XPS conundrum

Posted by: Jim Ashton on 22 June 2003

Hi folks,

Just spent most of the weekend experiencing the addition to my home system of a 2/h XPS (about 4 years old I believe) from my local dealer.

To put it bluntly I was underwhelmed.

Took it home last Thursday night and put it straight into the system to warm it up. I was otherwise busy for most of the evening but music was playing in the background some of the time (esp.on the Kans in the kitchen) and I did sit down to listen 'informally' to a few tracks every so often.

Initial impression: sounded great but not much different really from the 'bare' CDX.

On Saturday I spent hours listening carefully to rapid-fire A/B comparisons of XPS/no-XPS using favourite tracks. At times I heard (or thought I heard) various improvements, including a slightly more 'analogue' sound (reduced digital 'hardness'), a slightly tighter bass, complex multi-instrumental passages that made a little more sense musically etc. None of these differences was anything other than very subtle however, and at no stage could I point to anything really
significant or consistent. So basically my initial impression was never seriously challenged, and today the XPS has been duly returned to sender with a polite 'thanks but no thanks'.

I have to say that this outcome is quite a surprise. The asking price of NZ$4500 is not a small amount of money to me, but I was fully prepared at the outset to be unable to do without it once I'd heard it. I should also probably make it clear that I absolutely love the sound of my system as it stands - on both LP and CD - an opinion which dates in particular from the point when I went active.
I consider it to be significant that the XPS test has in no way diminished the truth of that statement. Finally, I honestly don't think that in a blindfold test I'd be able consistently to pick which was which between XPS & no-XPS.

So what's going on here? A number of alternatives have suggested themselves to me (and naturally they are by no means mutually exclusive), to wit:

1. I have cloth ears - actually I KNOW I have cloth ears and I've just been masquerading as a 'Hi-Fi buff' all these years whilst not having a clue what I was wittering on about - there I've said it. But my wife (whom I consider to have better ears than mine, but who admittedly wants to spend the dosh on something else) and 18-year-old music enthusiast of a son agreed with me...

2. XPS was stuffed in some way - dealer is investigating this one.

3. Some other part of my system is acting as a sufficiently limiting factor to prevent the XPS shining through - what could it be? The 15-year-old 72 (never serviced) ? The equally aged Ruarks that I recently dismembered to remove the passive crossovers? But then why does it sound so bloody good without the XPS? (add that last line to all points below)

4. My listening room is too small (it is actually, but not by much), I need better stands (I use a couple of late-80's Sound Organisation towers), I need to upgrade the speaker cable (A4), I need a better mains power source (it's a dedicated 6mm spur from the fuseboard that I installed myself, with a box on the end sporting 8 UK-style 15 amp round-pin gold-plated sockets and a couple of recently added NZ-type sockets, all wired up inside like a mini-ring main) etc.

5. It's the type of music I listen to - typically the sort of modern jazz that makes some people scream and shout. But I also like coutry, folk, rock ... just no classical, OK?

6. I have simply found my natural resting place on the ladder and never need to worry about upgrading ever again (which is WHY it sounds so bloody good...)

Would the esteemed and most erudite members of this distinguished forum perchance have any other suggestions?

Ta
Jim

Posted on: 22 June 2003 by redeye

Jim

I have a CDX, 102 etc. Two friends with similar systems have XPSed themselves in the last few months. Both came to the same conclusion, namely do the pre amp first.

If you're dead chuffed with what you're hearing then my advice to you is stay where you are.

On the other hand Shore have a nice shiny 82 looking for a home

redeye

Posted on: 22 June 2003 by Steve Toy

My limited in-dealer-demo-room experiences have pointed to the CDX/102 -> 82 upgrade as being bigger than the CDX/102 -> XPS upgrade.

Having got the 82 in the system, the XPS then makes a big leap as it's not being strangled by the 102.

Simple really!

Moreover, I recently heard a CDX2/202/200/Ruark Prologue Twos system, and adding the XPS2 made only a subtle difference in comparison with swapping Naca5 for Townsend Isolda cable.

I didn't get chance to hear what a 282 pre would do...

Source-first is great, but I consider a decent active pre as being part of the source.

Regards,

Steve.

