Justifying your monetary layout

Posted by: quincy on 12 October 2001

In comparison to most of you cats I have a modest system but I derive the maximum amount of pleasure from it.

Now what I was pondering is this ... many of you guys have parted with mucho dinero for your components. Is it not true to say that you might diss the cats that have the so-called inferior systems because you now realise that your monetary outlay has resulted in little or no gain in audio enjoyment?

In fact, if I may be so bold as to suggest that it could be a case of sour grapes witherin' on the vine.

I ain't tryin' to diss any cat on the forum. I just thought I would hoist it up the flagpole and see who salutes.

Posted on: 12 October 2001 by Alex S.

respect brother

Alex

Posted on: 12 October 2001 by Craig B

Sorry Quincy,

If it was my comment re: 'throwing your Karik into the river' in your 'Coating the Karik with lead' thread that led to your asking the above, then let me make it clear that I was just pulling your leg (mostly Linn's leg really).

The Karik is a fine player, and I am sure that it provides you with much musical satisfaction.

I have, what most here would consider to be, an entry level Naim system, and have not encountered any system bashing from those that prefer to invest more heavily into the hobby. Having just posted a message encouraging other lurkers to join in and contribute here, I feel like a hypocrite dissin' your tunes. Again sorry.

Enjoy the music,

Craig

Posted on: 12 October 2001 by quincy

Man

There aint no need to apologise. I aint hittin at you.

What I was suggesting that there are some fine systems that sound sweet and clear without parting with too much bread.

Some cats may dismiss these set-ups because they have parted with big bucks for very little return.

Peace

quote:
Originally posted by Craig Best:
Sorry Quincy,
If it was my comment re: 'throwing your Karik into the river' in your 'Coating the Karik with lead' thread that led to your asking the above, then let me make it clear that I was just pulling your leg (mostly Linn's leg really).
The Karik is a fine player, and I am sure that it provides you with much musical satisfaction.
I have, what most here would consider to be, an entry level Naim system, and have not encountered any system bashing from those that prefer to invest more heavily into the hobby. Having just posted a message encouraging other lurkers to join in and contribute here, I feel like a hypocrite dissin' your tunes. Again sorry.
Enjoy the music,
Craig

Posted on: 12 October 2001 by quincy

Mr Pig

Cats who seek to be popular generally never achieve such status.

Karik / 32.5 combo is an aid to inner peace and tranquility.

Posted on: 12 October 2001 by Phil Barry

I could buy a better car than I have for the replacement cost of my system, at retail prices.

As far as I can tell, it's been very well-spent money - but I've really enjoyed music reproduced at home since I got an LP12 and a Musical Fidelity A1 10-12 tears ago.

I've found expenditures on Naim, at least on used equipment, to be exceptions to the law of diminishing returns.

If there are sour grapes around, I suspect they're hanging by people who haven't spent the big bucks.

All I can say is this: I'm happy with my system, but if I hadn't been able to afford the CDS/LP12-ARO/82/2 x hicap/250, I would have been very happy with an LP12-Ittok/62/140 (and screw the CDs) - about $2000 in the US - not cheap, but not extravagant, either.

Regards.

Phil

Posted on: 12 October 2001 by matthewr

Personally I doubt that Mr Pig is happy with his system. I also doubt that he will admit it.

Matthew

Posted on: 12 October 2001 by Alex S.

Phil

quote:
since I got an LP12 and a Musical Fidelity A1 10-12 tears ago.

I like it. Just 10-12 tears. I'd have cried a lot more if I'd bought an MF pre instead of the 32.5 all those years ago. I very nearly did.

Alex

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Andrew L. Weekes

quote:
Me? I've got Mana, so I get happier by the day :0)

Yet you still don't like your CD player as much as your LP12.

Mana not quite so magic then?

Andy.

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Don Atkinson

but I derive the maximum amount of pleasure from it

I don't understand what this means, could you explain?

Cheers

Don

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Andrew L. Weekes

As for justifying the money I've spent on my system (which is modest by some standards), it's very easy for me to do.

