadly for the spooks the later redesign of the light cluster whilst giving the Favorit's rear view a subtle but effective and modern facelift does not accomodate the Alien manufactured mind control system recovered from Roswell.

As a result the field experiment is going all wrong and instead of encouraging support for the US amongst the good people of Cheshire who happen to ride in Steven's cab its sending Steven mad. Hopefully, he'll fight his way through his madness, realise he is actually a CIA secret agent and with the help of a beautiful and brilliant but initially sceptical woman who has a high flying career in the local council will expose the bad guys and save the day. Essentially Steven is Mel Gibson in the little remembered 1998 thirller Consipracy Theory

Armed with these facts you should have little trouble in understanding the reasons behind Steven's increasingly bizarre postings, if not the postings themselves.

Matthew

I knew it. Unfortunately though Simon, and don't shoot the messenger, but you will now receive a severe spanking from Herm for getting off track from the fascinating subject at hand.

Amazing New Discovery

Honest Minky,

What did I do to scare you this way? I am not (nor have ever been) into spanking, active or passive. Ask Mr Robinson who somehow has amassed extensive files on most members' proclivities.

And a tweaky tip for PR: change those black socks in yr amp for charcoal ones, and you'll hear tremendous increase in speed and resolution at the same time. You'll wonder why you ever bothered to work on your mains, ball bearings and basically everything you ever did.

Herman

Whatever.

Don't try to read too much into the person behind the postings. It kind of misses the point...





Regards,

Steve.

quote:

---

quote:

---

You're talking nonsense.

---

Only if you fail to understand the implications of what I say.

---

The implication of the quotation is that an argument with implications that can be understood cannot be nonsensical. If we accepted this, we would set human society back by thousands of years!

And the implication referred to in the quotation is that we cannot perceive objects at all (since by definition objects are things we perceive as discrete entities).

This is most disturbing!

<Departs hastily, with anxious expression, to fill his 102 with an uncountable number of mysteriously undisentangleable dark grey socks>

--J

A goal in mind.
Lots of time.
Lots of money.
Great people behind it.

Marc

There's still time to get these on eBay (listed, oddly enough, under the "Integrated Amplifiers" category...):

82-->552 upgrade kit

quote:

---

The solution to this conundrum is: yes, we all fail to see the implications of this piece of philosophy Mr T rather autistically is attempting to share with us.

---

Herm, Patrick, Jeremy,

We should cherish Steven's vague Hegelian musings. The great thing about them is that it's only a matter of time before things go from a priori metaphysics to outrageous empirical assertions (witness Hegel's infamous claim that there could not possibly be more than seven planets).

It's my secret dream to have a few angry, hardcore Thomists pop up here. They would argue furiously against this so-called "new science". I imagine them entering into the analogue-vs.-digital debate with especial fervor, offering all sorts of a priori Aristotelian arguments to the effect that digital replay is not only inferior, it's a manifest impossibility and an abomination before God.

So let's keep an open mind here.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patrick Dixon:
ejl

But is 'analogue' really 'analogue'?

---

Not really. But if it sounds that way, fine.

quote:

---

Is there a 'smallest' energy level that we can change things by, or is will we keep discovering ever smaller levels - a bit like a russian doll?

---

Yes we is will. A bit like a russian doll (only better).

quote:

---

I think we should be told. Steven?

---

I just told ya! Never ask a philospher; you'll only get questions for answers.

Herman

What's all this sock malarky ?

I thought we had already established that an 82 is already a 552 by virtue of it not being a 52.

And yes, time may be discreet but that doesn't mean that analogue is digital. Does it ?

And the way we perceive the world is actually more symbolic than real (a bubbling cauldron of chaos and entropy and nowhere near as much fun as a roomful of supermodels). Now that's what I call a conspiracy.

And about the socks. I don't know where you got black/grey from. I always use argyle or tartan and a tip : make sure you haven't used said socks as a spunkrag because this tends to harden the sound up slightly. Not that you should go the other way with fabric conditioners etc as this just fecks up the bass. I had a mate once that claimed that the best socks were ripened on the hooves of homeless people. He disappeared never to be seen again after an expedition down a disused train tunnel. I think it was the John Williams film score booming from his ghetto blaster that alerted the lookout bum, after which wheels were literally put in motion. They say that human flesh tastes like pork. I wouldn't know, but shortly after my friend's disappearance a local fruit and vege shop was attacked by a "crack" squad of piss soaked vagrants. They dropped their shopping list during the getaway phase of the operation. On it, scrawled in blood, were the chilling words -

"teg buf mugin ApPles" (sic).

I am not saying "don't take the socks from homeless people to use as hi-fi performance boosters". Just be careful out there.

Anyway, off the track as usual. Sorry Herm. Spank ?

quote:

---

And the implication referred to in the quotation is that we cannot perceive objects at all (since by definition objects are things we perceive as discrete entities).

---

Indeed we do, and to perceive an object as being descrete we have to nullify/negate the existence of all other objects for the duration of being conscious of that one object.

As soon as we are conscious of the fact that we are conscious of a given object , we are no longer conscious of that given object...

Our attention has shifted away from that object to the concept of being conscious of it.

And so on...





Regards,

Steve.

Like Goldfish then...

Jay

Yeah...well it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Give a philosophy student a glass of Limeade,
And, he will say, Is this a glass of Limeade?
And if so, Why is this a glass of Limeade?
And after a while he'll die of thirst

Say Half Man Half Biscuit

quote:

---

And after a while he'll die of thirst

---

Cos like any other normal student he didn't want limeade, he wanted a f*cking beer!



Regards,

Steve.

Well, I tried to become educated about preamps, but instead learned..

1) Socks in the 82- more analog. Interesting, I also experimented a bit and found that mittens also improved the analog feel, whilst gloves, with their more clearly defined digits, sound, well, more digital.

2) If a tree falls on a taxi cab, and nobody but the driver is there to witness it, did it ever really happen?

3) Nobody knows why a preamp is either good, or expensive.

Oh well.

Bruce

By extension of previous arguments, we know that Mr T does not exist. If things exist only in relation to other things, then how did the first thing exist? Oh my...

And it was written:

"But is 'analogue' really 'analogue'?"

By extension, it follows that 'analogue' cannot be older than digital. Until digital existed, there was nothing to compare whatever it was we had before digital to, so analogue could not have existed. In fact, if analogue and digital are the only two options, it follows that there was no recorded music before digital. Analogue could not have existed prior to its opposite.

So there.

Oh, this also means that if the Forum exists, there MUST be an anti-Forum. And yes, there is!!!

- GregB

Insert Witty Signature Line Here