Demo of NAP500 vs NAP500DR

My SL loom cost me £7.7K. The cost of doing the DR upgrade to the 500 would be more appealing but the SL became available first. I think many people will end up doing the DR upgrade at some point so it pretty much comes down to individual choice. Lots of us have the cable side of things already sorted out and a significant slice of that cohort will probably never go SL. So if you lay it all out and my reasoning is not totally off, the DR upgrade looks like the more  likely option if you were not planning a cable upgrade in the next few months. 

We did lengthy assessments of SL at home and were far from convinced at first. But it panned out in SL's favour after a good 2-3 weeks running. We're having the DR done on spec. We won't be comparing 500 to 500DR unless we fall into the lap of a demo. This is unlikely.

Sam, it's a cost-benefit assessment as you say. For those who need more than 5m runs of speaker cable the DR upgrade will probably give more bang for the buck but IMO both should be considered for maximum effect. I was lucky only needing 3m runs of SL which I've had for the last 5 months and I'm looking forward to the 500DR with no financial qualms.

Steve

Steve makes a valid point regarding the cable length cost vs DR upgrade. If it's more than 5m I think I would go for the DR upgrade first.

As regards a 500 upgrade v SL speaker cables:

For me the SL speaker cable home loan was a great experience but at over £5k for 2 x 9m run it is not value for money me at this stage for me. It further showed how good NACA5 really is and that it is real value for money.

So life goes on and my system continues to play some great music!

After saying that I have booked my 500 for a service (wonder if I will need the 500PS serviced as well?) and a DR upgrade which is also c£5k.

I get that feeling that I will eventually not be able to resist the SL cable upgrade (funds permitting that is)  just to ensure the further investment in my 500 is maximised.

Richard

For me, the decision to have my 500s DR'd in preference to SL speaker cables is a simple, straightforward one. The 500 is, to my mind, irreplaceable in my system, whereas there are many options regarding speaker cable. The upgrade/service on my 500s is quite a bit cheaper than the runs of SL I'd need. So, an easy decision.

I'm reaching the end of upgrading my system for the foreseeable future. It sounds pretty wonderful (even with those dreadful NACA5s) & I wouldn't be getting the DR upgrades if it wasn't for the fact the amps will be due for an overhaul anyway.

Happy to read that the consensus thus far seems to point to the 500 DR upgrade as preferable to the SL speaker cable upgrade and that the improvements it brings will likely not be lost on those sticking with NACA5.

Now, where did I put that piggy bank!

I think the SL and DR technology were developed together in the making of the Statement. The NA009 transistor certainly was.

Allant93, any reason for the large spacing of your post. A bit waste full really.

yes, exactly...

enjoy

ken

The SL cables first emerged in January for the interconnects and then the SL speaker cables a few months later, but the DR Power Amps have not been available before then - unless I really missed something last year!

Don't get me wrong, it is a personal choice that for me the SL speaker leads, in  my system, was so much better than the NAC A5 that it was worth the cost of three 7m runs Active. It imparts a clarity in timing and drastic reduction in colouration that transformed my system's performance - but I got a demo first (thanks to Graham) and that made it easy.

I think there is still a view in Naim circles that expensive connectors everywhere but on the longest run to the speakers is OK, probably down to years of conditioning that NAC A5 was good enough and that improvements upstream somehow 'pushed-through' any problems with the NAC A5. Untill the DR tech with the Pre and source supplies the overall performance envelope probably justified that approach I think.

But as everything else has been improved, the NAC A5 became the bottleneck for performance - in the context of my system - is what I heard.

I think people are happier spending money on a box rather than a wire, even if the wire would give them more performance for the same spend. I was not 'happy' that the SL speaker leads were so expensive, but in the context of my system they worked so well it was a no-brainer upgrade.

The DR 500 does different things alongside the improvements in clarity, so I think it will work ok with NAC A5, but would advise a demo to confirm all is well for what you want to achieve. My view is the SL speaker leads did more than the DR500 in terms of clarity, sense of presence and low-frequency purity of notes and tunefulness, but the DR500 did more in terms of overall confidence and grip on the performance and dynamic linearity. Combining the two will be best I think. 

Certainly the idea of trying a less-expensive speaker lead upgrade from the NAC A5 combined with the DR500 may give the best results when funds are restricted, but a demo or home trial would be really needed, as it would for the SL speaker leads.

All personally subjective! The aim of the thread is to discuss views and posit what may be worth considering.

DB.

i probably read too much into what you said. in my system, cables are all dressed properly etc etc -- i thought you were suggesting that one will need to do more on top of that, but i guess you are not saying that... silly me...

enjoy

ken

In your position Tony I would do exactly the same for the reasons that you state.

What may be worth looking at, rather than the SL speaker leads, are some of the less expensive leads being discussed on other threads. In your system I think that will offer you a lot - but I share your pain in running Active and considering speaker lead changes!

DB.

well put Sam. i have limited experience of the SL (only having the SL IC) and of the DR only via the other DR upgrades in my systems (of course, minus NAP500).

from that, and from what i hav read here from various posts, it seems that the SL cable brings a new level of clarity and articulation, detail and "believabiliy" across the freq spectrum. The DR upgrade lowers the noise floor very signiicantly and therefore allows the extra level of detail from the SL to be much more apparent. Just my view of course.

enjoy

ken

DB and Tony, 

You could save a fortune and do a Jeremy Corbyn - become a 'pacifist'! 

Seriously though Tony I can understand where you're coming from. It's easy to become enticed every time there is a new bit of kit or upgrade but if your system sounds good to you, and I've had the pleasure to listen to it, the SQ won't deteriorate if you don't succumb. Just don't do any home demos of the SL speaker cable. 

ATB

Steve

Allante, 

What are you on? 

Enjoy whatever you're doing.

On the review of the 250DR on "the ear" website, Steve Sells, Statement designer has been directly quoted as saying the the DR amps do not require NACA5 or SL cables, they are cable tolerant.

This applies to the 250.2/300/500 amps also. BUT not the olive or CB amps.

It would be nice of Steve Sells to confirm if this 100 % accurate.

This makes alot of sense Ken, and chimes with DB's view on the synergy of both upgrades. I will hopefully have a dem of both in the New Year but am also very much hoping the DR alone will be a pleasing enough upgrade for the time being, as not only do I need a bigger piggy bank for both, but also a construction crew as most of my current NACA5 is under the floor and in the wall. That is a tough one to get past the Mrs unnoticed. The DR upgrade is childs play.

That would make sense - and makes an early 250.2 / 300 / 500 with DR upgrade very good value for money.