Introducing Uniti, our revolutionary new streaming platform.

Could Core get the streaming platform? That would be ideal

Solid Air posted:

jonnaim posted:

Yes existing range of pre amps is now 14 years old , tape monitor anyone ? 

As someone with a 282 / 250 dr / hi cap dr amps it is safe to say I will be doing no more upgrading until a new refreshed range is released.

naim seem to be targeting the John Lewis market and the premier league footballers leaving nothing for the rest of us with classic system kit.

 

very disappointed that it looks like another long wait for something new for us.

I honestly don't think that's a fair assessment. The Classic amps sounds brilliant. You mention yourself the DR upgrade, which was recent and very well received. Naim don't - unlike some others - do 'marketing upgrades'; they only refresh the range if there's a genuine improvement to be made. This has a very positive effect on second-hand prices and system matching. 

I don't know what you have against John Lewis customers and footballers, but I guess they might like hi fi too, unless they're disqualified by not shopping at specialist dealers? Not everyone knows whether the 282 or 252 are higher in the range, nor cares. The target market for the new Uniti range is much the same as the old one I would have thought. 

We should give Naim a pat on the back for this - a great little company at the top of its game - instead of berating them.

It's a snob value thing. Heaven help us if the "exclusive" hi-fi we like to boast about became attainable and recognisable by the sort of people who shop in John Lewis or, shock horror!!!, Richer Sounds.

Given how good the current classic range amps are, it would seem more likely to release new source components next. Things have moved on further there. DAC replacements would make the most sense to me since there are probably more ND? owners out there who would rather extend the life of the streamer without replacing it. It is probably the component of least resistance in terms of purchasing and acts as a gateway to new stuff. Regardless of whether you love the new styling (most people) or loath it (the minority and I), you're much more likely to slowly supplant existing gear with new gear if you already have one new bit (a hypothetical DAC) in the rack.

Ummm…interesting. Yes, the digital landscape (DACs, streamers and software) is moving faster than analogue (pre and power amps) as witnessed by the focus of the changes/upgrades to the Uniti range. I will admit that I am a die hard 'source first' old git which is of course centered in the digital realm these days. But I also feel that the pre amp is the 'heart and soul' of my system and have heard the most fundamental improvements in SQ as I have upgraded this 'beating heart' of my system.

Having said all of this, the biggest and most significant technological developments in recent years have of course been in the digital realm. So what am I saying? Well, IMHO, we are only going to make significant headway in the quest to improve SQ and move towards the ultimate goal of 'sonic realism' if both the analogue and digital facets of our systems advance in harmony and indeed the Statement project has so far concentrated on the analogue side of things. It took this initial fundamental development in the analogue realm (i.e. pre and power amp design) to lay the ground for what we all now anticipate - the Statement streamer. So although digital is moving faster than analogue, Naim have chosen to develop analogue first with the Statement project. That is quite a….err….statement of where their priorities lay and rather interesting don't you think?

Exciting times ahead and who knows how and where the Classic line will develop next. Trickle down Statement analogue technical developments  first, or trickle up Uniti digital developments, or both? All I know is that I will be watching with interest.

feeling_zen posted:

Given how good the current classic range amps are, it would seem more likely to release new . . . 

On the one hand, I think there's some merit to the idea that the Classic range amps are still pretty good. 

BUT:

The Classic range is, in the US at least, enormously over-priced for the SQ on offer (just looking at new prices).  I've had the chance to use an Exposure 3010S2 pre/power for a while, and it was noticeably better than the 202/NAPSC/HC/200 I stumbled in to.  A $3800 retail system should not be noticeably better than one that would cost over $10K USD, but it is. 

From that, and other experiences, I conclude that the Classic range is in desperate need of an overhaul.  If I had to speculate, Naim have focused on the extreme high end (Statement), shifting on the fly to address the market for streaming, and on consumer-friendly products like Mu-so.  I also note that the 5 series has been through more iterations than I care to contemplate; this to me represents a perceived need to be competitive in that market sector. 

The information about the new Uniti range is telling - 25 engineers working on it for 3 years represents a substantial capital commitment that is not available for overhauling the Classic range.  Which, in turn, tells us that Uniti is more important to Naim than is the Classic range.  Food for thought there . . .

Here's to betting that the "V1" and "nDAC" will be next to get the Statement upgrade treatment, followed by the IA line, 6si, XS3, SN3, etc. 

