from Hi-Cap to Supercap 2

I run the SC with a SN, and i must say the same as you, the biggest improvement was from bare SN to SN/HC.
But i didnt regret the buy of the SC, because i hated the look of the HC.

I used to run my 1994 82 with 2xHCs. I had a home dem of a SC2, and neither I nor my dealer were impressed with the difference.

Some months later I had the 82 fully serviced and Pots 8 upgrade. After letting it all settle in, I tried the SC2 again. This time the difference over 2xHCs (which themselves had been serviced) was tremendous.

Are you connecting the SC2 with one SNAIC or two? That also makes a difference.

(Not immediately relevant, but as a matter of interest, we also tried a side-by-side test between current type and 'olive period' black SNAICs, and found the older ones were more open.)

The CD3.5 and HC will be holding back the performance. Recently I heard a dem of an 82 which a fellow Forum member wanted to try over his 102. He too has CD3.5/HC. We found that opening the window wider also reveals the limitations elsewhere in the system. He kept the 102.

Yes, I'm using 2 snaics, albeit different types (one old and one brand new).

I bought the SC2 as a long term investment. I got it only 8 months old at a great price.

I plan on buying a 2nd hand 252 at some point but would no doubt be better off getting my 82 serviced and buying a CD player and speaker upgrade first. I'll have to get a quote for getting a full service.

I bought the 250-2 to enable me to buy some larger speakers. I'm looking at the PMC OB1's but am waiting to hear some Neat's first.

Hallo Monty, I too have an 82, formerly with one HC, then two HC, and now SC.
The difference was relevant in any passage, but mostly with the SC.
I have a chome 250, but both 205/82 have been serviced in july 2007.
It is frankly hard to believe the huge difference a good service makes . . .I did it because anybody was telling me to do it, and I am very happy to have followed the advise.
Best regards
Andrea

Depending on the age of your 82 (i.e. if it could benefit from Pots 8), a full service plus Pots upgrade would be £450-500. You will not recoup this when selling on, so it is only worth doing both if you plan to keep/enjoy the 82 for at least another 2-3 years. A service only would be about £250.

Andrea,

I have same rig as you except 2 hicaps. I agree service on the 250 was huge improvement but how did you determine the improvement on your 82? I keep waiting for a reason to send my 82 in but it still sounds great but is 12 years old.

At the risk of upsetting people, I see very little point in using a supercap if you cannot connect using a burndy.

The raison d'etre of the supercap is to use the burndy connector. Supercap with snaic is like ferrari with wheels from a mini. It works, but is a pale imitation of what it is capable of. If you have a device that you want to power using supercap, and it has no burndy, then ask yourself why. Either its pre 1995 or so, or it was never designed to take best use of supercap.

"At the risk of upsetting people, I see very little point in using a supercap if you cannot connect using a burndy."

I think Jon is absolutely correct on this.

Recently I tried a supercap [Olive vintage] on my 72 without great success, obviously via the same DIN terminated SNAIC that I use with my Hi-cap. This same Supercap was later fitted in a friend's set via Burndy to a new Superline. This was a wonderful advance on using the new phono-stage with a Hi-cap ..

I don't think the results would be a surprise in either case ...

ATB from George

My Olive SC worked very well with a Nait 3R till I got a 52.
I was rather surprised by it as I wasn't expecting it to do much with a humble 3R.

But it was well worth it and had pretty good run together. ( no doubt my over-the-top enthusiam for the 3R is because of it, too )

Hell, it even did some wonder with a NAHA with some 'fones.

Dear Kuma,

Personal taste and the individuality of our sets and listening rooms will always produce different responses to such an arrangement, IMO.

The supercap on my 72 actually radically altered to musical presentation in that bass-lines became very weighty - not pleasant at all. But my set has an admirable sense of musical balance with a Hi-cap.

In a different room then it is possible that more bass could possibly be welcome ...

The suggestion to pull the speakers out from the wall is not helpful to me. Why would one spend on such a change [from Hi- to Supercap] only to loose more living space?

