Size matters? (Fun is the one thing that money can buy?)

I wonder how many of them would feel the same if they put one in their current system?  I have a feeling most would not want to for fear of a certain realisation.

You're probably right but they must have been special products in their day to be so revered all these years later.  When I was young I had a Honda 400/4 which I loved and I still look back at that as a 'proper' bike that embodied everything that was good about the hobby but I would guess it would be nice to won now but a bit dodgy on the road compared to anything current.

Kiwi cat posted:

In 1990 we had a home demo of Naim amplification to use between my Linn  Sondek and Celestion Ditton speakers . It was the Nait 2 vs the Naim 62/140. Frankly the Nait 2 sounded better than the 62/140. It was not until the Hicap was added that the 62/140 sounded better than the Nait 2. I think the Nait 2 and Sondek is a wonderful combination and a great "man cave" system. The Nait 2 is a supreme example of the Naim sound. Just match it with appropriate speakers and you are in audio nirvana.

Today's great man-cave system (or at least, my man-cave system) is Qute2/NAP100/Dynaudio X12's on stands.

Max, re definition of fun . . . this man-cave system is relevant.  I think part of what can lead to the "fun" descriptor is when a system "sounds great and is not so crazy expensive that I have to wonder whether I'm getting all that I paid for."  With a Nait-based system, or Qute, the money is short and it's fun because it sounds great and we haven't mortgaged the future.  Why isn't an $80,000 system so fun? Maybe because once having spent $80,000, we have this nagging thought that we don't KNOW if we're getting our money's worth.

With a Nait, or Qute, one can hardly conclude that we're not getting our money's worth.

Bart posted:

 Why isn't an $80,000 system so fun? Maybe because once having spent $80,000, we have this nagging thought that we don't KNOW if we're getting our money's worth.

 

Nail, Head, Bashed!

Hence, the regular comments on here regarding how much might be lost, should one "downgrade" to fewer boxes.

I occasionally harbour such doubts when, gazing at the stack of boxes on Fraim, I wonder "do I really need all this kit to enjoy my music?"

I guess I'll never take action to find out, and the feeling usually soon passes, as enjoying the "now" is more important than trying to recall, (probably inaccurately), how good or otherwise things used to sound.

It's all good.

'Fun', 'Musical Involvement', 'Emotion' are nothing to do with technology and more to do with psychology.  However getting a complete and rounded system for reproducing music where both the technical aspects (such as detail, bass extension, low compression at the frequency extremes, etc., etc., etc.) and the psychological aspects are in full balance is a function of technology.

For myself enjoyment of reproduced music comes from getting this balance right (at whatever technological level or price point!).

P.S.  Watts don't measure quality, they only measure the potential to make things louder.

To me, fun is a concept of enjoying oneself in an overwhelmingly pleasant way (if that isn't tautology), and is far more to do with the music than the quality of its reproduction.

i might describe going to a live rock gig by a favourite band as fun. I certainly wouldn't consider the same word for a tragic opera, which I may enjoy just as much, but the emotions stirred are rather different.

On this basis I suggest a more appropriate word than fun might be enjoyment.

As for the music system, I think I gained as much enjoyment from  my music 40  years ago as I do now, though the system I play it through has changed completely (and I tapped my foot involuntarily to rhythmic music then, and do now). There is a level of refinement in what I have now that I certainly like and appreciate, and I'm sure that if I were to put this side by side with my system 40 years ago I'd find the latter disappointing - but it did not make listening to music lack enjoyment, and hand on heart I can't say I enjoy it more now, but I am certainly in a very happy place with it.

cat345 posted:

Massimo Bertola posted:

 

... ''Is the audio myth according to which smaller, less powerful amps frequently sound better than bigger, more powerful ones, true?'' 

 

In some ways I do believe that myth. Less components, less taxing of the power supply and easier implementation. I believe that things changed when the hifi industry started following the trend toward smaller and less efficient loudspeakers. People wanted smaller loudspeakers that can do bass and as a consequence the need for more powerful amplifiers.

What a waste in the name of a more friendly decor!

 

That reflects my own observations over the years

Loki posted:

The fun is first choosing the path and then walking the path; choosing the music, then listening to the music; then choosing the next upgrade... ad infinitum.

To some of us choosing the gear, whether first system or upgardes is a chore, a necessary process to get where we want to be, but a lot of time researching, picking through the hype, going to dealers, listening, avoiding being led over budget, fear of being ripped-off (especially if buying secondhand unseen) etc etc.

Of course that's not denying that the discovery of something that sounds better can bring a smile to the face - the wow factor - while for many the act of purchase can have that psychological kick (I can't remember what it's called), like a feeling that Christmas has come (though sometimes followed by post-purchase guilt or doubt, and maybe post-purchase justification especially if less satisfying than expected, and time spent aclimatising to the new sound convincing self it is better).

Best get a great sounding system on first purchase and stick with it forever - except systems people can afford are often of lesser sound quality than they would prefer, while even if someone did buy the ideal system on day 1, chances are that occasionally something would break and they'd have to go back to the research etc...