Posted on: 22 June 2003 by plynnplynn

XPS added to CDX/82 does not make really significant difference in my experience. Saw it as necessary route to CDSII.

Posted on: 22 June 2003 by prowla

Perhaps a silly question, but what's your mains supply/plugboard/cables like?
I've been experimenting recently and built a distribution block and am looking at the power cables to each item too. I'm pretty much astounded at the difference they've made.
(I've got CDX/82+2HiCap/250, and it sounds rather good.)

Posted on: 22 June 2003 by Jay

Hi Jim

There's some great advice on this thread and I'm inclined to agree. Good as your 72 is I don't think it's letting the XPS shine through.

I picked up an XPS to go with my CDX just over a year ago. With the 102/Hi it was clearly better, but $4k+ better? Maybe, maybe not, very subjective and personal (let's not go there). Beggers can't be choosers sometimes in the Shakey Isles so I went for it at the time. Big dividends when I picked up my 82, it's a whole new ball game!

If I had my time again and an XPS and 82 were on offer, I'd take the 82 first. If there's one at Shore and you have a hole burning in your back pocket - give it a try.

Otherwise - keep your system - you seem happy with it!

Jay

Yeah...well it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by plynnplynn

quote:
Originally posted by Jay:

If I had my time again and an XPS and 82 were on offer, I'd take the 82 first. If there's one at Shore and you have a hole burning in your back pocket - give it a try.

I would agree to some extent with this. My experience would tend to suggest that the CDX is such a great CD player on its own that more added value for your money would come from an 82 rather than an XPS. I would be interested in what some of the Naim staff have to say about the 'added value' from the XPS on a CDX. I have a CDSII now and so it is historical from my perspective but neverthless interesting. To be honest after I bought the XPS for my CDX I didn't give it much time to settle down before I bought a CDSII and so perhaps I shouldn't comment.

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by plynnplynn

quote:
Originally posted by Jim Ashton:
1. I have cloth ears ...
2. XPS was stuffed in some way..
3. Some other part of my system is acting as a sufficiently limiting factor .....But then why does it sound so bloody good without the XPS?
4. My listening room is too small ... I need to upgrade the speaker cable (A4)....I need a better mains power source (it's a dedicated 6mm spur from the fuseboard ...
5. It's the type of music I listen to - typically the sort of modern jazz that makes some people scream and shout. But I also like coutry, folk, rock ... just no classical, OK?
6. I have simply found my natural resting place on the ladder....

Jim
In answer to your points I make the following comments:

1. I have cloth ears ... I will discount this one.

2. XPS was stuffed in some way.... Always a possibility but unlikely.

3. Some other part of my system is acting as a sufficiently limiting factor .....But then why does it sound so bloody good without the XPS? ....Unlikely to be the issue because as you say it was OK before adding the XPS and it is not much different now.

4. My listening room is too small ... I need to upgrade the speaker cable (A4).... But this is not an explanation of lack of improvement now.
I need a better mains power source (it's a dedicated 6mm spur from the fuseboard ... This is not an explanation of lack of improvement since adding XPS.

5. It's the type of music I listen to ..... But this is not an explanation of lack of improvement now.

6. I have simply found my natural resting place on the ladder....Not sure I know what you mean and so I discount this point.

In response to John's points I feel that I would like to make the following comments:

1 From your overall description I would be disinclined to change any of your electronics. You seem like you're very happy with the sound your system produces, so why bother changing? ......Have to have some measure of agreement with this but it is reasonable to expect improvement when you spend the sort of money you have just spent.

2 I think if you want to get even better sound, you should invest in either or both of these two areas: supports and cables. It is then a case of maximising what you have already got, which you are eminently happy with..... But you should be getting improvement now without further expense. What is suggested here should give even further improvement.

3 As Steven has implied, I would be strongly tempted to audition some (professionally terminated) Townshend Isolda speaker cable in place of your A4.... I would suggest that this is precisely what you shouldn't do now as you are really into the unknown then unless it is NACA5 and that is what Naim recommends.

4 Otherwise you might want to investigate superior supports for your equipment .....That doesn't give a solution to your existing peoblem although alternative supports for the XPS might improve the performance of the XPS.

