NAPSC is b***dy marvelous.

I've been thinking about one for my 102. Apparently it is agood upgrade/addition at a reasonable price.

#5

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Bailey:
I added a NAPSC to my NAC202 at the weekend and it has completely transformed the system - different league. Much more lush, detailed and expansive sound.

If you haven't got one and have a 102/202 it really is worth the extra 225 quid.

Just had to get that off my chest really

---

The addition of this NAPSC dates back from the time of the 102 as the olive highcap can only power one thing. Additional power to the 102 to separate the audio section and the rest was found to be necessary to enhance the 102 performance. However, as the new series come to play, I would expect that the 202/282 would have a more elegant powering scheme (like the 52) so that the NEW highcap (with power option) allows the 202/282 be powered effectively without this little thing). It seems to me that not much changes have made to the new series for the mid and low models (282/202...). I also heard that the CD5 is just a variation of the 3.5 model with some cosmetic chages.... Naim Audio has to do better that this to impress me... I would suspect that the main reason for the change in the Naim traditional sound characteristic is the implementation of the new components (such as the 007 resistors, capacitors, etc.) that they have little control over this issue.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tuan:
I also heard that the CD5 is just a variation of the 3.5 model with some cosmetic chages.

---

Have you ever heard a CD3.5 beside a CD5? The players do not sound remotely similar! The CD5 is so much better and more sophisticated than the 3.5, that is isn't even funny. I would definitely take a bare CD5 over a 3.5/Flat. Of course, a CDX is better again, but it's in another league.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Bailey:
I added a NAPSC to my NAC202 at the weekend and it has completely transformed the system - different league. Much more lush, detailed and expansive sound.

If you haven't got one and have a 102/202 it really is worth the extra 225 quid.

Just had to get that off my chest really

---

Really? is that so? I am still waiting for my NAPSC to go with my 3 days old 202/200. My dealer told me it should arrive in about 2 to 3 weeks time.

Anyway, your post is really making me very anxious to get hold of the NAPSC.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mike Hanson:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tuan:
I also heard that the CD5 is just a variation of the 3.5 model with some cosmetic chages.

---

Have you ever heard a CD3.5 beside a CD5? The players do not sound remotely similar! The CD5 is so much better and more sophisticated than the 3.5, that is isn't even funny. I would definitely take a bare CD5 over a 3.5/Flat. Of course, a CDX is better again, but it's in another league.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

---

In my own opinion, I do not see much improvement between the CD3/CD3.5 and now the CD5. The improvements (changes) are NOT enough to make a jump (as you sell yours for half the price paid and then pay a Full price for the new model for a LITTLE gain in performance). I can buy the CD5 but I did not for the reason stated and rather going for the CDX2. My point is that there are number of improvements that suppose to be obvious to Naim (like the powering sheme of their pre-amps) and they have not been addressed.

Tuan,

you say the power supply issue should be "obvious" to us but I'm not sure I see your point. We have looked at combining the functions of the NAPSC and the Hi-Cap into a single box and our conclusions were that it wasn't worthwhile doing. To combine both units in a Hi-Cap size box was a definite step back, sonically. The Hi-cap itself has little free-space inside and having the two PSU elements crammed so close together obviously compromised both. The other alternative of putting both elements of the Hi-Cap and NAPSC in a single large chassis worked much better but there was no advantage over the two separate units. Indeed the biggest disadvantage was the projected cost which would have priced it much closer to a Supercap.

In the end the decision to stick with 2 separate units was deemed wisest both from a sonic point of view and from the point of view of providing upgrades for our customers in easy steps. Remember that the NAPSC can also be used on its own to power a Headline and in many situations where a Hi-cap would be used, an additional NAPSC section would be superfluous.

Richard

I'm with Mike. I compared the 3.5 to the CD5 at length before I bought my CD5 and, even dismissing the relative merits of each, their presentation is worlds apart. I'm sure the difference would be noticeable with a couple of blankets over the speakers.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard Dane:
Tuan,

you say the power supply issue should be "obvious" to us but I'm not sure I see your point. We have looked at combining the functions of the NAPSC and the Hi-Cap into a single box and our conclusions were that it wasn't worthwhile doing. To combine both units in a Hi-Cap size box was a definite step back, sonically. The Hi-cap itself has little free-space inside and having the two PSU elements crammed so close together obviously compromised both. The other alternative of putting both elements of the Hi-Cap and NAPSC in a single large chassis worked much better but there was no advantage over the two separate units. Indeed the biggest disadvantage was the projected cost which would have priced it much closer to a Supercap.

In the end the decision to stick with 2 separate units was deemed wisest both from a sonic point of view and from the point of view of providing upgrades for our customers in easy steps. Remember that the NAPSC can also be used on its own to power a Headline and in many situations where a Hi-cap would be used, an additional NAPSC section would be superfluous.

Richard

---

Richard.

