Need help!! 202 or 282

Hello Ken,

If you are going t o get NAC252+300, why not buy 202 first so that you can shorten your waiting time for next upgrade. It is not wise to climb up the ladder step by step. Give you a big jump!!

The difference between 202 and 282 is massive. Even if you add the NAPSC to the 202, the difference is still massive.

Consider your upgrade path. You could buy the preamp. Then you could add a Supercap (to avoid too many steps) then you could go for the 252. Now each step is expensive. If you buy a 202 and NAPSC, then when you add the supercap, you will only be using one 24v power supply from the supercap. This will sound better than a Hicap, but it's the minimum use of a supercap's capability.

If you buy a 282 instead, you will immediately benefit from the extra ability in the 282. Then when you add the supercap, you will use two 24v supplies from it and therefore reap even bigger benefits in the one hit.

I would go with the 282. It's a much better preamp and when you add the supercap you will reap even bigger gains again. It also provides one other benefit - you could change the 200 to the 300 early and run with a 282/supercap/300 for a while. This could be beneficial if the room or speakers require extra power which you can't provide just yet, but you won't be disgracing the 300 since the 282/supercap is a very good preamp indeed.

Regards,
Frank.
All opinions are my own and do not reflect the opinion of any organisations I work for, except where this is stated explicitly.

I upgraded a couple of months ago, after some demos, with both the 282 and 202, with CD5+FC2+Intros to match my existing system.

The difference was immediate and so noticbly better with the 282, that i didn't really consider the 202 after hearing the 282. The music was so much more apparent and lively and engaging.

I upgraded from a Nait 5, which was quite a jump. If you're looking at a 252 in only a couple of years then maybe some more cost effective choice could be made, as a 282 seems more that an interim improvement?

ricardo

Listened to a 282 in my system last weekend. 72/HiCap/Cd5/new 250/Neat Vitos. Depth, soundstage, musicality, extended highs, a sure step in the direction I want to go, but w/only a hicap I am not sure if its a place I want to stop. Without an opportunity to listen to the 282 w/a Supercap I am currently unsure what the true potential is in the 282.

To complicate matters my new 250 shut down again this am w/the volume at only 9:30 playing the new Peter Frampton cd. It rocks....so was I....& then the silence. I don't remember my 140 shutting down so much, but I had changed the fuses so who knows.

I hear that a pr. of 250's is sublime & "effortless" but I didn't think I'd have to toy w/such a decision so soon. Like yourself I really want to upgrade the pre to a 282/or 252.

Regis

In the evolution of my system, based on the previous generation of Naim electronics, I found that the 82 was, all in all, the best single upgrade I ever made to my system. At the time I introduced it into a system based around an old, much loved 42/110 combination, and from there I was able to build up the system in a whole host of ways. I think that the role of Naim pre-amps in their systems is absolutely fundamental to the musical and sonic performance of a system. Since long term plans are often hard to fully know ahead of time, I would get the 282 if funds permit, and then if you are still in a position to invest more, weigh a Hi-cap 2 and a 250 or perhaps some of the other permutations Frank alluded to above. I think there is a reason that Naim engineered the maximum variety of logical upgrade scenarios into this upper middle level of their pre-amps.

The only purchase I don't believe many would advocate is a 282 with a Supercap 2 all in one purchase, as done together, this is close enough to a 252 to make the extra cost of going to a 252 the most logical if you were to be spending in that range. As always, try to find a good dealer who you can develop a relationship with, and they can help you understand these options for your self, and weigh your listening priorities. After all, you may be more sensitive to source enhancements, or possibly your room or your priorities will favor a speaker be given more priority in your system building. Ideally, you should try to insure that any given upgrade or purchase would serve you well, even if you did not add anything else, as circumstances and finances can change over time, and it is always better, in my view anyway, to have a system that reflects the listeners personal priorities.

Good luck!

Hi all,

Really thx a lot for the valuable advice and information!