When I had a Nait 3 [not 3R], I found that it was verging on being too bright and forward in musical balance terms, so if the Supercap brought more weight then under those conditions, I might have found this extra weight of value. Did the supercap bring more weight to your Nait 3R?

ATB from Geogre

yep.

Overall heft and better timing/groove.
I was also stunned at the clarity and naturalness that the SC brought even off a simple preamp section of the 3R. ( serviced )

Nothing bloated about it actually. It extended the bottom end with much authority so controlled the WATT 6's drivers with firmer grip. It gave the speakers much better *corner handling* and I thought that it complimented a *bopping* nature of the 3R well.

A Nait 3 I have heard was laid back comparatively to my 3R. Not at all bright. Altho, next to the Nait 2 or original Nait, they were more forward.

I used a Chrome Bumper HC and prior to the SC with the 3R and comparatively, it's bloomier.

If you have a later serial Olive HC, it's probably more svelt than my Holden Fisher HC, I'd reckon.

I am not familiar with a general voicing of a 72.

quote:

I see very little point in using a supercap if you cannot connect using a burndy
Thats interesting, maybe the reason why i cant hear a big improvement.
My SN is connected with a B-Snaic 4 and 5 to my SC.
Is the Burndy also made as a 4 and 5 version to fit with my SN, or which Snaic to i have to replace

Take the Superline as an excellent example.

You can power this via the Din socket from your preamp or from a hicap via snaic. This gives you one 12V rail which then fans out inside the superline to the 12 (6 left, 6 right) power supply input points (if you look at the wiring, its obvious)

Lets see how this really happens: In the superline, the burndy socket is between the din socket and the internal wiring. So the 12V single rail from the din goes to the burndy, where it goes *out* of the superline. (Yes, *out*).

What happens next depends on whether you have the bundy plug thing inserted, or you have a supercap connected via burndy cable.

In the former, the output pin of 12V is wired through to the 12 input pins back into the superline. (* i am assuming this is how it works, its logically correct for the arrangement and visual inspection indicates its right). *this happens inside the large black terminating plug thing*

This is why you must have either the plug fitted or the burndy cable.

If you have the bundy cable from a supercap, then the output 12V pin is ignored. And there are twelve individual 12V rails coming up the burndy cable from the supercap -- the SC outputs the twelve individual rails. In other words you have 12 times (in a very generalised armwaving way...) the amount of powersupply compared to a hicap or preamp feed.

So it is clear how the hierarchy works.

12V snaic from preamp -- good feed, yes, but a single 12V rail from the preamp.

12v snaic from hicap -- better, because you have a dedicated hicap just to generate that one 12V rail. But its still one rail.

12v snaic from supercap -- better still, because you have a dedicated supercap just to generate that one 12V rail. But its still one rail.

Supercap via burndy -- twelve individual 12v rails come up the burndy from supercap.

I would imagine a similar arrangement applies to the snaxo242/362 for example. And something along those lines with preamps which can take a supercap upgrade. Which is why the terminating plug thing is vital if you *dont* have a burndy/supercap connected.

That might be the theory Jon, but the SC does repressent a significant improvement over a HC on the 82.

When I did this upgrade, I was also using a CD3.5 (with a FC in my case)and I was over the moon with the upgrade. At the time I was somewhat surprised that James (JWM) was reporting that he couldn't hear a significant improvement, but as he has said above he only really appricated it after he had his 82 serviced.

The 82/SC was the amp which I most enjoyed. I subsequently added a 52 and am still not conviced I like the 52, in fact I am thinking of going back to an 82.

Gary

quote:

Originally posted by Gary S.:
That might be the theory Jon, but the SC does repressent a significant improvement over a HC on the 82.

I didnt say it wouldnt.

"12v snaic from hicap -- better, because you have a dedicated hicap just to generate that one 12V rail. But its still one rail.

12v snaic from supercap -- better still, because you have a dedicated supercap just to generate that one 12V rail. But its still one rail." "

I'm not sure why you would prefer a 52 over an 82, assuming both were in just-serviced condition.

jon

quote:

I'm not sure why you would prefer a 52 over an 82, assuming both were in just-serviced condition.

