Do Naim SL2's "Image"?
Posted by: JohnMak on 17 February 2003
I have just read a review of the Naim SL2's and they sound like the type of speaker I would enjoy. I.e. sealed enclosure - fast and tight bass - a bit like the Linn Isobarik's I had years ago before I went "mental" and "started turning Japanese"
Now I am looking at gettting rid of all my Jap and American stuff and returning to what used to give me so much pleasure .... the downside is, that I have learned to enjoy the 'imaging" qualities of some American speakers and hope I can have both this and the slam, drive and timing of the best of British.
Any comment appreciated.
Now I am looking at gettting rid of all my Jap and American stuff and returning to what used to give me so much pleasure .... the downside is, that I have learned to enjoy the 'imaging" qualities of some American speakers and hope I can have both this and the slam, drive and timing of the best of British.
Any comment appreciated.
Posted on: 17 February 2003 by Frank Abela
SL2's image in the way you'd expect a Naim speaker to image, but better than the old days.
Consider a band or small group of musicians like a jazz trio or classical quartet. SL2's don't throw up a huge image into the room and give you gobs of space for you to walk around and in between the players. Instead, they present a close knit group of musicians playing off each other. Also, the group doesn't play right in the room necessarily, but very often between the speakers and back away from you. If you think of how a small band as mentioned above sounds in a typical venue, the SL2 presentation is quite a close approximation.
Of course, if you have a large orchestra like the LSO for example, then you need the presentation to be much bigger. This does happen with the SL2. Again, it's not so big that things always appear as though the perfromance is always in a hall (typical of Jap/American kit), but they still present the scale and power of the orchestra with great dynamism and scale. one benefit of this approach is that highlighted soloists often don't appear exaggeratedly large or out of proportion in relation to the rest of the orchestra. I always find it odd when an oboe is as big as the massed string section below it. This is what happens with a lot of non-Naim kit.
So a certain amount of adjustment would have to be made on your part to figure out what the SL2s would be doing, but give it some time (typically at least half an hour) and you may begin to appreciate this closer, almost intimate, presentation that the SL2's present.
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.
Consider a band or small group of musicians like a jazz trio or classical quartet. SL2's don't throw up a huge image into the room and give you gobs of space for you to walk around and in between the players. Instead, they present a close knit group of musicians playing off each other. Also, the group doesn't play right in the room necessarily, but very often between the speakers and back away from you. If you think of how a small band as mentioned above sounds in a typical venue, the SL2 presentation is quite a close approximation.
Of course, if you have a large orchestra like the LSO for example, then you need the presentation to be much bigger. This does happen with the SL2. Again, it's not so big that things always appear as though the perfromance is always in a hall (typical of Jap/American kit), but they still present the scale and power of the orchestra with great dynamism and scale. one benefit of this approach is that highlighted soloists often don't appear exaggeratedly large or out of proportion in relation to the rest of the orchestra. I always find it odd when an oboe is as big as the massed string section below it. This is what happens with a lot of non-Naim kit.
So a certain amount of adjustment would have to be made on your part to figure out what the SL2s would be doing, but give it some time (typically at least half an hour) and you may begin to appreciate this closer, almost intimate, presentation that the SL2's present.
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.
Posted on: 17 February 2003 by Andrew Randle
Naim imaging is similar to Linn imaging, in that they both give solidity and purpose to the musician, AND they project the physical force behind the instrument from the direction of origin.
i.e. you can PHYSICALLY feel the kick drum coming from the centre-right.
This is an excellent quality of good high-end flat-earth systems.
Andrew
Andrew Randle
Linn Binn Sinner
i.e. you can PHYSICALLY feel the kick drum coming from the centre-right.
This is an excellent quality of good high-end flat-earth systems.
Andrew
Andrew Randle
Linn Binn Sinner
Posted on: 17 February 2003 by Vik
All Naim speakers image, only that the SL2 is more transparent in this area.
vik
vik
Posted on: 17 February 2003 by Vik
For that matter, just about any loudspeaker pair that is synchronised to "talk" will image.
