Going activ or better preamp?
Posted by: Norman on 12 April 2001
my current setup consists of a CDS, a NAC 72, HICAP, NAP 135 and the SBL. I´m quite happy with that so far, but there are still some black boxes around...
I see two major upgrade ways:
1) To go active with two more 135´s plus Snaxo + Hicap.
2) To replace the weakest part of the chain by a NAC 52 or at least a NAC 82 (a) and later(b) plus supercap.
Is the 82 somewhere between 72 and 52 or only together with the supercap and without closer to the 72?
BTW, is an active chain with a stereoamp and two monos thinkable?
BTW2, price for the FRAIM are
and why they use glas, what´s pretty strange...
Cheers,
Norman
As much as I love the 72/hicap, I would think you'd best put your money into a better preamp. How much do you have to play with?
The 82, especially with 2 hicaps (or s'cap) is very satisfying. With a CDS, I imagine it would be sublime in a way the 72 can't approach.
But you've got a bunch of options, based on my fuzzy knowledge of UK costs -
1) s'cap the 72, then get the 52
2) an 82 and 2nd hicap now
3) the 135s, SNAXO, hicap, and
In the US, 2X135 + SNAXO + hicap + 72 is awfully close to 52 financial territory, so
4) 52.
Enjoy your hunt.
Phil
you've got the source, and I would definately want to go to at least 82 + Super before going active, especially with 135s.
If you want to do it in stages, and think you will end up with the 52, I would suggest putting a Super on the 72 for now.
It's not quite an ideal system (by all accounts 82 + 1xHi does some things better), but you're then only one step away from heaven. This is the minimum cost way to a 52.
cheers, Martin
i'd like to play devil's advocate and suggest an alternative, perhaps "about face" approach. (i guess my judgement is coloured by the fact that i have been enjoying an active system since yesterday. its still warming up, but the special magic is there...)
you see, i know for sure that a long time ago, in the "flat response" days, quite a few well known people had 6-packs based on the humbler 32.5/hicap and naxo combination -- i actually heard such a system -- and it sounded absolutely fab driving isobariks.
yes, i know, pre-amp technology has moved somewhat, but given what i say above, i think going active straightaway is not as out of the question as current thinking might suggest. getting rid of those passive xovers on the sbl's so your 135's have an "easier" time may turn out to be quite an important musical step for you.
i would almost suggest that with a basic active system, you will be able to hear the effect of other upgrades much more easily.
just a thought. totally counter hierarchy principle -- blind application of which sometimes may not be appropriate...
what is worth saying though is that all the other suggestions by fellow forum members will definitely improve your system substantially -- a supercap is awesome -- but for me the "active" effect has a musical dimension that to my ears is not achieved by passive systems - unless of course, you are talking about 500 bases systems, (i have yet to check this myself...)
enjoy...
ken
For your upgrade path I would recommend the preamp upgrade before changing to active (that is the choice I would make) but Ken is also right that going active is an excellent upgrade.
Mark
Not a deliberate plan, but the crossover and 250 came up at a very reasonable price 2nd hand so I took the plunge.
With my LP12 in the driving seat it is brilliant; the CD player (Audio Analogue) is OK, but the system does show its limitations.
I also remember enjoying early active systems; 32, NAXO,250s and Kans or 'Bariks - so you don't have to wait for a 52 on the front end....
Jo
It seems to be the next logical step.
You might just be surprised.
I was.
Best Wishes
P.
Like yourself I had an early opportunity to go active with 135's but was encouraged to upgrade my pre-amp 1st. At that time I was using an 82 with Hi-Cap and was invited to a Naim evening organised by my dealer. In my opinion the demonstrations that evening proved that the better pre-amp gave a more realistic and controlled portrayal of the music.
Listen to a 52 first, like Pierre I think this will be your favourite option
Listen and enjoy
Steve
quote:re 52s
There will be a load coming on the market second-hand pretty soon!
