AV3?!?!
Posted by: SimonJ on 25 March 2005
Anyone (Naim or non Naim) heard any rumors about a potential AV3? When, specs, price etc...
Neil,
Look Richard just posted details about the new scaler for the DVD5 that will be available before the end of the year, and yet we can't find out if there's any developments on a AV3 by then too
Roy.
Look Richard just posted details about the new scaler for the DVD5 that will be available before the end of the year, and yet we can't find out if there's any developments on a AV3 by then too
Roy.
Neill said:
My Apologies. I wasn't specifically thinking of the DVD5 when I wrote that very off the cuff comment, but realise that I could've infered it unintentionally, which I did not intend or mean to do.
However, two things were on my mind when I wrote that.
Naim is easily one of the most reputable and ethical specialist manufacturers; however, there are more than a few so called 'specialist' manufacturers that are not, but still like to charge exorbitant prices for the sake of modifying someone elses kit (usually a mainstream brand acts as the 'donor' machine.)
The other reason I took a generic 'snipe' at some so-called specialist and IMV overpriced products justified only by their marketed prestige and perceived 'quality' IMHO, is the way the reverse applies to some very good, even excellent 'mainstream' kit that gets litle if any recognition, simply because of poor marketing/brand image as regards the requisite 'up-market' image.
Remember the NAD 3020?, or the Pioneer A400? - killer amps in their price range in their day, but certainly not what one could call 'specialist' most especially the Pioneer, not a name most would associate with serious HiFi at the time, and even today it would appear.
I spend most of my 2 channel forum time here, on Naim HQ, but do occasionaly check out the general HIFi scene elsewhere, and over on that other er, 'flat' forum.
I've noticed over there, and occasionally (albeit mostly in the past) here as well, some quite irritating comments, with regards to the use of expressions such as 'Japanese' or usually "Far Eastern Manufacture" expressed or implied in a derogatory manner, and usually accompanied by an attitude that basically comes across as xenophobic, arrogant, and to some possibly even a bit racist, or certainly descriminatory in a racial sense; i.e. it's Far Eastern, therefore it's crap.
I've expressed my views of this behaviour lately in other threads, as I was really starting to find it offensive, to be frank. I'd like to think I'm a pretty polite person, and certainly I try to always be considerate and respectful of others views, opinions, and feelings, but I felt in principle that I should say something, so I have already made my feelings known in other threads, albeit perhaps not quite so directly.
I guess it annoys me for two reasons. One, living in Australia, a strongly multicultural society, I have a number of friends of Asian origin, so it smarts a bit there. The other one is that when it comes to quality HiFi, the Japanese for instance don't have to apologise to anyone anywhere. So often they are slagged off for instance as merely 'copiers' not 'true' innovators, or quality manufacturers, or in a league alongside the so-called 'specialist' manufacturer, usually (but not always) of UK origin.
If we take a look at things like VHS cassette, CD, DVD, SACD etc, it's not hard to see who the innovators have been in the recent past. To be sure, companies like Naim have extensive R&D, and innovate as well, and come up with engineering and design solutions to many problems that either elude, or are not considered necessary for a lot of(but not all) mainstream manufacturers.
But in my many years of being involved in the music and hiFi scene I have seen some highly priced exotic looking, highly reputable but underwhelming hifi products from so-called specialist manufactures, proclaimed on high to be the best thing in HiFi since the invention of electricity, only to be thrown on the garbage heap when the company/manufacturer collapsed, or went into business doing something else, or that much lauded 'specialist' product was replaced by the next 'new' thing.
So some mainstream manufacturers make outstanding products, and some specialist ones despite all the hoopla, basically take the same flour, raisins, salt, pepper, butter, eggs, etc and bake a differently styled cake, that is marketed as being 'sooo much better' than the plain label one with the exact same ingredients.
Sorry to have been a bit long winded with this, but did feel the need to expand upon my thoughts, and once again apologise if it seemed in any way that I was impuning Naim in this regard.
I don't know how many plasma/LCD panel TV's being sold here are HD, but they currently vastly outsell CRT sets, and in most stores, CRT is found hiding in some back corner - prices of plasma and LCD are now down around large screen CRT TV prices here.
That wouldn't surprise me. I tend to think the 'modern' generation (whatever that is) doesn't have a lot of spare time thesedays with longer working hours, gymn, gymn, and gymn (gotta get those muscles boys) keep fit routines, oh and computing and such like, such that music in the home is more something you do the vacuming to, unless you're a music enthusiast, and movies work well as they offer a quick entertainment 'fix' that can be also easily shared, but quality of sound is certainly not on the wishlist within reason - most don't seem to be able to hear a difference.
On other hand, sales of large screen devices, projectors etc are raging - it seems people do notice differences in picture quality easier than sound, and up to a point are prepared to pay for it. It's not uncommon to see a large plasma, or O/H projector paired with a DVD/amp in a box, with slimline speakers all round - sort of B&O look on the ultra-cheap.
Heheh, you're doing better than me; I still have all my VHS videos, however all my new movies are of course on DVD, plus I've been gradually replacing my 'favourite' or 'rare' films on cassette as they become available on DVD, so in time all the tapes will go. I've had very limited exposure to SACD, but have liked what I've heard. Definitely in terms of tonal balance, and detail, the best of both vinyl and CD to my ears. But I'm an musician, and a bit of a gear head as well, - the average punter isn't. However, I still think the effect of a large screen with HiRes picture is something the average Joe can see right away, and provided prices drop fairly quickly past the intial early adopter stage, I still tend to think it will overtake regular SD in time. And of course if the new players are backwards compatible with existing DVDs, then one keeps ones collection, but buys new releases on hidef.
