Difference between 72 & 102

Marco,

I don't have problem with Dave's line of enquiry. I will a answer all of his questions as best I can.

I think he's responding in a very reasonable manner considering that he uses the very system I'm not terribly enamoured with.

Garyi,

If a sistem sounds like a pile of poo from the outset, I have no reason to think it will get any better (subject to running in/warming up issues.)

Otoh, a sistem which sounds initially "impresive" may become wearing over time.



Regards,

Steve.

With all due respect, why can't you just accept Steve's opinion rather than attempting to discredit it in some way?

Marco,

I'm not trying to discredit Steve's opinion in any way, I'm merely trying to determine how he came to his puzzling conclusion (which I'm doing as Steve and I continue this discussion). With Steve's last post detailing three systems he auditioned which caused him to conclude the 102 is "unlistenable", it's obvious something was wrong with the installation.

Now, regarding your opinion of a 72 vs. a 102--I have no problem with that. It's an incorrect conclusion (that the 72 is a superior sounding device to the 102), but hey... you are more than intitled.

regards,

dave

P.S. Thank you Steve.

“With all due respect, why can't you just accept Steve's opinion rather than attempting to discredit it in some way?”

Well Stallion, possibly Dave thought Steve’s opinion was wrong, as do I.
Or are we not now allowed to question Steve’s opinion?


“For the record, I also agree with Steve regarding the 102.”

Record update:
I and others too numerous to mention strongly disagree with Steve regarding the 102.

Mr Tibbs

Stallion, I am not attempting to be distructive here.

You should know as well as anyone that an hour demo (a one off mind) can not allow you to determin something which most others would disagree with.

would you Marco, (and this is a simple question requiring yes or no) say that a 250/hi-cap does not work with a 102. If so can you give a decent reason why?

i.e. not based on a one hour demo some years ago in a hifi shop.

My conclusion is as 'correct' and as valid as anyone else's. Please respect this fact.

You're right Marco..and I apologize for being a bit of a smart-ass on that one. I simply find it difficult to believe anyone would come to your conclusion with a comparison that seems so black and white in this case. In my rig, it's clearly not a matter of taste--more like night and day differences with minute details in the mix missing (as well lesser dynamics, bandwidth, believability, etc. with a 72 in place).


regards,

dave

This is the kind of discussion I enjoy. There is no flaming, and no exchange of insults.

Dave disagrees with me, and the basis of his disagreement is that his setup probably sounds a lot nicer than the CDX/102/Hi/250/Credos that I heard about 18 months ago.

Believe me Dave, if you heard that rig, you'd having been running out of the room to grab the 82 from its shelf as well.

Most importantly, everyone is right here.

If I was just trolling on this issue, Dave's questions would have tied me in knots by now.

Based on my own experiences, I'd prefer a 102/140 to a 102/Hi/250, but an 82/Hi/250 would do very nicely.

It will be interesting to hear if the new 202 has the same issues with a 250 and beyond as the 102.

To all those who get annoyed (with me) on public fora

Read what is said with care, take a deep breath, call me (or whoever) all the tw*ts under the occasionally seen bright yellow object, count to 20, and then post to ask a few pertinent questions.

Regards,

Steve.

Someone's not been paying attention, and will be kept in at break...

quote:

---

I had the 102 playing along with a nap90 for a fair few months and the two sounded fantastic

---

A 102 will work well with power amps below a 250, IME. A Nap 90 is below a 140 in the hierarchy, and as such a 102/90 combo will be a balanced system, and will work beautifully.



Regards,

Steve.

C'mon Steve, two posts in a row don't cut it. Threesomes are the minimum.

Doh!

I was just getting to my third post in a row and Herm beat me to it. Bugger!

I'll have to learn Marco's superfast typing techniques, drink less beer on my night off, and get a new computer that doesn't miss out letters as I type them forcing me to edit posts or spend an equally lengthy time checking through them carefully.



Regards,

Steve.

Believe me Dave, if you heard that rig, you'd having been running out of the room to grab the 82 from its shelf as well.

I wouldn't doubt it from what you've expressed.