I just turn it on and it plays music.

Makes it worth the entry price in my book.

Andy.

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Mick P

Gentlemen

I have two systems, an older entry level in the dining room and a better one in the lounge.

I am happy with both and have never regretted a penny of expenditure. After all, you only make money with the intention of spending it on something you enjoy.

One good thing about Naim is that you do not lose a lot of money when you resell. I intend to keep my stuff for ever so that makes it even better value for money.

Regards

Mick

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by ken c

Personally I doubt that many of the contributors on this forum who own 'mega bucks' systems are happy with them.

i dont know what a mega buck system is, but i am very happy with my system.

I also doubt that many of them would admit it.

if i ever became unhappy with my system, the priority would hardly be to "admit" it (who cares?), but to get rid of it, superfast!!!

enjoy

ken

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by ebirah

Quincy, I'm not sure I don't argee with you.
Really cheap hi-fi generally sound awful to my ears (but I happily listen to a casette-radio while I'm cooking) but for what is these days a relatively modest outlay (say, CD5/112/150) you can get a stunning system. My experience is that the law of diminishing returns kicks in very sharply after this level. When I went from my 140 to 250 the leap was not as large as I'd hoped - the 140 is a great amp; the 250 is better but buy how much in absolute terms? A few months ago I posted how, although the CD2 is better than the CDX, I felt the difference was better spent on CDs because the absolute difference between the two wasn't a case of one being unlistenable - they're both great.

Given that, I have chosen to upgrade merely because I can afford to. I'm just saying that if I had to live with a CD5 etc I could easily and happily do so. Perhaps the best time I ever had listening to music was when I was 14, crazy for it, and had a pile of stuuf that I wouldn't entertain today (Pioneer deck, Trio KT amp and Ram One speakers - they were fantastic!).

Steve

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Andy Kirby

quote:
The 250 is gutless and cannot drive Saras cleanly at very high volume.

quote:
"the 140 is a great amp; the 250 is better but buy how much in absolute terms?" Ebirah
Not much at all! Which is my whole point.

'fraid I have to disagree with you here Mr pig. A good few years ago I picked up a pair of saras, cheap, in my local hifi store and started driving them with a Nait 1 through to a 42.5/140 then 42.5/Snaps/250.

The move to the 250 was one of the biggest upgrades I have made, it brought the sara's alive, the music flowed and they begun to sound like I had hoped, a not so junior version of the isobaric.

Conventional wisdom seems to be that a 250 is a minimum for the saras but that the isobarik is an easier speaker to drive.

This was not an expensive upgrade either, by the time I had cashed in my 140 a ten year old recapped 250, was not a lot more, certainly less than the cost of a decent stand, and well worth it.

Am I to understand that 'phase n' Mana under a 140 would have given me the same ability to dive the speakers as plugging in a 250?

Regards

Andy

[This message was edited by AndyK on SATURDAY 13 October 2001 at 20:01.]

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Alex S.

Will include biamped 110s vs bi-140s vs single 250.

I'll let you know if I can justify the monetary saving.

What I have noticed to date is that a 110/250 biamped off an 82 is better than a single 250 (both ways round), that 2 250s is better than that (of course) again with 82, but that 32.5 doesn't like being bi-amped and works better with a single 250.

I will try the 110s/140s as quasi mono blocks.

Alex

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by BrianD

quote:
Still don't think that the 250 brings saras 'alive' though, it just can't move the drivers fast enough

Everythings relative, isn't it? Compared to running Sara's with a NAP110, the NAP250 (insert any cliche you like to indicate the 250 does a better job)

Bri

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Alex S.

Its fair comment that a 250 can barely drive Saras, it can barely drive AE1s either. But I blame the speakers not the amp. Both buggers to drive. As bad as a Shogun but without the hateful looks (I imagine).

Alex

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Mick P

Chaps

I have a 140 driving a set of Saras in my secondary system and it sounds bloody good.