5 And perhaps, as annoying as it would be, maybe you should send some of your older equipment into Naim for servicing? It may still sound great, but because the sonic degradation is so gradual, it may be a case of "you-don't-know-what-you're-missing-until-you've-heard-the-difference" phenomenon.... This could well be true but why are you getting so little advantage from the XPS is the question and that has not yet been answered.

Terry

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by anthonyc

Jim,

I want to recount my experience with this upgrade as I had a similar result to you. I had CDX/102/NAPSC/180 which was my first Naim system and which I loved, it sounded great to me. The dealer had demoed me the XPS when I bought this and unfortunately I could not get the improvement this gave out of my head. So I then got a secondhand XPS, plugged it in and thought everything sounded worse - subdued, dull and verging on muffled in fact. I have my system on lousy supports but I suspected the 102 as a bottleneck. So off I went to find a secondhand hicap, which I bought and installed and WOW, it was a real revelation. Nothing could have prepared me for the improvement this made - now it was everything the system had been before but with so much more detail and dynamics and just more of everything - one of those truly fundamental improvements that cannot be disputed.

I am sure my poor furniture supports are inhibiting the system to some extent, being as the CDX/XPS sounded great at the dealers through 102/NAPSC/180 but the hicap compensated in such a way that it left me feeling very happy with the XPS upgrade (eventually).

I since have upgraded to 82 and supercap (I did this one stage at a time; one hicap to 2 hicaps to supercap) and only once I got to 2 hicaps with the 82 was I convinced that my system was better than the 102/ hicap system. I think the 102/hicap/napsc/180 did what it did to perfection. The 82 I think has a wider bandwidth (is trying to do more) which exposed my poor set-up issues more clearly than the 102.

I would hope that some of my experience may be of relevance to your system, given the 72 is supposed to be similar to the 102 (I'm not trying to start anything contraversial by saying that!).

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by Phil Barry

Some thoughts:

1) NACA5 is an immense revelation compared to A4; the A4 may very well be the bottleneck. ordinarily I wouldn't mess with cables, but....

2) you write as if you've listened for hifi artifacts. Some very important changes cannot be discerned immediately, and perhaps longer term listening is the way you will hear the importance of the XPS.

3) how old are your hicaps, amps? when were they last serviced? are you sure the electronics are working properly?

4) not hearing a good VFM improvement from the XPS does have advantages....

Regards.

Phil

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by greeny

I can't comment directly on your preamp/CDX combination but having just changed the XPS for the XPS2 I can say the following:

When I initially added the XPS (82/hi) there was a worthwhile improvement in performance. This I lived with for the last 2 years. I recently removed the XPS whilst awaiting the XPS2 (preamp now 82/SC), well the difference was dramatic, having become accustomed to the XPS everything now sounded flat and lifeless, the difference was huge.

I now have added the XPS2 and am happy again

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by bjorne

Plynnplynn. I don't get it. In the thread DVD Audio (It really is in the source) you got upset with me and mad max when we argue that the differences between cheaper and more expensive cdplayers are not always very big and that sometimes it might be worth upgrading the preamp before the cdplayer (as many have said on this forum lately). Now you say that more value might come from buying an 82 before an XPS. I don't follow your logic. Maybe I misunderstood you in the other thread.

Jim, maybe point 6 in your post is the correct one. There are actually people,believe it or not

, that are happy with their sistems and don't feel the need to keep on upgrading!!! Cheaper things like spur(s) and naca5 however does'nt hurt your wallet. The 72 would probably thank you if it gets a service.

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by plynnplynn

quote:
Originally posted by bjorne:
Plynnplynn. I don't get it. In the thread DVD Audio (It really is in the source) you got upset with me and mad max when we argue that the differences between cheaper and more expensive cdplayers are not always very big and that sometimes it might be worth upgrading the preamp before the cdplayer (as many have said on this forum lately). Now you say that more value might come from buying an 82 before an XPS. I don't follow your logic. Maybe I misunderstood you in the other thread.

If I got upset with you then I should be told that I am a naughty boy. I'm sorry also that I can't be bothered to re-read the other thread to find out what I did say. My memory of the discussion however is that £500 CDPs were being compared to £3000 CDs and statements were being made about them not being significantly different.