Time I guess will tell
Best regards
John...
quote:I am taking the bait I think its highly unfair to call the DVD5 a tweaker/assemblers machine, after all naim put a lot of r&d into the DVD5 and its shows. It also has excellent cd reply.
My Apologies. I wasn't specifically thinking of the DVD5 when I wrote that very off the cuff comment, but realise that I could've infered it unintentionally, which I did not intend or mean to do.
However, two things were on my mind when I wrote that.
Naim is easily one of the most reputable and ethical specialist manufacturers; however, there are more than a few so called 'specialist' manufacturers that are not, but still like to charge exorbitant prices for the sake of modifying someone elses kit (usually a mainstream brand acts as the 'donor' machine.)
The other reason I took a generic 'snipe' at some so-called specialist and IMV overpriced products justified only by their marketed prestige and perceived 'quality' IMHO, is the way the reverse applies to some very good, even excellent 'mainstream' kit that gets litle if any recognition, simply because of poor marketing/brand image as regards the requisite 'up-market' image.
Remember the NAD 3020?, or the Pioneer A400? - killer amps in their price range in their day, but certainly not what one could call 'specialist' most especially the Pioneer, not a name most would associate with serious HiFi at the time, and even today it would appear.
I spend most of my 2 channel forum time here, on Naim HQ, but do occasionaly check out the general HIFi scene elsewhere, and over on that other er, 'flat' forum.
I've noticed over there, and occasionally (albeit mostly in the past) here as well, some quite irritating comments, with regards to the use of expressions such as 'Japanese' or usually "Far Eastern Manufacture" expressed or implied in a derogatory manner, and usually accompanied by an attitude that basically comes across as xenophobic, arrogant, and to some possibly even a bit racist, or certainly descriminatory in a racial sense; i.e. it's Far Eastern, therefore it's crap.
I've expressed my views of this behaviour lately in other threads, as I was really starting to find it offensive, to be frank. I'd like to think I'm a pretty polite person, and certainly I try to always be considerate and respectful of others views, opinions, and feelings, but I felt in principle that I should say something, so I have already made my feelings known in other threads, albeit perhaps not quite so directly.
I guess it annoys me for two reasons. One, living in Australia, a strongly multicultural society, I have a number of friends of Asian origin, so it smarts a bit there. The other one is that when it comes to quality HiFi, the Japanese for instance don't have to apologise to anyone anywhere. So often they are slagged off for instance as merely 'copiers' not 'true' innovators, or quality manufacturers, or in a league alongside the so-called 'specialist' manufacturer, usually (but not always) of UK origin.
If we take a look at things like VHS cassette, CD, DVD, SACD etc, it's not hard to see who the innovators have been in the recent past. To be sure, companies like Naim have extensive R&D, and innovate as well, and come up with engineering and design solutions to many problems that either elude, or are not considered necessary for a lot of(but not all) mainstream manufacturers.
But in my many years of being involved in the music and hiFi scene I have seen some highly priced exotic looking, highly reputable but underwhelming hifi products from so-called specialist manufactures, proclaimed on high to be the best thing in HiFi since the invention of electricity, only to be thrown on the garbage heap when the company/manufacturer collapsed, or went into business doing something else, or that much lauded 'specialist' product was replaced by the next 'new' thing.
So some mainstream manufacturers make outstanding products, and some specialist ones despite all the hoopla, basically take the same flour, raisins, salt, pepper, butter, eggs, etc and bake a differently styled cake, that is marketed as being 'sooo much better' than the plain label one with the exact same ingredients.
Sorry to have been a bit long winded with this, but did feel the need to expand upon my thoughts, and once again apologise if it seemed in any way that I was impuning Naim in this regard.
quote:But most HD ready plasma's in the UK cost £3,000. Thats a lot for the average punter to buy into.
I don't know how many plasma/LCD panel TV's being sold here are HD, but they currently vastly outsell CRT sets, and in most stores, CRT is found hiding in some back corner - prices of plasma and LCD are now down around large screen CRT TV prices here.
quote:With the audiophile world only having world wide an estitmated 1 million members, he worked it out that only 1 in every 6000 are interested in high quility audio cinema.
That wouldn't surprise me. I tend to think the 'modern' generation (whatever that is) doesn't have a lot of spare time thesedays with longer working hours, gymn, gymn, and gymn (gotta get those muscles boys) keep fit routines, oh and computing and such like, such that music in the home is more something you do the vacuming to, unless you're a music enthusiast, and movies work well as they offer a quick entertainment 'fix' that can be also easily shared, but quality of sound is certainly not on the wishlist within reason - most don't seem to be able to hear a difference.
On other hand, sales of large screen devices, projectors etc are raging - it seems people do notice differences in picture quality easier than sound, and up to a point are prepared to pay for it. It's not uncommon to see a large plasma, or O/H projector paired with a DVD/amp in a box, with slimline speakers all round - sort of B&O look on the ultra-cheap.
quote:I for one have just finished changing all my video's to DVD. Lets face it we have made several attempts to change the cd format and all have failed.
Heheh, you're doing better than me; I still have all my VHS videos, however all my new movies are of course on DVD, plus I've been gradually replacing my 'favourite' or 'rare' films on cassette as they become available on DVD, so in time all the tapes will go. I've had very limited exposure to SACD, but have liked what I've heard. Definitely in terms of tonal balance, and detail, the best of both vinyl and CD to my ears. But I'm an musician, and a bit of a gear head as well, - the average punter isn't. However, I still think the effect of a large screen with HiRes picture is something the average Joe can see right away, and provided prices drop fairly quickly past the intial early adopter stage, I still tend to think it will overtake regular SD in time. And of course if the new players are backwards compatible with existing DVDs, then one keeps ones collection, but buys new releases on hidef.