If I was just trolling on this issue, Dave's questions would have tied me in knots by now.

Wow...I never knew I had it in me ;-)

Most importantly, everyone is right here.

I believe that nails this discussion on the head. Shame we all can't meet...I think we'd all learn from the experience.

best regards,

dave

“1) CD5/Flatcap2/112/150/Credos

2) CDX/102/Hi/250/Credos

3) CDX/82/Hi/250/Credos.

System 1 was very enjoyable, I expected system 2 to be more so, but it was actually worse; I really found that I could not live with it, and system 3 was by far the best - of course!”


So, let’s see now, sys two has a better CD player, a better preamp, a better power supply, a better power amp and the same speakers, but, according to our Steve sounded worse than sys one.

Steve, did you not for a minute suspect something was amiss?

BTW, before I brought my 102 home for a dem, I heard it first in the dealers dem room. It was hooked up to his resident hicap/250 and sounded so good I nearly bought it there and then. He knew I had a 42.5 at home, so put a 62 (near equivalent of the 42.5) in place before doing the 102 dem. Once the 102 went in, the music just took off - way better in every respect.

Mr Tibbs

"Most importantly, everyone is right here."

I think not!

Mr Tibbs

In all the above did the 102 have a NAPSC? The NAPSC makes a huge difference to the 102, in general say the 72 is better if listening to one or two sources than the 102, use all inputs and the 102 may have the edge depending on prefernce/model variations. But with the 102 ou get remote and more inputs, however add the NAPSC and the 102 bests the euivalent 2 combo.

So and I've not heard all of these but I put the scale at:-

102
72
102 NAPSC
102 HI (Very close to the one below)
72 HI
102 NAPSC/HI

I guess a similar role would be followed with a supercap as compared to a hi-cap.

Me I skipped the 72 and very happy with a 102/NAPSC/250 with LP12 source. CD5 not so sure so next step want to try CDX2 VS Supercap to drive the 102 & CD5 when funds allow.

To err is human; to really foul it up requires a computer.

"Most importantly, everyone is right here."

"Perception is everything" (though you do wonder why a bell didn't ring assuming Steve was familiar with Naim's track record at the time).

My other concern regards the dealer. If it was that obvious system 1 sounded better than system 2-what in blazes did the dealer say! Did he agree with the customer's findings to avoid making himself look inept with system setup..or did he disagree with Steve?

regards,

dave

The "rights and wrongs" were based on personal experience

Everyone is right in their own experience, if they tell it how it is/was.

quote:

---

"Most importantly, everyone is right here."

I think not!

Mr Tibbs

---

So you are the one who is "wrong" then.



Regards,

Steve.

Steve,

Did your dealer agree with your findings (system 1 sounded better than system 2)?

regards,

dave

quote:

---

My other concern regards the dealer. If it was that obvious system 1 sounded better than system 2-what in blazes did the dealer say!

---

He said something to the effect of "I told you so."

when I first tried to hook up a 102 with a Hi/250, I could see him frowning. I ignored him, and carried on.

So he's obviously got some unknown gizmo going on in there deliberately designed to fuck up a 102 with a Hi/250...



Regards,

Steve.

So he's obviously got some unknown gizmo going on in there deliberately designed to fuck up a 102 with a Hi/250...

(I'm sure that wasn't intended for me ;-)..Seriously though...I really find discussions like this give more insight into the other person's perceptions and bias. I find it most instructive..it's not a waste of bandwidth (for me).

He said something to the effect of "I told you so....when I first tried to hook up a 102 with a Hi/250, I could see him frowning. I ignored him, and carried on.
"


That last quote says some things about the dealer in question...things that Naim's UK Dealer Training Team might be interested in.

regards,

dave

Dave,

My dealer does Naim dems Strictly By the (Naim) Book. That's why he is still a Naim Dealer. At the time, the Fraim was not available. Now it is, and he swears by it as the ultimate stand for Naim equipment.

He offers Music Works as an alternative to those like me who want that kind of thing. At the time, he had only sold MW gear to a total of FOUR customers including myself not being a full-on Naimie in terms of my kit.

