unregulated vs regulated amps

Posted by: analogmusic on 13 October 2015

Hello all,

 

I would like to ask the forum members which sound they prefer, the unregulated amps like NAP 100, Uniti, UQ, Superuniti, 200 or the regulated ones like 250, 300 - in terms of PRAT and speed.

 

Of course in hi-fi terms the regulated ones are much better.

 

 

Posted on: 13 October 2015 by Simon-in-Suffolk

Well for me the 200 was good, but it was with the 250.2 I felt I got the full Naim effect.

 

Posted on: 13 October 2015 by hungryhalibut

Is there an answer to this, or is the OP simply trying to garner views from others to support the assertion that the 200DR is better than the 250DR? I preferred the old 200 to the 250.2, but prefer the 250DR to the 200. In both cases the 250 is regulated. 

Posted on: 13 October 2015 by ChrisSU

I chose to 'make do' with a 200. It was a trade-off, as it means I can get an NDX/282 and still only need 3 boxes, which is all I have room for: I would have liked to go for a 250, but then I'd have needed a Hicap as well. With a new 200DR, that shouldn't be so much of a problem, as the DR supply to the preamp is supposed to be comparable to a Hicap. 

Posted on: 13 October 2015 by elkman70

I have always thought that the Nait5 (original) and 200 were good unregulated amps, the 300 a good regulated, but the 250 never held favor, even though regulated.

 

Regards,

 

Nick 

Posted on: 13 October 2015 by HiFiman

I run two NAP 110 setup as mono amps prefer these to a regulated olive 250 I once owned.

 

Posted on: 13 October 2015 by feeling_zen

The Naim power amps sound better the further up the range you go. From the 250 onwards they happen to be regulated.

 

I think that is about all the can be said. It's not like Naim produce a regulated and non regulated power amp at a similar price point of a similar design age for comparison so it is a bit like apples and oranges.

Posted on: 14 October 2015 by Richard Dane

Well, it's not really possible to judge the amps in isolation.  Why?  Well, let's take as an example the classic amplification system of say a NAC202, NAPSC, HICAP, and NAP200.  Very nice indeed, and, assuming a source of similar or even better calibre, very nicely balanced.  However, swap the NAP200 for a NAP250 and while certain aspects improve, overall the performance becomes worse.  Listen to the NAP250 in this scenario and you'd think it a bit too leaden compared to the more "sprightly" NAP200.  The truth of course is that the NAP250 is the better amp but it's asking more from both source and particularly the pre-amp.

Posted on: 14 October 2015 by ChrisSU

Richard, surely, if you wanted to make that comparison, you'd start with 282/NAPSC/HC/250, then put in a 200 to reveal the differences?

Posted on: 14 October 2015 by Richard Dane

Chris, sure.  I'm just showing how easy it is to make a better amp sound worse.

Posted on: 14 October 2015 by Clay Bingham
Originally Posted by Richard Dane:

Well, it's not really possible to judge the amps in isolation.  Why?  Well, let's take as an example the classic amplification system of say a NAC202, NAPSC, HICAP, and NAP200.  Very nice indeed, and, assuming a source of similar or even better calibre, very nicely balanced.  However, swap the NAP200 for a NAP250 and while certain aspects improve, overall the performance becomes worse.  Listen to the NAP250 in this scenario and you'd think it a bit too leaden compared to the more "sprightly" NAP200.  The truth of course is that the NAP250 is the better amp but it's asking more from both source and particularly the pre-amp.

Bingo! My 250.2 seemed just as described vs 200 from 282/hi cap through 282/twin hi caps. As soon as I added my Supercap the 250.2 just bloomed. Balance and context do not get the prominence they deserve when we all comment on various components.