Time I guess will tell
Best regards
John...
Greetings All
Neill said:
Heheh, from my 'other' posts re the Sony All Digital amp, it must seem like I've become a convert to the 'dark side'.
Not so.
To be truthful, apart from my Walkman WMD6C cassette deck (a bit of a cult item in it's day) I've never taken Sony that seriously before now with regards to 'high end' kit. Just sort of didn't cross my radar. Neither did the Denons, Yamahas etc of this world either.
Over the last couple of years with my growing interest in HT, I ended up choosing a Sony DVD player over Arcam, Toshiba, Pioneer, Denon, Yamaha, Marantz etc, pretty much as it provided the best performance for picture and sound for movies to my ears and eyes, and things like the finish/build/engineering/remote etc just put the icing on the cake.
Pretty much the same when it came to getting an AV processor amp - I ended up after much auditioning and general angst going with the then TAE/TAN combo. (Angst because I couldn't afford an AV2/175/150 combo)
We have some of the basic, and also QS range of receivers here, and badged 'tuned in the UK' etc as you describe.
Personally, Sony seem to make a huge range of products; frankly the entry, or middle of the range ones don't appeal that much - unlike Naim there is not the same consistency of sound in the range to my ears.
However, there is a world of difference IMHO from that level to the top of the line ES range in sound, finish, presentation etc.
The ES range also seems to 'stay' 'in' for a bit longer - typically around 18mnths seems to be the model lifespan, albeit the previous TAE/TAN was around for over 4 years - there were a lot of delays and rumours long before the new digital paradigm arrived. 18mnths seems to correspond quite well with the likes of Arcam; I read once on their web site that 18mnths is their products planned lifecycle.
Of course, Naim is a totally different kettle of fish, with ongoing 'evolution' rather than outright obsolescence, and kudos to them for it.
Here in OZ, Naim would hold their prices a lot better than Sony; however the kit rarely comes up for sale. Sadly though, according to my dealer, once it goes much over two or so years old, one does not get a lot for it on trade-in or resale; perhaps why most hold onto it.
As you say, we are in two totally different markets. As I posted elsewhere, if I could get an AV2/175/150 combo for similar money, or perhaps a reasonable amount more than the Sony digital, I would go for it.
However, on performance grounds for movies, it seems to be more swings and roundabouts v's the Sony digital than a clear cut better/worse as far as I have been able to assess it, (and I have listened long and hard!) with performance advantages on both sides, and thus personal taste will always be a deciding factor.
The cruncher unfortunately is price. To be sure the market here is VERY different by the sounds of things to the UK.
On RRP here, the difference between the AV2/175/150 (assuming one already has a 2 channel amp, and is adding on to provide 7.1 facility) & the 7.1 channel all digital ES Sony, is the best part of eight thousand dollars, nudging closer to ten thousand dollars when one takes into account the discounts that Sony ES dealers will offer.
That means I could take the Sony, buy a pair of say B&W N804's to go with it, and have some change left over.
You see the dilemma that places a Naim fan like me in, - unfortunately not one of Naims creation or fault, just the different market pricing structure/exchange rates/freight etc, as you point out.
Sadly, as much as I like the Naim AV2 'sound'for HT, IMHO I feel it would be more of a performance move sideways, than ahead in the movie sound stakes, for an arguably different, rather than 'better' overall movie presentation compared to the all digital Sony AV amp.
One has to make choices in life, and presently the AV2/175/150 combo is too much for me to consider paying at the present time to simply satisfy my Naim preferences, especially with regard to my systems development in other areas, re updating the stereo side of it etc.
Prior to this Sony entering my life, as I mentioned, I'd not have seriously considered it as 'high end' material - but I am surprised and delighted to not feel sonically short changed at all; indeed the golden beast has knocked many of my HiFi precepts and notions of quality & VFM into something of a cocked hat over the past few weeks since I've had it connected to my CDI & SBL's.
However I agree with your comments about Sony in general, and certainly do not feel as 'enthusiastic' re the entry/middle range stuff. But then I also feel 'picky' about most kit in that range: i.e. the entry/mid-level Denons, Yamahas, Arcams etc of this world.
Perhaps I've become a hifi 'snob' myself, heaven forbid, however I would rather think that over the years one does become acclimatised to listening to quality kit, and it takes a certain level of quality, regardless of brand to provide satisfaction overall. Whilst it's not perfect, this the top ES Sony digital amp does. Umm, here's an thought - perhaps if we put a 'different' badge on it?
Best Regards
John...
Neill said:
quote:Can I just go back to your points about Sony. I have heard many Sony demo's over the years and they just leave me cold. I just don't like sony hi-fi/home cinema, but each to there own, I guess thats why no two hi-fi systems are alike. In the UK sony kit comes with badges on them stating 'tuned for uk market' don't know if you were aware of that. Sony also change there model range in the uk every six months. So if you buy a 1k amp for example, six months later you can pick it up from a bargain basement store for about £400. The kit just fails to hold its price.
Heheh, from my 'other' posts re the Sony All Digital amp, it must seem like I've become a convert to the 'dark side'.
Not so.
To be truthful, apart from my Walkman WMD6C cassette deck (a bit of a cult item in it's day) I've never taken Sony that seriously before now with regards to 'high end' kit. Just sort of didn't cross my radar. Neither did the Denons, Yamahas etc of this world either.
