Unlock those locking DIN plugs - it's official !

Posted by: Henry Cosker on 26 September 2001

I see in this Autumn's Naim News that Technical Director Roy George finds a "small but noticeable improvement" if the locking rings on Naim DIN plugs are left undone.

Could this also apply to the much larger and heavier collars that lock the Burndy cables in place? It seems to me that you need to lock the Burndy when you first connect it, because the action draws the plug into the socket. But once connected the collar can be loosened without the plug being drawn out of the socket.

I'm considering trying it, but does anyone think this is inadvisable?

Posted on: 29 September 2001 by Alex S.

Have you tried the Linn Silver with a Naim CDP?

I don't exactly know but I think the interconnect I'm refering to and now use is only available with a CD12. Perhaps you could verify whether the Ikemi interconnect is the same.

Alex

Posted on: 29 September 2001 by BrianD

quote:
The 102 can be a bit harsh at the top end for my tastes

The numbers 72 and 32.5 spring to mind.

Brian

Posted on: 29 September 2001 by Steve Toy

The interconnect I tried is indeed the one that comes with the CD12. It is also on sale for around 200 pounds.
The only thing that puts me off the Chord Anthems is the price, although I think I should admit that they are worth it.
Another option is the Nordost Red Dawn, but that is even more expensive. Although I haven't tried it in my system at home, it is more detailed than the Anthem, but at the expense of tonal neutrality being a little bright.
I would prefer to limit myself to the brands that offer DIN/RCA conections.
For the record, does anyone know of any others, apart from Nordost and Chord Company?

It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve

Posted on: 29 September 2001 by Steve Toy

A Densen versus Naim war is about to break out!
I am in need of assistance...

Their amps both do PR&T and tune. They are both very good.
The Densen CD player is crap, IMHO, and is not good value for money compared to Naim.
Naim CD players are anything but crap. IMHO, they are the best against all their competition at a given price.
The Densen amps are perhaps better value for money, IMHO - until you have to splash out on interconnects to make them sing.
They are not upgradable with off-board power supplies.
When you order some Naim gear you get it within days...
When you order Densen gear, don't bother. Just walk out with the dem model because A, you know that that one actually works, and B, it will then be your dealer who has to wait months for one, and not you!
Naim has a forum.
Densen sometimes has a website.
Naim is a UK company.
Densen doesn't even have anyone working for them in the UK.
Naim tells you about forthcoming products in a magazine delivered to your door. (Although if you own amps by Densen, you are one of the last to receive it! )
Densen tells you about forthcoming products on its sometimes-available website, which are for ever forthcoming, but never arrive...
As you can see, I really like Densen - much better than Naim!

It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve

[This message was edited by Steven Toy on SUNDAY 30 September 2001 at 05:24.]

Posted on: 29 September 2001 by Rico

quote:
ps. If anyone quibbles when you try to flog your old leads just tell them they are certified as better sounding and charge extra for having done the work.

I'll drink to that.

I have not yet heard a Linn interconnect that does anything towards improving music.

Rico - SM/Mullet Audio

Posted on: 30 September 2001 by Alex S.

Rico

quote:
I have not yet heard a Linn interconnect that does anything towards improving music.

Then I invite you to come and listen to mine.

Steven

quote:
It is also on sale for around 200 pounds.

£120 per metre where I got mine with Din to Din plugs complete with rings for me to saw off. I don't think they tell Linn so I'd better not say where. I bought half a metre for £100.

Alex

Posted on: 30 September 2001 by BrianD

quote:
Surely you're not suggesting the 32.5 and 72 are smoother than the 102

I seem to make enough *definite* and *controversial* posts. I didn't think I'd be questioned on this one. confused

I made the comment purely on the basis of....

quote:
The 102 can be a bit harsh at the top end for my tastes.

I see the *for my tastes* as a key point. Steven also said "an 82 would be nice". I assume he isn't in a position to afford one right now otherwise he'd have bought one. In my experience the 72 and 32.5 are anything but harsh so I posted to that effect. If someone isn't 100% happy with a 102, hasn't raised the cash yet for an 82, why not look at a 72/32.5 until they can? That's all I meant. In fact, should someone not be happy with a 102, be unable to afford an 82, what else can they buy from Naim? I almost didn't post because I thought it was so obvious!

The relative merits of the 102 v the 72/32.5 has been discussed many times by lots of people on the forum. I haven't done extensive comparisons of these preamps so I'm not in a position to claim I *know* (IMO) which I *prefer*. Therefore, no, I'm not claiming that a 72/32.5 is smoother than a 102. I just know that a 72/32.5 is not harsh *for my tastes*.

Does that clear that one up?

Brian

Posted on: 30 September 2001 by garyi

Unlocked um, sounded exactly the same, locked um back up.

Bye.

Posted on: 30 September 2001 by Alex S.