This is a function of distance from L speaker to R speaker. Correct synchronization is based on time-correctness. Meaning if you hear a drum roll from L going to R, it is full bodied without smearing or without a hole in the centre, for example.
This also means the speakers must be in precisely mirror-imaged. Meaning if you toe in one speaker 5 degrees, replicate with other speaker.
When imaging is correct, the pair will disappear.
the closer you get the trickier it becomes. good rule of thumb.
This is just one aspect to high end nirvana. Imaging setup must be complemented with musical and tonally correct loudspeakers for a thrilling and emotional experience, but how many are there actually out there???????????????????????????????????
vik
This is a function of distance from L speaker to R speaker. Correct synchronization is based on time-correctness. Meaning if you hear a drum roll from L going to R, it is full bodied without smearing or without a hole in the centre, for example.
This also means the speakers must be in precisely mirror-imaged. Meaning if you toe in one speaker 5 degrees, replicate with other speaker.
When imaging is correct, the pair will disappear.
the closer you get the trickier it becomes. good rule of thumb.
This is just one aspect to high end nirvana. Imaging setup must be complemented with musical and tonally correct loudspeakers for a thrilling and emotional experience, but how many are there actually out there???????????????????????????????????
vik
Posted on: 19 February 2003 by J.N.
John
No Naim system will image like the best (i.e. Quad electrostatics)
If that's your primary requirement; Naim is not for you.
In as much as a Naim system will 'image' I reckon the important aspect is the new range of amplifiers. They produce a much more spacious, three dimensional audio picture than the old amps.
Good luck.
No Naim system will image like the best (i.e. Quad electrostatics)
If that's your primary requirement; Naim is not for you.
In as much as a Naim system will 'image' I reckon the important aspect is the new range of amplifiers. They produce a much more spacious, three dimensional audio picture than the old amps.
Good luck.
Posted on: 19 February 2003 by Laurie Saunders
The SBLs and "older" Naim amps image very well indeed.
Sorry to bring this up again, but mains improvements have given me "spaciousness" and "air" to match what I`ve heard from, say Audio Research, etc...whilst still keeping PR&T
Laurie S
Sorry to bring this up again, but mains improvements have given me "spaciousness" and "air" to match what I`ve heard from, say Audio Research, etc...whilst still keeping PR&T
Laurie S
Posted on: 22 February 2003 by Peter C
A lot of the Japanese And American gear that images well doesn't always sound involving, you're aware of its imaging and hifi qualities rather than the music.
When you listen to Naim you're more aware of the music , which is the way it should be.
When you listen to Naim you're more aware of the music , which is the way it should be.
Posted on: 22 February 2003 by J.N.
Peter
Right on,brother. (Sorry; I came over all sixties there).
I've only ever heard one system that did it all - i.e. Naim type PRaT and involvement factor WITH a real, huge three dimensional soundstage.
It was a Krell/Wilson system and would retail now at around £50k.
Ah well................
Right on,brother. (Sorry; I came over all sixties there).
I've only ever heard one system that did it all - i.e. Naim type PRaT and involvement factor WITH a real, huge three dimensional soundstage.
It was a Krell/Wilson system and would retail now at around £50k.
Ah well................
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by Laurie Saunders
Angi73
..did you hear them in a dealers? As I have often said, many dealers seem able to succeed in making Naim gear sound terrible by setting up kit carelessly...maybe the speakers you heard were not run in? I would be surprised if ,with due care and attention to setting up, SL2s cannot be made to image well
laurie S
..did you hear them in a dealers? As I have often said, many dealers seem able to succeed in making Naim gear sound terrible by setting up kit carelessly...maybe the speakers you heard were not run in? I would be surprised if ,with due care and attention to setting up, SL2s cannot be made to image well
laurie S
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by J.N.
Angi
Very interesting. Something must have been amiss to prefer Intros and Allaes to SL2's, unless the 'edge' that the cheaper speakers have was giving you an excitement factor, which the much more sophisticated SL2's were not?
But; I accept your point about there being a sonic hole in the middle of the speakers, that the Spendors filled in.
There is a difference between 'space' and 'image' and the new Naim amps are much better at the former IMO, but if you must have holographic imagery; look elsewhere.