"The information about the new Uniti range is telling - 25 engineers working on it for 3 years represents a substantial capital commitment that is not available for overhauling the Classic range.  Which, in turn, tells us that Uniti is more important to Naim than is the Classic range.  Food for thought there . . ."

That's one interpretation, and not necessarily a correct one. Perhaps they could see that the same time, manpower, and capital commitment put into the Classic range was unlikely to deliver any meaningful change, save for a price increase to cover the R&D for what would end up as a marginally different product, because the improvements were not to be had.

And being owned by a corporate investment company, they may be under pressure to sell more units in growing markets where they don't have as much penetration...whereas the Classic series is more of a niche-type market with little growth potential, especially given the changes in peoples' music listening habits over the past 20 years.

Plus, people who buy the Uniti range can get "upgraditis" too...

Couple of impressions from RMAF, Core seems like a steal here in the US.  I would hate to own a US right now. Hoping that same fate doesn't fall on my Uniti 2. The new Uniti prices here in the US seem very nice compared to the old Uniti range. I thought there would be a steep price increase but that doesn't seem to be the case. Again the Core looks to be a steal at $2500. 

Bob Edwards posted:

feeling_zen posted:

Given how good the current classic range amps are, it would seem more likely to release new . . . 

BUT:

The Classic range is, in the US at least, enormously over-priced for the SQ on offer (just looking at new prices).  I've had the chance to use an Exposure 3010S2 pre/power for a while, and it was noticeably better than the 202/NAPSC/HC/200 I stumbled in to.  A $3800 retail system should not be noticeably better than one that would cost over $10K USD, but it is. 

From that, and other experiences, I conclude that the Classic range is in desperate need of an overhaul. 

To me that just sounds more like maybe Naim is not the sound for you. Which is also perfectly fine. Many would disagree that the Exposure outperforms the Naim at it's price point let alone above but for those that find it does, I think it is more of an indication that tastes have changed.

I say this from experience as one who worshipped at the temple of Linn for a long time and never felt Naim offered VFM until one day I did a dem of new Linn and Naim stuff and found to my shock the same experience you had with Exposure; "this Naim kit is trouncing this more expensive Linn kit". I'm not so naive as to think the Naim was objectively miles better. The Linn sounded pretty much how I remembered as did the Naim. But I like the Naim in a way I never previously had 15 years before. I had changed.

Naim might very well renew the classic range tomorrow for all we know but if you thought the discrepancy was so great with another brand, I suspect you may not be won over unless they abandon the Naim sound and go in a radically new direction (which will cause most of the old club Naim customers to leave when it comes time for the next upgrade).

I would never stick with a brand for the sake of it. I'm quite happy to consider other things if my tastes change or if Naim move in a different direction. But I don't think the current classics fail to match up to the competition in their price class (let alone lower cost price classes) either.

feeling_zen posted:

Bob Edwards posted:

feeling_zen posted:

Given how good the current classic range amps are, it would seem more likely to release new . . . 

BUT:

The Classic range is, in the US at least, enormously over-priced for the SQ on offer (just looking at new prices).  I've had the chance to use an Exposure 3010S2 pre/power for a while, and it was noticeably better than the 202/NAPSC/HC/200 I stumbled in to.  A $3800 retail system should not be noticeably better than one that would cost over $10K USD, but it is. 

From that, and other experiences, I conclude that the Classic range is in desperate need of an overhaul. 

To me that just sounds more like maybe Naim is not the sound for you. Which is also perfectly fine. Many would disagree that the Exposure outperforms the Naim at it's price point let alone above but for those that find it does, I think it is more of an indication that tastes have changed.

Naim might very well renew the classic range tomorrow for all we know but if you thought the discrepancy was so great with another brand, I suspect you may not be won over unless they abandon the Naim sound and go in a radically new direction (which will cause most of the old club Naim customers to leave when it comes time for the next upgrade).

Zen -

On the one hand, entirely reasonable.  On the other, extremely funny, since a number of people would say Naim abandoned the old Naim sound with the demise of the olive range.  Despite having owned a ton of olive gear, I'm not one of them.  And I had the same experience as you re Linn, though possibly a few years before you - mine was back in 1993.

I think the difference is less in changing taste than it is in a lack of attention.  The 202/282/252 haven't changed officially since they were launched, and all three were derived from their predecessors and share a lot of the sonic and musical character with them.  And if it were simply my taste, at least one of the people who heard both systems would have preferred the Naim, n'est-ce pas?  The 202, after all, has been around now for 14 years, and is basically a slightly improved 102, itself introduced in 1996 (IIRC, anyway).  I'm not sure why it should be a surprise that a newer design from a different company might actually be better. 