Jon,

I guess you mean:
"I'm not sure why you would prefer 82 over a 52, assuming both were in just-serviced condition"

Regards,
Edouard

Dear Edouard

That's why God invented SubEditors ;-)

jon

quote:

"I'm not sure why you would prefer 82 over a 52, assuming both were in just-serviced condition"

Maybe because the CD3.5 is not good enough, and therefore a 52 would be wasted.

regards,
mat

This is really the subject of a separate thread, but briefly, the 82 used to get my foot tapping in a way that the 52 just doesn't. Don't get me wrong, the 52 has all the detail and all that, but it's just a bit too polite and soft on some of the stuff I like. I also don't like the deeper presentation of the 52.

mjamrob - I had the CD3.5 at the point I added the SC to the 82, I've since moved on and currently use an LP12 and Linn Acurate DS.

quote:

Originally posted by jon honeyball:
So it is clear how the hierarchy works.
12V snaic from preamp -- good feed, yes, but a single 12V rail from the preamp.
12v snaic from hicap -- better, because you have a dedicated hicap just to generate that one 12V rail. But its still one rail.
12v snaic from supercap -- better still, because you have a dedicated supercap just to generate that one 12V rail. But its still one rail.
Supercap via burndy -- twelve individual 12v rails come up the burndy from supercap.

Or, slightly corrected: -

Preamplifier supplied FROM suitable power amplifier = 24V x 1
Preamplifier supplied from HiCap = 24V x 2 each 24V SUPERIOR to that from Power Amplifier and independent of any power amplifier demand modulation effects.
Preamplifier (282 one SNAIC-5 only) supplied from SuperCap = 24V x 2. Supplies SUPERIOR to those from HiCap and independent ...

282 preamplifier (2 x SNAIC-5) supplied from SuperCap = 24V x 4. As above ...

252 preamplifier supplied from SuperCap - 24V x 12 audio power supplies - separate, additional, supplies for digital and relays.

In the case of a SNAXO2, is there also a large number of independent 24V sources supplying the SNAXO via Burndy when using a SuperCap, when compared to a HiCap supplying the SNAXO via SNAIC ? This is the only occasion that I will have any need for a SuperCap as its not as useful to me as a 555PS. I don't want to buy a SuperCap if the difference at the SNAXO is small.

Joe

quote:

Originally posted by joesilva:
I don't want to buy a SuperCap if the difference at the SNAXO is small.

My Book of Naim gives -
"The rear panel has an array of output sockets to allow the SUPERCAP to be used with preamps, NAXOs and the PREFIX using 2 x 24V audio supplies - the NAC 82 using 4 x 24V supplies – or the NAC 52 and the SNAXOs using 13 supplies."

and - the different in active mode is huge between the two power supply options.

quote:

Originally posted by Adam Meredith:

quote:

Originally posted by joesilva:
I don't want to buy a SuperCap if the difference at the SNAXO is small.

My Book of Naim gives -
"The rear panel has an array of output sockets to allow the SUPERCAP to be used with preamps, NAXOs and the PREFIX using 2 x 24V audio supplies - the NAC 82 using 4 x 24V supplies – or the NAC 52 and the SNAXOs using 13 supplies."

and - the different in active mode is huge between the two power supply options.

Thanks Adam.. Ouch !!! I already own 3 555PS's and an XPS-T. Now I have to save for a SuperCap and 500 ....

quote:

Originally posted by mike/dallas:
Andrea,

I have same rig as you except 2 hicaps. I agree service on the 250 was huge improvement but how did you determine the improvement on your 82? I keep waiting for a reason to send my 82 in but it still sounds great but is 12 years old.

Hallo Monty, I actually sent both 250 and 82 to service, so I can't tell the difference . . . I am sorry, can't help on this one.
Best regards
Andrea

quote:

Thanks Adam.. Ouch !!! I already own 3 555PS's and an XPS-T. Now I have to save for a SuperCap and 500 ....

sorry, i know i am slightly off-topic, but for a short while, but can you please tell me how you found the difference between the std nat01 PS and the xps-t?

enjoy
ken