Over the last couple of years with my growing interest in HT, I ended up choosing a Sony DVD player over Arcam, Toshiba, Pioneer, Denon, Yamaha, Marantz etc, pretty much as it provided the best performance for picture and sound for movies to my ears and eyes, and things like the finish/build/engineering/remote etc just put the icing on the cake.
Pretty much the same when it came to getting an AV processor amp - I ended up after much auditioning and general angst going with the then TAE/TAN combo. (Angst because I couldn't afford an AV2/175/150 combo)
We have some of the basic, and also QS range of receivers here, and badged 'tuned in the UK' etc as you describe.
Personally, Sony seem to make a huge range of products; frankly the entry, or middle of the range ones don't appeal that much - unlike Naim there is not the same consistency of sound in the range to my ears.
However, there is a world of difference IMHO from that level to the top of the line ES range in sound, finish, presentation etc.
The ES range also seems to 'stay' 'in' for a bit longer - typically around 18mnths seems to be the model lifespan, albeit the previous TAE/TAN was around for over 4 years - there were a lot of delays and rumours long before the new digital paradigm arrived. 18mnths seems to correspond quite well with the likes of Arcam; I read once on their web site that 18mnths is their products planned lifecycle.
Of course, Naim is a totally different kettle of fish, with ongoing 'evolution' rather than outright obsolescence, and kudos to them for it.
Here in OZ, Naim would hold their prices a lot better than Sony; however the kit rarely comes up for sale. Sadly though, according to my dealer, once it goes much over two or so years old, one does not get a lot for it on trade-in or resale; perhaps why most hold onto it.
As you say, we are in two totally different markets. As I posted elsewhere, if I could get an AV2/175/150 combo for similar money, or perhaps a reasonable amount more than the Sony digital, I would go for it.
However, on performance grounds for movies, it seems to be more swings and roundabouts v's the Sony digital than a clear cut better/worse as far as I have been able to assess it, (and I have listened long and hard!) with performance advantages on both sides, and thus personal taste will always be a deciding factor.
The cruncher unfortunately is price. To be sure the market here is VERY different by the sounds of things to the UK.
On RRP here, the difference between the AV2/175/150 (assuming one already has a 2 channel amp, and is adding on to provide 7.1 facility) & the 7.1 channel all digital ES Sony, is the best part of eight thousand dollars, nudging closer to ten thousand dollars when one takes into account the discounts that Sony ES dealers will offer.
That means I could take the Sony, buy a pair of say B&W N804's to go with it, and have some change left over.
You see the dilemma that places a Naim fan like me in, - unfortunately not one of Naims creation or fault, just the different market pricing structure/exchange rates/freight etc, as you point out.
Sadly, as much as I like the Naim AV2 'sound'for HT, IMHO I feel it would be more of a performance move sideways, than ahead in the movie sound stakes, for an arguably different, rather than 'better' overall movie presentation compared to the all digital Sony AV amp.
One has to make choices in life, and presently the AV2/175/150 combo is too much for me to consider paying at the present time to simply satisfy my Naim preferences, especially with regard to my systems development in other areas, re updating the stereo side of it etc.
Prior to this Sony entering my life, as I mentioned, I'd not have seriously considered it as 'high end' material - but I am surprised and delighted to not feel sonically short changed at all; indeed the golden beast has knocked many of my HiFi precepts and notions of quality & VFM into something of a cocked hat over the past few weeks since I've had it connected to my CDI & SBL's.
However I agree with your comments about Sony in general, and certainly do not feel as 'enthusiastic' re the entry/middle range stuff. But then I also feel 'picky' about most kit in that range: i.e. the entry/mid-level Denons, Yamahas, Arcams etc of this world.
Perhaps
I've become a hifi 'snob' myself, heaven forbid, however I would rather think that over the years one does become acclimatised to listening to quality kit, and it takes a certain level of quality, regardless of brand to provide satisfaction overall. Whilst it's not perfect, this the top ES Sony digital amp does. Umm, here's an thought - perhaps if we put a 'different' badge on it? Best Regards
John...
Thanks for the prompt reply. As I thought really.
My local dealer is lending me the AV2 this weekend. Looking forward to that.
I've demoed it before at the dealers, along with Lexicon, Paraosund, and have also owned Primare, Arcam and Yamaha kit too and meddeled with countless others too.
I regret the day we sold a Densen Beat 100 amp so as to integrate everything, that was so much fun. Music has never been as much fun since.
I love my movies too, so have been on the look out for the "do it all box" aka the AV2 to appear and be able to afford it.
That time has arrived.
What you say does bolster what I already think, so thank you for that. I know the AV2 isn't perfect, but then what is?
If Naim could add Logic 7 to their kit then I suspect it wouldn't be far off.
My local dealer is lending me the AV2 this weekend. Looking forward to that.
I've demoed it before at the dealers, along with Lexicon, Paraosund, and have also owned Primare, Arcam and Yamaha kit too and meddeled with countless others too.
I regret the day we sold a Densen Beat 100 amp so as to integrate everything, that was so much fun. Music has never been as much fun since.
I love my movies too, so have been on the look out for the "do it all box" aka the AV2 to appear and be able to afford it.
That time has arrived.
What you say does bolster what I already think, so thank you for that. I know the AV2 isn't perfect, but then what is?
If Naim could add Logic 7 to their kit then I suspect it wouldn't be far off.
General Skanky said:
Welcome to the Naim forums BTW.
The AV2 is a superb processor, but the music card as someone else pointed out is it's main strength - that and the Naim qualities of basic sound such as rythmn, pace, timing etc and a full rich tonality.
