300/552 vs 500/552

Yes and yes.

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.

Frank,

Could you expand a bit on the differences,

Regards


NB

Well it wouldn't be a very good product if it was twice the price and not a lot better would it?

As you'd expect, the 500 has more of everything. Better grip, better pace, better transparency, better timing, bigger scale. But then you'd expect that for twice the price! The 552 makes a hell of a difference to the scope of these power amps. The 52 was holding the 500 back a lot. The 252 holds the amp back too. The 552 lets the whole lot breathe.

Now the 300 is a very good amp indeed with bags of power, good scale and brilliant timing by most standards. It's just that the 500 is twice the amp (and twice the cost) of the 300. After all, topologically, the 300 is pretty much half the amp that the 500 is so you'd expect the difference to be substantial - and it is.

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.

The real contest should be: active 300 vs passive 500 in a 2 way system.
Anyone have had the chance to try?

Emmanuel

All opinions are my own, and reflect those of the organisation i work for, even if not stipulated.

Yeah...that would be really interesting active 300s v passive 500 through a 552!

So.....has anyone compared a passive NAP500 against an active 2*NAP300 system????

As at the end of the day they work out about the same price (excluding a SNAXO and HiCap).


Richard

Now, now chaps, no skimping. This demo deserves nothing less than a Snaxo powered by a Supercap.

Roll on a rollover weekend!

Roy

I've done the 52vs 552 in a 6x135/Snaxo/Supercap/DBL system as well as using the 52 with 1x500/1x300/2x135 active and 1x500 passive.

In retrospect the best all round sound was with the 552/6x135 active. The 300 is leagues away from the 500 in a revealing system, even when using it as only a tweeter amp.

By preference I have reverted back to passive 500 over going active with 500 mixed with other lesser amps.

I have not heard the 552/500 passive in my system (although I have heard it elsewhere) and this is in an entirely different league to any active system with less than the 552 up front.

If I knew now what I knew then, I would not have got the 300 and 500, but gone straight for the 552 and kept on using the 6x135s.

I have little doubt that a passive 500 will also outperform active 300s-it really is that much of a better amp.

Ron
Dum spiro audio
Dum audio vivo

I'll add my voice to the choir.

I recently did the 300 vs 500 demo. It was really no contest, the 500 was better in every way....which it should be at twice the price. I doubt very much that active 300s would be better than passive 500.


Chris Bell

Hi Ron,

So are you saying that a 552 with a passive 500 is going to be the best system, to you at least, and would be better (how ever you define this term) to a 552 with 2*300's active?

Richard