Help on upgrade

but the experience of going active (when it works) is so strong that its worth it even given where you are, which is no mean system! people go active with less. one consequence of going active is that your system will definitely become rather more revealing (rithlessly so!!!) which you may consider an advantage as you can then start upgrading from a clearly identified "weakest link".

fwiw, i have upgraded to active with 2x250 (from passive 1x250) and supercap for snaxo before upgrading my cd2 to cdsii. but i knew this was the next step anyway, so doesnt really make that much difference to me. and my system certainly doesnt sound horrible with my old cd2. however a recent dem against cdsii showed me what i DIDNT know i was missing...

however, do take other views into account. and if you have a good dealer (hang on, i mean, GOOD DEALER), listen to him too...

good luck and enjoy

ken

BTW, I've often done the comparisons between various bits of equipment, since I've got two Naim systems myself. One is CDX/82/Super/250, and the other is CambridgeCD6/32.5/SNAPS2/110. I've also got an extra SNAPS2 to play with. I've tried a wide variety of combinations and comparisons, and I can tell you that upgrading your player is the most significant improvement, followed closely by the pre-amp upgrade. Many people say that an 82 needs two Hi-Caps, but a single SNAPS2 does wonders, so your Hi-Cap will be just fine.

In contrast, when I switch the 110 for the 250, the system sounds a little more authoritative, but you quickly overlook this gain. The power amp can increase the maximum potential volume, but upgrading the player and pre-amp will have just as much of an impact (since they provide a cleaner signal for whatever power amp you have).

I used to run 3.5/Hi/102/Flat/140, and I was never happy with the maximum volume; it started "shouting" at a fairly low level. I changed the 3.5/Hi for a CDX, and this increased the maximum volume significantly. Then I replaced the Flat-Cap on the 102 with the Hi-Cap, and a similar improvement ensued. Changing the 102/Hi to 82/2*Hi brought even greater gains. When I finally went from 140 to 250, the maximum volume wasn't affected very much at all. It sounded more confident, but the difference was small compared to the other upgrades.

Therefore, upgrading the CD2 to CDS2 is the best first step. Then get yourself an 82, or a Super-Cap for the 72 (on the way to a 52). After all of this, see if you still want to go active.

The one exception in all of this is the SBL. It's got a crappy passive crossover, and I understand that active operation improves it significantly.

In the end, you should try the various options at your dealer before making any move. Only your ears can tell you for sure. Then again, I suppose you might want to have eighteen boxes in your living room.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

quote:

---

The one exception in all of this is the SBL. It's got a crappy passive crossover,

---

Yeah nice one, Mike. We all know you've never got to grips with the sound of the SBL - but if you could point out the engineering deficiencies of the SBL PXO to the boys&girls at Naim R&D, I'm sure they'll hurry up and sort it out.

From a lay viewpoint, it looks like the best finished production x-over I've ever seen. No arguments that the performance of the SBL is enhanced in active operation.

Rico - all your base are belong to us.

If the crossover isn't a problem, then why do they sound so weak around the crossover frequency?

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

[This message was edited by Mike Hanson on WEDNESDAY 23 May 2001 at 19:05.]

therefore, the passive crossovers in all these speakers are, ermmm, whats the word now, ahh, "crap"....

enjoy

ken

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

quote:

---

...Yes, activation provides benefits for virtually all speakers.....

---

so for these speakers to benefit from activation, there some be something crappy about them, yes?? and in the case of the sbl's you have nailed down the midrange as the crappy bit. in another speaker you would possibly find another crappy bit or bits. i see what you mean now. i have no doubt that you are describing the sbl's that you heard -- this is simply not my experience with my 1995 vintage sbl's.

let me attempt to describe another part of perhaps the same elephant with my eyes closed (but hopefully my ears open). the sbl's do not scale as well as the isobariks, but they are more accurate, faster and more musical to my ears. theyhave bass but not as much as i would like -- unfortunately -- nbl's are not for us...

its a tough area, which can easily degenerate into meaningless waffle, comparing how we perceive performance of same kit but under different circumstances. still, we do pretty well i think...

enjoy

ken

Once again, rather than taking the time to listen, Mike is relying on the old "therefore" line. At least he didn't list every change he has ever made to his Naim systems--although he does manage to list both of them yet again.

KC--on a more serious note, active SBLs with 4x135s is a bit out of line with a CD2/72. You'll get FAR better music with a CDS2 and a 52, using your 140 with SBLs passive.

Cheers,

Bob

Ride the Light !

Active operation for SBL's is not a band-aid for your "crap x-over"!

quote:

---

Whenever I complain about the SBL, everybody says that they sound much better active. Therefore, the crossover is crap. I believe the midrange is the biggest issue, as voices, piano, etc. sound pinched and lean. My Albions are far, far better in this regard.
If the crossover isn't a problem, then why do they sound so weak around the crossover frequency?