The CDX and CDX/XPS debate and 82 before XPS is I realise counter to the source first approach but my experience of these components was so favourable when I upgraded to them that my response reflects that experience even if it does deviates from the normal source first approach.

Going back to the earlier thread and CDPs there is no way however that I would agree that am 82 should come before a CDX if the pre-amp was for example a 72 or even a 32.5 and the current CDP is a CD3.5. The source first argument wins there.

I think the non-standard response from me is a result of my belief that the naked CDX is such an excellent CDP and that the XPS doen't make as much difference as one might expect. (again I have to say I didn't let my XPS settle down for long and so it 'tamed' the CDX only a little).

Apologies if I was rude or discourteous in the earlier thread. I'm not usually like that.

Terry

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by NB

Quote:-

(of course the answer to the above Q is that, every time a Kiwi posts - some loser like me always asks why it is that so few Kiwis post and thereby alienates said Kiwi )

Important Disclaimer: All above said in light hearted jest - with Smiley faces inserted to avoid all doubt or possible implication of sarcasm, which was not intended
______________________________________________________________

Wouldn't even think it was sarcastic in any way Ritchie

The forum always welcomes people from any walk in life here, glad you stayed on the forum. Everyone opinion is important.

Good luck in the rugby mate,

Regards

NB

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by steve watts

I had a really long session yesterday (Sunday) and finally removed any doubts that I have had over the last three months after moving from 3.5/Hi to CDX and then CDX/XPS.

Track 3 on Massive Attacks - 100th Window seemed as though it was in surround sound. A big wall of music that just filled the room.

This never happened when I had the 3.5/Hi.

It took a number of weeks for me to fully appreciate the difference though and there are a number of people that had to reassure me through this period.This may be the case here - the XPS needs time to warm up plus a readjustment to what it brings.

I would not sell mine now.

Glastonbury and an 82 next.

Steve

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by Martin Payne

I vividly remember when J.N. put an XPS on his CDX.

He was using 82/Super/2x135/SBLs - I think on SO tables at the time.

I would put this as one of the biggest "bloody hell" type upgrades that I have heard in a long time - reminiscent of the upgrade from passive to active on my Isobariks. That big!

I suspect the bare CDX just wasn't up to the job with the rest of the system. I find it hard to believe that those differences wouldn't shine through on a 72-based system. Maybe a service is badly needed?

I note that he is now looking to upgrade to XPS2 once he has sold his current PS. Apparently it is even better - at least he reckons it is when heard through a friends' 552/500/NBLs.

cheers, Martin

E-mail:- MartinPayne at Dial.Pipex.com

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by bjorne

quote:
Originally posted by plynnplynn:

If I got upset with you then I should be told that I am a naughty boy.

Apologies if I was rude or discourteous in the earlier thread. I'm not usually like that.

Terry

Hi Terry. I believe there is some språkförbistring(swedish word

) going on here.
Meaning that some subtleties in the language are easy to miss. You were neither rude nor discorteus. I just got the impression that you were a "source first" believer claiming that a CDplayer upgrade were always preferable to a preamp upgrade in the other thread and here saying otherwise.

regards Bjorne

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by trickytree

Hi Jim.

Many years ago in my digital days I had a Marantz CD94 to which I blindly added a CDA94 converter, ( Audiophools thread anyone

).
To cut a long, boring and expensive story short I eventually went back to the CD94 on its own. It somehow seemd more natural that way.
Moral; more boxs dont mean more pleasure

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by Rasher

Don't do it - just don't. If you do, you may end up "upgrading" every item in your system looking for an improvement that you never really needed, and probably it won't satisfy as much as your existing system. Once you begin, there is a need to find the sonic improvement to justify the cost, and you raise the stakes with every purchase.
Chose option 6.
If you do, you are a better man than I.

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by herm

quote:
Originally posted by J. A. Toon:
As Steven has implied, I would be strongly tempted to audition some (professionally terminated) Townshend Isolda speaker cable in place of your A4. Apparently it is supposed to be quite special with Naim systems!