While it may appear counter-intuitive, I think Naim having focused their attention elsewhere was entirely appropriate - they might not be around if they hadn't. 

Bob Edwards posted:

feeling_zen posted:

Bob Edwards posted:

feeling_zen posted:

Given how good the current classic range amps are, it would seem more likely to release new . . . 

BUT:

The Classic range is, in the US at least, enormously over-priced for the SQ on offer (just looking at new prices).  I've had the chance to use an Exposure 3010S2 pre/power for a while, and it was noticeably better than the 202/NAPSC/HC/200 I stumbled in to.  A $3800 retail system should not be noticeably better than one that would cost over $10K USD, but it is. 

From that, and other experiences, I conclude that the Classic range is in desperate need of an overhaul. 

To me that just sounds more like maybe Naim is not the sound for you. Which is also perfectly fine. Many would disagree that the Exposure outperforms the Naim at it's price point let alone above but for those that find it does, I think it is more of an indication that tastes have changed.

Naim might very well renew the classic range tomorrow for all we know but if you thought the discrepancy was so great with another brand, I suspect you may not be won over unless they abandon the Naim sound and go in a radically new direction (which will cause most of the old club Naim customers to leave when it comes time for the next upgrade).

Zen -

On the one hand, entirely reasonable.  On the other, extremely funny, since a number of people would say Naim abandoned the old Naim sound with the demise of the olive range.  Despite having owned a ton of olive gear, I'm not one of them.  And I had the same experience as you re Linn, though possibly a few years before you - mine was back in 1993.

I think the difference is less in changing taste than it is in a lack of attention.  The 202/282/252 haven't changed officially since they were launched, and all three were derived from their predecessors and share a lot of the sonic and musical character with them.  And if it were simply my taste, at least one of the people who heard both systems would have preferred the Naim, n'est-ce pas?  The 202, after all, has been around now for 14 years, and is basically a slightly improved 102, itself introduced in 1996 (IIRC, anyway).  I'm not sure why it should be a surprise that a newer design from a different company might actually be better. 

While it may appear counter-intuitive, I think Naim having focused their attention elsewhere was entirely appropriate - they might not be around if they hadn't. 

I don't think the analog amps have changed much purely because so much thought went into them and analog has not seen advances like digital has. So I have no expectation that a new amp should always outperform a design that is nearly 15 years old. Given that Statement is a literal statement of the belief in dedicated analog only amplification chain, it makes it hard to assume they will suddenly go all Linn and merge digital and preamps more than they have. I can imagine revised and restyled amps but nothing drastic to make someone suddenly like the successor to a 202 if they were never fond of the original.

I think our Linn journey must have been at the same time. I bought a Linn Majik in '93 or '94 and went source to speakers Linn by '95. Took a 13 year break from hifi in 2001.

DUPREE posted:

I agree that this assessment is unfair, and the 272 is pretty much a drop in replacement for the 282 in all but a few use cases, the only thing that is missing is a 500/NDS level streamer/preamp. I honestly think the market for an analog only pre-amp like the 282 has to have about run it’s course. Maybe it’s generational (I’m in my mid 40’s) and do have a lot of vinyl, but I just couldn’t see where the market for a 282 type device is going to go anymore. You miss too much music not having the option to stream. I have owned an analog all linn active system (LK/Kairn/LP-12/Ikemi etc) and updated to NAC-N 272/XPS/NAP-200/LP-12 and a QB -- I think their roadmap is strong and the products they have been releasing just super.

> On Oct 7, 2016, at 7:42 PM, Naim Audio Forums <alerts@hoop.la> wrote:
>

If the 272 is truly a drop in fir the 282, the 282 would not be selling and Naim would drop it from its line (like the CDS3). Incidentally, where does the 272 stand now against a Uniti Nova?

Bob Edwards posted:

feeling_zen posted:

Given how good the current classic range amps are, it would seem more likely to release new . . . 

On the one hand, I think there's some merit to the idea that the Classic range amps are still pretty good. 

BUT:

The Classic range is, in the US at least, enormously over-priced for the SQ on offer (just looking at new prices).  I've had the chance to use an Exposure 3010S2 pre/power for a while, and it was noticeably better than the 202/NAPSC/HC/200 I stumbled in to.  A $3800 retail system should not be noticeably better than one that would cost over $10K USD, but it is. 