"Fun" for me involves a lack of control. Letting loose, not measuring, not analyzing, living in the moment and not looking at the next thing coming. In short, throwing away anxiety and cranking the volume. Dynamic, punchy, toe tapping, body throwing stuff. Start with a pounding beat delivered on time, don't shred me with treble and I'm probably going to have fun with it.

On the other hand, there's joy, satisfaction, emotion and intellectual pleasure that comes from presentations with more control, balance and subtlety. If they can also keep your foot tapping as the complexity increases, they must be Naim systems  As long as the dollars put in don't bring with it an anxiety that ruins it, this is the sweet spot for me.

Cars, for me, are like this too. We still have an old Subaru Impreza that is still fun to fling around country roads. It isn't fast, it isn't a sports car, it isn't comfortable, I have to crank the windows myself, it's ugly and full of dents and the neighbors must hate having to look at it in our driveway, but it can go anywhere, in any weather, it sops up any pavement irregularity and sticks until it doesn't. It embodies freedom from worry and freedom from pretense. I also have a Porsche Boxster S. The Porsche isn't fun to fling around country roads because isn't fun pounding a more expensive car through real world bumps and chuck holes when you are the one making the payments. I find myself worrying about where I park it, where I drive it, getting rock chips, getting it dirty, tearing up expensive tires and finding cats sleeping on the fabric top. But get that Boxster on decent pavement in the mountains and it has a satisfaction to the way it drives that I haven't yet found in anything else I can afford. Me driving that car down Skyline Drive with the top down and my wife sitting next to me is as close to heaven as I'll ever get. Add a Naim system to that and I'll skip heaven altogether.

Many interesting replies, thanks. I'm slowly reading them (I'm a slow reader/thinker/digester), and am slowly realising that perhaps my idea of why Naim is special is because it's fun from Nait to NAP500... from top to bottom, like a good human being.

More coming, hopefully.

M

dave marshall posted:

Bart posted:

 Why isn't an $80,000 system so fun? Maybe because once having spent $80,000, we have this nagging thought that we don't KNOW if we're getting our money's worth.

 

Nail, Head, Bashed!

Hence, the regular comments on here regarding how much might be lost, should one "downgrade" to fewer boxes.

I occasionally harbour such doubts when, gazing at the stack of boxes on Fraim, I wonder "do I really need all this kit to enjoy my music?"

I guess I'll never take action to find out, and the feeling usually soon passes, as enjoying the "now" is more important than trying to recall, (probably inaccurately), how good or otherwise things used to sound.

It's all good.

I've kinda done the experiment, by owning 2 systems.  The Qute system is, definitely, fun.

Clemenza posted:

"Fun" for me involves a lack of control. Letting loose, not measuring, not analyzing...

That really captures it. The point where an audio system stops being fun is when you're analyzing it more than just enjoying the music.

When I think of fun components, I think of the mu-so, the CDX, the CD5XS, amps like the Ion Systems Obelisk 2 (the poor man's Nait 2), the Sonneteer Alabaster, the Qute, speakers like the Amphion Argon 3 speakers, the Graham Audio LS5/9 and the Davis Acoustics Olympia Master One. If I had to analyze why they're fun, I think it comes down to focussing on the midrange and getting the timing right. Once those are present, minor problems elsewhere are easier to live with, or to forget about.

Jan

So more hi and less fi?

Makes choosing speakers easy - an ATC SM75-150 on its own, no woofer or tweeter. Wonderful, wonderful mid - the lack of bass and treble clearly being irrelevant!!!

Fun for me is the unexpected. Sometimes it is a great surprise how something changes by a random parameter, like using CD instead of a Spotify-streamed piece of music, or my old Technics amp which is driving my mans-cave (yes, I have one) 30yr old speakers to great levels.

I copy the words of Max that Naim is fun from Nait to 500 Series. In any case, where I threw in a piece of Naim, there was a drastic improvement in SQ.

I love it - more money to be spend on Naim.

I agree with most others, fun/enjoyment can be experienced on most systems, since it is a personal psychological thing, the right music at the right time. My current system a mu-so qb, and 2 small radios, works fine, especially the qb is fantastic and tempts me at time to dance, something that for estetic reasons should be avoided at all costs. I am sure I will enjoy my system   when my 250s and 200 come back from DR and service.  

Jan-Erik Nordoen posted:

Clemenza posted:

"Fun" for me involves a lack of control. Letting loose, not measuring, not analyzing...

That really captures it. The point where an audio system stops being fun is when you're analyzing it more than just enjoying the music.

When I think of fun components, I think of the mu-so, the CDX, the CD5XS, amps like the Ion Systems Obelisk 2 (the poor man's Nait 2), the Sonneteer Alabaster, the Qute, speakers like the Amphion Argon 3 speakers, the Graham Audio LS5/9 and the Davis Acoustics Olympia Master One. If I had to analyze why they're fun, I think it comes down to focussing on the midrange and getting the timing right. Once those are present, minor problems elsewhere are easier to live with, or to forget about.

Jan

When a system's balance is just right, so that one forgets about it! The component's on their own don't cut the cake.

