I am very pleased with my recent upgrade to 282 from 202, and looking at different options here. (I still have the 202/200 and that is a really fantastic amplifier too by the way)
In terms of a NAP for the 282/HCDR :
The obvious one is another upgrade to NAP250DR, and that is the most expensive one but also the most tempting one. However I'm thinking of all possible options and unfortunately I cannot have the option to hear what any variant of NAP 250 adds to my system over and above my NAP 200
My source is a chord Hugo and speakers B&W 805S.
I think I read a post written by Vauxhall MK II in which he said that for him replacing 202 by 282 changed the tonal balance of his system and to restore it would have needed a NAP 250.2
That is also what I hear, the 282 has a different tonal balance (less bright) and I am not sure if changing the power amp will restore it back to the balance.
My options are a NAP250DR, an olive NAP 250 for a lot less money, a 200 DR, and if I want to keep my 202/200 for another room (which is tempting also), then maybe for cost control maybe even a NAP 100 or NAP 155XS with the 282 (with new, easier load speakers)
Of course NAP250DR is the best, but I am looking to get the most sound/music for my money and get opinions from everyone before I decide.
recent thread by catalin metal saying the 200 is "dry" also is a source of concern to me. I don't still quite get the "dry" character of the 200, since to me it is reflecting maybe the dry nature of the source and recording. on Vinyl I never hear anything remotely dry at all.
my questions are
1) Is there any issue in mixing NAC 282 with an olive 250? I don't mean technically but in terms of sound quality and resolution. A few trusted dealers have told me its not really a good idea. (this is not driven by sales). But I can't hear why since no chance to try out NAP 250 olive
2) Has anyone tried 282 with NAP 155 or NAP 100?
3) does the NAP actually influence the tonal balance of a system? I mean if the 282 is less bright does the 250.2 match it so that the end result is more balanced than 282/200?
Thanks for your responses.
Posted on: 14 August 2015 by CharlieP
analogmusic,
I had a 282/hicap with a NAP150 for a short while. I was blown away by the 282 and loved it. I soon acquired a NAP200, which showed me how much more wonderful was he 282 than I had even realized. I lived with this combination for several years, enjoying it immensely. Last year, I finally felt I could justify buying a NAP250, which was a dealer demo. This brought much more dynamics to the music, with better grip on the bass from my speakers, and more of everything I loved about the 282/200 combo.
I do not get all this talk about dry. I enjoyed the music every step of the way. If it was "dry" - whatever that means - then I guess I really enjoyed "dry." This is really great music making kit, and when properly setup should provide you with years of enjoyment. If you can gracefully afford to add the 250DR, then by all means go for it. If not, then you will likely very much enjoy keeping the 200. If you like how it plays music, then don't let anyone talk you out of it.
All the best,
Charlie
Posted on: 15 August 2015 by hungryhalibut
The 250DR is a phenomenal amp and a very significant improvement over its predecessors. I'd suggest ditching the 202/200 and using a much smaller amp for a second system, maybe a Nait 5i, in order to fund the 250. Better to have one really good setup that two middling ones, unless the objective is to collect equipment, which some seem to like to do.
Posted on: 15 August 2015 by Foot tapper
Ummmm, how about a pair of NAP135s? From my auditions, a pair of NAP135s is a considerable step up from a CB 250, an olive 250 or a black 250-2. After all, new NAP135s were twice the price of a NAP250 at the time.
I haven't heard a 250DR though.
I have only compared the 135s with a NAP300 on one occasion and that was driving a pair of PMC FACT12s - a very demanding speaker to drive. The dealer and I agreed that the 135s fared much better than the 300 on that occasion. It may be a different outcome with different speakers though, as the 300 is also widely acknowledged to be a classic, great Naim amplifier.
My 2p to add even more permutations for you.
Best regards, FT
Posted on: 15 August 2015 by Simon-in-Suffolk
I ran the the 282 /HCDR with a 200 for a while using ATC speakers. I certainly wouldn't call it necessarily dry, in fact the 200 has quite a sweet sound on the 282, detailed and quite musical.. but ultimately lacks the resolution and authority of the 250.2.
That is the NAP I now use.. you notice textures and timbres, atmosphere and subtle nuances with the 250.2 you just didn't notice with the 200..Bass dynamics, and orchestral sounds seem more convincing with the 250.2 with my speakers. Brass and violin's have a more natural balance, and voices sound more realistic. I really found it a great match for the 282/HCDR that only seems to improve if you change the NAC further at a future date.
For me the 250.2 introduced me to regulated amps, and it would be hard to go back to unregulated amps now, and the 250.2 is acknowledged at being a classic Naim amp design... that in its various incarnations goes back pretty much to the dawn of Naim.