---

The weakness in your logic is that you've not examined the x-over in your beloved Albions, removed it, and converted them to active operation (with custom designed active x-over) in order to make a judgement on the comparative strength of their passive x-over. You've made an assumption, and merely extrapolated. I'm sure your experience along the rocky hifi trail to date has taught you that this is a 'wrong turn' back down the path.

If we want to get round-earth technical here, does anyone know the x-over frequency of the SBL PXO? And Mike, perhaps that coincides with a dip in your hearing, or a resonant point in the rooms you were hearing? That specious argument aside, I know we've both accepted long ago, that the SBL's aren't for you. Slagging off the engineering of them on our hosts forum, however, will not win you any technical, or smiley, points!

If you come to London some time, we'll give you the opportunity to bury them once and for all - as long as you bring the XTC albums. You'd be hearing them as they're meant to be heard.

Hospitality aside Mike, I respectfully reject your unusually ill-considered argument.

**some will note, I bought a hifi comic this month, and liked that quote. David Price, I think.

Rico - all your base are belong to us.

sorry to divert the course of your enquiry.

I agree with Bob's response above. Yeah, the 72 was once the dog's bollocks of pre's, and headed up many an active system. These days, there are many more options available to you.

I find the SBL's run pretty well passive on a 140. No doubt improved grip is a benefit of passive with (say) 250 or better. I'd strongly recommend a better pre - at least an 82 - and the power supply permutations that surround this. You may wish to consider S/C+72 even - there are some around that fervently support this as a stepping-stone route to 52 nirvana.

Above 82, you might wish to consider a source upgrade. Skip CDX/XPS and head straight for the dizzying heights and remarkably musical presentation of the CDSII. Alternately, track down a CDSI, then wait patiently and have the CDSII upgrade done. You'll have a "worthy" source either way - and this discussion doesn't take in vinyl.

A good dealer will help you explore, and should make you purchasing both easy, and fun. Do make sure you find one, before you start the "upgrade engine".

Rico - all your base are belong to us.

Perhaps it's the difference between a man who like's women to weigh 120 pounds (me) to someone who likes women closer to the 90 pound mark. I can't stand all those bones and sharp corners, ribs highly delineated, produtruding hip bones, etc. Ultimately, it comes down to personal preference. I think the SBLs are unpleasant (especially in the midrange), and you don't. Let's leave it at that.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

quote:

---

Perhaps it's the difference between a man who like's women to weigh 120 pounds (me) to someone who likes women closer to the 90 pound mark.

---

ah, now i understand ...

enjoy

ken

quote:

---

Perhaps it's the difference between a man who like's women to weigh 120 pounds (me) to someone who likes women closer to the 90 pound mark. I can't stand all those bones and sharp corners, ribs highly delineated, produtruding hip bones, etc. Ultimately, it comes down to personal preference.

---

Mike

I think I understand where you're going with that, but feel compelled to note that your approach does little to further participation from 'the fairer sex' here on our favourite forum!

Rico - all your base are belong to us.

quote:

---

Whenever I complain about the SBL, everybody says that they sound much better active. Therefore, the crossover is crap. I believe the midrange is the biggest issue, as voices, piano, etc. sound pinched and lean.

---

Mike, congratulations on pulling off a fantastically high quality misguided absolute, this ranks along with Vuk's now legendary 'Kans honk' as being one of the best.

The SBL is a speaker I have heard very often since it was released, and it does in all fairness seem (like Kans) to be a speaker that it is more than possible to get a horrible sound out of. I have certainly heard more SBL systems that I have hated than ones that I have liked, though the ones I have heard that I have liked prove beyond any doubt that it is a very competent speaker.

Purely by chance, the only SBL systems I have heard and actually liked have been passive, and one of the best was using the old drivers and cabinet, so I am not convinced the changes over the years have been quite as radical as some believe.

When they are set up badly they can sound bright, thin, and weightless, with a real headache inducing hardness. Conversely, in a good installation they are warm, open clear and natural sounding and very, very easy to listen to. Its all down to good setup and room matching, I have heard a LP12 / 32.5 / Hicap / 250 / SBL system that could absolutely crucify certain less happy 52 / 4 pack installations.

I also consider the SBL to be very power amp tolerant too, were I to use a pair I could certainly be happy with a 140, as some of the best sounding SBL systems I have heard have been thus driven. So as for the original question, assuming all is currently well installed on good supports I would do the CD first, then the preamp, and probably wouldn't even bother with changing the power amp.

