What's next Guys?

Buy more records

Sagitarius in aeternum

Thanks for that Mats,

Your Post suggests that my sistem is already good enough, and yes is does sound great. However, I want to make it even better. You know what I'm talking about.

Mark.

mark, what size room do you have? I have cds2/xps/52/super and 135`s. I went from a 250 to 135`s and thought it was a major improvement. I would think that 180 to 135`s would be a giant step. The move from 250 to 135`s was bigger than 82/super to 52/super in my very large room. S/h 135s are a bargain these days. That would be my move. The 135s added body and presence over the 250. Also, I have never heard arcs but I hear that they need some power. Just my 2c. david

Markas,

Have you done anything with your mains (or whatever it's called in Canada) yet? Dedicated mains supply and isolated ground with 135s must be the biggest hi-fi bargain around at the moment.

Jeremy

Mark,

Before you do anything may I suggest you go and audition a CDS3. You will be amased at the improvement in your system.

Regards

NB

David, my place is kinda open plan but the listening area is appox. 15' x 15 feet. The dining room leads off from there (L-shape).

JeremyB, No dedicated mains yet, that’s the next job on the list. Do you mean that there should be a dedicated spur for the power amp and a separate one for the power supplies?

Ok thanks, two votes for 135’s. Does anyone else agree with this solution?


Mark.

NB, CDS3 is more than I was willing to spend right now so I did not even consider it. But, if you think it’s that much better that the CDS2 I’ll try and get a dem. Does it work with the XPS1?

Cheers,

Mark.

Yes the CDS3 does work with the original XPS. From what I have heard on the forum the XPS2 is quite an improvement over the original but that can be upgraded some time in the future.

All I can say Is give the CDS3 a listen and then its up to you whether its worth spending more than your budget.

Failing that then yes I would agree with other members that upgrading the 180 to a pair of 135's would be a worthwhile jump.

Regards

NB

Last time I checked the Naim list 135's had disappeared so it'll have to be second hand or a 300?

Smike

Smike,


for the price of a new 300, Mark could purchase the CDS3 head unit.

Regards

NB

NB you're right there - I guess I've always had mullet tendancies though preferring a more even expenditure accross the sistem than all up front.

Smike

Although there is a nice jump from 180 to 2*135 (you'll notice better control and more sense of "ease" during those dynamic sections), it just sounds like more of the same. However, the jump from 82/Super to 52/Super is magical!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

quote:

---

Do you mean that there should be a dedicated spur for the power amp and a separate one for the power supplies?

---

I mean a single dedicated spur for the system (recommended by Naim) with the right number of wall mounted sockets. The separate ground appears to be important for the 135. I don't know if it is as important for the 180.
Going form 102 to 52 was certainly magical, Mike says it is also magical from 82 to 52 which should change the plan I think.

My suggestion is to try the mains upgrade first, if it is a definite improvement get the 52 for sure, if not you may want to consider the 135s instead (all second hand of course, you should be able to get both for a lot less than the price of a new 300 or a 252).

180 to 135's or 82/Supercap to 52 ? I went from a 72 to a 52 which was huge and 140 to 250 to 135's - both huge. My gut tells me that the 135's will give you the biggest bang for your bucks as they are two steps up the food chain whereas the 52 is only one and on paper 82/135 seems beter balanced than 52/180. Not sure about your speakers but if they are at all difficult to drive I would go for the 135's - they will give you much more grip and allow you to go louder easier. If you are happy with the brawn aspect of your system and want more finesse, go for the 52.

Minky,

I agree with you but Mark states he is after the best overall improvement. Source first suggests looking at the CD player and you can't get better than the CDS3.

This will give him improvements in all aspects of the music. Whereas upgrading the 82/2*hi will open up the window the music is being heard through and upgrading the power amp just improves the power and control of the music.

Its a tough one as neither of the upgrades is "wrong". All three upgrades will show big improvements.

Regards

NB

Used 52, if you choose not to just blow the budget on records.

Staggered that there is even the slightest debate here.

Best;

Mark

quote:

---

Originally posted by NB:
Source first suggests looking at the CD player...

---

I'm generally a "source first" advocate. I'm not a zealot, however, and I also subscribe to the "weakest link in the chain" approach. I believe you have to have a balance between the two. For example, anyone who suggests that a CDS2/XPS/Nait system is a "sensible" approach is off his rocker.

I've not heard the CDS3 yet myself, but I do have a CDS2. This is a great player, but it can be choked by the downstream components. The 82/Super is a good pre-amp, but it's rather exuberant and rough around the edges. In comparison, the 52 is refined, detailed, lyrical, exceedingly competent, and impressive in a subtley self-confident way.

Additionally, all source components, regardless of their stature, tend to be improved by a 52. For example, my lowly Creek T43 tuner sounded much better when I went from 82/Super to 52.

