NAIM Design Criticism
Posted by: ErikL on 10 May 2003
Hello,
I do not currently own any NAIM equipment, but I certainly aspire (I hope to save for an entry-level NAIT5/CD5/FC2 system w/ bookshelf speakers; possibly Epos, JMLab, Neat, or Dynaudio). I recently found the following post, dated July 2000, on another hi-fi board.
I am very interested in any design insight or clarification from folks here.
Thanks,
-Erik-
"To the Naim owners and fans, skip over this post it will be painfull.
All Naim products are NOT high performance audio equipment by their electronic design. I will not address their looks, price, marketing,ect. I will only state the electronic facts, and they are shamefull. As I stated before the basic core circuit design was a rip-off from a mid 60's RCA design book. It is pure class B and full of crossover distortion. If you like that sound you bought the right amp! The signal coupling cap are the worst you could pick TANTALUM! The 1980's amps had undersized power supplys and their voltage went up and down with the bass (remember the phrase about the music having "jump" and "bounce", well thats what the DC voltage was doing), not a good thing. The quality of the parts inside was not what any of us would want, their tolerance was to large.
If you took a Naim product to a REAL audio engineer they would shake their heads. Naim saw this and started making small changes to correct their problems, but they could not do to much or that would cast a bad light on their old products. They are better now but not good enough to be "high-end". To do this the would have to start over with a clean sheet of paper, no more RCA class B.
Remember a salesmans job is to get YOU to give HIM YOUR MONEY, and they did unfortunately in the case of Naim."
[This message was edited by Ludwig on SUNDAY 11 May 2003 at 05:21.]
[This message was edited by Ludwig on SUNDAY 11 May 2003 at 05:27.]
I do not currently own any NAIM equipment, but I certainly aspire (I hope to save for an entry-level NAIT5/CD5/FC2 system w/ bookshelf speakers; possibly Epos, JMLab, Neat, or Dynaudio). I recently found the following post, dated July 2000, on another hi-fi board.
I am very interested in any design insight or clarification from folks here.
Thanks,
-Erik-
"To the Naim owners and fans, skip over this post it will be painfull.
All Naim products are NOT high performance audio equipment by their electronic design. I will not address their looks, price, marketing,ect. I will only state the electronic facts, and they are shamefull. As I stated before the basic core circuit design was a rip-off from a mid 60's RCA design book. It is pure class B and full of crossover distortion. If you like that sound you bought the right amp! The signal coupling cap are the worst you could pick TANTALUM! The 1980's amps had undersized power supplys and their voltage went up and down with the bass (remember the phrase about the music having "jump" and "bounce", well thats what the DC voltage was doing), not a good thing. The quality of the parts inside was not what any of us would want, their tolerance was to large.
If you took a Naim product to a REAL audio engineer they would shake their heads. Naim saw this and started making small changes to correct their problems, but they could not do to much or that would cast a bad light on their old products. They are better now but not good enough to be "high-end". To do this the would have to start over with a clean sheet of paper, no more RCA class B.
Remember a salesmans job is to get YOU to give HIM YOUR MONEY, and they did unfortunately in the case of Naim."
[This message was edited by Ludwig on SUNDAY 11 May 2003 at 05:21.]
[This message was edited by Ludwig on SUNDAY 11 May 2003 at 05:27.]
Steve, apparently you didn't read my post carefully. To repeat, I intend to save for a NAIM system (FYI, I consider keeping my present non-NAIM system and spending my money elsewhere as an alternative to NAIM gear). I also didn't state that the opinion in the pasted quote was mine. I found it on another site.
I remain interested in hearing anyone (knowledgeable of amplifier design options) counter the quote in my original post. To clarify, I would like to hear specifics concerning the impact of using tantalum versus alternatives, and the '60's RCA design versus comparables. Perhaps my exclusion of these specifics has led to some confusion.
Thanks,
-Erik-
I remain interested in hearing anyone (knowledgeable of amplifier design options) counter the quote in my original post. To clarify, I would like to hear specifics concerning the impact of using tantalum versus alternatives, and the '60's RCA design versus comparables. Perhaps my exclusion of these specifics has led to some confusion.
Thanks,
-Erik-
I'll have a go 
"All Naim products are NOT high performance audio equipment by their electronic design. I will not address their looks, price, marketing,ect. I will only state the electronic facts, and they are shamefull. As I stated before the basic core circuit design was a rip-off from a mid 60's RCA design book. It is pure class B and full of crossover distortion."
Is it?
In fact Naim circuit is so far from that 60's originial in the details you wouldn't believe it. You, like many before though, have simply looked at the circuit diagram.
Here's the challenge - go and build your own, then get it to sound as good as the Naim original. I'm sure there's a number of forum members who would be happy to perform testing for you!
"The signal coupling cap are the worst you could pick TANTALUM!"
Again why?
What properties bother you - with signficant DC bias, as is the case in most places, they work well. Unfortunately most of the better alternatives would have to be physically huge.
"The 1980's amps had undersized power supplys and their voltage went up and down with the bass (remember the phrase about the music having "jump" and "bounce", well thats what the DC voltage was doing), not a good thing. The quality of the parts inside was not what any of us would want, their tolerance was to large."
All unregulated supplies vary with load. You can use a class A design with constant load but then need a PSU capable of delivering it all the time. Innefficient and bulky.
