The problem only exists as long as you are potentially prepared to make the investment, otherwise it's not a problem......., like for me listening to a statement is ok as I know I will not have the funds - so I just can enjoy it.

That's the point Bert - it all comes down to affordability at some point or other.

This seemed to be the implication in the post I responded to, even if light hearted. Thus my response.

At the time we heard the 552 it was so far off the radar as to be not part of my universe. But the strong impression lasted. At the time we didn't run a Naim amp and the 252 was our long term aspiration. Although we didn't think we'd ever get to that level either.

Pre-amps - what do they each bring to the party?

Less and less, as they get better. They kinda just get out of the way of the music and leave the power-amp to generate the required volume.

Working on the 'straight piece of wire with gain' theory, it's counter-intuitive in a way. The 552 is stuffed with discrete components, and the S1 even more so.

John.

I can't agree there Harry. I've gone from the Nait 1 through 62/140, 82/250, 52/active 250 to 552/500 (initially with 300s) over the years and all the preamps were 'properly musical'. The current 282 is a very musical preamp and is excellent VFM. I listened to the 252 when considering my upgrade path from the 52 and found the 252 a bit lumpy in comparison to the 52. I decided at that point to go to the 552. 

The OP should listen for himself before deciding as those who own a particular preamp are going to have a bias. 

I think the 282 is pretty poor Steve. The 202 not being up to much either. So we'll agree to diverge, which is part of the beauty and fascination of the whole thing.

I can't hear 202 or 282 could rated so bad. I think to each their own, but one should read all opinions. Many people here aspire to 282 and could be put off by negative view of it.

I have now managed to hear lots of naim kit from UQ2, Nait XS, SN, Uniti, SU, 202/200, 282/200, 252/250 and 552/500.

and for sure cannot hear the negative aspect that Harry hears on 202 or 282.

However I will say this, proper set up is of utmost importance. Which includes high standards of termination of NACA5 on both ends, source, proper speaker matching.

I also had the chance to compare the little UQ with small speakers and 552/500 with much larger speakers, and totally agree with Steve J. Both were musical. There were of course huge differences of scale and power, but they were both musical in that special Naim way.  

I don't (now that my set up issues are sorted) also hear this blanket of sound over the 202 mentioned by OP, it is quite a fine preamp if given the right calibre of source.

I have no experience with the current black range, but in my 30 years of owning Naim I've gone through Nait 1, 32.5, 102, 82 and 52. Other than the 102, each was a definite step up from the previous preamp.  I've since stepped off the Naim amp ladder.

I find that statement incredible.  In my experience Naim amps - perhaps more than any of their other products - have with one possible exception to be market leaders.   What do you find about both products to be so poor? Some explanation?

Firstly, thanks to everyone for posting.  Some really interesting experiences and opinions with some big fans of both the 252 and especially the 552. 

I've learnt a lot reading through them all and now look forward to doing as a number of you have suggested and listening to them, as I'm keen to hear each and their individual merits weighed against the increased cost.

Just responding to analogmusic's point - it was only when the two were played back to back at the dealers that I was underwhelmed with the 202 and it's blanket effect.  At home, I love the sound but am yearning for more, or indeed less!

Even in this new digital world populated with yugos, exakt machines and french devialets the old adagio is always the same: sound quality is all around the preamp !

I would say mostly around the preamp, which is also an extension of the source. The two really go hand in hand.

As we are all well aware, it's all subjective and depends on a lot of variables. After having been thrilled to bits with CD5, CD5/Hi, CDX2 and CDX2/XPS2, not to mention the sheer professionalism of the dealer and Naim themselves, Helen and I were keen to go more Naim when the time came to upgrade our amp. An Audio Innovations 500.

We found the 202/200 to be good at holding a tune and grippy, but rather monochromatic - all bass and treble. We thought the combination a bit asthmatic and rather bleached. So we saved a shed load of money and just concentrated on enjoying the music for a few more years.

Then came the time when we decided the 500 had to go and because of our ongoing love of Naim sources we home auditioned the 282/250. We thought the presentation was rather contrived and mechanical. Like a Loudness button had somehow jammed on. Whereas the CDX2 had a naturally exuberant presentation and would rock along to anything, it did posess subtlety when required. But we didn't think the 282/250 so capable of this. Everything it played sounded like pedal to the metal. The following week we took it back and spent an afternoon swapping between all the permutations of 202, 282, 200 and 250 we could come up with. Then we plugged in a rather scratched and battered Graaff GM50. Sold. And another bucket of money saved. 

