NAC282 a dissapointment !!!

It's REALLY SIMPLE:

The better your pre and power amp is the more likely it is to over-reveal an under-strength source component.

A CD5 is way too under-strength for a 282 which is an awesome preamp.

Take the 282 back and for pity's sake buy a CDX2, and leave the 282 'til you have an XPS2 IMO.

Joe90

System balance---

My experience with Naim systems is that they ruthlessly reveal inadequate sources--I strongly believe that's what has happened here. OTOH, when "unbalancing" a system, it is always better to weigh the source more heavily. So a CDX2/112/150 makes far more sense (and will sound better) than a CD5/Hi/282/150.

Source first really can seem like a broken record on this forum, but it does work.

Phil--you really should try a CDX2. As good as a CD5/Hicap is, a CDX2 simply leaves it for dead. In your situation, the 282 is, as others have pointed out, simply telling you more about the source than you really want to know. Of your options, I'd probably either go for option 2 or spend the money from option 1 on a CDS2 and an 82.

Best,

Bob

left for dead??

Although this would seem to be fer sure, not everyone thinks the cdx2 is a no brainer over the Hi/cd5. Bob Shedlock comes to mind among other...

Bruce

I just upgraded from a 92r to a s/h 82 with two Hicaps, it was a better deal than buying a 282 (which I wanted) an no hicaps. All that for only 2/3 the price fo the new 282. At first I was underwhelmed with what I bought. Then a week later I was listening to my vinyl rock and was really taken by the details, and on whole the music was better. But, I reflected on my old 92 and realized how the base level Naim products are really good. Sure takes lots to get incrementally better sound. Now to replace my CD5/fc2 with an X. However, I listen to radio most of the time , maybe 50% then 25% each for vinyl and CD. So I don't see spending a whole lot for the CDX for only 25% listening pleasure. And the CD5 is a good product.

glenn

Life is analogue

I haven`t given the "new kit" a thorough audition yet, but I find the descriptions of the sound of the olive kit as "harsh" "upfront" a little bemusing......to my ears my 52/135s simply sound fluid,organic, delicate with fantastic presence I can understand that this kit can can easily be made to sound harsh, by poor setup. Without hearing the new kit, I cannot make a judgement, but any reduction in that presence(ie. more "laid back") would be hard for me to swallow.

I did do a comparison with a CD3 and a CD5.....the newer model, to my ears was a definite downgrade...far too "commercial"
I hope the rest of the "new" range do not mirror what I heard with this comparison

Laurie S

Laurie S

quote:

---

Without hearing the new kit, I cannot make a judgement, but any reduction in that presence(ie. more "laid back") would be hard for me to swallow.

I did do a comparison with a CD3 and a CD5.....the newer model, to my ears was a definite downgrade...far too "commercial"
I hope the rest of the "new" range do not mirror what I heard with this comparison

---

For long time Naim die-hards, I can imagine the voicing of new kits might sound too 'commercial'.

As an outsider, I think it is a good move in Naim's part whether it was intentional or not to take the existing sound to the next step. I can only speak for CDX2 but, I don't think they ruined what Naim has been offering per se. It still sounds organic, fluid and delicate in the right systems ( both Naim or non-Naim).

Perhaps you are right. It seems less *in your face* than older kit but it sounds more complete and can present the music in far more engaging way than many others out there. My only niggle for CDX2 is that it might have forgone a bass articulation in an absolute sense but I think it's a small price to pay to let new breeds of people enjoy what Naim can offer.

I have had numerous demos of older Naim kit in the past and whlist I loved what they did I could never bring myself seriously consider going all-out Naim or even home-demo one till the introduction of newer range.

so, I don't think they completely *sold out*.

Hi Folks,

I really don't buy into this idea that you can't see the benefits of a better preamp unless your source is fully maxed out. In my experience the system definitely gets better as you improve the preamp, regardless of what you do to the source. So if Fled is not hearing the 'improvement' of the new range, lets not fall into the trap of the Emperors new clothes, and blame the lack of improvement on all things under the sun. The simplest arguement is usually the best-in this case maybe the 282 is not that much better than the maxed out 102?

System balance is about allocating money. If Fled buys a better preamp his system will improve, however it seems that he may have to go to 82/Scap or 52 to get the dramatic changes he is looking for. This may not be the best way to spend money, and this is where system balance becomes important. Perhaps he'll get a bigger return on improving his source? If it was my cash I'd be thinking 2nd hand CDS1 or CDS2 and then look at the preamp issue.

However, if a cheap 52 came along...

