Naim Audio 1984 Price List!

Wow, hardly one page with such a small number of choices and look at those prices! I wonder if there is something similar for North America from the 80s or 90s

Arun

That's amazing Ken 

The Hicap is on the list but the pre-amps are referred to a 32 and 42 - with no .5 reference - so presumably the 32.5 and 42.5 were not out in 1984

I like the firmly worded advice at the foot of the price list re what's expected of dealers, active v passive, and speaker cable. 

15% vat. 

Price of 135s makes me sad

Chris, the Hicap would only work with the .5 versions of the Pre amps i think. I bought my 32/Snaps/110 in 82, and remember my dealer waxing lyrical about the Hicap when it came out later.

Nice one Ken!

Allowing for inflation and the added VAT, the 135s and 250s would have cost around £2400,00 in today's currency. If only...

NacA4 @ £1.30 per mtr. NacA5 is now £30 per mtr....

Never heard of a S.M.Clarke before.

Wonder how many employees at that time ?

gary yeowell posted:

Chris, the Hicap would only work with the .5 versions of the Pre amps i think. I bought my 32/Snaps/110 in 82, and remember my dealer waxing lyrical about the Hicap when it came out later.

Nice one Ken!

The early hicaps had a 4 pin output as well as the 5 pin 'socket 4'. I got my first Naim in 1983 (a 42/snaps/110). Back then it was still expensive, especially when I had to save up for it from my wages working in the uni bar while doing my PhD. Who would have thought that thirty years later people would be buying interconnects at £1,750 each! Or speaker cable at £300 a metre. 

S.M.Clarke = Shirley Clarke.  Shirley was co-founder with Julian, and very much the "Grande Dame" of Naim.

She passed away back in 2012.  Here's the thread in tribute to her;

https://forums.naimaudio.com/to...ley-clarke-1933-2012

Very nice lady indeed.

Struggling then and struggling still but managed to finally getting my first Linn/Naim system not too long after this letter.

Impressive enough to make a good friend of mine start the first ever Naim agency in this country after coming over and had a listen to it.

Cheers

Pedro

That takes me back. I do recall thinking at the time that surely the 135s couldn't be twice as good as the 250 on a cost basis. Still not convinced. Also makes the current 2nd hand prices of NAT01 and PS look a bit fairer. Very tempted apart from the FM turn off fear and lack of remote control. Also the statement regarding active vs passive are still debatable IMO. I'd run active 180s on IBL VS passive 250 (-all olive) any day.

Chris Dolan posted:

That's amazing Ken 

The Hicap is on the list but the pre-amps are referred to a 32 and 42 - with no .5 reference - so presumably the 32.5 and 42.5 were not out in 1984

I bought a Hicap within a few months of its release in 1984......the early HCs also had a single rail supply that worked splendidly with my 42. The .5 series was not introduced until 1985. That 42/Hicap saw off all the preamps I compared it with in my system....an Audio Research SP8, a PS Audio, Magnum and some four-box Krell monstrosity that was priced several fold above it. For some reason, I drank JMH Kool-Aid and sold the 42/HC to a friend and purchased one of the very first Musical Fidelity MVT preamps-to this date the very worst preamp I have heard. 

18 items listed life was so simple in those earlier Naim days

Don't forget there was only one TT and only 3 pairs of speakers that apparently warranted serious consideration, back in them there days.

Marksnaim posted:

That takes me back. I do recall thinking at the time that surely the 135s couldn't be twice as good as the 250 on a cost basis. Still not convinced. Also makes the current 2nd hand prices of NAT01 and PS look a bit fairer. Very tempted apart from the FM turn off fear and lack of remote control. Also the statement regarding active vs passive are still debatable IMO. I'd run active 180s on IBL VS passive 250 (-all olive) any day.

Have you been able to compare the 250 against the 135's?  I hadn't until I took a leap of faith and bought  a pair earlier this year.  I find it difficult to quantify improvement as "twice as good" etc. but I was expecting that the 135's would be like the 250 but more powerful - but the difference is more comprehensive: the greater power means much greater authority and control over the bass (so subjectively I have less but better quality) and it also brings much greater separation of the various strands of the music.  Twice as good?  I don't know, but I would certainly recommend anybody to pay 2x the s/h price of an Olive 250 to buy a pair - if you're lucky enough to find them.

Don't forget there was only one TT and only 3 pairs of speakers that apparently warranted serious consideration, back in them there days.

What would of been the price of the One and Only turntable back then i remembering purchasing one with a Ittok arm and I think it was an Asak cartridge? all I remember it took an age for the wallet to recover enough to purchase a Naim pre,power amp plus a power supply to upgrade my Nytech set up.

bluedog posted:

Marksnaim posted:

That takes me back. I do recall thinking at the time that surely the 135s couldn't be twice as good as the 250 on a cost basis. Still not convinced. Also makes the current 2nd hand prices of NAT01 and PS look a bit fairer. Very tempted apart from the FM turn off fear and lack of remote control. Also the statement regarding active vs passive are still debatable IMO. I'd run active 180s on IBL VS passive 250 (-all olive) any day.

Have you been able to compare the 250 against the 135's?  I hadn't until I took a leap of faith and bought  a pair earlier this year.  I find it difficult to quantify improvement as "twice as good" etc. but I was expecting that the 135's would be like the 250 but more powerful - but the difference is more comprehensive: the greater power means much greater authority and control over the bass (so subjectively I have less but better quality) and it also brings much greater separation of the various strands of the music.  Twice as good?  I don't know, but I would certainly recommend anybody to pay 2x the s/h price of an Olive 250 to buy a pair - if you're lucky enough to find them.

I did hear them when they came out at the Sound Organisation in London. I agree that they brought a very different presentation and I was hugely impressed. Unfortunately my wallet wasn't quite fat enough at the time for me to take the plunge. Oddly enough I found the difference between three 250s and six 135s to be less compelling when driving active Isobariks. Even more so considering the far greater expense. In the end I managed to source PMS Briks, Naxo, Hicap and two really early bolt down case 250's for only marginally more than the new cost of the 135's and that was a game changer for me. The value for money issue is so dependent on the fatness (or lack of) of the wallet at any given time. 

Indeed - that's why I had to wait 30 years to buy the 135's  Sadly, I no longer have my 'brisk and my S20's don't have an active option.  But ithere may come a time when I just might be tempted to listed to a s/h 552/300 set up - I think at current prices we're talking about £13-15k?? Olive prices seem to have flattened out so the price to change for the 552 option will make it worth looking at sometime.  In the meantime happy to enjoy the top of the passive Olive hierarchy.

£1.30 got you a nice pint of Lager or 20 Malboro's. That's £5.00 or £10.00 in today's money.   £30.00 seems like good going.

Pcd posted:

What would of been the price of the One and Only turntable back then i remembering purchasing one with a Ittok arm and I think it was an Asak cartridge? a

I am preetty sure that mine cost £340 (excluding arm and cartridge) in 1982 - and I got the Valhalla upgrade for the amount of the price difference which took it up to about £370 

Of course, in 1984 I was probably making about $28,000 a year, give or take...

In 1984, I got ~4,350 GBP grant for doing PhD.