Later when looking for new speakers we hit a truly magic moment when we heard a CDS3 into 252/300. Tears flowed. We didn't think Naim amps could do such power with subtlety, such grip with grace. It was both impressive and beautiful.

So I don't much rate some of Naim's other efforts. So what? Who cares? What does your room sound like? Nothing like mine I'll bet. This is the beauty of our passion. Well, a part of it. You might come round here and think my system is frankly a bit crappier than it should sound. That's fine. It will still  sound just as good to me.

There was a time when my personal experiences would not accept this but in the past five years or so I have come to regard the pre more as a part of the source. A kind of secondary source which must work well (and ideally disappear) in conjunction with the primary source.

Like the DAC V1 does!

We're back to "you like what you like" George. If it works for you, it works. And if it works it's good. No need for justification, offense or defense. 

I don't agree that the 282 is an inferior pre-amp, on the contrary, I really like it, if that's as high as you can go on the Naim ladder it certainly wouldn't be the end of the world.

The 202, now that's another story.

I have no problem with someone not liking the 282 (or even hating it). I use one and love it but there are plenty of people who hate the whole Naim range and each to their own.

People really respond to different things. In the 90's, if you'd asked me I would have said that Naim didn't do it for me and I worshipped at the temple of Linn. And that was despite hearing a CDS/52/135x2 into Isobariks. Then things changed and the Linn didn't float my boat anymore and the Naim did.

I think the fact that an opinion has been stated so strongly against the 282 and to some degree the 202 merely reinforced the answer to the OP. The preamp does play a very significant role still in the audio chain. Source first may be still paramount but in terms of having the largest immediate impact on the character of a system, I would say speakers first and then preamp second.

Hi Harry the Hornet

With a start point of your 202/hicap/200, the next step up in terms of pre-amps makes a substantial difference to most of us who have tried it.  It's a big step up whether you go for a 282, a 252, a 272 or my personal choice, a 52.  You may even try a 202/supercap if you wish - a combination that I also tried and rapidly dismissed, far preferring a 282/hicap.

If you use the search function on this forum, you will find many, many, many threads about the respective pros & cons of the 282 vs 252.  Each has its own strong advocates and critics. 

Most of us would agree that the 252 is more refined (than a 282 + Supercap) and more revealing of the subtleties of different musicians' techniques.  This is how it should be.  Some prefer this extra refinement, others less so.  I found that my foot tapped when 282/hicap or 282/supercap was in the system, yet it did not whenever a 252 was in the system (and I auditioned three different 252s in two different systems).

This, in essence, is why I sought out a 52, a pre-amp that I loved on first listening and retain to this day.  However, there are also members of this forum who have replaced their 52 with a 252 and never looked back.

But the 282, the 252 and the 52 are all a substantial step up from a 202.

Then there is the 552.  It is a lot more expensive than any of the 282, 252 or 52.  Trouble is, it is a whole lot better than any of them.  And, I don't want to even talk about the S1 

So, if you like the sound of your system with a 282 in it, then buy one and enjoy the extra music that it undoubtedly brings.  No need to look back.  If however, you see yourself going further up the Naim hierarchy at some future date, then I recommend finding a good Naim dealer who will demonstrate several of the better pre-amps so that you can find the flavour of Naim pre-amp that most floats your boat.

Hope that helps, FT

Well indeed it is absolutely subjective no doubt on that.  Strangely I preferred the CD5xs over the CDX2 until the latter was wired with a XPS2 then it was game over. In effectthe CDS3 like musicality that came with the 5XS at least to some extent became apparent in the CDX2.  I recognise some of your observation with regard to the 202/200  but still thought it a very engaging system but the 282 in terms of soundstage, depth, textures etc an absolute paradigm shift.  And then I added the CDS3 and get your point about the emotion which is now even more so with the 250 DR.

Of course it is about room and also speakers - I doubt I'd find your systemj crappy!!

The 152/FC absolutely rocks in our room. Sure it's coloured, brash and rather sloppy, but huge fun. Worth every penny.

Folk and their ears eh?