A suggestion to Naim (and I want my shares!)

Posted by: Arye_Gur on 18 September 2003

In a way, it seems to be strange to me, that someone thinks that a new 202 bests a 82.

So I think that the people in Naim have a level of quality they don’t want to go below. If they have the technology to produce at the price of a 202 pre with the quality of a 82, I’m sure they can go to the opposed direction. We all agree that the lowest level these days is the 112 – and here is my suggestion:

Naim will manufacture a pre NAC 66; this pre will cost half of the price of the 112 and will have the same quality of a 112. This will bring Naim to many houses that can’t afford Naim these days (me included…), Naim will be much more popular, it will let Naim to lower the prices of all the products.

The difficulty as I can see it, is how to define the quality of a 112? Few members are thinking that the 112 best the 102. I’m sure that all of us agree that the 102 is at least very close by quality to the 202. Ahaaa!!! According to few of us, the 202 bests the 82. So it seems that my NAC66, with almost the quality of a 82, and half of the price of a 112, will brake down the all audio market prices – and maybe this is the reason why Naim are not going this way. But if they will follow my suggestion, don’t forget that it is my idea – and Mark Levinson – be aware and take care!!!

Arye

Posted on: 19 September 2003 by Mike Hanson

You're making a logical error here, Arye. You're assuming that people's reports of their perceptions are accurate. Neither their perceptions nor the resulting reports can be construed as objective. Therefore, all of your "greater than" and "less than" ruminations are spurious.

Also, remember that we're talking the difference between pre-amps! We're a bunch of obsessive nuts here, and we like to exaggerate the difference between components. Ultimately, there's exceedingly little difference between them to begin with. (Just ask any "normal" person who's happy with a Japanese stereo.)

If you're looking for a pre-amp with the equivalent quality of your hypothetical "66", why don't you just round up and buy yourself a 72?

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Posted on: 19 September 2003 by syd

quote:
Originally posted by Mike Hanson:
(Just ask any "normal" person who's happy with a Japanese stereo.)

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Why ask somebody about preamp differences, who has in all likelyhood never heard any. Like asking a blind person to say whether he preferred Picasso or Dali.

Yours in Music

Syd

Posted on: 19 September 2003 by Mike Hanson

quote:
Originally posted by syd:
Why ask somebody about preamp differences, who has in all likelyhood never heard any. Like asking a blind person to say whether he preferred Picasso or Dali.

That's not quite the same thing. The people with Japanese systems aren't deaf. (No wise cracks, now.

) They just don't value the minor differences (on an absolute scale) between a 112 and 552. Sure one's better than the other, but these differences are generally over emphasized in our own subjective reports.

For most people, sound reproduction systems are categorized into a number of standard categories:

Transistor Radios / AM Car Stereos, and other shite
Midi systems (good enough for most "normal" people)
Good stereos
Professional club & arena systems

Within the "Good stereos" bucket, most people respond in a standard fashion. For example, my first "good" system was 3.5/Flat/102/NAPSC/140/RoydAlbion in an oak cabinet with DIY isolation platforms. I had my best friend and his wife over to hear it, and she was under-whelmed. As I climbed the upgrade ladder, her opinion didn't change. After a while I gave up on her ever "getting it".

It wasn't until I reached CDS2/52/2*135/Albion sitting on lots of Mana that she came to me and expressed that she thought it finally sounded really good. It took that much to make a difference to her. Yet with each change from that first meager system to the last virtually top-of-the-line setup (and there were many changes between the two), I thought the incremental improvements were "significant".

That's what I'm talking about.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Posted on: 19 September 2003 by syd

That's not quite the same thing. The people with Japanese systems aren't deaf. (No wise cracks, now. ) They just don't value the minor differences (on an absolute scale) between a 112 and 552. Sure one's better than the other, but these differences are generally over emphasized in our own subjective reports.

One example does'nt prove anything. I could list dozens of friends and associates who really have never heard a real hi fi sistem, even well chosen inexpensive seperates and really beleive their £250 to £500 Midis etc are what its all about (often being told by shop assistants in Curries,Dixons etc that it's the very latest thing from Japan so it must be very good. Quite a few have expressed total astonishment on hearing quite a few of my sistems over the years, even when I did'nt rate what I had as all that great. They also tend to be the same people who could improve what they've got(by quite a large margin) by careful placement of the speakers ie taking them out from behind sofas etc. But this does'nt prove anything either. Just that I think that if these people could be dragged to a good dealers and played a varity of sistems it might really open their eyes/ears to the possibilities.

Yours in Music

Syd

Posted on: 19 September 2003 by syd

Alex B

Have you ever heard the old A&R A60. It was a really good musical amp and it had tone controls and I would bet it would give you a lot more pleasure than any sub £1000 AV amp going. They sell for very little now' Maybe you need to rethink your priorities. I honestly feel that the software you plan on playing will sound poor on anything except very old gear which isn't to revealing. I think you're heading for a big disappointment.

Yours in Music

Syd

Posted on: 19 September 2003 by prowla

There is some really good budget kit about.
Nad (3020) & Rotel (820) amps, Kef (Coda?)speakers, Dual (505) turntables, probably some CD players.
I really don't think that's Naim's market.
Naim come in at a price above what most normal people are prepared to spend, and go to prices beyond what most sane people would spend. (I'm neither normal not 100% sane BTW.)

Paul Rowlands

Posted on: 19 September 2003 by Arye_Gur

I must say that I was joking. I tried to show how strange it is that some peoples’ thoughts can lead to what seems to me a strange conclusion - a 112 is better than a 82. If Naim can manufacture at the same price a product equal by quality to a product that was “until yesterday” much better and more expensive, than it leads me to a “logical” conclusion that Naim can all the time make cheaper and cheaper products without damaging the high quality. At the end of this process Naim will pay us if we will take their products.

Arye

Posted on: 20 September 2003 by Arye_Gur

ghunter,

I don't think that there is an equation that says that a better technology makes things cheaper, I think that the audio area is a good example exactly to prove my point. You can build a very cheap electronic amplification by using chips only. Why using transistors? And if using transistors, the fact that Naim are planing their own transistors and manufacturing them outsourcing makes it cheaper or more expensive? And if you are right, why it doesn't happen that the cheap massive production like the Japanese cpmapnies, are not coming with a cheap amps that have the quality of my very old 32-5/90-1? And I listened lately to several of new European amps and they don't have the quality of my old amplification.

Mike,
I think that a pre makes a great difference, and not like you - I think that the "normal people" or at least most of them are not listening in a "critical way".

Arye

Posted on: 20 September 2003 by Arye_Gur

I'm well known as one of the greatest fans of Mana. Actually I think that an empty Mana has a better sound than the best Naim's gear !

Arye