On the latter note, precision components do not bring about precision circuits. You talk as an engineer but seem to fall into the trap many others do. In fact incorrectly applied, precision components can make things worse. You also assume that because you see, for example, a 5% tolerance resistor, it's precision is 5%.
"If you took a Naim product to a REAL audio engineer they would shake their heads. Naim saw this and started making small changes to correct their problems, but they could not do to much or that would cast a bad light on their old products. They are better now but not good enough to be "high-end". To do this the would have to start over with a clean sheet of paper, no more RCA class B."
I've come to learn that topology is almost irrelevant to how something sounds, when correctly applied.
It is true though for those not sufficiently competent to understand the details, some topologies are MUCH easier to get working properly, since the details of the design are less critical (e.g. single ended, class A).
Push pull class AB (not B!) amps, as with Naim, are VERY hard to get working correctly, unless you address the details. Most people have no idea why the Naim design sounds so good, despite it's apparently simple architecture.
Ponder this - it's possible to take the same basic circuit from something that's average, to something truly stunning, without actually changing the basic circuit topology at all.
Any idea how?
King has summed it up perfectly: -
"Putting the best parts together don't always work. But putting simple parts together cleverly gives great results"
I'm not without criticism of Naim, I feel that some products should be better for the price, but I've not found much better, except for the bits I've built myself, hence I still use mostly Naim components!
Andy.
"All Naim products are NOT high performance audio equipment by their electronic design. I will not address their looks, price, marketing,ect. I will only state the electronic facts, and they are shamefull. As I stated before the basic core circuit design was a rip-off from a mid 60's RCA design book. It is pure class B and full of crossover distortion."
Is it?
In fact Naim circuit is so far from that 60's originial in the details you wouldn't believe it. You, like many before though, have simply looked at the circuit diagram.
Here's the challenge - go and build your own, then get it to sound as good as the Naim original. I'm sure there's a number of forum members who would be happy to perform testing for you!
"The signal coupling cap are the worst you could pick TANTALUM!"
Again why?
What properties bother you - with signficant DC bias, as is the case in most places, they work well. Unfortunately most of the better alternatives would have to be physically huge.
"The 1980's amps had undersized power supplys and their voltage went up and down with the bass (remember the phrase about the music having "jump" and "bounce", well thats what the DC voltage was doing), not a good thing. The quality of the parts inside was not what any of us would want, their tolerance was to large."
All unregulated supplies vary with load. You can use a class A design with constant load but then need a PSU capable of delivering it all the time. Innefficient and bulky.
On the latter note, precision components do not bring about precision circuits. You talk as an engineer but seem to fall into the trap many others do. In fact incorrectly applied, precision components can make things worse. You also assume that because you see, for example, a 5% tolerance resistor, it's precision is 5%.
"If you took a Naim product to a REAL audio engineer they would shake their heads. Naim saw this and started making small changes to correct their problems, but they could not do to much or that would cast a bad light on their old products. They are better now but not good enough to be "high-end". To do this the would have to start over with a clean sheet of paper, no more RCA class B."
I've come to learn that topology is almost irrelevant to how something sounds, when correctly applied.
It is true though for those not sufficiently competent to understand the details, some topologies are MUCH easier to get working properly, since the details of the design are less critical (e.g. single ended, class A).
Push pull class AB (not B!) amps, as with Naim, are VERY hard to get working correctly, unless you address the details. Most people have no idea why the Naim design sounds so good, despite it's apparently simple architecture.
Ponder this - it's possible to take the same basic circuit from something that's average, to something truly stunning, without actually changing the basic circuit topology at all.
Any idea how?
King has summed it up perfectly: -
"Putting the best parts together don't always work. But putting simple parts together cleverly gives great results"
I'm not without criticism of Naim, I feel that some products should be better for the price, but I've not found much better, except for the bits I've built myself, hence I still use mostly Naim components!
Andy.
Interesting question and thread!
I have spent the last 25 years slowly and painfully chopping and changing my Hi-Fi, up until about 4 years ago, when I decided I liked the sound my system was producing. Guess what - it was all Naim! (all be it with some cable and support tweaks etc).
The point is I agree with the chap above who said "use your ears" - they don't lie!
P.S. my system images just fine!
I have spent the last 25 years slowly and painfully chopping and changing my Hi-Fi, up until about 4 years ago, when I decided I liked the sound my system was producing. Guess what - it was all Naim! (all be it with some cable and support tweaks etc).
The point is I agree with the chap above who said "use your ears" - they don't lie!
P.S. my system images just fine!
'Barnstaple men shown to be overly fond of sheep'......Now where did I put me wellies?..
quote:
Originally posted by J. A. Toon:
Nevertheless, you're right when you point out that many Hifi manufacturers put so much emphasis into microscopic-precision imaging, etc., that they entirely screw up more basic musical fundamentals.
John.
----
_E-mail: john.toon@btinternet.com_
Hi John I'm not against stereo imaging and would like to improve this aspect of my sistem but as you say not at the expense of what i've already got. I feel that I would really need a lottery win to get this though.
Yours in Music
Syd
Tuan, I couldn't agree with you more. Anyone have any direct design and testing experience they can relate to this discussion?
Andrew L. Weekes, your post was helpful; thanks.
Otherwise, I seemed to have injured some very sensitive egoes. Not my intention.
Cheers,
-Erik-
Andrew L. Weekes, your post was helpful; thanks.
Otherwise, I seemed to have injured some very sensitive egoes. Not my intention.
Cheers,
-Erik-