On the spatial aspects of HT performance, IMV it's very good, but not quite 'state of the art' - heh I'd be another that'd love to see Logic 7 added, and yes, it would then be just about perfect!
In some ways a choice of processor comes down to subjective likes/dislikes as there are a number of processors & processor/amps that compete at the AV2 level re overall performance, but with slightly different balances re the music/HT equation, such that selection will always be a matter of subjective preference rather than a better/worse or 'best' scenario IMHO.
If you don't mind a lengthy read, have a browse through a thread I started re "I have heard the possible future of amplification - Part 11" etc, where I have discussed my impressions/thoughts re the AV2 with the Sony TA-DA9000ES All digital processor/amp, and also compared to my Naim equipment when used in tandem with the Sony using it's processing and pre-out features into the Naim kit I own for HT purposes.
Best Regards
John...
quote:What you say does bolster what I already think, so thank you for that. I know the AV2 isn't perfect, but then what is?
If Naim could add Logic 7 to their kit then I suspect it wouldn't be far off.
Welcome to the Naim forums BTW.
The AV2 is a superb processor, but the music card as someone else pointed out is it's main strength - that and the Naim qualities of basic sound such as rythmn, pace, timing etc and a full rich tonality.
On the spatial aspects of HT performance, IMV it's very good, but not quite 'state of the art' - heh I'd be another that'd love to see Logic 7 added, and yes, it would then be just about perfect!
In some ways a choice of processor comes down to subjective likes/dislikes as there are a number of processors & processor/amps that compete at the AV2 level re overall performance, but with slightly different balances re the music/HT equation, such that selection will always be a matter of subjective preference rather than a better/worse or 'best' scenario IMHO.
If you don't mind a lengthy read, have a browse through a thread I started re "I have heard the possible future of amplification - Part 11" etc, where I have discussed my impressions/thoughts re the AV2 with the Sony TA-DA9000ES All digital processor/amp, and also compared to my Naim equipment when used in tandem with the Sony using it's processing and pre-out features into the Naim kit I own for HT purposes.
Best Regards
John...
Thanks for the pointer, but I have read it thoroughly. Very interesting stuff indeed. I've also trawled quite al ot of other posts too over the last year here and other forums. (Sometimes too much knowledge is not good.)
I want to keep my system as minimal as possible. I already have an Arcam DV27a, a Sky+ box so all that's needed is the AV2 (to replace my Arcam AVR200).
I must admit to a lot of kit snobbery too.
Can't help it, I like to appear a bit elitist on that front.
The best systems will most likely consist of a mix of kit from a variety of manufacturers to cater for both music and film, but I've been there and as good as it sounds, there's nowhere to sit!
So the AV2 should do it nicely on both fronts with a slimline system that still has a lot of quality.
As I use ATC active speakers, a good front end is all I need.
So the question in my mind, apart from the rumoured AV3 that promises so much more, what pre/pro out there can compete with the AV2 for "both" music and film and cost a reasonable amount?
I want to keep my system as minimal as possible. I already have an Arcam DV27a, a Sky+ box so all that's needed is the AV2 (to replace my Arcam AVR200).
I must admit to a lot of kit snobbery too.
Can't help it, I like to appear a bit elitist on that front. The best systems will most likely consist of a mix of kit from a variety of manufacturers to cater for both music and film, but I've been there and as good as it sounds, there's nowhere to sit!
So the AV2 should do it nicely on both fronts with a slimline system that still has a lot of quality.
As I use ATC active speakers, a good front end is all I need.
So the question in my mind, apart from the rumoured AV3 that promises so much more, what pre/pro out there can compete with the AV2 for "both" music and film and cost a reasonable amount?
Thanks for the comments.
My rears have to be next to us firing backwards against the wall as they are too big and heavy to be placed anywhere else than on stands. The room layout dictates this.
However, even with a lowly AVR200 doing surround, when the lights are down etc, rear spatial effects seem fine.
So I don't really have a worry with the AV2.
Went to try and get it today from my dealer but as he didn't have enough leads to connect DIN to XLR for my ATCs I couldn't tkae it away. I'm devastated.
But it'll be all go tomorrow. I really am looking forward to it.
My rears have to be next to us firing backwards against the wall as they are too big and heavy to be placed anywhere else than on stands. The room layout dictates this.
However, even with a lowly AVR200 doing surround, when the lights are down etc, rear spatial effects seem fine.
So I don't really have a worry with the AV2.
Went to try and get it today from my dealer but as he didn't have enough leads to connect DIN to XLR for my ATCs I couldn't tkae it away.
I'm devastated.But it'll be all go tomorrow. I really am looking forward to it.
Hmm, interesting thoughts
If there's anything I've learned over the last few years that I've been dabbling with HT, it's that the majority of folks coming from a 2 channel/music background into HT, tend to judge HT/movies by the same criteria as a 2 channel system, aka 'musical' or 'flat earth' values, which is something of a mistake IMV.
One system is ideal/configured for music, and another is ideal/configured for HT/movies, with quite different performance requirements IMHO.
There is some overlap of performance parameters, but other than that it's not apples with apples, as HT implies a coherent and integrated blend of picture and sound; a requirement that does not exist with 2 channel stereo.
The most convincing and satisfying setups that I have heard for music, or HT, are separate systems; inevitably one system that tries to do both involves compromises somewhere along the line to one or the other medium.
Reality being what it is, most of us don't have the wherewithal to have two systems in two separate rooms, so we live with those compromises, but compromises they are.