Thank you for the 'official response'. Actually, the concept of powering multiple sections of the pre-amp (52) was not new and if I am correct, the new flatcap can be used to power more than one thing. How about using a transformer that used for the new NAP250 with separate windings, 3 caps: one for each channel and one for the digital section? ... and try to keep the price down for the sake of customers? and you tell me that Naim cannot make this cheaper than the price of a high cap plus a NAPSC? That is why there is other company like Av**dale in the market.

I'm not taking Tuan's side (although I though the 3.5 was as good a a cd5--and both sound like Naim cd players), but I have been VERY curious to understand why (even on a theoretical basis) taking the digital sections of a pre-amp off of the hicap and putting them onto a much smaller power supply improves things. Does the smaller napsc have lower noise specs that the hicap?

Judd

Originally posted by Tuan:
I also heard that the CD5 is just a variation of the 3.5 model with some cosmetic changes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Tuan,

of course you don't have to, but you didn't respond to Mike Hanson's question whether you had ever heard a CD5. Frankly your rather querulous claims sound as if you haven't, and you're just talking websh*t.

Herman

Unfortunatly I did not have the money to buy a CD5 when I bought my Planet 2000. I was scared off buying a sh 3.5 buy what I had read on reliability and availibility of parts.

Just before I paid for the 2000, I asked the dealer to put the CD5 on for a couple of songs, and it made me quite sad that I was buying the planet. The 5 is just so good, in a totlay different league to the 2000, yes it is twice the price, but the 2000 IMHO is the best player for under £1000 gbp.

With a Hicap, the CD5 must be unbelivable value for money, as the music I imagine would be incredible.

quote:

---

Originally posted by herm:
Originally posted by Tuan:
I also heard that the CD5 is just a variation of the 3.5 model with some cosmetic changes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Tuan,

of course you don't have to, but you didn't respond to Mike Hanson's question whether you had ever heard a CD5. Frankly your rather querulous claims sound as if you haven't, and you're just talking websh*t.

Herman

---

Herman
I have heard the CD5 many times at my dealer in Toronto. First of all, I dont think that people on this forum claim things that they have not tested out themselve. This forum is for us to express own opinion, experience (in a civilized manner) to for fabricating things to mislead others. I am quite familiar with all Naim CD players (up to CDX2) thanks to people like Mike (Hanson and Steve (HiFi FoFum - Naim dealer in Toronto) who allow me to test them all for my own future upgrading path.

quote:

---

but I have been VERY curious to understand why (even on a theoretical basis) taking the digital sections of a pre-amp off of the hicap and putting them onto a much smaller power supply improves things. Does the smaller napsc have lower noise specs that the hicap?

---

My undestanding of the term digital in this usage is the switching, illumination and motors etc (for volume), none of these functions are part of the audio circuits but may create considerable (comparatively) noise into the circuit they are connected. If these are powered completely independently then the power supply for the audion circuits (i.e the flatcap, hicap, supercap) CANNOT be contaminated by this noise, hence better sound. This is completely sensible as far as I can tell.

In fact the thing that bugs me is that the quality of the power supply for these digital sections should not be very significant (hence can be made cheap). I dont understand why an Argos £10 special transformer wouldn't do the job just as well!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tuan:
In my own opinion, I do not see much improvement between the CD3/CD3.5 and now the CD5. The improvements (changes) are NOT enough to make a jump (as you sell yours for half the price paid and then pay a Full price for the new model for a LITTLE gain in performance).

---

I agree that it's not a worthwhile upgrade from a CD3 or 3.5 to a CD5. But if you didn't already have a CD3, and the CD5 fit your budget, then it would be better to get the CD5 rather than the 3.5. It's a much better player!

You may have noticed that I just gave much the same advice to a fellow in another thread. He has a 3.5 and is considering upgrading to a CD5. I told him to go for a CDX instead, which is the same advice I've given to you in person.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

quote:

---

Originally posted by greeny:


My undestanding of the term digital in this usage is the switching, illumination and motors etc (for volume), none of these functions are part of the audio circuits but may create considerable (comparatively) noise into the circuit they are connected. If these are powered completely independently then the power supply for the audion circuits (i.e the flatcap, hicap, supercap) CANNOT be contaminated by this noise, hence better sound. This is completely sensible as far as I can tell.

---

This makes perfect sense to me. The switching and lights can send noise back into the power supply--hence sending noise into the audio sections connected to it. Makes sense.

Judd

What is a NAPSC.
I've looked on the NAIM web site and the brochures and it's not listed??

Yes it is!

Look Harder under the power supplies section.

Reading this thread should give you a good idea what it does.

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Bailey:
I added a NAPSC to my NAC202 at the weekend and it has completely transformed the system - different league. Much more lush, detailed and expansive sound.

If you haven't got one and have a 102/202 it really is worth the extra 225 quid.

---

Just added a NAPSC to my 102 and the difference was immediate. More air, deeper lows, cleaner,clearer sound much more detail. Never had any sound stage to my system. The music on some CD's envelopes the entire room. To quote my 12 year old " everything sounds so clear you can hear every instrument."

I don't have a Hicap yet and can't imagine what that is going to do. If you don't have one get one for your 102.

#5