Dear NAP 200, please accept my sincere apologies...

I've heard a 282 and 200DR without any additional PSUs. Sounded absolutely stunning!

Conclusion? pre-amp is the more important partnin that setup. 

NAP 200 DR is an excellent partner to my SU!

KR, J

Nice write up Claude.

Last year I bought an ex dem 2014 NAP200 from my local Naim dealer. Personally for me I think it sounds superb. Crystal clear fast and engaging and more than enough bass for my ears.

At some point in the future I fully intend to add a 282 to partner the 200.

Ian.

ClaudeP posted:

My 300 has been sent to Plurison (Naim in Canada) for a recap and a DR upgrade, and the nice folks at Codell Audio have been nice enough to lend me a 200 in the interval.

I've said a number of times in the past how I was unimpressed with the 200 - at some point I listened extensively to one at a Montrel dealership as a potential to a 140 upgrade with my then CDX2/XPS2/102 front end. Overall, I found the 200 hard where it should soft (mids and highs) and soft where it should be hard (bass and low medium). I decided to go for a used 250.1 instead and I never looked back... that is, until I upgraded the 250.1 for a 300.

I had a longer exposure to a 200 at a friend's house, in her CDX2/202/200/SF Cremona system. The NAP 200 did fair a little better there, but I still found it lacked authority in the bass, presence in the medium and had a tendancy to be aggressive in the highs. Not my cup of tea.

It was not without some apprehension then that I installed this non-DR 200 in my LP12/CDS3/552/Harbeth SHL 5 Plus system a couple days ago. Total surprise: it does a wonderful job here. It's quick on its feet, surprisingly tuneful and engaging without any trace of abrasiveness in the highs. Of course it doesn't quite match my 300 in terms of dynamism, detail and "organic" feel (and it's not supposed to, given the price difference) but I have a great time listening to music and I completely forget its presence after a few minutes. A this time I'm listening to Gewandhaus-Quartett playing Mendelssohn's Four Pieces for String Quartets and the 200 plays it beautifully.  It has also worked wonders with Françoise Hardy this afternoon.

Again, I sincerely apologize for all the bad things I've said about the NAP 200. It plays beautifully partnered to a 552! It seems that I'm not a fan of the 202/200 matchup - for me a 202/250 combo sounds better. BTW I've yet to hear a 282/200 system, but I'd be very curious to find out.

Claude

I do hope the difference between the NAP 300 and NAP 200 will be rather appreciable since I have the NAP 200 and will be receiving the NAP 250 DR next week. The interesting part is I have the Harbeth SHL5 too, albeit a non-Plus version.

I currently have the NAC 282 / NAP 200 with the Harbeth SHL5. I briefly listened to the NAC 202 / NAP 200 yesterday to reconfirm my impressions on the NAC 282, and it didn't take long for me to get the 282 back into the system after some listening. The NAC 202 / NAP 200 sounded slightly flat and anemic when compared to the energetic and dynamic presentation of the NAC 282 / NAP 200. 

In summary, NAP 200 sounds more engaging and enjoyable with the NAC 282 than the NAC 202 in my system, with the Harbeth SHL5. I wager the NAC 552 will take it to a higher level when partnered with the NAP 200. Having said that, I hope the NAP 250 DR will be a significant improvement over the NAP 200 when partnered with the NAC 282.

Claude, have you come across the 250/202 partnered on your travels ? I have 200 (not DR)/202/HCDR/NAPSC and was thinking about doing 250DR/202 which goes against the grain (swap 282 for 202) but I found the 200/282 too "warm" sounding and preferred 202.

Calum

Not quite - I went from 102/NAPSC/HiCap/140 to 102/NAPSC/HiCap/250.1 and even 102/NAPSC/HiCap/300 for a short while, after which I upgraded the 102 to a S/H 252, skipping the 282 altogether.  

I really liked the 102/250.1 pair, and kept for more than 2 years. Please let me now if you're equally happy with your brand new 202/250DR setup when you receive it.

Claude

ryder. posted:

ClaudeP posted:

My 300 has been sent to Plurison (Naim in Canada) for a recap and a DR upgrade, and the nice folks at Codell Audio have been nice enough to lend me a 200 in the interval.