From that, and other experiences, I conclude that the Classic range is in desperate need of an overhaul.  If I had to speculate, Naim have focused on the extreme high end (Statement), shifting on the fly to address the market for streaming, and on consumer-friendly products like Mu-so.  I also note that the 5 series has been through more iterations than I care to contemplate; this to me represents a perceived need to be competitive in that market sector. 

The information about the new Uniti range is telling - 25 engineers working on it for 3 years represents a substantial capital commitment that is not available for overhauling the Classic range.  Which, in turn, tells us that Uniti is more important to Naim than is the Classic range.  Food for thought there . . .

I can see the logic.  It is interesting that the much of trickle down from the c 10 year Statement project (which seems to have finished around the time when the new Uniti project started) has been made into the Classic, XS, 500, and old Uniti ranges.

 Much of the innovation in the new Uniti range appears to on the digital side and ease of manufacturing.

So, I guess there is scope to update the casing of the Classic analogue components and make them more price competitive.  The other point is what the sterling exchnage rate.

There also seems scope to update the digital elements in the XS and Classic range, as pointed in posts above.

Exciting times.  We'll either complain or embrace depending how recently we bought something.  

Jude

DrMark posted:

.......

Plus, people who buy the Uniti range can get "upgraditis" too...

I did. Uniti 1 => Superuniti => NDX/SN2. 

The Uniti range is marketed at a different demographic I would suggest, and there will undoubtedly be a percentage of those who buy into the Uniti range that will get the bug and 'Go deeper' !

ChrisH posted:

DrMark posted:

.......

Plus, people who buy the Uniti range can get "upgraditis" too...

I did. Uniti 1 => Superuniti => NDX/SN2. 

The Uniti range is marketed at a different demographic I would suggest, and there will undoubtedly be a percentage of those who buy into the Uniti range that will get the bug and 'Go deeper' !

I think the gateway theory applies here or is at least one of the targets. I was told in recent HiFi show that 85% of Muso and 73% of Uniti buyers are new clients to Naim (if I remember the figures correctly). When you are hooked more purchases will follow…

Jude2012 posted:

DUPREE posted:

I agree that this assessment is unfair, and the 272 is pretty much a drop in replacement for the 282 in all but a few use cases, the only thing that is missing is a 500/NDS level streamer/preamp. I honestly think the market for an analog only pre-amp like the 282 has to have about run it’s course. Maybe it’s generational (I’m in my mid 40’s) and do have a lot of vinyl, but I just couldn’t see where the market for a 282 type device is going to go anymore. You miss too much music not having the option to stream. I have owned an analog all linn active system (LK/Kairn/LP-12/Ikemi etc) and updated to NAC-N 272/XPS/NAP-200/LP-12 and a QB -- I think their roadmap is strong and the products they have been releasing just super.

> On Oct 7, 2016, at 7:42 PM, Naim Audio Forums <alerts@hoop.la> wrote:
>

If the 272 is truly a drop in fir the 282, the 282 would not be selling and Naim would drop it from its line (like the CDS3). Incidentally, where does the 272 stand now against a Uniti Nova?

The 272 surely stands against the Nova where it currently stands against the SuperUniti. Unless of course the Nova, though some miracle, becomes as good as a 272/250, which is distinctly doubtful. According to my dealer, the 272 sells really well, the 282 hardly at all, and they couldn't remember when they last sold a 202. 

CharlieP posted:

 If I understand correctly, these new units run on an operating system adapted (from Linux?) by Naim.  There has been much talk on the Streaming Audio forum, as well as elsewhere, about the sound quality benefits of the small, purpose-built computer "Microrendu."  Perhaps a streamlined, purpose-built-for-audio OS in these new Unity offerings is one of several features intended to take audio quality up a few notches?  I guess we will soon hear from those who can audition these new boxes...

Charlie

I very much hope that Naim has put in the new box something at least as good as the competition. The old US already could have been a potentially interesting device. But it was impaired by poor software and plagued by reliability problems. It was also lacking essential low-level support for data exchange which is mandatory for a server.

I very much hope that Naim has learned the lesson and that the Core can be setup to fulfill the needs of different users: as a pure UPnP server, as a server + renderer, as an Open Home device, etc. These functionalities can be easily implemented at zero cost with open source software, see mRendu and Bryston BDP-Pi, for example. I also hope that the s/pdif output of the Core is better than (or, at least, as good as) what one can obtain with, e.g., a mac mini and a top USB to s/pdif bridge and that the Core can be directly connected to a streamer in much the same way as the Melcos. I also would expect that the Core is able to collect and dispatch internet streaming services to a connected DAC or streamer.

