Today I have so far spent 3 hours listening to different combinations of equipment. Before I talk about specifics let me first explain my hi-fi philosophy. I asked myself a few questions: why did I buy Naim equipment in the first place? Answer: the usual clichés: pace, rythm, timing, dynamics, handling of transients and so on. I was less worried about absolute detail although imaging and soundstaging are hi-fi tricks which I have always appreciated as secondary pleasures. The most important thing is can I follow the tune? Does it have that smile-on-face-foot-tap-ability? If I'd wanted detail as an end rather than as a means I wouldn't have bought Naim equipment in the first place. To hear a violinist farting is an amusing aside but should not be the reason for buying an expensive hi-fi.
So, thanks to Tony's refreshing and intelligent approach, I thought I would try combinations of the equipment I have. The sources remained the same: CDS2/CDPS and LP12/Ittok/DV-20X/AW modded Lingo. The power amps also did not change: a single 250 for each pair of speakers. What I changed was the pre-amp and the speakers. I used an 82/S-Cap and a 32.5/Hi-Cap and B&W N805s and original (non bi-wirable) AE1s.
The music I used was as follows: CDs: Moloko, The Time is Now; Ozric Tentacles, Pyramidion; Vinyl: Supertramp, A Soapbox Opera: Shostakovich Piano Conc No.1 (final movement)
So here are the results:
I will start with the speakers since the results are less contentious. The AE1s are fast, tuneful, dynamic and have more bass than a box their size has any right to have. The metal drivers take one hell of a lot of driving. (For decent volume a 32.5 needs to be at 12 o'clock for CD and 4 o'clock for vinyl - but the 250 did not seem to be over over-heating at these levels.). What they don't have is tremendous detail, some musical information just gets lost, and one is aware not that these are very small speakers but that they are in a box. Orchestral music gets a bit squashed. The drivers are well integrated, they image very well and have a surprisingly large sound stage (on hne cableway granite stands and Mana Soundbases). These are fabulous little speakers and I would love to hear a NAP500 give them a real wallop. And the B&Ws? Contrary to popular forum belief, they are just as fast, they are less boxy but have a slight boominess and lack of control in the bass compared to AE1s. They are a lot more refined and sculpt intruments better. A few subtle changes in tempo missed by AE1s are conveyed by the 805s. They also handle transients superbly - the drivers stop as well as start real quick. they make the AE1s sound a little uncouth. As I have often maintained these are refined, seamless and musical speakers, doubtless better than AE1s, but the AE1s, do all the things I really care about very well. Other B&W speakers may be crap for all I know.
So what about the pre-amps?
I must start by saying that an 82/SC is a better preamp combination than a 32.5/HC, but by a surprisingly small margin (in these tests). The 82 is more revealing, more detailed has none of the veiling apparent on a 32.5 by comparison. It also has a little more drive and enthusiasm than its smaller cousin. So what of a 32.5? Wow! this is some preamp with bags of PR&T. It has all the Naim virtues but a lot less "Hi-Fi" merits than an 82. This is very apparent using the B&Ws which seem quite demanding of upstream components but the AE1s still really groove. Consider the price differential of the two combinations and the ability of the cheap one is quite staggering.
I lived with a 32.5 H/C very happily for some years but was overjoyed neither by one nor two hi-caps on the 82 so I thought I would try another comparison: 82/Hi vs 32.5/Super. The results: The veil over the 32.5 is almost completely lifted, also because it is lighter in the bass than an 82 the 805s sounded better controlled (regardless of some loss of detail). Hi-hats impressed. There was foot-tapping a-plently to Pyramidion and the breathiness of the Moloko vocal was impressive. So what of 82/Hi-C? A very sweet top end. But the bass had gone flabby (finally) in the 805s and, whilst it was well extended in the AE1s it had lost some tunefulness. Vocals were good. I would prefer to live with 32.5/S-cap to the 82/HC by some distance. I used to think it hardly worth changing a 32.5 for anything other than an 82 but I've changed my mind, I think one should go straight from 32.5 to 52. Based on these listening tests I would upgrade 32.5/HC to 32.5/SC to 52/SC with no stops in between. The 52 I know to be a leap to another dimension but it is a very revealing pre-amp - any faults with regard to source quality, set-up, supports and room acoustics will be murdered. There is little doubt that a 32.5 is less detailed and revealing than an 82 but it is quite capable of allowing both the LP12 and the CDS2 to show most of what they can do. Nor is it an obvious bottleneck, especially with regard to traditional Naim virtues.