Massimo Bertola posted:

Loki,

thanks, you've forgotten to add that it was Side One, Track Six...

Joking. Mine was a reference to that song, of course. And it was meant to wonder if fun can be bought by money after all, since it appears that a Nait 1 (1983, 13W) is enough to provide it.

Best

Max

Does it matter how musical ( or fun ) an item is or perceived as being if you are listening to it when you are not in the mood to have fun ?

Looking back my old system of Micro seiki DD 40 / Quad 303 and 33 / Radford Tristar T90's was so much more fun than anything that I have listened to since but was that becasuse I was 21 at the time and "free and easy " ?

In part I think so – or, rather, I think that fun is perhaps a function of a mix of age and a given way to 'live' it. In this sense, I fear it becomes more and more difficult to experience fun with age as it is more and more complex to 'live' one's age.

Massimo Bertola posted:

[snip] as it is more and more complex to 'live' one's age.

 

Can you elaborate a bit more on this pleae? If I'm not mistaken, I'm one generation behind you and I cannot see how it gets more and more complex to live one's age.

Open question from someone who likes to be enlightened.

Is it size, or one's perception of size when comparing with everyone else? Does comparison diminish fun by promoting an inferiority complex?

Loki posted:

Is it size, or one's perception of size when comparing with everyone else? Does comparison diminish fun by promoting an inferiority complex?

That depends on whether you are of the "keeping up with the Jones' " one-upmanship mentality, or somehow regard the hifi as a status symbol. 

In terms of music reproduction a good example would be the diminutive PMC Fact 12, which vastly beats many a larger floorstander in terms of sound quality. But in terms of perception, it  depends where you are coming from:  some people, e.g preferring stand-mounts, may  perceive the Fact 12 as large, to people accustomed to many decent-quality floorstanders they may be perceived as small.

As for  the question, measuring one's chattels agains someone else's, by any measure, e.g. cost as well as size, and whether that be hifi, TV, car,  etc., is surprisingly common but is a sad, negative personality trait, and I am sure can lead to feelings of inferiority if the individual feels a need to have things at least as good but maybe doesn't have the means to do so. Worse, of course, is the person who feels they have to boast about their better things, trying to meke themselves feel superior, which again is surprisingly common. 

ARDBEG10Y,

what I meant is that age becomes complex with age. Biology is definitely tautologic. My self-perception is that of a younger man: I have long noticed that our self-image (how we feel ourselves from inside) ages much more slowly than our body and mind. My father-in-law considered himself 'a boy' until, at 78, he had double brain stroke and was given for dead in hours (now he's alive and not bad, thanks luck).

My ears are not the same any more (although they do well for 63); and my capacity to, say, let myself go, enthuse about something, be spontaneous is diminishing. As my wife wisely remarks, I have listened to an enormous amount of music in my life, and I listen as a composer (which I am, after all), not as a music lover, so each and every session of music is for me terrain for reflection, analysis, comparison; I hear an orchestra and mentally elaborate the score, and I use that experience to enrich my familiarity with sound and music. I am never tired with active participation in music.

But when I am alone with the stereo, all that asks a huge toll: my experience of what comes out of the speaker is not a plain listening pleasure but a constant, accurate comparison with everything I have musically experienced in my life; I would very much love to lean back, relax and enjoy that innocent, half-living sonic postcard but truth is, I can neither hear reproduced music like a plain listener nor like a professional – I sit in a listening limbo where my expectations are high, disappointment 'round a corner and yet my inner wish to be thrilled, entertained, transported away is still the one I remember from my twenties, when I put In the court of the Crimson King on my cheap turntable and was carried to a synesthetic dreamland where music, sound, even the album sleeve, my daily life, the friends I used to play with, all became a whole, a unique whole.

Now I simply can't do that: because of the life I've lived. So a part of me still feels like a 20 years old, another is well aware of being 63. You can't fix that, not more than you can become entirely an old man or forever remain a youngster. There is a mix we have to accept. And each year brings more contrast, more tension...

But it's wonderful to be ageing, too: first of all, my luck is so enormous that after my share of relational s**t (three tentatives of life as a couple) I ended up with a wife who's 21 years younger than me, accepts my audio nut-ness gladly, never fusses about one cable or anything else; and is a choir conductor and a delightful human being. I have money to buy things (well I have been working for almost 40 years), and enjoy good health (apparently). And I could never, ever renounce my experience, what gives my life its richness. So, I said that age become complex with age, not that it becomes bad or difficult. Complex is something that asks to be reduced to unity (now I'm talking like my old master); a worthy task, to make one's life a pleasant unity, but not easy... When you want to complete your journey while a part of you still dreams being still, relaxed, uncommitted at the start of it.

My very best wishes

Max

That is a very good description of the aging process - and it does mean it is harder to have 'fun' than when much younger, though not harder to have enjoyment and satisfaction, and indeed if lucky enough to have achieved [much of] what you wanted to achieve out of life to date maybe satisfaction comes more easily.

Innocent Bystander posted:

(...) and indeed if lucky enough to have achieved [much of] what you wanted to achieve out of life to date, maybe satisfaction comes more easily.

Agreed. Even if [some of].

M