By then, he had sold a fair amount of Naim gear using their own leads only in the dems.

quote:

---

So he's obviously got some unknown gizmo going on in there deliberately designed to fuck up a 102 with a Hi/250...

---

I really hope that you understood that I was taking the piss with the above statement.


Regards,

Steve.

[This message was edited by Steven Toy on TUESDAY 21 January 2003 at 06:01.]

Now is the time to spill the beans...

I got a bit of a roasting from him after I first posted my findings of the above 18 months ago.

One of the Naim team rang him up to ask if I worked for him. He answered truthfully that I didn't.

The reason for the enquiry was that I seemed to know a little bit about Naim equipment setup.

PS has recently posted something about Naim equipment having some kind of hierarchy (iirc) (as opposed to being just lego bricks - my own interpretation.)

I must stress that my opinions stated here are my own, and not those of my dealer. If he so much as frowns on the odd occasion, then that non-verbal communication of his is open to my own (mis)interpretation.

One of my dealer's slightly frustrating traits is that he recommends nothing verbally, he just invites you to listen to alternatives that he happens to have in his shop. Ultimately you make your own choice as a listener/buyer.

My own stance is thus my old signature:

The proof of the pudding...


Regards,

Steve.

PS: Dave, if my views on this matter persuade you (and others) to consider upgrading to an 82 or 282, then so be it. It'll be a bloody big upgrade in terms of musical enjoyment.

[This message was edited by Steven Toy on TUESDAY 21 January 2003 at 05:56.]

Amen to Justin's comments on the value of demonstrations. First impressions can give you an idea of the character of a component, but if you want to know the value, for you, you need time. That is especially the case with a component that does one or two things really well--you can be blown away, but it might take a few weeks or more before you know if you are bothered by some shortcoming you didn't notice on first glance.

Meanwhile, I just want to add here that Steven is virtually alone in thinking that the 250 is somehow more unpleasant in any way than one of the unregulated amps (90-180). In fact, it is much kinder to harsh sources than the lesser amps.

--Eric

quote:

---

Meanwhile, I just want to add here that Steven is virtually alone in thinking that the 250 is somehow more unpleasant in any way than one of the unregulated amps (90-180). In fact, it is much kinder to harsh sources than the lesser amps.

---

Steven is not alone. The 250 is not a harsh amp, it simply more revealing of any harshness further upstream.



Regards,

Steve.

I really hope that you understood that I was taking the piss with the above statement.

Not a problem..just seemed to sense some frustration from the rubber-hose session ;-) We're fine...really.

Just thought your dealer's reaction to you reaching for the 102 was a bit odd (the frown). That seemed to indicate his displeasure with the 102 which should have triggered a call to Naim UK for assistance. For example, if I liked only 10 out of 12 pieces in a manufacturer's line (especially one like Naim where consistancy is the norm), I'd contact the manufacturer for assistance with those two under-performing pieces--not wave them off. Of course, for all we know they did get in touch with the factory, Naim did their bit, and the salesman simply doesn't like the 102 (strange as it may seem to some of us).

I do have a better understanding for why you made the decision you did...that's what's important. You're right about upgrading to the 82 (or higher)...I'll do it in a heartbeat once finances allow.

regards,

dave

I can't believe we are still arguing about this.

Steve you have either got caught in one of those spiral things where you didn't mean to post something in quite the way you did and here we are 18 months later with the statement: 102 does not work with hi-cap/250

Or you genuinly believe it, as a result of a 1 hour dem at your dealer, which by the sounds of things was heavily influencedc with frowns and suggestions from said dealer.

heres the deal. A 102 is a good pre amp, no doubt. with NAPSC its better, with hi-cap better still.

Add a 250 and it rocks, its not a bad match, there is no issues, its a good system.

why are we still arguing, its only your one opinion against well, everyone else.

Marco don't count, he is still arguing a 102 is better than a 72, which is not this argument.

“I hope I've managed to explain myself without offending you!”

Offended? No.

Bemused? Yes.

How anyone can say this system:
1)CD5/Flatcap2/112/150/Credos

Is better than this system:
2)CDX/102/Hi/250/Credos

Is beyond me.

Mr Tibbs