IMHO, with HT/movie sound, PRaT matters in so far as a sense of 'pace' adds excitement to the soundtrack of a movie; rhythmic elements help nuance of inflection in dialogue, and give an element of 'swing' to music background material in a film score; and timing is important as far as a sense of cohesion in the sound, much like musical reproduction. An ability to separate out dialogue, effects, and background music aids greatly in a sense of clarity, much as in music reproduction, where one can hear either the whole or the individual parts, together or separately.
But from there, the similarity with designed/configured for music systems and a specialist HT system is quite diverse.
Probably the most important parameters for HT/movie involvment IMHO are: the sense of overall soundfield acoustic 'space' & 'size' that matches at all times the on-screen image size in a relative sense; the clarity, sense of space and nuance in dialogue, relative to the sense of the acoustic environment in which it is recorded, and the correct spatial distance between actors on screen with the dialogue matching the visual separation of the actors as displayed on screen; the ability of effects placement to be precisely located within a seamless 360 degrees soundfield in the horizontal plane, and with a sense of vertical precision in the soundfield as well; in short, the acoustics should at all times closely reflect what one is seeing on screen - this is most important, otherwise one suffers a sense of visual and aural dissonance.
To that, one can add an ability to have such high resolution/clarity to be able to resolve the very finest nuances of sound texture, at very low volume levels, but also to have the power/headroom and dynamic reserves to present sound pressure levels smoothly and without strain up to 105Db per channel, (20hz to 20khz) and 115Db in the LFE channel. These are all Dolby digital reference requirements.
Certainly the 'serious' high end HT setups I have heard give away nothing to their 'high-end'2 channel cousins in terms of a very high standard of equipment being required to deliver this sort of performance level - v/few 2 channel systems can deliver that sort of dynamic headroom and loudness levels - indeed CD does not have the dynamic range of DVD period.
Indeed, the majority of 2 channel systems I have heard with 'add on' solutions to create a HT setup are very compromised in performance terms for HT in comparison with what can be achieved with a dedicated HT setup.
A good 'musical' 2 channel system doesn't necessarily cut it in HT, if it can't reproduce the huge dynamic range of DVD's and do it without effort, and the processor NEEDS to have real speed and precision in the steering and placement of effects if they are to ensure visual and aural coherence between sound and picture.
Again, one needs the sense of acoustic 'space' to give that sense of immersion and involvement in the movie. Mismatched (HiFi front, plus add on rears) speakers, or ones with limited soundstaging and imaging abilities (whatever their musical abilities may or may not be) tend to create a soundfield that sounds like multi-point mono, or merely papers the walls with sound, when what one wants, is, as has been pointed out, something that more resembles a large single surround 'speaker'.
Given all of this, is it any wonder some HT systems sound pretty lacking on music, and many music systems sound pretty uninvolving with HT. Certainly that has been my experience.
General Skanky said:
Heheh, we all take pride in our kit, and choices of kit, to be sure. However, from this side of the planet, the English (being VERY general here) sometimes come across as some of the most class conscious, and class ruled people on the planet, so as you seem to have strong UK product allegiances and, er, self confessed 'elitist' ones at that, it would seem to indicate that you are a 'product' of the UK class system perhaps.. (Dons flame suit).. but as you live there, quite understandably so!
HT Naimee said:
What 'model' Pioneer did you have? I believe the likes of the top of the range AX10i etc are very good; certainly my all digital sony provides the clarity/effects that you describe. Was the Pioneer in the same price bracket as the AV2?
I have no wish to offend, or start an argument; however I take a degree of umbridge with your last sentence "(even although it's the best already)"
If you were to add the prefix, or suffix "for me" or "IMHO" I would have no problems accepting that, as we are all different, and in HiFi, as in everything else, one mans meat is another mans poison.
However to flat out state the AV2 is 'the best' in a manner that implies not your opinion, but objective fact, actually, I have to say, and it gives me no pleasure to do so, that it does quite irritate me.
Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick, and I apologise in advance if I have, but it does seem a somewhat arrogant and elitist remark to make IMHO. Especially say, for owners of Lexicon, Meridian, EAD Theatremaster, or really anyone who has invested a lot of time, effort and money in their individual choice and selection for ownership, of high quality equipment in which they are justifiably proud. It's not just 'us' Naim owners who are proud and take pleasure in the ownership of fine equipment. (Be that elitist or not)
It might surprise you to know that outside of this forum, some Naim owners are regarded as being one-eyed elitist fanatics by the greater HiFi/HT community at large, not an image as a proud Naim owner myself, that I wish to be associated with. And to be sure, there is a lot of very fine audio equipment in the market place, that just so happens to not be made by Naim. As always it's great to have choice from a selection of broadly/generally equal high quality products, but with differing presentations etc.
Anyway, I apologise if I seem to be making a mountain out of a molehill, and please don't take it personally, but I did feel a bit annoyed when I read it, and needed to let of some steam...
Best Regards
John...
If there's anything I've learned over the last few years that I've been dabbling with HT, it's that the majority of folks coming from a 2 channel/music background into HT, tend to judge HT/movies by the same criteria as a 2 channel system, aka 'musical' or 'flat earth' values, which is something of a mistake IMV.
One system is ideal/configured for music, and another is ideal/configured for HT/movies, with quite different performance requirements IMHO.
There is some overlap of performance parameters, but other than that it's not apples with apples, as HT implies a coherent and integrated blend of picture and sound; a requirement that does not exist with 2 channel stereo.
The most convincing and satisfying setups that I have heard for music, or HT, are separate systems; inevitably one system that tries to do both involves compromises somewhere along the line to one or the other medium.
Reality being what it is, most of us don't have the wherewithal to have two systems in two separate rooms, so we live with those compromises, but compromises they are.