These experiments show that the importance of synergy and balance cannot be overstated when it comes to system building. A very revealing pre-amp could do more harm than good. (Another example of this that I know is that a stand alone CDX, even an XPSed one, sounds worse with a 52 than it does with 82/S-cap). Leaving aside certain hi-fi virtues, the best system, the one that really got me smiling and foot tapping most, that I can presently build is:
CDS2 or LP12/32.5/S-Cap/250/AE1s and I'm not joking when I say this (but could probably do with an outboard phono stage). I hope you believe that I have no axe to grind, no great earth politic, but I'm providing an honest assessment of what my ears, indeed my whole body, have just told me. I also know that CDS2/XPS/52/135s/N805s would give me more pleasure than what I have now in any given combination, but that is also a very well balanced system.
There is no doubt in my mind that maxing out sources is imperative. Just make sure that your power amp can drive your speakers (AE1s really are demanding - a 250 being a minimum requirement). I am certain that I would prefer CDS2/XPS/32.5/Hi-Cap/135s/AE1s to CDX/52/250/SBLs (on Mana Stairway to Heaven).
The question is: will I have the courage of my convictions and flog 82/250/N805s (keeping H/C and buying another 32.5 for home, plus buying phono stage and better cartridge for LP12) or will I keep saving for 52 and 135s - I'll keep you posted.
[This message was edited by Alex S on SATURDAY 25 August 2001 at 14:10.]
Posted on: 25 August 2001 by Alex S.
Paul: I lived with kans for about 5 years. Unfortunately they just don't go loud enough in my present listening room.
BD: Just a bog standard 32.5 but recently serviced.
Jim: Nice for a bit of 32.5 support before the crescendo of boos.
Joe: Of course you're right. The least I would hope for in this process would be a s/h linto (which I like) and a rebuilt troika if indeed they're good enough. The ekos/aro will have to wait since I'm hoping for some spare money as a result of this process.
General: s/h 135s may have to be added to the equation. I think I now need to know how to use a 250 on each speaker - so somebody please run how to do this by me one more time, (boy are those AE1s power hungry).
Depending on resale values I may well go from my present profiled system to the following:
CDS2/CDPS; LP12/Ittok/Troika/Linto/Lingo; 32.5/S-Cap; 135s; AE1s.
I'm fairly sure that I would be happier with the above system than with my present one and I'd have over a grand in my pocket as a result of the process.
Posted on: 25 August 2001 by Tony L
quote:
why did I buy Naim equipment in the first place? Answer: the usual clichés: pace, rythm, timing, dynamics, handling of transients and so on. I was less worried about absolute detail although imaging and soundstaging are hi-fi tricks which I have always appreciated as secondary pleasures. The most important thing is can I follow the tune?
Nail, head, kathwack. Exactly the point.
quote:
I must start by saying that an 82/SC is a better preamp combination than a 32.5/HC, but by a surprisingly small margin (in these tests). The 82 is more revealing, more detailed has none of the veiling apparent on a 32.5 by comparison.
I am sure this is a priority thing, and I am also certain that Alex’s priorities are incredibly similar to my own. I have just gone from a 32.5 / Hicap / 250 to a Nait 2 (I have now boxed up the bigger amp up until its sold). What struck me with the differences is just how little I care about them – The Nait 2 rocks like its life depends on it, I keep listening to the big, powerful and fun sound coming out of the Kans, then looking at the tiny little amp and laughing out loud. It just should not do that! I had the same feeling when I went from 135s to a 250, I just did not care about the difference, it was all in areas that for me don’t matter. There are of course people with different priorities who probably could not cope with the change. Fair enough, I am sure my approach is not for everyone.
quote:
There is no doubt in my mind that maxing out sources is imperative. Just make sure that your power amp can drive your speakers (AE1s really are demanding - a 250 being a minimum requirement). I am certain that I would prefer CDS2/XPS/32.5/Hi-Cap/135s/AE1s to CDX/52/250/SBLs (on Mana Stairway to Heaven).