I've said a number of times in the past how I was unimpressed with the 200 - at some point I listened extensively to one at a Montrel dealership as a potential to a 140 upgrade with my then CDX2/XPS2/102 front end. Overall, I found the 200 hard where it should soft (mids and highs) and soft where it should be hard (bass and low medium). I decided to go for a used 250.1 instead and I never looked back... that is, until I upgraded the 250.1 for a 300.

I had a longer exposure to a 200 at a friend's house, in her CDX2/202/200/SF Cremona system. The NAP 200 did fair a little better there, but I still found it lacked authority in the bass, presence in the medium and had a tendancy to be aggressive in the highs. Not my cup of tea.

It was not without some apprehension then that I installed this non-DR 200 in my LP12/CDS3/552/Harbeth SHL 5 Plus system a couple days ago. Total surprise: it does a wonderful job here. It's quick on its feet, surprisingly tuneful and engaging without any trace of abrasiveness in the highs. Of course it doesn't quite match my 300 in terms of dynamism, detail and "organic" feel (and it's not supposed to, given the price difference) but I have a great time listening to music and I completely forget its presence after a few minutes. A this time I'm listening to Gewandhaus-Quartett playing Mendelssohn's Four Pieces for String Quartets and the 200 plays it beautifully.  It has also worked wonders with Françoise Hardy this afternoon.

Again, I sincerely apologize for all the bad things I've said about the NAP 200. It plays beautifully partnered to a 552! It seems that I'm not a fan of the 202/200 matchup - for me a 202/250 combo sounds better. BTW I've yet to hear a 282/200 system, but I'd be very curious to find out.

Claude

I do hope the difference between the NAP 300 and NAP 200 will be rather appreciable since I have the NAP 200 and will be receiving the NAP 250 DR next week. The interesting part is I have the Harbeth SHL5 too, albeit a non-Plus version.

I currently have the NAC 282 / NAP 200 with the Harbeth SHL5. I briefly listened to the NAC 202 / NAP 200 yesterday to reconfirm my impressions on the NAC 282, and it didn't take long for me to get the 282 back into the system after some listening. The NAC 202 / NAP 200 sounded slightly flat and anemic when compared to the energetic and dynamic presentation of the NAC 282 / NAP 200. 

In summary, NAP 200 sounds more engaging and enjoyable with the NAC 282 than the NAC 202 in my system, with the Harbeth SHL5. I wager the NAC 552 will take it to a higher level when partnered with the NAP 200. Having said that, I hope the NAP 250 DR will be a significant improvement over the NAP 200 when partnered with the NAC 282.

Don't fret Ryder.

When I had my 282 I want from 200 to 250.2 and then 250DR. Each step up in power amp with the 282 was significant and very worthwhile. The final step to the 250DR was the biggest uplift in SQ. Just give the 250DR plenty of time to run in.

I seriously doubt you will have any regrets.

Hi Claude, Very glad that the NAP that I can only dream of going beyond has proved suitable with your NAC552! There have been those here in the past who've insisted that the NAP200 and NAP300 have a similar sonic signature.

Regards, Chris

Calum F posted:

.....but I found the 200/282 too "warm" sounding and preferred 202.

That was my experience too but since then, I've changed to leaner, drier speakers and would be eager to try a NAC282 with my NAP200 again.

C.

I have a NAP-200/NAC-N 272 combo and it is the best gear pairing I have ever owned.. it sounds absolutely superb..

nigelb posted:

Don't fret Ryder.

When I had my 282 I want from 200 to 250.2 and then 250DR. Each step up in power amp with the 282 was significant and very worthwhile. The final step to the 250DR was the biggest uplift in SQ. Just give the 250DR plenty of time to run in.

I seriously doubt you will have any regrets.

Thanks Nigel. I can't wait to have the 250 DR and Hicap DR. The first thing I'll do is to plug the Hicap DR into the NAC 282 / NAP 200 first, replacing the non-Naim PSU. After several days (or weeks), I will replace the 200 with the 250 DR. I am looking forward to an uplift in sound quality with each step.

Cheers.

My dealer loaned me their 200 while my 250 was being DR'ed. I have a 282/HCdr.

I really liked the 200. Quick footed as mentioned above and certainly engaging. But it soon ran out of steam though so it's not really a party animal. Good for those who don't or can't play at high volume.

Insert the DRed 250 and....wow. What a stupendous amp this is now. So much of everything. It's a velvet sledgehammer. Gone too is the slightly dark presentation and the low-mid warmth. The 250DR with a 282 has to be one of the best and most capable pre/amp combos ever. The 250DR's 80watts is the new 300watts. 