It seems that 282 is better than 202 in both performance and upgrade option for further improvement, I will try to arrange a serious listen a them, but I think it is "no way back" once listen to the 282.

Agree with bdnyc:

quote:

---

Naim pre-amps in their systems is absolutely fundamental to the musical and sonic performance of a system

---

It's ture that long term plans are often hard to fully know and and finances position can change over timea, better to get the best if funds permit.

Will let u guys know what finally I get, and share the experience!

ken, making a big jump in considering the 282, as we discussed, there are no way back if you listened to higher naim system. Honestly, will you consider a supercap/202 combo? Or sell the CD5 now and get the CDX2 to get the most from Naim (source first) theory?

I got friends who are heading for the road, so if you wanna get rid of your CD5, let me know

William (ship310 in R33)

So nobody discusses source strength before making preamp recommendations? At least until the last post before mine. [I appologise if you dudes have already gone through all of this with KTTO on previous threads]

If you're tlaking about using a slimline source, and won't be upgrading for a long time because you bought a 282 - just buy the 202. Music comes from the front of the system.

Rico - SM/Mullet Audio

Rico,

The source component wasn't mentioned, but I found that with the Olive series, a CDX/82/250 sounded better than a CDX/XPS/102/250. I speculate that the samewould hold true with the new Classic range. I recently heard a CDX2/202/200 and heard what an XPS2 could do...

...well, not a great deal basically. The 282 was out on loan at the time, but I bet that once it was in place, the XPS2 would then make a massive difference.

You can't underestimate what a decent preamp will do. More losses seem to take place at the preamp stage than anywhere else in the signal path.



Regards,

Steve.

Hi Ken,

I had the 202/250 with NAPSC before but had upgraded to 282 about a month ago. I think 282 provides a much better and dynamic sound stage presentation, as well as a much deeper, fuller performance. While 202 is a very good preamp, it is also true that once you have listen to 282, there is no going back!

Best wishes to your choice!

Steven

your entire argument assumes a CDX-level player at front. My post probes for the existence of such a source, and questions also system direction and funding.

Now, what is it you are trying to tell me? That if one had a CDX an 82 would be a good idea? Oh that's right, I used to run CDX+82 back in 1999....

Rico - SM/Mullet Audio

quote:

---

Now, what is it you are trying to tell me? That if one had a CDX an 82 would be a good idea? Oh that's right, I used to run CDX+82 back in 1999....

---

Jolly good Rico. I was just challenging your apparent dogma of source first always that you don't seem to practise yourself...

So what would you do now if you had a CDX/102/..., change the 102 for an 82, or get that XPS to max out your digital source first?

BTW, I see that in these flat earth parts silver is the new ferrous metal



Regards,

Steve.

Steve

quote:

---

I recently heard a CDX2/202/200 and heard what an XPS2 could do...

...well, not a great deal basically.

---

I found this very interesting. I'm currently waiting for my CDX2 to arrive...any day now

Whilst I was doing the dem I listened to an XPS2 as well, as I had heard so much about how it transormed the CDX2 into something really special. This was with 202/NAPSC/Flatcap2/200.

Like you I was rather underwhelmed and wondered whether it was just my ears/lack of hi-fi experience. Sure it was a bit better, but not £2k worth. I take it the next upgrade step (not for a year or two!) would be to replace the 202 with 282? What about Hicap2 rather than Flatcap2?

Cheers

David

quote:

---

Like you I was rather underwhelmed and wondered whether it was just my ears/lack of hi-fi experience.

---

Experience doesn't count for much with auditioning equipment other than not falling into the thrilling then fatiguing trap. What it does give you is th confidence to trust your own ears. I'd trust them if I were you because they don't seem bear false witness!

quote:

---

Sure it was a bit better, but not £2k worth. I take it the next upgrade step (not for a year or two!) would be to replace the 202 with 282? What about Hicap2 rather than Flatcap2?

---

I'd get the 282 and the Hi-cap2 not necessarily in that order.