I am totally convinced by source first. I am now convinced to the extent that a Nait 5 plus Intros (or S/H Nait 2 plus Kans) is absolutely all that is required until the source is at maxed out TT or CDS2. This is certainly what I am doing, the Nait 2 and Kan IIs stay, that is definite. Anyone who has anything less than a top flight TT or CDS2 with anything more than a Nait or say a 32.5 / 140 has a mullet system! I guess I’m lucky as I am not a volume freak, volume costs more cash.
In your particular position I would think about finding a easier to drive pair of speakers than the AE1, as I have said before I do like them, though they are amongst the worst amp suckers I have ever witnessed. I remember trying my old 62 / Hicap / 140 into a friends pair, and on vinyl I had the volume knob absolutely wide open, and they still sounded strangled. Stick them on the end a 250 watt amp and they really work. Do you really need a free space speaker? If not then Kans work and need little power, as would any number of Royds etc. Good free space speakers are a little harder to find, but Intros work well a bit from the walls, and again don’t need a lot of amp grunt. Neat Petites are excellent, though again need a wall nearby, and I think are not to hard to drive if you steer well clear of the Gravitas subs (from what I have heard they sound way better without the subs too). There has to be something more suitable than the AE1. My logic is that by using say a 140 instead of the 135s you have more cash to stick up front, probably enough for an Aro and Prefix / Hicap. IMHO a well better place to stick that cash. Your AE1s have a good second hand value (350 - 400 quid without stands?), and there are tons of great speakers that can be found for that second hand, certainly all the ones that I mention above.
quote:
and buying another 32.5 for home...
Funnily enough I know where there is a mint, recapped, and very well loved one sitting in its box waiting for a new home 
Tony.
Posted on: 26 August 2001 by Alex S.
Linked to our desire to upgrade is the notion of progress. The idea that as time passes so products improve is seductive and, since they need to sell their new products it is a philosophy fully extolled by companies such as Naim.
I know that technology moves on and that Naim take R & D seriously. I listened to Meridian's efforts when CDs first appeared and vowed never to embrace the format. (By 1995 I was forced to since new vinyl had virtually dried up by then. The progress that Naim have made with regard to CD players is demonstrated by the fact that I find listening to them a pleasure and not an ordeal).
What I don't like about "progress" is the notion that whatever has been left behind instantly seems to become a rather quaint collectors item not to be taken that seriously be audiophiles. The literature that came with my CDX stated "performance can be greatly enhanced by the addition of a CDPS". This was pre XPS days. If you ask Naim about the CDPS power supply now they are polite but rather dismissive. Nor should we forget that a 32.5 preamp was the best that Naim could make at the time: is progress so monumental or were Naim just not very good at making pre-amps in the mid 80s? Or perhaps it can still be regarded as a excellent product.
It is the same story with the Ittok tonearm, at the time Linn's (Japanese made) best. Now they dismiss it as hardly worth using. I'm sure the Ekos and Aro are better - but that much better? I doubt it. I found LP12/Ittok/Troika a well balanced, involving and enjoyable combinatiuon and at today's prices its a cost-effective one. Although I'm basically source first this one's good enough for me (until I'm substantially richer).
The LP12/Ittok/Troika is also very well balanced with my other source (CDS2/CDPS). I think this is important since I mix and match CD and vinyl replay on any given day. If there is a huge discrepancy in the quality of one's sources its difficult to appreciate the worst one. If that happens to be CD then its difficult to just enjoy the music and not regard it as digital pennance as a result of some past format war.
Perhaps DVD-A and SACD will have the same effect. Although source first, I know I don't want nor can afford 4 sources of equal quality. If all new releases were on vinyl then I would happily live with just one source. But if in the future a certain piece of music I want to listen to is only available on DVD-A 6.1 then bad luck, I won't be listening to it.
Posted on: 26 August 2001 by Tony L
quote:
Nor should we forget that a 32.5 preamp was the best that Naim could make at the time: is progress so monumental or were Naim just not very good at making pre-amps in the mid 80s? Or perhaps it can still be regarded as a excellent product.