IMHO, with HT/movie sound, PRaT matters in so far as a sense of 'pace' adds excitement to the soundtrack of a movie; rhythmic elements help nuance of inflection in dialogue, and give an element of 'swing' to music background material in a film score; and timing is important as far as a sense of cohesion in the sound, much like musical reproduction. An ability to separate out dialogue, effects, and background music aids greatly in a sense of clarity, much as in music reproduction, where one can hear either the whole or the individual parts, together or separately.
But from there, the similarity with designed/configured for music systems and a specialist HT system is quite diverse.
Probably the most important parameters for HT/movie involvment IMHO are: the sense of overall soundfield acoustic 'space' & 'size' that matches at all times the on-screen image size in a relative sense; the clarity, sense of space and nuance in dialogue, relative to the sense of the acoustic environment in which it is recorded, and the correct spatial distance between actors on screen with the dialogue matching the visual separation of the actors as displayed on screen; the ability of effects placement to be precisely located within a seamless 360 degrees soundfield in the horizontal plane, and with a sense of vertical precision in the soundfield as well; in short, the acoustics should at all times closely reflect what one is seeing on screen - this is most important, otherwise one suffers a sense of visual and aural dissonance.
To that, one can add an ability to have such high resolution/clarity to be able to resolve the very finest nuances of sound texture, at very low volume levels, but also to have the power/headroom and dynamic reserves to present sound pressure levels smoothly and without strain up to 105Db per channel, (20hz to 20khz) and 115Db in the LFE channel. These are all Dolby digital reference requirements.
Certainly the 'serious' high end HT setups I have heard give away nothing to their 'high-end'2 channel cousins in terms of a very high standard of equipment being required to deliver this sort of performance level - v/few 2 channel systems can deliver that sort of dynamic headroom and loudness levels - indeed CD does not have the dynamic range of DVD period.
Indeed, the majority of 2 channel systems I have heard with 'add on' solutions to create a HT setup are very compromised in performance terms for HT in comparison with what can be achieved with a dedicated HT setup.
A good 'musical' 2 channel system doesn't necessarily cut it in HT, if it can't reproduce the huge dynamic range of DVD's and do it without effort, and the processor NEEDS to have real speed and precision in the steering and placement of effects if they are to ensure visual and aural coherence between sound and picture.
Again, one needs the sense of acoustic 'space' to give that sense of immersion and involvement in the movie. Mismatched (HiFi front, plus add on rears) speakers, or ones with limited soundstaging and imaging abilities (whatever their musical abilities may or may not be) tend to create a soundfield that sounds like multi-point mono, or merely papers the walls with sound, when what one wants, is, as has been pointed out, something that more resembles a large single surround 'speaker'.
Given all of this, is it any wonder some HT systems sound pretty lacking on music, and many music systems sound pretty uninvolving with HT. Certainly that has been my experience.
General Skanky said:
quote:I must admit to a lot of kit snobbery too. Can't help it, I like to appear a bit elitist on that front.
Heheh, we all take pride in our kit, and choices of kit, to be sure. However, from this side of the planet, the English (being VERY general here) sometimes come across as some of the most class conscious, and class ruled people on the planet, so as you seem to have strong UK product allegiances and, er, self confessed 'elitist' ones at that, it would seem to indicate that you are a 'product' of the UK class system perhaps..
(Dons flame suit).. but as you live there, quite understandably so! HT Naimee said:
quote:My Pioneer had nice soundstage but simply lacked the realism. It didn't feel as if you were in the middle of things. But with the AV2 everything is clear and sharp and you feel right in the middle of the action. You can almost feel the bullets passing through you.
What 'model' Pioneer did you have? I believe the likes of the top of the range AX10i etc are very good; certainly my all digital sony provides the clarity/effects that you describe. Was the Pioneer in the same price bracket as the AV2?
quote:But seriously, I think an AV2 is money well spent and Naim constantly do a great job at further improving it (even although it's the best already).
I have no wish to offend, or start an argument; however I take a degree of umbridge with your last sentence "(even although it's the best already)"
If you were to add the prefix, or suffix "for me" or "IMHO" I would have no problems accepting that, as we are all different, and in HiFi, as in everything else, one mans meat is another mans poison.
However to flat out state the AV2 is 'the best' in a manner that implies not your opinion, but objective fact, actually, I have to say, and it gives me no pleasure to do so, that it does quite irritate me.
Perhaps I've got the wrong end of the stick, and I apologise in advance if I have, but it does seem a somewhat arrogant and elitist remark to make IMHO. Especially say, for owners of Lexicon, Meridian, EAD Theatremaster, or really anyone who has invested a lot of time, effort and money in their individual choice and selection for ownership, of high quality equipment in which they are justifiably proud. It's not just 'us' Naim owners who are proud and take pleasure in the ownership of fine equipment. (Be that elitist or not
)It might surprise you to know that outside of this forum, some Naim owners are regarded as being one-eyed elitist fanatics by the greater HiFi/HT community at large, not an image as a proud Naim owner myself, that I wish to be associated with. And to be sure, there is a lot of very fine audio equipment in the market place, that just so happens to not be made by Naim. As always it's great to have choice from a selection of broadly/generally equal high quality products, but with differing presentations etc.
Anyway, I apologise if I seem to be making a mountain out of a molehill, and please don't take it personally, but I did feel a bit annoyed when I read it, and needed to let of some steam...