Finally, although I'm sure the CDS3 is an improvement over the CDS2, I think much of that benefit comes from the new XPS2 power supply. Therefore, you would have to upgrade the entire front end, at very great expense. Therefore, upgrading to a used 52 makes a whole lot of sense, for a whole lot of reasons.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

I don't disagree that the 52 is an exceptional preamp and it was certainly one of the most memorable upgrades that I have ever done, but I was under the impression that once an 82 had had it's evil way with a Supercap it wasn't far behind a 52 (I stand to be corrected, but that was what everyone was saying when the 82 first came out). On the other hand the 180 is miles behind the 250, which are miles behind 135's. "Nice jump" doesn't do this upgrade justice - it's a giant leap.

Still think the question should be "what is wrong with the system as it stands ?". Nothing ? Buy more music. Not enough bass, clout, speed, scale, grip, volume ? Get the 135's. Need more "magic" ? Get the 52. If it were me and I was driving e.g. SBL's I would go for the 135's but I can't comment on the Arc's.

I think everyone is right here.

Mark could not be critisised for upgrading to either the 52/super or the 135's. Both are going to make huge jumps in sound quality.

It will be interesting to see which way he will go.

BTW I had a 82/hi/180 and was considerring the 135's before the 52 as I thought the 82 lacked clout!

Regards

NB

quote:

---

Originally posted by Minky:
...I was under the impression that once an 82 had had it's evil way with a Supercap it wasn't far behind a 52 (I stand to be corrected, but that was what everyone was saying when the 82 first came out). On the other hand the 180 is miles behind the 250, which are miles behind 135's. "Nice jump" doesn't do this upgrade justice - it's a giant leap.

---

I'll reiterate that 2*135 is much better than 180, but it's "more of the same". It takes what it's fed, and amplifies it. It does this with more aplomb, a greater sense of headroom, much more snap and punch, etc. This is especially great if you feel your maximum volume is too low. In the end though, the upgrade is mostely about amplification (as you should expect).

In sharp contrast, the 52 does something to massage the signal (or perhaps it's better to say "handles it more deftly and delicately"). The result is that the signal output by the 52 sounds much more "special" (and I'll say again: MAGICAL) than the 82. You listen, and then sigh with pleasure. It's much more emotional than the aforementioned power-amp upgrade.

It's easly comparable to going from CDX or CDX/XPS to CDS2. Something almost indescribable happens to the music, and suddenly you feel connected much more than you did before. Compared to the power-amp upgrade, it's really a no brainer.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

250.

Job done.

Get yourself a 52, you will not be disappointed, its just makes everything sound better..

I've done the 82/Hicaps to 82/Super to 52/Super, and the 52/Super is magical, leaves the 82/Super way behind

Others - racks and mains, sort them if you haven't already, to many people (including myself) have/had very good systems poorly setup, and all they required was some TLC...

naheed. . .

I'm with Mark and Naheed - 52!! 180 and Arcs is a surprisingly good match.

Alex

quote:

---

I'll reiterate that 2*135 is much better than 180, but it's "more of the same". It takes what it's fed, and amplifies it. It does this with more aplomb, a greater sense of headroom, much more snap and punch, etc. This is especially great if you feel your maximum volume is too low.

---

Exactly what I was saying, except that "more of the same" could be used to trivialise the difference between an M3 and a 318i.

Anyway, based on the above and especially if the following are true :

quote:

---

180 and Arcs is a surprisingly good match.

---

and :

quote:

---

The result is that the signal output by the 52 sounds much more "special" (and I'll say again: MAGICAL) than the 82.

---

The 52 wins the day, but listen to both options if you can ..

Ok I’m back. Thanks to all who have contributed to this topic. It’s been an interesting read.
Early last year when I was back in London, I did have a quick demo of the 135’s in my equivalent setup over at Grahams. I thought they were excellent, but as some of you have suggested they seemed to bring “more of the same” (actually a lot more) to the sound in terms of the overall control of the speakers. The reason I didn’t get them was that I had already decided on the CDS2 from a CD2.
Now, in the dem the improvement from the 180 to the 135’s was not the same as going from my CD2 to deming CDX/XPS & CDS2. The CDS2 brought a hell of a lot more magic by comparison. The CDS2 also brought with it the kind of effect that the 135’s bring in terms of control. In my current setup the 180 seem's to handle the Shahinian’s quite well. So, if the general consensus is that a 52 will bring a similar kind of overall improvement that the CDS2 brought, then I think a 52 will be the one to come first. I just wish I had listened to a 52 before, because I don’t know where I’m going to hear one around here.

Mark.

[This message was edited by markcas on MONDAY 19 May 2003 at 08:17.]