I am more than willing to be corrected on this, but as far as I am aware the 32.5 was the last Naim preamp designed entirely by Julian Vereker. I believe the 52 / 82 / and 102 etc are mainly the work of another designer or design team, so perhaps represent a very slightly different viewpoint or set of priorities. Obviously they all represent a new direction that Julian wished to travel as no product ever got out without his ok.
I look at CD technology in a different light to amplifier or speaker design, digital technology is still relatively new and still improving exponentially. On the other hand it is arguable as to whether anyone has built a better speaker than the Quad 57 yet! (Aha, now I remember what my free space speaker of choice is! Only need a Nait to drive ‘em too!). Amplifier technology is IMHO equally slow – there are some fabulous 40 year old hi-fi amps.
As for your feelings toward the Ittok, I agree it’s a great arm (I used to have one), but in comparison to a Ekos, Zeta, or my personal preference the Aro it is far behind. To my ears replacing a Ittok with an Aro is like removing a very thick blanket from in front of the speakers, the top end is so much cleaner (the Ittok is a bit “zingy” and mushy), the Aro’s mid is just fabulous, and whilst its bass is not as tight and extended as the Ekos or Zeta it is perfectly in perspective. This is a great arm, and to put things in context, for me going from a Ittok to a Aro is a way bigger upgrade than changing a 32 to a 52. Try and hear this one for yourself and see if you agree.
Tony.
Posted on: 26 August 2001 by John G.
"Anyone out there with LP12/ARO/Armageddon/Prefix/Supercap/Mana driving NAIT and Kans? Just curious to see how many people are willing to take this source first dictum to its logical conclusion." James
Hello James,
I ran an LP12, Lingo, Ittok, Troika/Klyde on Archidee stand with an Exposure 15 integrated with MC cards on a old Sound Organisation table and Quad ESL-57's for 5 years. I then went with a Ekos/Klyde. $8K of table $1K amp $1K speakers.
The Quads are still driven by the same amp now on a Mana Wall shelf. The LP12 is on a Mana Mini table, 5 tier amp rack on a Sound Stage located down in the basement on a concrete floor. The signal to the 15 is being fed from an Exposure 13 Phono Pre and Exposure 19 Line Pre tape out.
$8 K table, $3K racks, 3K phono/line amps to the same $1K amp and 1K speakers. Source first taken to the extreme but then the speakers are no slouch. All I need is more Mana 
Posted on: 27 August 2001 by Alex S.
First a small introduction. I am not taking these posts lightly. I do not wish to do anything that I might regret and nor do I wish to preach any falsehoods on this forum for the sake of dramatic effect or for any other reason. So I have done a lot more listening before posting these further impressions.
Naturally, any comments I make are my own honest opinions based on my ears, my listening room, my system combinations and my ancillary equipment and setup. In other circumstances things could be entirely different. Again I start with the least contentious aspect: the speakers.
The AE1s have been thrown out of the equation for a number of reasons.
1. Although remarkable for their size, their size is a limiting factor. They still sound a bit boxy and this is an aspect of loudspeakers I don't like.
2. Not even a 250 can really drive these "amp-suckers". They would need 135s or a 500 and these hardly represent a downsize.
3. The N805s are better. A lot better. And they are faster and very unboxy. I think all you B&W loathers out there should at least accept that the N805s are the exceptions that prove the rule.
4. The AE1s work well at home and the MS20i pearls, although a superb pair of speakers for £60, don't really cut the mustard.
Now for the preamps. I used a Supercap for both the 32.5 and the 82. (I have already concluded that the S/C is a very worthy addition to the 32.5 compared to H/C. Also despite potential downsizing at this time, I am also trying to improve the vinyl source. I also know what a 52 can do and will eventually buy one if funds permit. I am not pretending here that I might prefer a 32.5 to a 52).
There is little doubt that the 82 is a more "hi-fi" amp than the 32.5, it has greater clarity, transparency, separation. It also sculpts instruments a bit better and has a lot more bass. I deliberately picked a raucous, sometimes complex and confused piece of music (Bozzio, Levin, Stevens: Situation Dangerous) and the 82 can follow the music, but not without penalty - it can start to sound a little harsh and aggressive.