Christopher_M posted:

Calum F posted:

.....but I found the 200/282 too "warm" sounding and preferred 202.

That was my experience too but since then, I've changed to leaner, drier speakers and would be eager to try a NAC282 with my NAP200 again.

C.

Personally, I don't think "warm" is the word to describe the NAC 282 when comparison is made with the NAC 202. The NAC 282 is just more illuminated. The tone of the piano has more energy and is more illuminated with the NAC 282 whereas with the NAC 202 the sound of the piano is slightly subdued with reduced energy. I consider the reduced energy or illumination of the 202 as "flat sounding" while some may regard the 202 as being more neutral than the enthusiastic, energetic or exciting NAC 282.

Another perspective to the added illumination or energy of the NAC 282 is the 282 brings more body to the overall sound, be it vocals, sound of instruments or bass. The bass sounds fuller and has more punch and definition with the 282, hence the impression of the added warmth. Due to the added body / illumination / energy, some may have regarded the 282 to be a warmer preamp than the 202.

To me, the 282 does not sound warmer than the 202. Instead, I find the 282 to be more dynamic, energetic and illuminating than the 202. I associate "warmth" with a rounded sound that is dull and lacking in sparkle and dynamics.

James L posted:

My dealer loaned me their 200 while my 250 was being DR'ed. I have a 282/HCdr.

I really liked the 200. Quick footed as mentioned above and certainly engaging. But it soon ran out of steam though so it's not really a party animal. Good for those who don't or can't play at high volume.

Insert the DRed 250 and....wow. What a stupendous amp this is now. So much of everything. It's a velvet sledgehammer. Gone too is the slightly dark presentation and the low-mid warmth. The 250DR with a 282 has to be one of the best and most capable pre/amp combos ever. The 250DR's 80watts is the new 300watts. 

That is certainly refreshing to hear! My system is in a large living hall, almost in free space and I sit at about 10 feet away from the speakers, and I occasionally listen at high levels. The NAP 200 has a low-mid warmth and sounds slightly dark when compared to the 250 DR? Looks like I am heading in the right direction with the 250 DR as my speakers still sound a bit warm in the mids. More transparency and openness in the midrange (or the whole frequency spectrum) would be nice, and from your post it looks like the 250 DR will get me all that.

Bonjour Claude,

I purchased a new NAP-200DR/NAC-N 272 in the latter part of 2015 and then added an XPS-DR in early 2016. It was already a pretty nice sounding kit before adding the XPS and I am just thrilled with the music it makes. However, on occasion, I wonder if a NAP-300 would take matters to the next level. As much as I would like to, I am not yet prepared to make that level of financial commitment.

Very pleased to know you have found a new level of respect for the 200. Your comments confirm what I've been feeling when listening to music - the 200 is actually a great little amp.

rightcoastants posted:

the 200 is actually a great little amp.

Eh?!  :-)

C.

rightcoastants posted:

Bonjour Claude,

However, on occasion, I wonder if a NAP-300 would take matters to the next level. As much as I would like to, I am not yet prepared to make that level of financial commitment.

Yes, it would, in terms of musicality (conveying the sense of the musical message) and organic (as opposed to electronic) sound. Just don't listen to one in your system if you're not ready to spend the money!

ClaudeP posted:

rightcoastants posted:

Bonjour Claude,

However, on occasion, I wonder if a NAP-300 would take matters to the next level. As much as I would like to, I am not yet prepared to make that level of financial commitment.

Yes, it would, in terms of musicality (conveying the sense of the musical message) and organic (as opposed to electronic) sound. Just don't listen to one in your system if you're not ready to spend the money!

That's what I was afraid of! I am going to have to decide whether to renovate the kitchen and get new appliances or a NAP 300. 

rightcoastants posted:

ClaudeP posted:

rightcoastants posted:

Bonjour Claude,

However, on occasion, I wonder if a NAP-300 would take matters to the next level. As much as I would like to, I am not yet prepared to make that level of financial commitment.

Yes, it would, in terms of musicality (conveying the sense of the musical message) and organic (as opposed to electronic) sound. Just don't listen to one in your system if you're not ready to spend the money!

That's what I was afraid of! I am going to have to decide whether to renovate the kitchen and get new appliances or a NAP 300. 

Now that's an easy one, unless someone has invented a fridge that can kick out a choon like a 300 DR.