What does apparently mean in this context? You haven't heard it yourself, but you go by hearsay? That's not what 'let your ears be the judge' means. Let's not recommend things we don't have actual experience with.

Herman

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by plynnplynn

quote:
Let's not recommend things we don't have actual experience with.
Herman

Sounds like a good idea

Posted on: 23 June 2003 by Jim Ashton

Hi folks

Many thanks for all the feedback and points raised - it's quite a lot to take on board. Haven't really got time to do you all justice but here goes anyway...

Redeye - naturally I know about that 82 and have been tempted to audition (it's not 5 minutes walk from where I'm sitting right now!). Trouble is, it's pricier even than the XPS which was itself always going to be a streeeeeetch. Plus I'd then be wanting the SC (or at least another HiCap) which it seems is needed to do it justice.

Ritchie T - the opportunity issue is really what started me off. As several people have noted, and in fact I have already stated, I'm very happy with the sound I have now. But like anyone else I'm interested to know if I can do better within my budget, and the current availability of 2/h last-generation Naim kit is very tempting given that it won't last long in a tiny market like NZ.

John at Shore HiFi reckons that the 72 should easily allow the benefits of an XPS to be heard - he actually stated that it should be audible through a Nait. Thank you Plynnplynn for resolutely dismissing all the possible 'explanations' mooted (mine included) and concluding that the issue is not resolved.

Several people have suggested that my older Naims might need a service - well all of the power amps and the older HiCap have been re-capped in the last 12 months (plus the Ruarks have had much-needed maintenance work). The other Hi is about 4 years old and came to me as part of going active. On the other hand I was not aware that Naim pre-amps could benefit from a service - I'm not sure that NA Distributors offer one (?)

Steve Watts - the argument that it takes time to readjust to the improvement the XPS brings is seductive but I'm not sure I buy it. It seems more likely to me that the synergistic effect of several upgrades (eg XPS/82/SC) is such that the result is very much better than would be predicted on the basis of a single new box on its own. The XPS I listened to is 2/h which surely means that no run-in time is required and it should've been performing optimally within a few hours of being powered up.

Rasher - true words indeed - thanks! Question is - can I live up to them? It WAS difficult taking the XPS back, even though it apparently didn't improve the sound, because it certainly improved the look of my Christmas tree! However in the interests of marital harmony (if for no other reason) I do have to be able to do better than that.

Enough for now - thanks again everyone - I'll do nothing in a hurry.

Ciao
Jim

Posted on: 24 June 2003 by Stevo

Jim,

Even if it's s/h it could still take a good month to fully warm up. Haven't had an XPS myself, but that's my experience of both of my Hicaps, the NAP250, etc, etc.

When things are great out of the box, this is no bad thing, as there's always surprises down the line. Obviously, in your case, this characteristic is not so good!

Stephen.

Posted on: 24 June 2003 by Rico

quote:
On Saturday I spent hours listening carefully to rapid-fire A/B comparisons of XPS/no-XPS using favourite tracks.

I suspect thats one of problems right there. Plug in the XPS to the mains, connect your CDX, unplug the CDX mains. Listen for a few days. Then disconnect the XPS and have a listen. If you can't tell, there's something wrong. You will get nowhere doing quick A-B's between the two.

I've demmed the CDX/XPS through a 72 and heard huge differences - John's right.

Good luck in your search.

Oh, and as to "do your pre first" I don't agree. Esp where one can clearly enjoy the benefits of a strong source through a preamp as good as the 72.

best

Rico - SM/Mullet Audio

Posted on: 24 June 2003 by Jay

quote:
Oh, and as to "do your pre first" I don't agree. Esp where one can clearly enjoy the benefits of a strong source through a preamp as good as the 72.

That may be so but what about getting the best out of that LP12 that Jim has

Jay

Yeah...well it seemed like a good idea at the time.

Posted on: 24 June 2003 by Thomas K

quote:
You will get nowhere doing quick A-B's between the two.

Seconded. Especially with sources, an A/B will not give you the full picture (except, perhaps, for people who have a lot of experience with different sources).

I recently plugged my el cheapo DVD player in place of my CDS2 -- it didn't sound bad at all, but try living with it for a few days (did that some months ago) and you'll quickly appreciate what a better source does.

Thomas