Did you not find the Spendors to be slow and uninvolving by comparison?
I use SBL's by the way.
quote:
i listened to them the other day with a New NAP 250, NAc 282 with hi cap and they hardly imaged at all to my mind. There was a massive gap inbetween the two speakers.
We then switched to Spendor S8's and bam, imaging. I could tell where the singer was and i felt like i was there.
Im my opinion the SL 2's are one of the worst sounding speakers i have heard. all in my pinion.
Ive heard some allaes and some intros and they werent so bad, so its not just a naim prejudice.
Very interesting. Something must have been amiss to prefer Intros and Allaes to SL2's, unless the 'edge' that the cheaper speakers have was giving you an excitement factor, which the much more sophisticated SL2's were not?
But; I accept your point about there being a sonic hole in the middle of the speakers, that the Spendors filled in.
There is a difference between 'space' and 'image' and the new Naim amps are much better at the former IMO, but if you must have holographic imagery; look elsewhere.
Did you not find the Spendors to be slow and uninvolving by comparison?
I use SBL's by the way.
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by syd
Does this not depend on our definition of Imaging. If you mean the pinpoint accuracy of hearing/seeing every instrument indivuduall laid out before you (holographic as they say in the mags) then no they don't. But if you mean the wash of sound that envelops you at a real live concert then they do. This applies to Classical, Jazz, Rock, Folk etc. and to large combos and small, large acoustic spaces and small intimate clubs.
Yours in Music
Syd
Yours in Music
Syd
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by JeremyB
Andrew's comment was interesting - suggests that Naim/Linn setups tend to image high level sound sources. This difference is exactly what I have noticed with "holographic" Quad/Avalon/Revel/valve amps etc - they pinpoint (front to back, left to right) the low level instruments as much as the high level sources, which to my ears sounds unnatural - like electronically simulated stereo. Makes for a few nice tricks though - has anyone else heard the 3 D image of a piano keyboard at exactly the right spot, at the right angle and of the right size? I've only noticed it work on simple music though, like a Jazz trio.
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by Minky
I can't really help you with the "imaging" question because to be honest, I don't see the point in focusing on one variable in a complex equation when only the result is important but ..
I have run SBL's for many years and recently had a pair of SL2's at home for a week. Initially I went "wow" because compared to SBL's, the SL2's sound seemed to be much more in space rather than from the boxes. Unfortunately, after the novelty had worn off the SL2's were less involving than my SBL's BUT the fact that they had relatively little bass seemed to indicate that they do need a LOT of running in. I am going to have them back in a few months when I suspect that they will prove the point that Laurie made earlier which is that it is dangerous to judge Naim equipment after one listen when run-in and installation are so important.
I have run SBL's for many years and recently had a pair of SL2's at home for a week. Initially I went "wow" because compared to SBL's, the SL2's sound seemed to be much more in space rather than from the boxes. Unfortunately, after the novelty had worn off the SL2's were less involving than my SBL's BUT the fact that they had relatively little bass seemed to indicate that they do need a LOT of running in. I am going to have them back in a few months when I suspect that they will prove the point that Laurie made earlier which is that it is dangerous to judge Naim equipment after one listen when run-in and installation are so important.
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by JeremyB
quote:
and if they were wrongly setupa nd not run in then surely the Spendors are just as likely to have the same problem and yet they trounced them.
It may be worthwhile to go back and play a MONO recording. You could choose whichever speaker you prefer as the imaging question may not be so important in the long term.
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by JeremyB
quote:
they hardly imaged at all to my mind. There was a massive gap inbetween the two speakers.
We then switched to Spendor S8's and bam, imaging. I could tell where the singer was and i felt like i was there.
Im my opinion the SL 2's are one of the worst sounding speakers i have heard
Angi73,
I know it's a stupid question, but are you 100% certain (using a test disk) the speakers were wired with the correct phase and channels? Even swapping over left and right channels could have this effect.
Jeremy
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by u5227470736789524
It was almost like listening to music in mono!
***
That is not necessarily bad (which is the context in which I read your comment).
