NAC282 a dissapointment !!!

Hi Fled
I am also with you. Personally, I have not heard a good reason to upgrade to the lastest stuff and am an Olive fan through and through. You can now get some really fantastic stuff at good prices so stick with Olive!
I have an 82 and love it.
Happy listening
Raphael

If you're not getting more "detail" from the 282, something is very wrong.

How long have you given the 282? Dramatic changes in sound presentation can take a while to get used to. I upgraded from the 72 to the 282 and sort of missed the "blooming" around the bass. However, this blooming is a false addition to the recording and is wrong. The 72 gave a surreal feel to the sound, but I think if anything lacks with your system after adding a 282, you should look to another component to blaim.
Try a demo with the 282 through different speakers or with a better front end.

quote:

---

it seemed to miss off the last half of the note

---

You mean it is playing the note closer to how it was recorded and not adding any bloom to it.

I do not know the Olive range since I came late to Naim so this is nothing more than an opinion based on my experience with the "new" kit.

I started with a 112/Hi/150 and a non-naim CDP. I now have a 282/2xHi/250 with a CDX2 and am currently able to compare the two sets of kit.

My attitude is in line with Count.d. I love the 282 and hear a lot more quality in the sound of my system.

For info the transition was 1) add CDX2 to 112/150 then 2) substitute 282 for 112 still into 150 and finally replace 150 with 250. So I heard the benefits of the 282 without the 250 and after hearing the CDX2 into the 112 which means I am judging it without any clouding due to swapping everything at once.

Compared to the 112 the 282 creates a stronger sound stage, the background is blacker and deeper, the bass line is meatier but better in control and the individual notes are not atall smeared together which is especially noticeable on fast music. Putting together the descriptions of Olive kit appearing on the forum over time suggests to me it's sound is harder and more in the face than the new series (I am not saying the olive sound is poor, just trying to describe the difference) and that the new reference series has a more rounded sound but retains the drive and attack in a slightly more laid back way. This may explain why this discussion has opposite opinions about the 282.

Judged in context I believe the 282 is avery good pre-amp.

GEOFFP

Fled, try a demo of CD5/NAC282/New NAP250 (or even CDX2/NAC282/New NAP250) to fully appreciate what the 282 does to the system.

I'm not sure how much the old 250 differs from the new in real terms, but I found that when the 282 was partnered with a lower powered Power Amp (NAP200), it sounded a little too polite, refined and smooth. However, the NAP250.2 brought it to life and added far more weight, power and in-your-face vitality & bite.

My suggestion is to at least give these combos a go before committing yourself to sticking with Olive. However, how new 282/250 compares with Olive 52/250 is something I cannot answer.

Geoff.
You have summed this up well. I am not saying that the 282 is a bad pre amp ! far from it, it has a smooth pleasant sound and is certainly a NAIM, but I belive the aim to smooth out the percieved hardness in the olive series and perhaps target a larger customer base ! has led to a more relaxed sound which has also diminished the drive and attack most olive series folks will recognise and miss if it wasnt there in abundance. I for sure do even when camparing a clearly inferior pre as my current 102.
PHi

John.
Thats what I was expecting an absolute jaw dropping expierence for gods sake its a £2750 pre amp !! it should clearly knock spots off my lowly 102 and although better in some respects it did not do half as much as my recent upgrade to a 250 from a 180.
As for giving it time for my ears to be come used to the "new" sound is absolute crap.
Phil

fled,

I've not heard a comparison of the 82 with the 282. However, a lot of your complaints sound similar to the issues I had with my 82, after upgrading from a 72. There were lots of areas where the 82 murdered the 72, but to me the 82 always sounded recessed with the sonic picture being slightly disjointed, and quite frankly a bit dull to listen to. I was never really happy with my system until I got the 52.

David

fled,

cannot comment on 282 compared to 102. But can commend on 52 to 552. I was a long term user of 52 and really know what I'm talking about. Changed nothing else then pre.