Best Regards
John...
quote:Heheh, we all take pride in our kit, and choices of kit, to be sure. However, from this side of the planet, the English (being VERY general here) sometimes come across as some of the most class conscious, and class ruled people on the planet, so as you seem to have strong UK product allegiances and, er, self confessed 'elitist' ones at that, it would seem to indicate that you are a 'product' of the UK class system perhaps.. (Dons flame suit).. but as you live there, quite understandably so
A class system that showed the world the high standards we all aspire today, everyday.
There is one major factor that I don't think has really been mentioned and that is price.
An AV2 will cost me £1950 ex dem. A future AV3 is going to be a lot more, just guessing of course.
Anyway, taking the price into consideration then all the above comments make more sense.
So personally I'll be very happy. Probably.
HT-Naimee said:
Heheh, I agree, that all performance judgements with Hifi are predominately subjective - we are all going to respond in different ways to kit with different presentations, given a reasonably level playing field in other areas re price, build quality, finish etc.
Thanks for not taking my comments personally; no offence whatsoever was intended, and I tried hard to convey that in my 'little rant' as I felt not knowing you that it would've been very unfair and uncalled for, for me to have done so.
If in anyway whatsoever my comments hurt your feelings, once again I would apologise - it's a hard line to tread between expressing ones disatisfaction/annoyance with a statement, and offending someone unintentionally, and I very much appreciate your understanding.
Best Regards
John...
quote:of course it was a "IMHO-statement".
But then all performance judgements are
Heheh, I agree, that all performance judgements with Hifi are predominately subjective - we are all going to respond in different ways to kit with different presentations, given a reasonably level playing field in other areas re price, build quality, finish etc.
Thanks for not taking my comments personally; no offence whatsoever was intended, and I tried hard to convey that in my 'little rant' as I felt not knowing you that it would've been very unfair and uncalled for, for me to have done so.
If in anyway whatsoever my comments hurt your feelings, once again I would apologise - it's a hard line to tread between expressing ones disatisfaction/annoyance with a statement, and offending someone unintentionally, and I very much appreciate your understanding.
Best Regards
John...
Neill said:
I would concur with this. In terms of hard hitting, dynamic PRaT bringing that extra 'something' re involvement in the movie genre, the AV2 is indeed quite special. Just as Naim equipment is to the forefront of emotional involvement with music reproduction IMHO.
Certainly my Sony all digital beast gets very close re PRaT, but still not quite as hard hitting as the AV2 with the leading edge of transients etc, and the separation of sounds - there the AV2 is unmatched from what I've heard.
Still, whether it be the superb sense of visual and aural integration/cohesion, the finely graduated sense of detail/clarity in the sound re dialogue, effects, and music, and the tremendous dynamic range and smoothness, I nonetheless find myself doing an awful lot of stomach tightening, finger clenching, and having to remember to breathe during those dramatic moments with movies, when watching via the All digital Sony, so it's certainly doing something right re involvement despite not quite having the same level of hard hitting transient attack as the AV2. Heheh, I haven't quite worked out what it is, but on a subliminal level it certainly communicates and involves exceedingly well.
Out of interest/curiosity not having had an indepth listen to the TAG processors, when you say the AV2 was 'better' could you expand upon in what areas for you where the AV2 was your preferred choice? Was it just the sense of emotional involvement/drama etc, or were their other performance advantages that you heard?
Best Regards
John...
quote:I belive the Av2 has a great ability to convey, tension, emotion and drama. A lot of AV Pre amps seem to lack this ability.
I would concur with this. In terms of hard hitting, dynamic PRaT bringing that extra 'something' re involvement in the movie genre, the AV2 is indeed quite special. Just as Naim equipment is to the forefront of emotional involvement with music reproduction IMHO.
Certainly my Sony all digital beast gets very close re PRaT, but still not quite as hard hitting as the AV2 with the leading edge of transients etc, and the separation of sounds - there the AV2 is unmatched from what I've heard.
Still, whether it be the superb sense of visual and aural integration/cohesion, the finely graduated sense of detail/clarity in the sound re dialogue, effects, and music, and the tremendous dynamic range and smoothness, I nonetheless find myself doing an awful lot of stomach tightening, finger clenching, and having to remember to breathe during those dramatic moments with movies, when watching via the All digital Sony, so it's certainly doing something right re involvement despite not quite having the same level of hard hitting transient attack as the AV2. Heheh, I haven't quite worked out what it is, but on a subliminal level it certainly communicates and involves exceedingly well.
Out of interest/curiosity not having had an indepth listen to the TAG processors, when you say the AV2 was 'better' could you expand upon in what areas for you where the AV2 was your preferred choice? Was it just the sense of emotional involvement/drama etc, or were their other performance advantages that you heard?
Best Regards
John...
Well I've managed to pick it up today.
I have only had a tweak and very quick set up.
My intial impression is that it is very clear sounding and very musical.
Until I set it up I can't say on any other aspects of its performance.
I must say the set up looks to be incredibly easy if you have an understanding of AV paramneters.
So it's tinkering away in stereo at the moment and it's nice. I think it's showing up how crappy some of my cds are. Combined with the ATCs, any poor recording is going to be a lot more obvious.
I would say only after a very brief listen, that the AV2 is comparable to my old Densen Beat amp. So that's a good start for hifi at least.
I have only had a tweak and very quick set up.
My intial impression is that it is very clear sounding and very musical.
Until I set it up I can't say on any other aspects of its performance.
I must say the set up looks to be incredibly easy if you have an understanding of AV paramneters.
So it's tinkering away in stereo at the moment and it's nice. I think it's showing up how crappy some of my cds are. Combined with the ATCs, any poor recording is going to be a lot more obvious.
I would say only after a very brief listen, that the AV2 is comparable to my old Densen Beat amp. So that's a good start for hifi at least.