Posts about most things, but especially, to me, about such things as soundstaging and imaging, come down to personal taste and preferences, not something that is inherently right or wrong.
For me, imaging and soundstaging are an artifact of "stereo" reproduction and mic techniques, not truely a part of the "music". I have never "heard" imaging or soundstaging at a live event (at least not in the sense it can be reproduced by home audio). I can "see" so-called imaging and soundstaging, but it rarely has anything to do, for me, with the music being performed. Unless you are at a truely acoustic event (completely unamplified and un-microphoned, and how often does that happen anymore?) for me there is a discontinuity between watching the performance and hearing it. Vocals from a pa thirty feet in the air overhead, guitars (or violins, or trumpets or whatever) from a pa speaker thirty feet to the right, etc. I have been to "acoustic" jazz shows in "perfect" church-type environments where the acoustics of the venue would have easily supported the sound for the venue size/crowd capacity, and EVERY instrument is amplified and played through a pa speaker - the only "musical" image is a spot over to the left and another spot over to the right.
These are not meant to be arguments against attending live events (I have bootleg recorded over 100 events in the last 3 plus years - all in mono) or having fun with creating and "listening" to soundstages and images (stereo) in the home, but for me personally, I have never enjoyed music more than when I quit sitting in the "sweet" spot at home, worrying about whether it was mono or stereo, and tried to truely understand (and hear, not "see") the incredible beauty and creativity of the music so many gifted artists are able to give to us all.
Naim gear, which I have recently been blessed to discover, is helping me with my journey to that end.
So, do the SL2's image .... I haven't been fortunate enough to hear them (and certainly can't afford them), but, for me, it wouldn't matter. I would hope they play music well.
(this really is not intended to hijack the thread and to be critical of what anyone has said, it really is about personal tastes, mono often is fine with me. I really do value ALL the opinions expressed on this forum .... it is very educational for me and I thank you all for your insights and personalities, on this thread and the other 170 pages I have been catching up on the past couple months :-) )
Best regards
Jeff A
***
That is not necessarily bad (which is the context in which I read your comment).
Posts about most things, but especially, to me, about such things as soundstaging and imaging, come down to personal taste and preferences, not something that is inherently right or wrong.
For me, imaging and soundstaging are an artifact of "stereo" reproduction and mic techniques, not truely a part of the "music". I have never "heard" imaging or soundstaging at a live event (at least not in the sense it can be reproduced by home audio). I can "see" so-called imaging and soundstaging, but it rarely has anything to do, for me, with the music being performed. Unless you are at a truely acoustic event (completely unamplified and un-microphoned, and how often does that happen anymore?) for me there is a discontinuity between watching the performance and hearing it. Vocals from a pa thirty feet in the air overhead, guitars (or violins, or trumpets or whatever) from a pa speaker thirty feet to the right, etc. I have been to "acoustic" jazz shows in "perfect" church-type environments where the acoustics of the venue would have easily supported the sound for the venue size/crowd capacity, and EVERY instrument is amplified and played through a pa speaker - the only "musical" image is a spot over to the left and another spot over to the right.
These are not meant to be arguments against attending live events (I have bootleg recorded over 100 events in the last 3 plus years - all in mono) or having fun with creating and "listening" to soundstages and images (stereo) in the home, but for me personally, I have never enjoyed music more than when I quit sitting in the "sweet" spot at home, worrying about whether it was mono or stereo, and tried to truely understand (and hear, not "see") the incredible beauty and creativity of the music so many gifted artists are able to give to us all.
Naim gear, which I have recently been blessed to discover, is helping me with my journey to that end.
So, do the SL2's image .... I haven't been fortunate enough to hear them (and certainly can't afford them), but, for me, it wouldn't matter. I would hope they play music well.
(this really is not intended to hijack the thread and to be critical of what anyone has said, it really is about personal tastes, mono often is fine with me. I really do value ALL the opinions expressed on this forum .... it is very educational for me and I thank you all for your insights and personalities, on this thread and the other 170 pages I have been catching up on the past couple months :-) )
Best regards
Jeff A
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by connon price
Thanks for the opinions Angi73. in my experience, the spendor sp8s do image very well and are a very likeable speaker and "work" on a wide range of equipment.