Nope

Posted on: 30 September 2001 by Martin Payne

quote:
Originally posted by Allan Probin:
Just a suggestion, given what its going to cost you to upgrade to those Chord interconnects, wouldn't it be worthwhile also investigating ... changing the CD5/Flatcap/Denson for CDX/102/180 etc. etc.
Not wanting to start a Denson vs Naim war here. Its just that the kind of money you are thinking of spending on interconnects would go a substantial way to getting some great Naim boxes that would just love standard Naim interconnects.

My experience here echoes Allan's.

I used to own a CD2, which certainly preferred a CableTalk cable over the standard item.

I didn't think to question this when I went over to a CDX, but later found that the standard lilac one was a lot better.

The softness, warmth and masking of frequency extremes which worked with the lesser kit was very counter-productive with the CDX.

I would certainly try to demo putting the funds into a CDX with standard i/c instead.

Source first.

cheers, Martin

Posted on: 30 September 2001 by dave simpson

quote:
I tried it ages ago and the difference is so small it's not worth worrying about.

I'm finding the effect somewhat "stand dependent". In an all Mana'd rig "DIN centering" is virtually inaudible or rather "inconsequential". In an all AF/BASE rig it's quite audible. A hybrid rig with a Fraim under the source and pre-amp and AF/BASE supporting the pwrsups/pwramps exhibits the effect easily also. Curious as to the output of an all Fraim'd rig...and not just with din centering

regards,
dave

Posted on: 30 September 2001 by Mark Dunn

Hi all:

All of my interconnects are suspended and not just 'lying free'. The difference between having the the plug collars locked, loose or removed completely (slid back along the cable) is quite obvious.

It seems self-evident that the more carefully a system is set up, the easier it is to hear relatively small differences.

Best Regards,
Mark Dunnq

Posted on: 30 September 2001 by Steve Toy

quote:
I would certainly try to demo putting the funds into a CDX with the standard i/c instead.

I already have, at my dealer's, and whilst the standard wire sounds less like a cats' chorus

with the CDX through the Densen amps than the CD5, a better interconnect through Densen still pays dividends - albeit slighly smaller ones with the better source.

It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve

Posted on: 30 September 2001 by BrianD

quote:
Clearly you did mean that, in your experience, the 32.5 and 72 have a smoother top end than the 102.

No, I'm not saying that at all. What I said was this...

1. In my experience I would never consider a 72 or 32.5 to be in any way harsh.
2. I have not had enough experience of the 102 to make a judgement of how it compares with the 72/32.5.
3. I have read a lot of discussion on the forum in which some people have commented that the 102 has a tendencey to sounding *slightly* harsh. I'll add that this is usually put down to the lack of a NAPSC.
4. Based on others comments about the 102 and my own experience of the 72/32.5, I suggested that he try a 72 or 32.5 because Steven can't yet afford an 82.

So, I'm not suggesting that in my experience the 72/32.5 are smoother than a 102. Based on paragraphs 1 and 3 above, I offered my opinion that the 72/32.5 are worth a listen.

quote:
I can see now that you might have taken my words as a criticism of your perception. I'm sorry if you got this impression - it was certainly not intended

I clearly have a reputation now for being a bit 'jumpy'. But, I can assure you, I don't take your post as a criticism. Rather, that my first post didn't have any amplifying comments as to why I was suggesting 72/32.5. My reply was merely an attempt to clarify my position. I obviously failed to do that and probably still have.

Brian

Posted on: 01 October 2001 by Steve Toy

What you say makes perfect sense to me. Yes, if I could afford it, and I already had the CDX (not yet) I would get an 82/250.
When I heard the 102 and it sounded harsh:-
A) The Napsc was on,
B) It was only in the context of the 250 power amp, which was too good or it and showed it up, IMHO. The 102/Napsc/140, for example, sounded just fine.

It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve

Posted on: 01 October 2001 by Dev B

quote:
I clearly have a reputation now for being a bit 'jumpy'

Brian,

Stop being so jummpy

regards,

Dev (who doesn't think you are jumpy)

Posted on: 01 October 2001 by Tony L

quote:
BTW, I am experimenting with these interconnects between my CD5 and my Densen pre - which hates the bog-standard Naim interconnect!

I assume you had to re-terminate the Naim cable as it is DIN to DIN and your Densen is RCA - It is now not a bog-standard Naim interconnect!

In your situation the stuff to hunt down is probably Naim Aro, though it does take some hunting these days. Excellent stuff though. I have personally compared Aro against far too many cables, some costing well upwards of 250 quid (a friend is a round earth dealer), and nothing I have heard touches it. The standard Naim 5pin to 5pin interconnect that comes with the CD players is probably as good, though I have not directly compared it. It certainly works.