The 32.5 by contrast is a pre-amp of different character. It is warmer. Instead of getting aggressive it just throws a warm blanket over proceedings when they get really tough. It throws its hands up and says "okay, you will have to fill in the gaps here, I'm not going to get all shouty and aggressive, here's the warm blanket, I'll remove it when things calm down a bit." The 82's transparency by contrast can err towards brightness and harshness.
The veiling apparent when listening to all music with a 32.5/Hi-Cap is gone with a Supercap. It seems that a major key to Naim success is the optimisation of one's power supplies - this would be consistent with the company's own approach.
Being lighter in the bass, the 32.5 induces little of the bass boom problem which can surface with the 82/N805s. The 32.5 can still produce tuneful bass - to me a far more important attribute than bass depth or quantity.
In my system I slightly prefer the 32.5. I loose a little subtlety but I also loose the aggression which I have noticed in the 82 (and in other Naim "mid-range" products such as the CDX). It is a well worn phrase but the warmth of the 32.5 reminds me of the analogue sound. With regard to actual analogue sound, there is little doubt that the 82 phono board is better than the 32.5 board (a 32.5 board sounds a bit leaden by comparison) - but part of this downsizing procedure would include the addition of a separate phono stage.
Conclusions: As things stand I would be very happy to sell the 82. I would loose the remote facility which at work can be useful if the phone rings and I would gain the suspicion that my Super-cap was holding quite a bit in reserve; but I can live with these minor irritations. With the proceeds from the 82 I can buy a replacement 32.5 for home, a s/h Linto, a rebuilt Troika and a Mana ref table for the LP12. Can't be bad.
Alex
Posted on: 27 August 2001 by Alex S.
quote:
I’m lucky as I am not a volume freak, volume costs more cash
This is a major downsizing problem. I am not a freak but I like volume and have a large listening room.
One looses a certain poise and separation at high volume when an 82 is swapped for 32.5, but no loss of PR&T. But, and this is curious, although 2 250s definitely works better with an 82, with a 32.5 one works better - more integration and synergy. Again a question of system balance. And that holds true even at high volume. So an added benefit is I can go to 32.5 and actually gain by ditching one 250. I like downsizing when everything improves, even the hi-fi virtues.
In general terms, just as I think upgrading should be a progressive and fairly slow process to fully appreciate the changes, so do I think downsizing should be done in stages so that one's ears can grow accustomed to any changes. I am not saying that downsizing equals a reduction of quality or listening pleasure but the reduction of certain hi-fi virtues or changes in tonal nuance require some aural adjustment.
With regard to volume, it is easy to confuse levels of volume with levels of quality - a powerful, expensive system can sound superficially better at high volume. (Of course a poor one will sound significantly worse. You'll laugh, but my mullet DVD/32.5/HC/110/AE1s at home sounds quite musical so long as the volume is kept below 3 o'clock).
Alex
Posted on: 27 August 2001 by Mike Hanson
First of all, the 32.5 is a great little amp, sounding wonderfully cohesive. As Alex has said, though, it's rather veiled and warm. This can be nice at times, but the lack of detail is rather annoying and disappointing.
The 32.5 with a Super-Cap is quite special. I was astonished at how it improved the little pre-amp. However, I would take 82/SNAPS over 32.5/Super-Cap (and I've done the direct comparison).
Tony, I demand volume! I want to be immersed in the music. If it's tinkling pleasantly over there across the room, then I'm not happy. Fill the space, slam me against the wall, and make me sit up and notice nothing but the music!
Alex, you mentioned how the 82 can get a little rough sounding at higher volumes (especially with complex material). When I upgraded from the 82 to 52, this all went away. Compared to the 52, the 82 sounds like a raucous and over-enthusiastic child. It's pretty talented, but it often trips because of its own exuberance.
Regard the Nautilus 805s, Alex, you and I will have to agree to disagree. I've demo'ed these extensively. Although they have several pleasant traits, they have three major failings: there's a real problem with obvious bridge from bass to treble drivers, the tweeters are far too directional, and the bass is poor (deeper bass is almost non-existant, and upper bass is lumpy). Fix these things, and it's a nice speaker.
-=> Mike Hanson <=-