But my experience is also that the sl2 is a very demanding speaker that is either so bad that it needs top flight equipment from its own manufacturer or so good that it let you know just how bad the linn cd player was. My opinion is that both are sort of true. Did you have a listen to the 30k Naim electronics on the sl2s? and I may have missed it but what were the 6K electronics that your granddad selected?
Remember that speakers are completely passive devices (except for the current they try to force on the amp) and are just doing what they are told. every cd player, cable, pre, cable, amp, cable combination will tell the speaker something different. I don't know how much experience you have taking the same pair of speakers and plugging them into various sets of electronics, but my experience has shown me that though certain aspects of the speaker remain similar, the speaker will really sing a very different song depending on the electronics in front of it.
Naim speakers are something that people usually "get" last about Naim systems.. No one starts with the speakers and then says, wow, those sound great on my old kit, maybe I'll try their amps. Not in my experience. Now that I understand and love what my SBLs do, Just about every other speaker I listen too just sounds wrong, fake, phasey, boomy, unnatural. They convey musical meaning much better than the SP8s, and sound great doing it. But that is just in my mind, I have no idea what is going on in yours. And not to say that when I was your age I was more or less experienced with music in terms of rhythm and harmony and all than you may be, I don't know what your experience and perceptions are, but I doubt that I would have liked them either. By the way, the SBLs I'm talking about were the precursor to the SL2, and very similar in their requirements to sound good. The SL2 is probably even more demanding.
Anyway, it is great to hear different points of view on this typically one sided forum. Many members, including myself, are very curious how other people come to conclusions so different from our own experiences. But that is usually the answer, our conclusions come from our own experiences.
Hope any of this is interesting to you,
Connon
But my experience is also that the sl2 is a very demanding speaker that is either so bad that it needs top flight equipment from its own manufacturer or so good that it let you know just how bad the linn cd player was. My opinion is that both are sort of true. Did you have a listen to the 30k Naim electronics on the sl2s? and I may have missed it but what were the 6K electronics that your granddad selected?
Remember that speakers are completely passive devices (except for the current they try to force on the amp) and are just doing what they are told. every cd player, cable, pre, cable, amp, cable combination will tell the speaker something different. I don't know how much experience you have taking the same pair of speakers and plugging them into various sets of electronics, but my experience has shown me that though certain aspects of the speaker remain similar, the speaker will really sing a very different song depending on the electronics in front of it.
Naim speakers are something that people usually "get" last about Naim systems.. No one starts with the speakers and then says, wow, those sound great on my old kit, maybe I'll try their amps. Not in my experience. Now that I understand and love what my SBLs do, Just about every other speaker I listen too just sounds wrong, fake, phasey, boomy, unnatural. They convey musical meaning much better than the SP8s, and sound great doing it. But that is just in my mind, I have no idea what is going on in yours. And not to say that when I was your age I was more or less experienced with music in terms of rhythm and harmony and all than you may be, I don't know what your experience and perceptions are, but I doubt that I would have liked them either. By the way, the SBLs I'm talking about were the precursor to the SL2, and very similar in their requirements to sound good. The SL2 is probably even more demanding.
Anyway, it is great to hear different points of view on this typically one sided forum. Many members, including myself, are very curious how other people come to conclusions so different from our own experiences. But that is usually the answer, our conclusions come from our own experiences.
Hope any of this is interesting to you,
Connon
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by Minky
I couldn't agree more with the comments from Jeff :
"Posts about most things, but especially, to me, about such things as soundstaging and imaging, come down to personal taste and preferences, not something that is inherently right or wrong.".
Exactly ! I don't care about why a system makes great music, just that it does.
and Connon :
"Naim speakers are something that people usually "get" last about Naim systems.. No one starts with the speakers and then says, wow, those sound great on my old kit, maybe I'll try their amps. Not in my experience. Now that I understand and love what my SBLs do, Just about every other speaker I listen too just sounds wrong, fake, phasey, boomy, unnatural. They convey musical meaning much better than the SP8s, and sound great doing it. But that is just in my mind, I have no idea what is going on in yours. And not to say that when I was your age I was more or less experienced with music in terms of rhythm and harmony and all than you may be, I don't know what your experience and perceptions are, but I doubt that I would have liked them either. By the way, the SBLs I'm talking about were the precursor to the SL2, and very similar in their requirements to sound good. The SL2 is probably even more demanding."