Otherwise, as HH suggests, I would not know what to be excited about the new Core. Let's wait and see. Hopefully details and technical documentation will come out soon.

Hungryhalibut posted:

Jude2012 posted:

DUPREE posted:

I agree that this assessment is unfair, and the 272 is pretty much a drop in replacement for the 282 in all but a few use cases, the only thing that is missing is a 500/NDS level streamer/preamp. I honestly think the market for an analog only pre-amp like the 282 has to have about run it’s course. Maybe it’s generational (I’m in my mid 40’s) and do have a lot of vinyl, but I just couldn’t see where the market for a 282 type device is going to go anymore. You miss too much music not having the option to stream. I have owned an analog all linn active system (LK/Kairn/LP-12/Ikemi etc) and updated to NAC-N 272/XPS/NAP-200/LP-12 and a QB -- I think their roadmap is strong and the products they have been releasing just super.

> On Oct 7, 2016, at 7:42 PM, Naim Audio Forums <alerts@hoop.la> wrote:
>

If the 272 is truly a drop in fir the 282, the 282 would not be selling and Naim would drop it from its line (like the CDS3). Incidentally, where does the 272 stand now against a Uniti Nova?

The 272 surely stands against the Nova where it currently stands against the SuperUniti. Unless of course the Nova, though some miracle, becomes as good as a 272/250, which is distinctly doubtful. According to my dealer, the 272 sells really well, the 282 hardly at all, and they couldn't remember when they last sold a 202. 

Why would the 272 be the 'lower' than the Nova with all the improvements ?  Unless of course a XPS  is added to the 272.

One dealer in one part of one country, is anecdotal info at best.

A random, rambling thought about platforms, upgrades etc, fueled by too little coffee whilst sat in the lab here at 8am on a saturday morning with a workload mountain to get through....

I think there is some confusion hereabouts regarding the directions in which improvements happen.

In the analogue world, you tend to make the big bets at the high end by doing things like reinventing your power regulator with an entirely new design, with circuit design to support it (eg DR) and then hope you can increase volume of the item by pulling it down the range. Much of this has happened with Statement -- volume knob, work on DR etc. You start by redefining the top of the tree.

Digital work goes the other way. You have to start with the volume product and then refine it upwards. Remember what I wrote about Naim (and Linn etc) not being able to define wire standards? It means that Naim has to work to other peoples rules here, and inter-operate both with networking protocols, streaming protocols and data formats. They have to make it as good as they can. This learning is iterative, and is ideal for pushing *up* the range. 

So you cannot start with a Statement level streamer. All that would happen is that you end up with an orphaned platform where support costs are terrifying, unit volumes are minuscule and profits are probably losses anyway, because you cannot push downwards with the digital tech. You *must* start at the lower end and push upwards. 

Do this week's announcements meant that a Statement streamer wont happen? I have no idea, and if i did I wouldn't discuss it here. What I am 100% certain about however, is that Naim *has* to get the Unity core digital platform out of the door *first*, and then strive to have it trickle upwards. 

if what has been said is true, then new Unity is a significant step up from old Unity, which in itself was a damn good platform for digital operation. New unity platform plus naim R&D to push upwards has huge possibilities for new NDX and NDS devices, and maybe ultimately a Statement level device. 

But do not confuse and conflate what can be done in the analogue area (push down) with the digital area (push up)

Hope that helps

jon

"These functionalities can be easily implemented at zero cost with open source software, see mRendu and Bryston BDP-Pi, for example"

There is no such thing as zero cost for a manufacturer. If naim is to do something, it has to test, validate, dealer support, warranty the platform.  That is an entirely different world to you shoving something on that you downloaded this morning. 

Well done Jon, a very informative, sensible post from someone who knows these things. Much as some of us seem to think otherwise, Naim is a thriving business and by acting for the best interests of their company, as they are compelled to do, we all benefit from the continuing excellent support we've come to depend on and the development of even better kit down the line.

fred40 posted:

It""s now possible I guess to power of the uniti instead of leaving ...the gear on standby. Why this change of believe? It was strongly adviced by Naim to leave it on 24/7.

There are non negotiable international rules about power consumption of devices in standby. It is an entirely different regulatory framework to the days of the 250. My CDS/52/135 6pack system trundles along at about 160W in standby (I posted the figures I measured nearly a decade ago on here), which would be quite unthinkable today.

Go look up EN50564:2011, for example, which supersedes IEC62301.