Right out of the box the 552 was a huge improvement over the 52 and worth every penny.

After demoing the 552 I had to go back to the 52 because it needed some days for delivery. Even my girlfriend stated there is no way to go back to the 52! The difference was to huge.

Now after 3 weeks my system really sounds that good.

If you want read my comments on the other forum

Hermann

But I would comment that even my modest upgrade to a 62/140 and then HICAP were not all that pleasant without good mains supply. Maybe there is something holding the preamp back. Forget maybe most certainly this is the problem. I would say to work mains and on source because the preamp is already highly capable.

FWIW my gear is sounding so good now that it's hard to imagine it get's better. I added some home made power cables that regretably made a huge difference to the areas of sound that were not quite right and now I have to make thtem for my whole system. I can't lie to my ears better is better.


Ken

“cannot comment on 282 compared to 102. But can commend on 52 to 552.”

OK, it sounds like this: “I can not comment Grinzing because I’ve never visited this village but I can comment Vienna, Kärtner Strasse.”

A new 552 to an olive (used) 52 is somewhere 4-5 to 1.

graphoman

I think count.d’s remark:
(However, this blooming is a false addition to the recording and is wrong. The 72 gave a surreal feel to the sound)

as well as the one of alexgerrard:
(If you have the cash to buy a new 282, you would also have almost enough for an olive 52. Which is a fantastic thing, and WAYYYYYYYYY better than a 282.)

both educational, for me, at least. They help me to decide which way to go from my 72 if I’ll have the means.

graphoman

graphoman,

it was meant to show that there is a big difference rather than tell him to buy a 552.

Hermann

quote:

---

You're effectively suggesting he should buy a component he doesn't like (in the context of his system -- which is pretty decent), then go on some mad "upgrade trail" where he then systematically replaces the rest of his system

---

Like I've already stated, I'm not suggesting he replace the rest of his system, I'm suggesting he try a demo of a better front end and different speakers. The CD5 is far too low in performance to match the quality of 282/hicap/250. This will be revealing all sorts of limitations in the front end. I woudn't choose a pre-amp at that price on the basis of what I happen to own at the moment. Look ahead.

Fled,

Getting the sound to how you like it is not straight forward and you won't get as much help as you wish if you continue to rubbish people's advice with "that's total crap". With that show of arrogance, it's not suprising you're having difficulty coming to terms with the new Naim sound. Look beyond the end of your nose and try different components out with different cd's at your own leisure.

I have to agree with Mark (mrbassman). I have recently upgraded from CDX/112 HiCap/150 to CDX/282 HiCap/150 and the difference was stunning, day and night, as somebody else put it.

I have previously upgraded from CD5 to CDX and bare 112 to HiCapped 112. These upgrades were significant and well worth while but I felt the 282 upgrade was by far the best but, there again I suppose it should be for the price.

The PRAT was the main gain. Before, I thought I had a decent system although I never felt it sounded as good as the shop demos. With the 282 I am more than satisfied and feel it has brought the whole system to a much higher level. Musical enjoyment has increased dramatically.

Phil

Hi Fled

Your perception illustrates an interesting point. That of personal taste.

The 282 should be giving you more timbral information, sense of scale, layering, smoothness and a bigger soundstage.

BUT...... you may have other sonic priorities?

I would guess that there is a parallel with say CD3 to CD5. Some prefer the '3' because it has a faster, leaner sound.

The '5' has a more sophisticated sound to be sure, but possibly not as 'exciting'.

Has the 282 robbed you of some of that excitement and perceived speed?

Things can go out of kilter with a system 'out of balance' and this is maybe what has happened. I'm not suggesting that you spend a shed load of extra money, but a CDX2 plus a second Hi-Cap or Supercap would transform the 'sound' of your new pre-amp.