Then an XPS2 will probably be night and day.

Regards,

Steve.

quote:

---

So what would you do now if you had a CDX/102/..., change the 102 for an 82, or get that XPS to max out your digital source first?

---

Steve

thank you for your most interesting observations. I should like to point out that this is not dogma, just plain old (hard-won) experience talking.

In the example you give, I would most likely take the XPS before moving up from the 102. Especially noting a hicap and NAPSC. It would make for an interesting audition. Some folks bleat about the 102 and what it does/doesn't do. My experience of XPS or CDSII upgrade over the naked CDX is that its all perfectly audible/musical/enjoyable above the humble 72, which in my book makes it worthwhile. I certainly heard the benefits of CDS2-CDS3 on a mere 32.5 - go figure.

The 202 - now that's a special bit of kit... I'd love to audition one against a late NAC82. I would be surprised if the 82 won, but would expect certain aspects of the 202's performance to show the strengths inherent in the presentation of the new kit.

quote:

---

" that you don't seem to practise yourself... "

---

err you've lost me there, Steve. I'd never recommend an (2)82 where a CDX(2) or LP12 was not pre-existing; I myself moved up to an 82 from a 32.5 after acquiring a CDX. No preamp changeouts until XPS, CDS2, and then CDS3. I trust that's source-first enough for most! in the dim and distant past I ran a mullett - lesson learned.

enjoying the music

Rico - SM/Mullet Audio

I have a CD5, P3 and Tuner as sources for my 90 pre. I think it's best to get a decent pre like the 282 because that will make the most of the signal from all three. Just upgrading the CDX is just one source and 1/3 of my listening time. I do listen a lot to the tuner and then to CD and last, but not least, the P3.

Sigh!!! when will I get that big bonus in the sky?

glenn

Life is analogue

Rico,

So you got your CDX before your 82, but you didn't get your XPS or CDS2 until after you had got the 82.

Source first would surely dictate that you'd get these before making any preamp upgrade.

I agree that one shouldn't be running slimline CD players with anything better than a 102, but in my more limited experience reverse mullet is as bad as mullet. Imho, it is better to balance your budget across the whole audio chain with a slight weighting towards the source.



Regards,

Steve.

Thx all for the enormous input

The 282 was borrowed for review, so I can only have demo on CDX2/202/200/active allae, I must say the 202 is a very good peramp; this system sounds very good, active is awesome.

After demo, talk to dealer, consider the various upgrade options, I end up decided to go with the NAC282 to minmise the steps and budget on upgrade path.

As the NAP 200 can power the 282, I don't have to add a Cap to 282 immediately, and once I go active with another NAP250, I can add a super cap to power both the 282 and SNAXO, as such the super cap is fully utilised and justified.

I totally agree with the source first theory, and I also think a decent peramp can get the best from the CD5, and drive the NAP200 best, and my next upgrade must be the CDX2.

Back home with the 282/200, I understand how important is the peramp, it determines the characteristic of a system, and surely the Nait 5 as peramp can't get the most from CD5 and explore the true potential of NAP200. Now the power and potential of the system seem to be released! The backgroup is quite, overall pic is large and open, and more detail and refined bass. It's just the first day, and it is great! I am sure it will be much better after burn in.

I learn a lot from this upgrade:

(1) there is no way back on the system you heard

(2) minmise the upgrade steps, and always get the best you can afford!

(3) an active system is awesome, depends on different system, I will perfer going active with 2 NAP250, rather than passive NAP300.

KKTO

forget to mention the speed, the system now is very fast, it is obvious on the last part of last tract "Sultans of Swing" of Dire Straits Alchemy Live!!

Glad you solved this.

I question the use of the s'cap for 2 devices. I believe Naim says only the FC2 can (or is that 'should?) power 2 devices. Paul? Richard?

Regards.

Phil

confirmed that Supercap can only power 1 device, and additional hicap or supercap is needed for SNAXO.