I love my SBL's too and they ARE demanding. I tried SBL's several times over the years as my system grew and didn't make the switch until I got 135's. Until that point they sounded dry and boring. From my week with the SL2's I got the impression that they are probably easier to drive but harder to get right. Something that worries me is how tiny the tolerance is between the floating tweeter and the baffle and how critical the stability of the cabinet is to this arrangement. This was months ago and I spoke to my dealer again today and he still doesn't think that they are run in enough for me to have another listen. How does Naim develop speakers if they have to wait months to find out if something works or not ?
I like what Connon says about experience. I maintain that "every man is an island" when it comes to his enjoyment of music and although some of us may be better equipped to judge the quality of a system in terms of hi-fi criteria, no one can claim that their musical experience is more profound than anyone elses.
"Posts about most things, but especially, to me, about such things as soundstaging and imaging, come down to personal taste and preferences, not something that is inherently right or wrong.".
Exactly ! I don't care about why a system makes great music, just that it does.
and Connon :
"Naim speakers are something that people usually "get" last about Naim systems.. No one starts with the speakers and then says, wow, those sound great on my old kit, maybe I'll try their amps. Not in my experience. Now that I understand and love what my SBLs do, Just about every other speaker I listen too just sounds wrong, fake, phasey, boomy, unnatural. They convey musical meaning much better than the SP8s, and sound great doing it. But that is just in my mind, I have no idea what is going on in yours. And not to say that when I was your age I was more or less experienced with music in terms of rhythm and harmony and all than you may be, I don't know what your experience and perceptions are, but I doubt that I would have liked them either. By the way, the SBLs I'm talking about were the precursor to the SL2, and very similar in their requirements to sound good. The SL2 is probably even more demanding."
I love my SBL's too and they ARE demanding. I tried SBL's several times over the years as my system grew and didn't make the switch until I got 135's. Until that point they sounded dry and boring. From my week with the SL2's I got the impression that they are probably easier to drive but harder to get right. Something that worries me is how tiny the tolerance is between the floating tweeter and the baffle and how critical the stability of the cabinet is to this arrangement. This was months ago and I spoke to my dealer again today and he still doesn't think that they are run in enough for me to have another listen. How does Naim develop speakers if they have to wait months to find out if something works or not ?
I like what Connon says about experience. I maintain that "every man is an island" when it comes to his enjoyment of music and although some of us may be better equipped to judge the quality of a system in terms of hi-fi criteria, no one can claim that their musical experience is more profound than anyone elses.
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by Rico
gah. next you'll be discussing bi-wiring! 
SL2's kick ass.
Frank's description was very apt. Well done!
Rico - SM/Mullet Audio
SL2's kick ass.
Frank's description was very apt. Well done!
Rico - SM/Mullet Audio
Posted on: 23 February 2003 by JeremyB
I get the impression most people on the Forum with SL2s would distribute the 8k pounds differently (probably top second hand amps and the rest on the source which would total a lot more than 8k pounds new). I didn't "get" the Allaes until I had a 52 - probably the minimum for the SL2s too.
Posted on: 24 February 2003 by JeremyB
Jeff - interesting post. In stereophile this month there was an interview with Ry Cooder who pointed out that for simple miking techniques the sound an individual performer made in any "normal" arrangement of the musicians and their instruments reflects off many different surfaces before it gets to the microphone - this is difficult to avoid if they are to hear and see each other!
Posted on: 24 February 2003 by J.N.
quote:
But my experience is also that the sl2 is a very demanding speaker
I think Connon has hit the nail on the head here. Naim listening is not 'easy listening' - it says "pay attention to the music"
The Spendors have a 'nice' sound and are easier to listen to.
I have a friend with several good systems who detests the sound of my Naim system.
He uses horn speakers in his main system.
Nuff said?