In essence; I reckon that the 282 is currently too good for the rest of your system. The consensus seems to be that a 282 is significantly better than an 82 (which it should be).

Is your Hi-Cap new/serviced and giving its full potential?

The other factor to consider is that a good quality revealing pre-amp like the 282 will need at least month to shine.

Brand new kit tends to sound stilted for some weeks, before it opens up.

Or; to come back to my original point; you may just prefer that more 'edge of the seat' sound of the older kit.

Perhaps it's an 'age thing' but I became tired of that old sound and much prefer the more sophisticated sound of the new kit.

Good luck.

Do we know what the differences are between 82 and 282 - technically that is? Are there any?

First apologies to count.d I didnt intend to insult you, and "total crap" was intended as a figure of speach. I certainly do not wish to be or appear to be arrogant.
Anyhow the whole point of this thread was to open a disscussion with respect to olive vrs reference.
As I have said the 282 was/is better than the 102 in many way it has brought about extra detial/timbre but not dynamics and also not by significant amounts. I beleive this to be the "sonic signature" (relaxed and smooth as apposed to lively and dynamic) of the reference series and not a limitaion of my source, with that said of course a better source would show the 282 in a better light but would it change the "sonic signature" I am doubtfull.
My problem now seams to appear to be lager than I first hoped for as..
1. I either except the 282 and buy a CDX2 hoping that this gives me what I am looking for ? £5k
2. Buy an olive 82 and use the spare cash to get an old CDX. £3k
3. leave it all alone and go on a cruise !

Phil

Hi,
I've posted my findings on the 282 elsewhere, but I'll repeat what happened to me the other weekend when I borrowed a 282/250/XPS2 to find which 2 out of those three would be the best upgrade in my current system.

My conclusions were the 282 sounded considerably better (all be it in the short space of time that I had it) than the 102, and I would not have purchased the XPS2 to power my CDX2 before changing the pre.
Thats in fact what I aim to do - get the 282 and the XPS2 and wait for the 250 (or poss 300).
I guess its a case of what are you looking for. I can fully see how some prefer the 'olive' sound and the virtues that brings.
But after my experience of that weekend i can fully agree with those that say sort source and pre out first.

quote:

---

First apologies to count.d

---

No problem Fled.

One thing I've learnt over the years is trying to evaluate a sound I'm happy with by theory, doesn't always go to plan. No sooner had I convinced myself that "this can't make much difference to that", it does. I've also learnt that whatever upgrade Naim offers, they're always right, after listening to a diverse selection of records.

The Fraim changes the dynamics of the sound presentation. I wouldn't have thought that, but it does. If you're thinking long term of the fraim, try it.

Another area where the sound will change dramatically is the speakers. Different speakes can totally change the dynamics, speed, excitement, etc... The reason why I said it can take time to get used to different presentations is that I bought the Shahinian Obelisks and it took a short while to get used to those. Now, all conventional front firing speakers sound false to me.

I do agree with the "match" between Naim components at various levels. When I ran the 112/HiCap/150 combo (admittedly from a non-naim CD but a good one) the whole was prehaps greater than the parts.

I did'nt really realise this until I upgraded on a part by part basis to get to what I have now, CDX2/282/2xHiCap/new 250.
As I said earlier on this thread at various points along the way I had different mixes of components and it was'nt until I got the complete "set" that I obtained the synergy of a great system.

In retrospect and through listening for 1 week to the old setup followed by a return to the new system it became clear that each has a synergy of it's own.
This is a difficulty that presents a challenge to anybody upgrading. Short of listening to the complete system that is graded to match within the Naim hierarchy you do not get the "full story' of each of the componenets. This can account for the dissapointment that that lurks when for example as fled has done you only substitute only one of the components.

Unlike AllenB I chose for the 250 rather than the XPS2, I have to admit with some excellent advice from my Naaim dealer. He in the same vein as discussed above suggested that the XPS2, and for that matter a Supercap, could come later but to be warned that that would elevate the source end and eventually lead to a CDS3 head unit and Oh dear! the 252. This would be part of a search for synergy again but at a still higher level, which I have decided I cannot afford!