Cables (like everything else) should be tune demed. Don't be taken in by "detail" air, space etc, many exaggerate theses areas at the expense of far more important things. Many cables are IMHO really guilty of time-smearing, i.e. the hi-hats sound strangely detached from the bass drum timing wise, and some screw up the tune, the fun and groove dies. Silver cables seem to be the worst in this respect.

Tony.

Posted on: 01 October 2001 by BrianD

Eh! Wot! Who rattled your cage??

Just joking.

Thanks

Brian

Posted on: 01 October 2001 by Steve Toy

I don't tend to listen for air and space. I want the hi-hats to time with the bass drum as much as you do. I find that the Chord Anthems do this anyway. (The Chord Chrysalis is very close to the Naim wire, apparently.) Densens are just amps that thrive on expensive (flat earth) interconnects, so I'll pursue that route, as it seems to be working.
I won't accept harshness/distortion in the upper frequencies, which sounds nasty, as well as destroying any semblance of focus.

It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve

Posted on: 01 October 2001 by Phil Barry

I haven't followed this thread in any detail, but I must present a counter-opinion to Steven' claim that the 250 is too good for a 102.

I found a 72/hi/250 system to be stunningly good during 1998-1999, long after it was Naim's top of line.

Steven didn't like a 102/napsc/hicap/250. I think most Naim fans would. If you're buying in the right price range, you owe it to yourself to listen to a 102/napsc/hi/250. You may agree with Steven; you may not.

Regards.

Phil

Posted on: 01 October 2001 by dave simpson

Steve,

Do you recall the source used when you did the 102 dem ? Was a napsc used? Curious... wondering if the problem might have been a source or set-up issue.

I purchased the 102 upon its release to replace my 72 in a 72/hc/250 rig. Still have the 102.

Even with out a napsc I wouldn't describe the 102 as "harsh" unless a 52 was compared (actually , I'd change the description to "wobbly" with the 52 in the equation

Hmmm... I wonder if it could have been a case of the 72 rolling off the top-end (and low end) compared to the 102?

regards,

dave

[This message was edited by dave simpson on TUESDAY 02 October 2001 at 03:51.]

Posted on: 01 October 2001 by Steve Toy

The results I obtained outlined above were using QS Reference supports and Credos. As it was an all-Naim system, it made sense to use Naim interconnects and NACA5 - which I like anyway.
The QS seems to highlight imbalances even more.
I also learnt something about Credos: they often sound thin and harsh, and a certain comic of a hi-fi magazine said as much last year.
However, Credos are just very honest speakers, and they only show up harshness/thinness further upstream.
I heard the Credos sound truly wonderful - sweet, smooth, and yet dynamic, but only when the hierarchy of the electronics was absolutely correct:
The CD5/FC2/112/150 sounded good.
The CDX/82/250 sounded much better.
The CDX 102/Napsc/250 sounded wrong, IMHO.
This is how I heard it using the equpment cited above, in my dealer's demo room.

It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve

Posted on: 01 October 2001 by dave simpson

Hi Steve,

Against the 82, I'm sure a 102 could sound a little screechy

I know what you mean regarding the Credos. I've found the "thin ,harsh treble and one note phasey bass" characteristic to be a by-product of spike wobble. Unfortunately, people don't take the care with setting up the Intro/Credo that's given to more expensive or "serious" speakers (the leaf suspension and low mass combo doesn't help when installing them on thick carpet either).

Like dead musicians and IBLs , let the Credo/Intro pass into Eternity and we'll see if they get the last laugh

Posted on: 01 October 2001 by Steve Toy

I hope you are refering to the speaker setup and not those great *wobbly* stands that I like!

The floor surface of my dealer's demo room is a bit *lunar* in its relief and topography, but with judicious levelling via spike adjustments, we/I were able to produce some jaw-dropping sounds from that otherwise great listening place of his...
If I was not too careful with the securement of the spikes on his floor, or cable dressing - nothing was allowed to touch walls or each other in this respect(!) - he was soon checking the above out himself - with a big frown if they weren't absolutely bloody perfect!

He affords the same level of fastidiousness to All of his demo setups in order to get the very best from equipment that is assembled in his room, from truly budget right up to top-flight Naim stuff, including all the bloody speakers he's got...
I even undertook a hair-splitting dem, at his behest, on different speaker stands, using an array of standmounted speakers.
The differing results were astounding...
Just the stands alone, using the same pair of speakers, did a stark contrast between flat earth, and round earth approaches. Me? I leaned towards flat earth - it just made more musical sense.

There were also far too many variables, although each was considered in turn...

Each combination was testimony to the principle of *suck it and see*!
A good dealer is a good dealer, and that is the bottom line!

He doesn't pay me to do all this, we both just enjoy the process, and I wouldn't want it any other way!

It's always a nice day for it, have a good one
Steve

[This message was edited by Steven Toy on TUESDAY 02 October 2001 at 14:35.]

Posted on: 01 October 2001 by BrianD

Is that the most

ever used in
a single post?

Brian