Cheers, Jens

Hi Jens, are you still using an 82/2HC?

Kuma....if my only auditions of olive kit had been at a dealers (ANY dealers)...I would not be a Naim owner now!

Jens I agree.....when I upgraded from 82 to 52....ALL my sources sounded better...including my £300 VHS

LaurieS

ok Gents this has been a very interesting thread with lots of views on source first and new vrs old !!
So to add to the debate I manged to demo a friends olive 82 in my system over the last 2 days and this is what I found (just to refresh CD5+Hi as a source olive 82+Hi+napsc olive 250 and Dyn 1.1s)
This is what I heard.
Significant increse in weight
Significant increase in Detail
Absolutely superb dynamics.
THe base was completely controlled tight and fast.
THe highs shimmerred but was no way harsh as the 102 can be(even with coldplay and hill st soul which can be a challange to listen too !!)
Then I relised what the essential difference in the two demos was.. its the mid range, with the olive it was clearly improved with the reference it tended to blend in rather than be defined.
The other clear fiffernce was the extension to the notes on leading edges, the olive 82 clearly enhanced this the reference didnt.

Did I get WOWed yes, most definatly yes.

So do my findings suggest that the CD5+hi was maxed out - I dont think so
Is there better sources - of course !!
Is the new 282 a great amp -- yes no doubt
Do I prefer it to the olve 82 -- No definatly NO.
so much so I will hopefully be picking up a s/h olive 82 tonight for less than half the cost of the 282
Phil

Well, after a long thread and most people advising you to try your demo with a better front end, you've chosen to ignore the advice.

You won't waste your money on the 82 and you won't lose much on it, but I still don't think it's the right step.

Julian,

He will be getting a cheap pre-amp, but are we here to discuss how cheap we can get any Naim system?

Fled is not happy with his sound. He is getting deeper and deeper into refining individual aspects of mid range, notes, etc... this is all with (due respect to CD5 owners) a CD5! This front end does not produce a good enough signal to warrant Fled's meticulous scrutiny.

With a better front end notes will be extended, have deeper bass, cleaner mid range, etc...

count.d
I have not ignored the advice ! I would love to get a better source as well, a cdx being the most likly but currently I am happy with the CD5+Hi. My reasons being, I have not that many CD's (300ish) so I am also waitng for the new format debate to settle before spending more on a CD source or other format.
My upgrade path has been based on what I personally percieve to be the musical benifits the first being to control the Bass and remove/reduce the "shouty" nature of the 180 so hence my first aim was to get a 250 (which I am very happy with), then the other area that I needed to improve was the harhness of the 102 even with the Hi and NPSC it was still a little on the hard side plus I wanted more weight and definition this clearly could be covered in many ways source being one of them. I have chossen the PRE because I personally belive that to be the right way forward for me at this moment. The source upgrade will undoubtly follow shortly (I hope my wife does not read this !!) and this may also be a change in format who knows ?
The point being I do listen to the advice on the forum and value it ands its members highly but I do reserve the right to
a, disagree and, b follow may own intuition.

Phil

quote:

---

Originally posted by count.d:
With a better front end notes will be extended, have deeper bass, cleaner mid range, etc...

---

True but why does my current source reveal this with an olive 82 and not a 282 ?

When you say you like the extended note and deeper bass, you may find that it's a colouration from the 82 and/or CD5. If you heard a better source with a 282, you will find it has a better extended note and better extended bass.

As I've already said before, stick a different pair of speakers on the end of your system and you may find you have too much bass and too much extended notes. Your whole system refinement will go to pot.

Regarding which format you tend to buy, how long are you going to wait? There will always be format changes. They may settle on one format when you're 90.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurie Saunders:
Kuma....if my only auditions of olive kit had been at a dealers (ANY dealers)...I would not be a Naim owner now!

---

Laurie,

Well then, the US dealers must have been representing Naim kit wrong all along or they have been too *hard-boiled* for me.

Somehow, I didn't really detect the organics and naturalness from the old kits at all.

If you think CD5 is a let down, I am curious what you think of the new CDX2. ( it boggies less than the old one is what I see. Not good. But it's not quite dragging its arse, either. )

quote:

---

Somehow I didn`t detect the organics from the old kit at all

---

Precisely!

Laurie S

When the 5 series first appeared I noted comments here about a change to a more dare I say "generic" sound. Whether by accident or intentionally (I hope the latter) Naim was building for a wider audience but at the same time trying to preserve as much of the famous "olive" sound that compromise would allow.