Why -
Derek W
As far as I know, NAIM is working on a 52 follow up with new design (500 fit), so there gonna be some 52´s on the s/h market soon...
Norman
Trade in your 72/hicap for a 52. The outlay is about the same as adding the extra 135s, SNAXO and hicap, but the benfits will be much greater.
After buying the 52, you should do one simple thing. Save. Then save some more. Then save a little more. Then trade in your 135s for a 500. The 500 makes SBLs motor like you wouldn't believe. Active operation helps SBLs in all kinds of ways. However, 500 operation changes music reproduction fundamentally in terms of timing, speed and accuracy. This does not change with active 135 operation since the 500 actually addresses problems in the 135s!
You said:
As far as I know, NAIM is working on a 52 follow up with new design (500 fit), so there gonna be some 52´s on the s/h market soon...
That's what a lot of people said about 135s when the 500 was announced. Hasn't happened yet.
Regards,
Frank.
1. Improving their CD-playback. The CDS-II is good but there is still more to come.
2. A/V
My 52 is staying with me even if there is a new one. It is more than capable of fronting the 500 in an active setup and is very difficult to see how Naim could improve on what is already probably the best preamp on the market. The active/passive debate is interesting as well. Norman - since you seem to have no budget restrictions I would listen to the 52/500 setup. It kills an active six-pack with astonishing ease!
quote:
Norman - since you seem to have no budget restrictions I would listen to the 52/500 setup. It kills an active six-pack with astonishing ease!
i have budget restrictions, but the 52/500 demo head to head with a 4 or six pack, is something i would kill for...
enjoy...
ken
Active does things that even the mighty 500 passive doesn't.
Dev
have you actually done the comparative demo?? lucky you.. can you provide a little more detail. you will recall that bob edwards actually did some extensive comparative listening tests sometime ago and concluded in no uncertain terms that passive 500 was king.
mind you, i used to hear folks say that passive 135/sbl is better than active 250/sbl -- until i actually did the demo myself -- and came to the exact opposite conclusion. just shows you how important it is to try for yourself, heh...
enjoy...
ken
Nigel, tell you what: unfortunately I do have budget limitations..
So the 500 is no option for me. I heared the 500/52/NBL at a dealers demo room. Was quite nice, but not as good as it should. I guess it only showed 70% for different reasons...
I am also sure, that 2x250 is much better than 2x135 passiv with SBL. But the 500 seems to be a different story. New amp design etc.. Nobody I know gives the vote to the 6 pack compared to the 500. But sure, I´d like to make the experience myself.
Cheers, Norman
I have heard the 500 and the active 6-pack and, for me, the 500 is astonishing. The active setup does a couple of things. Firstly it enables the amplifiers to be used more efficiently by breaking out the x-over before amplification. This itself should not make a huge difference. The biggest factor is the increase in speed to give us that lovely PRaT. They do this of course by bypassing the passive x-over network which introduces delays. The interesting thing is that the 500 uses new transistor technology which eliminates some of the protection circuitry normally used in power amplifier design. The result is a much faster amplifier showing that the true limitation is further up the chain towards the source. For me there is absolutely no contest. Now what I haven't heard is the active 500 setup which I am lead to believe is out of this world. I'm one of the silly buggers that's going to try to get there but it's going to take some time!
i consider active drive to be mainly a power amp upgrade -- you give each a more dedicated function, and you dont waste power in the passive crossover. but if the 500 is really better than lesser n-packs, then, as you say, there is something else that is still getting in the way of the music in the power amps, which the 500 apparently emphatically addresses. i find it fascinating all this attention at the penultimate stage of the chain, when hierarchy suggests that there should be more effort on the pre-amp (s'pose you could consider snaxo part of the preamp, just to be awkward??). and this suggests that the weakest link in a nac52/sbl/250 or 135 system are the power amps?? hmmm...
enjoy...
ken