So in conclusion on reflection the 112/HiCap/150 had synergy and gave a happy energetic sound with good qualities. Part substitution of that system unbalanced it. The CDX2/282/2xHiCap/new 250 has synergy "in spades" and now I have all three running together it is a great system. I am not sure that one part of this system could be singled out as the most important in making the difference.

It is unfortunately a leap of faith to some extent when buying one component at a time. Listening to the final "system" at the dealer can help but it is not your home.

I would be interested to hear whether people think the same synergy exists within the hiearchy of the "Olivës" or does each component standout more from the equivalent one step lower on the ladder?

regards
GEOFFP

quote:

---

Originally posted by fled:
John.
Thats what I was expecting an absolute jaw dropping expierence for gods sake its a £2750 pre amp !! it should clearly knock spots off my lowly 102 and although better in some respects it did not do half as much as my recent upgrade to a 250 from a 180.
As for giving it time for my ears to be come used to the "new" sound is absolute crap.
Phil

---

I completely agree with you Phil, my system CDX/102/250/NAPSC/HI-CAP.
Don’t like the sound of the new range at all, to smooth and in my personal opinion it’s lost that Naim edge to the sound.

And you are right £2750 for a side ways step, it may look nice but you will end up spending ££££££’s more. With the money trade in your CD5 and buy a CDX and XPS.

Sean

I am not in a 82 or 282 area, but I know very well what some of you says.
I was upgraded from Nait 2 to Nait 5 with CD 5 as a source and Intro 2. With Nait 2, I have had a real PRAT even with CD 5, but when Nait 5 comes, he was act like a better amp in many areas, but PRAT was gone. Now, with Nait 5 I hear like music comes from some creamy filter which makes music indirect, rather than direct in order to space in my room. Nait 5 is better sounding than Nait 2, but only when you look at individual parts, overall, sense for music is much more on a Nait 2 side. With Nait 5 is no more GIGO (garbage in garbage out), and bas extension is very much shortened. Also, midrange expression was tammed and sounds grey, somehow...if not mechanical sound, but sounds like calculated in some way, if you know what I mean. There is no timbral colour and you can't diferentiate for example, first guitar second guitar leads. All in all there is no those head shaking/foot stompin effect.
Nait 5 is like a brand new modern synthetic t-shirt, and Nait 2 is a classic Levis cotton t-shirt which will serve you until you die. My attitude is that people from Naim are underrated people who are going to upgrade from Nait 2 to Nait 5 and it is not fair that we don't have all what we are have in Nait 2 + prefix 5 new qualities.
I was believe that this is only case in a 5 series, but now it is evident that Naim is changing. Why the hell we can't buy anymore products with qualities which are make this company a truly legend?!
2750 GBP or 4000 EUR, MAN! For 4000 EUR 282 should kick the shit from 102 ass. For 4000 Eur you shouldn't talk like that about 282, but you are and that's not ok.

Is NAIM getting naim?
Ozren

Some thoughts (based on the fact that I haven't got a 282)...
1) Is there a burn-in factor here - will the 282 become more friendly after a couple of weeks? My Naim system sounds a bit out of kilter for perhaps a week after switch on.
2) Others have suggested that the 282 is too good for the CD5. Now I've got olive kit, and I think the upgrade from 62s to 82 was probably my best (with CD3.5/Hi front end). Is the 282 a reinforcement of the big-endian approach?

Paul Rowlands

quote:

---

Let's not confuse the graininess, and dare I say it, the slight distortion of the olive series as livliness and dynamics

---

I always wondered why Naim gear sounded so much more "alive" and more like the real thing than anything else out there (that I had heard).

So it was just the extra distortion and graininess was it? That explains it.



Paul