Tony.

enjoy

ken

Shouty SBLs are caused by the folowing items:

1) Poor Speaker set-up
2) Poor system set-up
3) Bright reflective room
4) Bad room: ie light construction
5) Superflous transducers (TV,Phone,ect)

In a good room, I will put SBLs up against any other non-Naim speaker. They are capable of stunning performance. They will make all other speakers sound broken!

Chris Bell
CDS2/52/500/DBL

quote:

---

women to weigh 120 pounds (me) to someone who likes women closer to the 90 pound mark

---

Mike,

From your post, is it fair to assume that you like 'big mamas'.

Care to elaborate?

Dev

I was interested to see your post and your mention of the next upgrade. I assume (possibly incorrectly) that you considered replacing the CDX for the CDS2 head unit, and wondered why you chose to add the supercap to the 82 instead?

Just curious

Cheers

Matt

quote:

---

If we want to get round-earth technical here, does anyone know the x-over frequency of the SBL PXO?

---

Alco,

it's not quite the answer to your question, but this is what is says in the Naim "Active Systems" manual:-

quote:

---

Specifications - snaxo
input impedance >10 kilohms
output impedance <50 ohms
crossover frequencies
2-4 credo, sbl 2.7kHz
3-6 nbl 250Hz, 2.8kHz
3-6 dbl 350Hz, 2.8kHz
filter slopes 18dB/octave
Case size (H x W x D) 76 x 205 x 300mm

- ixo2
input impedance >10 kilohms
output impedance <50 ohms
crossover frequencies
credo, sbl 2.7kHz
filter slopes 18dB/octave
Case size (H x W x D) 58.4 x 430 x 300mm

---

cheers, Martin

1. Get a good dealer. I don't have much of a choice here as there is only one where I live. But I think they are very good and knowledgeable about Naim products.

2. Upgrade source first then move down to pre-amp before considering power amp. I have read all the arguments for and against going active. I am particularly interested to learn more about the different dimension that going active opens up. I didn't know what this mean until I had the chance to audition an active setup organised by my local dealer at one of his friend's house. I am tempting to go active particularly when there is an opportunity to acquire 2x135 on the second hand market at about STG2,100 per pair. Would you say this is a good buy? The unit is about 4 years old

Rico said:

quote:

---

I think I understand where you're going with that, but feel compelled to note that your approach does little to further participation from 'the fairer sex' here on our favourite forum!

---

Face it, Rico! This is a "boys" playroom. We occasionally see "girls" here, but it's a pretty unusual occurance. Besides, I doubt that anyone of us is here to "pick up chicks". We're here to swap ideas, mostly about stereo equipment, and more specifically about Naim gear. If a woman were to read that I don't like the Kate Moss look, that's more likely to make them feel welcome. Besides, I'm pretty sure that our local mascot, Samantha Fox, is more than 120 pounds.

Tony said:

quote:

---

congratulations on pulling off a fantastically high quality misguided absolute, this ranks along with Vuk's now legendary 'Kans honk' as being one of the best.

---

Thanks Tony. I aim to please! I understand that SBLs can sound good if perfectly setup in a perfect room, but that seems a little extreme, doesn't it? I've heard the Albions (and many other "good" speakers) in different rooms, and it was never this hard to get an acceptable performance. Hell, the local Naim/Neat/Royd dealer in Toronto can just plunk a set of Neat Mystiques or Royd Doublets (both about half the price of the SBL) in any old spot on the floor, and they sound much better than I've ever heard from SBLs.

As far as the active versus passive thing goes, some speakers' passive crossovers are better than others. The SBLs is deficient in the midrange. Considering that Naim has an active upgrade option, this deficiency may even be part of the design, hoping to lure its customers into the active world. Who really knows for sure?

It seems that the SBL is like one of those fiddly cars that only runs on Tuesday, if you treat it just right, don't step to hard on the accelerator or it will stall, be easy on the brakes or they will lock, never drive against the wind, etc. Sure it's a wonderful car when it's coasting down a hill, but that's not acceptable. Almost any US$4K speaker can sound good under the "perfect" conditions. When you consider that matching the speakers to the room is one of the most difficult tasks, the SBLs are obviously a "problem product". That must be why Naim is finally discontinuing and replacing them with a more practically designed speaker. The recent NBLs and Allae are good examples that Naim has learned their lesson.

Dev said:

quote:

---

From your post, is it fair to assume that you like 'big mamas'. Care to elaborate?

---

I would say that "medium mamas" is probably a better description. I would say that a "big mama" would be at least 180+ pounds. Depending on the body type, I've found girls in the range of 100-170 pounds very attractive. How's that for being flexible? Besides, I'm far more attracted to personality and attitude, so I don't even know why I'm having this conversation.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-