4 x 135's vs Nap 500 into SBL's
Posted by: Steve Crouch on 01 October 2002
Has anyone done the comparison and moved to a 500 from active SBL's driven by 135's?
Cheers
Steve
Cheers
Steve
Posted on: 01 October 2002 by Manu
Everyone having done the demo agree.
500.
Emmanuel
All opinions are my own, and reflect those of the organisation i work for, even if not stipulated.
500.
Emmanuel
All opinions are my own, and reflect those of the organisation i work for, even if not stipulated.
Posted on: 03 October 2002 by Simon Adams
I upgraded about 18 months ago from 4 x 135 active SBL's to 1 x 500 with NBL's. Needless to say, the difference was huge. I was not expecting the 500 to sound SO MUCH better than my active 135 set up - but it did. Believe me, the 500 is streets ahead of 4 x 135.
Moving from SBL's to the NBL's gave another massive leap in music enjoyment - again the NBL's are streets ahead of the SBL's. The combination of 500 plus NBL's is staggering!!! Can't wait to pick up my 552!!! Music Nirvana here we come!!
Simon.
Moving from SBL's to the NBL's gave another massive leap in music enjoyment - again the NBL's are streets ahead of the SBL's. The combination of 500 plus NBL's is staggering!!! Can't wait to pick up my 552!!! Music Nirvana here we come!!
Simon.
Posted on: 07 October 2002 by Vik
....where listening to passive sbls is hardly tolerable.
Most of us in this part of the world have trying room conditions. Couple that to a speaker that can be tricky in getting tempo AND rock-solid imagery.
So active solution such as active 250s, are much more coherent (musical) than a passive 500, and is the preferred choice here, funds permitting.
Having said that, a 500 is so much more natural sounding than 135s, having a less truncated, faster AND quieter presentation than 135s anyway. Couple that with good speaker positioning, and a passive 500 drive really gives active 135s a hard time in hi-fi aspects.
But there is a lot to be said for having that LF driver in alignment with the HF driver, I feel. And so I'll skip some of the hi-fi accuracy and get more of musical accuracy - if we want to call it that.
Anyway, that we use SBLs means we agree on something, at least. Most Naim users who use most of what else there is on the market havent got the first thing about Naim. In their defence, the preponderance of harsh sounding SBLs (improper setup) turns away many potential buyers. This in itself reflects of these owners' lack of understanding of this remarkable loudspeaker).
Lastly, just to clarify, active 500s will kill a 4 pack.
vik
Most of us in this part of the world have trying room conditions. Couple that to a speaker that can be tricky in getting tempo AND rock-solid imagery.
So active solution such as active 250s, are much more coherent (musical) than a passive 500, and is the preferred choice here, funds permitting.
Having said that, a 500 is so much more natural sounding than 135s, having a less truncated, faster AND quieter presentation than 135s anyway. Couple that with good speaker positioning, and a passive 500 drive really gives active 135s a hard time in hi-fi aspects.
But there is a lot to be said for having that LF driver in alignment with the HF driver, I feel. And so I'll skip some of the hi-fi accuracy and get more of musical accuracy - if we want to call it that.
Anyway, that we use SBLs means we agree on something, at least. Most Naim users who use most of what else there is on the market havent got the first thing about Naim. In their defence, the preponderance of harsh sounding SBLs (improper setup) turns away many potential buyers. This in itself reflects of these owners' lack of understanding of this remarkable loudspeaker).
Lastly, just to clarify, active 500s will kill a 4 pack.
vik