AS the new reference series appeared gradually over the horizon early reports were of a more sophisticated sound with great qualities which while modified from the "olive" sound was still highly desierable and could woo newcomers (myself included) to the NAIM sound.

What it has also done is disrupt the old Naim philosiphy and caused the two camps which are equally represented here.

I guess both camps are right because at the end of all the discussion the big questions are:
Are you happy with how your system sounds?
In your house?
With your music?

Answers of YES are what matter to the individual.VFM is also in there somewhere and is a subjective though important aspect of the "yes" answer.
It is clear that fled for example gets closer to firm "yes's" with and 82 than with a 282. I on the other hand feel the 282 is a "yes" for me.

Did I make a point in there somewhere? Who knows, roll on the great debate.

GEOFFP
If

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurie Saunders:

quote:

---

Somehow I didn`t detect the organics from the old kit at all

---

Precisely!

Laurie S

---

HA!

A true flat earther!

quote:

---

also your assertion that there are always new formats is a bit bogus. cd has been commercially top dog for 15+ years now with the only *new* format doing any significant sales being minidisc and that's dying a death now too. vinyl has pottered along but is hardly the commercial powerhouse it once was. even when 2 new 'superior' formats have been introduced the one must have feature is backwards compatibility with cd. look at all the trouble the dvd forum is going to in order to achieve this. anyone sensible realises that this is a period of transition within the audio industry (although thanks to some dim decisions it's going to be a long one) the only sensible decisions to make now are either to stick with cd or go for a jack of all trades but master of none. as i'm interested in music i'll stick with cd for now and wait to see what happens.

---

Julian, I think this thread is starting to get a little confusing, you have just said what I said and yet you think I said the opposite. I said to stick to cd.

John,

Stop getting excited. No one's obsessed about any product on this thread. If you look at previous posts, they are suggestions.

Kuma.......I`m confused. How do you percieve that I am a "true flat earther"(look at my profile to see details of my kit.

I do not understand this term

Laurie S

Some time ago I visited a dealer with the mind to "get into" high end hifi (whatever that is ?) we went through a series of demos Meridian, Arcam FMJ, Cyrus etc and of course Naim. THe Naim sound knocked my socks off it was so far removed from everything else I heard it completly captivated me, that is why I choose it and am currently improving on that sound.
If the reference equipment was available at that time ? would I have bought it over the other equipment ? I am unsure.
THat is NOT to say it isnt any better than the olive equipment its just different and it is all personal taste.
I happen to love the olive sound its what enticed me into this forum, if you wish to desribe it as coloured or even distorted, then fine I dont realy care what its called. I love it.
This thread was realy to pass on my observations on the demos I have described, it was certainly not a swipe at the reference equipment or its owners.
But one thing is clear and should be disscussed at length is weather this is the end of the road for that Naim sound that so many are fanitical about (sad basterds that we are)
Phil

Fled..."is it the end of the road......."

My own feeling is that the olive kit was/is exceptionally fussy about setup.......when done right, it sounds sublime. Get it a bit wrong and you get what is often described as "the Naim Sound" ...dry, forward, harsh, often even crude. My suspicion is that the new kit is far mor tolerant of less careful setup, and thus is likely to sound better in a wider range of circumstances. However the quid pro quo of that approach is (and I speculate here)that the abilty to optimise the sound by careful setup will also be limited.

laurie S

Would it be fair to state the following?

1. Some Naim users prefer the sound of the new range, whilst others clearly prefer the sound of Olive kit, especially the amplification side of things. i.e. If prices were equal, some would still choose 82/250 against 282/250.2.

2. For a given budget, one could arguably buy used Olive kit that would sonically beat the new equivalent. In my case, I guess my £8549 worth of CDX2/282/250/HC could have got some pretty top-notch Olive gear, possibly even CDSII/52, etc.

3. There is a great deal to be said for synergy with Naim, particularly in terms of amplication. e.g. in my experience 202/250 or 282/200 sounds a bit 'wrong' but 282/250 is just superb. Evidence strongly suggests there is also a risk of losing synergy by mixing Olive and Reference amplication. Possibly this also applies to power supplies.

4. Some people only have the budget for Olive kit at present, so the comparison with the new range is largely academic, or for future reference.

5. Some people have the budget for either route and have a choice to make. Personally, I weighed up factors such as warranty, aesthetics, ease of demo, ease of trade-in, availability of a good deal by buying a complete system, plus had a semi-irrational desire simply to buy new, and went for the new range.

Fled--

Congratulations on a terrific purchase!

And also on doing it the right way--listening for yourself! Too few people, it sometimes seems, actually do that...

Best,

Bob