I know Mr Pig was unhappy with his 250/Sara set up but lets be fair, he did on his own admission buy a 10 yr old totally knackered set which had to be re furbished a later.

The 250 must be in the top 5% of amplifiers when it comes to power and to suggest it is lacking is total twaddle.

My 250 drives my SBL's superbly and I am more than content with them. The 250 is a classic and will be remembered when you and I are pushing up daisy's.

Regards

Mick

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Steve Toy

There are many other things we can spend our money on:-

A better car.
A car is an instrument of utility.
When you try to turn it into a source of pleasure, it usually ends up in flashing blue lights, paperwork, points on licence, and money wasted on motoring pleasure taxes (aka speeding fines.)

A better pension - so that you can enjoy life when you are old, buy your dream hi-fi when you are deaf, and a nice car when your reactions are too slow to be safe at any thrill-inducing speed.

A bigger house - it's not much of a big house if it doesn't have a dedicated listening room - which is not that much use either without a decent system.

A holiday of a lifetime, or several of them.
The hi-fi makes the coming home and having nothing to show for it - apart from a few crappy photos and insect bites - less of a come-down.

Expensive furniture and decor.
These are bound to give you more musical satisfaction because they look nice.
The Fraim is a fair piece of furniture, what more do you want?

Put all your money into savings.
So your kids can inherit it all and each go out and buy a CDS2/52/500/DBL on Fraim system with your hard-earned.

Expensive clothes and trinkets.
Pure aesthetics and no real function.
The glowing green lights on the Naims in the dark look nice, although the DBLs are as ugly as sin.

Charitable causes.
Now there's a thought!

It's always a nice day for it, have a good one!
Steve

[This message was edited by Steven Toy on SUNDAY 14 October 2001 at 05:50.]

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Steve Toy

I can't comment on whether it was interesting or fun to read

but it just doesn't look as aesthetically pleasing (

)

to my ears.

It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Steve Toy

It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve

Posted on: 13 October 2001 by Alex S.

Steve

Excellent post (the non-smilie one).

Mick

A 250 might be in the top 5% powerwise although I very much doubt it. That still leaves it unable to drive certain speakers properly. I recently listened to some Dynaudio Craffts - superb stand mount monitors - the drivers barely budged with a 250.

Alex

ps Early, isn't it. Steven, you seem to sleep even less than me.

Posted on: 14 October 2001 by ebirah

Worth mentioning I've had Saras as well as the aformentioned 250 and 140. The 250 had no problems driving Saras at all; neither did the 140, it just wasn't quite so good at it. Alternatively the best upgrade was replacing the Saras with Kans, irrespective of power amp. I find the Saras far too coloured, so much so that they were unlistenable after I'd had SBLs (which followed the Kans) for a while. The Shahinians I now use are definitely coloured but far more musical than the lot.

Steve

Posted on: 14 October 2001 by Steve Toy

Alex,
I finished work at a little after 4 this morning, chilled out on the Forum for a bit, and hit the hay at 7.
I've just got up!

It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve

Posted on: 14 October 2001 by Mike Hanson

When I started my Hi-Fi quest over three years ago, I budgeted about $5000US for a two channel system, which I thought should be plenty. I went around with a bunch of test CDs, and I quickly eliminated vast swaths of audio gear. I had very specific expectations, and the systems that didn't disappoint me in some way or another were few and far between. By the end of six months I had spent double my budget, but I still wasn't satisfied.

Now that another couple of years has passed, and I've climbed almost to the top of the Naim ladder, I am almost never disappointed with what I hear from my system. (My only complaint is that I would like it to be LOUDER occasionally, although everyone who hears how loud I play my system is sure that I'll be deaf soon. )

Therefore, my system is "good enough". It does what I expect, and I was fortunately able to afford it. The question "Is it worth it?" has no bearing on the subject. I'm satisfied, and that's all that matters.

BTW, like Mick, I also have a second system. Although it's not nearly as good as my main setup, I don't expect so much from it. Therefore, it's "good enough" too.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-