Simon
Posted on: 15 August 2015 by Foot tapper
Originally Posted by b_lund:
B&W 805 are not demanding so hardly the best solution changing to 135 or 250 unless high SPL are required
A Nac 52 with supercap, or just a SC to replace HC might be the better result
I found a strong preference for the NAP135s over the various NAP250 amps when driving benign loads such as Proac Tablette 2000 Signatures as well as more demanding speakers. So my experience may differ from yours.
I agree on your comments about pre-amps, having auditioned 282/SC, 252/SC and 52/SC before buying the 52/SC as I preferred the musical sound quality of the 52/SC. However, this was before the days of the Supercap DR, which may suit the 252 more than the 52.
Either way, if the OP is inclined to upgrade from a NAP200, then any variant of 250 or 135 will be a step in the right direction.
Best regards, FT
Posted on: 15 August 2015 by nigelb
I have owned the following iterations in the following order
202/200/NACA5
202/200/HC(non DR)/NACA5
282/200/HC(nonDR)/NACA5
282/200/SCDR/NACA5
282/250.2/SCDR/NACA5
282/250DR/SCDR/Super Lumina Speaker Cable
Not saying this is the optimum way to upgrade but each improvement along the way made sense to me and none was a sideways step. I should make it clear that during the above changes I only listened with a digital front end (NDX) so can't comment on what changes there would be with an analog source.
Yes it has been quite a journey but I took the time to audition each upgrade along the way and each step brought a worthwhile uplift in SQ. It is impossible for me to recall the detail of the improvements at each step but reading Simon in Suffolk's descriptions above (who's upgrades are similar during the 282 phase) certainly ring true with my own experience. Some say that all you need with the 282 is a HCDR and I wouldn't disagree too much but I found a great improvement moving to a SCDR but I moved from a HC non DR so much of what I heard was the DRing of the power supply I would imagine.
I have detailed the speaker cable used also because if you do go to the 250 DR you might want to budget for an upgrade in speaker cable (if you are using A5) as I found the 250 DR puts pressure on speaker cables and it is a little too much for the good old A5 making it sound a little thick and congested. I am not suggesting you go to the lengths of Super Lumina speaker cable and many here have found the TQB cable to be a significant improvement on the A5 with modest outlay.
If it don't sound posh don't part with your dosh!
(I know I have used this one before).
Posted on: 17 August 2015 by analogmusic
I have now had the opportunity to hear the 250.2 and I can hear the differences.
I don't get all this forum talk about the 250.2 being "fat and slow"..
It is not slow, neither fat. (really forum people?)
In fact I can detect no speed differences with the NAP 200 (catalinmetal???) this is very much a Naim amplifier.
and I can hear the increased resolution and better handling of highs
But I find it lean on my speakers. I hear the increased bass control and definition, but with my speakers and my taste I much prefer the bass of the Nap 200. No accounting for taste, it is my preference.
The soundstage is different than NAP 200, and I don't like the new soundstage. and I can't live with this soundstage at 
Maybe I need to move my speakers around, but still?
I know the 250.2 is the superior amp, but somehow I like the NAP 200 more in my room and my speakers.
So there... Another one who prefers (at the moment) what the NAP 200 does.
It is a matter of taste. Maybe I need to go to NAP 300 like many others have said....
Posted on: 17 August 2015 by analogmusic
switching back to NAP 200, ok I hear the difference again.
I think the NAP 250.2 is the better one, and it exposes just how coloured my speakers are.
250.2 isn't really a good match with B&W 805s...not to my taste anyway, NAP 200 suits this speaker more. That metal dome tweeter can sound bright, and the 250.2 does push it in that direction to my ears with more resolution of the highs.
I think that NAP 200 and B&W 805S were sort of "covering up" for each other.
like you said, maybe best to get a Nait 5 and NSats and be done with this.
Posted on: 17 August 2015 by badlands
I myself for years always touted the merits of the 250-2 and was always amazed by that description that the 250 was fat and slow, I found it as you, as the complete opposite to that, but there were members on this site for whatever reason bashed it, and for reasons that still have me wondering why members on this site took their word as gold and believed them and just took what they said as gospel.
I also went from a 200, I owned it for a couple of years before upgrading to an 250-2, and yes there is no comparison, the 250-2 is at an entirely different level, speed, detail, power, bass grip, just trounced the 200 in every way. That was the only Naim amp I ever regret selling, oh and the Nait 2 
.
Posted on: 08 October 2015 by Igor Švab
Originally Posted by The Strat (Fender):
Some have reported that a 200 is a better match with certain speakers than a 250 - never ever have I found that to be the case - my experience is that of Badlands.
Why not.
I prefer SuperUniti alone to Superuniti+nap250.2.
I like what 250.2 brings to the table. More and deeper bass, focused vocals, really sloppy cymbals (they sound like plastic). Superuniti has uniform, cohesive sound across the spectrum, NAP250.2 has bass and middle and treble. But no cohesion like SU.
Not to say how 4.3 firmware improved the sound of SU.
