I need to challenge people here as if one looks through older posts, the 52 was once the bees knees. Of course its updated model is better, but then the praise and words said for the 552 make one think THAT was the pinnacle.
No post says the 552 is lacking. None. So why desire the Statement?
(And how is the 52 now viewed?!)
Human fickleness is perplexing. Maybe that's the wrong word, but when the 'Statement 2' comes out, how will the Statement be commented on... e.g. "I was listening to superb hifi but now the band is properly in the room".
Curious, don't you think?
Oh well, we've heard all that praise before... Back in Vuks olive times the 52 was playing miles ahead in a different league than the 82, even SCed it would not come close to the level of the awesome 52. Then came the black 252 being significanty better but not for long until the magic 552 became the holy grail and pinnecle for every true naim enthusiast...Edouard still around? DR uprgade followed and now we hear the mighty S1 even leaves the 552 cold in comparison. I have been off the forum for several years and my hearing has deteriorated a bit while years were passing almost unnoticed...so nothing new under the sun..
Cheers
Franz
Maybe not, Franz. I've had a demo of 552DR and S1 back-to-back and was very impressed at what the S1 delivers over and above the 552DR. That said, it hasn't reduced my enjoyment of my 552Dr (thank goodness).
But I remember on your thread, 552 over 282..... it took you some time to decide to get the 552?
analogmusic posted:But I remember on your thread, 552 over 282..... it took you some time to decide to get the 552?
You remember correctly, analogmusic. The 552DR represents an almost eye-watering outlay and the 282/SCDR combination is very, very good. The S1, well, carries a price that is beyond eye-watering but I'd have to confess it has a performance to match.
As far as i intended from Mr. DB and other people experienced with Statement amps, it's just the S1 pre that wins hands down over the 552, much more than Nap S1 over the 500. In fact my experience with 552DR is that ,taking for granted its phenomenal dynamics, sometimes it sports a little aggressive presentation where the S1 is more open and natural at the same time. Probably the next gen, of preamps will receive a trickle down technology from Statement ( new volume control in first instance).
Regards
Roberto
no need of frame 
no cable mess..... very good design....
On the subject ... of a preamp sound .......... this does exist .... years ago my brother worked with Tim Paravicini on an amp for Heybrook ......... they tested loads of circuits including some very expensive selected IC's ......... they all sounded quite different even though the quoted frequency responses were ruler flat. The effect was not subtle - enough to effect perceived balance. In conclusion ... the whole thing is a series of design decisions regarding circuit layout, earthing, psu etc etc ......... and of course you finally have the interaction of the power amp with the pre amp. The 552 must have been an attempt at the time to push things as far as possible within certain perameters - to that end it is superb. The statement - largely removed the parameter/constraints on the designers - and not surprisingly things have moved on.
Regarding naim sound .... there is no doubt in my mind that Naim play with the circuit design to enhance sonic properties in alignment with their sonic trademark. fast leading edges, pacy sound etc etc.
I believe that there is no such thing as a preamp or passive controller that does not influence the sonic outcome....there are advantages and disadvantages depending on approach. Never forget the preamp is not something in isolation it is part of a system - that interacts with the amp and source......we live in a largely imperfect world .... otherwise it would be flat..... (perhaps not...he he)
well there appears to be a Naim sound - despite some Naim denial of this.
Change some of the Naim cables - like NACA5, lavender interconnects, DIN/XLR and there is no longer that Naim sound anymore.
In my experience of designing and building HiFi amps, the preamp was much more difficult to get right.
With a power amp you could get about 70% of the way there on paper by applying the right set of principles in the right places (knowing which principles and where to use them is the trick here), and then doing the last bit by tweaking.
With preamps I could only get about 30% of the way on paper and never really managed to get the tweaking good enough for my objectives. I settled on a star earthed passive controller using Alps 'blue' pots (the the same type that Naim use!) and carefully chosen wire and an approximately 'linear' internal layout. I never managed to beat this with an active preamp, simply because I wasn't good enough at tweaking preamps. Unlike power amps, with preamps I never really quite 'got it'.
analogmusic posted:interesting, that preamps have character of their own, when in fact at 252 and 552 level they aren't supposed for that kind of money.
To my ears, they couldn't sound more different.
Naim sound? No such thing.
More of the same? No.
I can only imagine what the S1 brings to a system. We've all got our cut off points. The S1 is in territory which in my universe gets spent/invested elsewhere.
Huge posted:In my experience of designing and building HiFi amps, the preamp was much more difficult to get right.
With a power amp you could get about 70% of the way there on paper by applying the right set of principles in the right places (knowing which principles and where to use them is the trick here), and then doing the last bit by tweaking.
With preamps I could only get about 30% of the way on paper and never really managed to get the tweaking good enough for my objectives. I settled on a star earthed passive controller using Alps 'blue' pots (the the same type that Naim use!) and carefully chosen wire and an approximately 'linear' internal layout. I never managed to beat this with an active preamp, simply because I wasn't good enough at tweaking preamps. Unlike power amps, with preamps I never really quite 'got it'.
Going on my third year with Naim, Time flies when having fun!
As one Audio Reviewer put it:
There are two types of components worthy of owning, the best & very close to the best, for a whole lot less!
Clearly the 552, exemplifies the former.
@ Hugh, what's your take on the following thread, posted a few years ago???
"Ok, so it's a deliberately provocative thread title, but in idly considering upgrading my 252 to a 552, it got me thinking about the real-world absurdity of buying an £18k box simply to control volume. I'm only feeding it from my NDS so not using it for input switching.
I know there have been a few threads on here about using the volume control of a dac in place of the pre - the Hugo springs to mind, and with the new TT version having remote control, you wouldn't lose any functionality of a regular pre. I also know a hifi reviewer who runs a 300 amp has a passive pre rather than a Naim pre, so clearly others have also considered alternatives to a pre, but am I missing something?"
Allante93!
PS. Can one use a non-Naim Passive Pre Amp with Naim AMPS?
I'm a little confused, in any event I went with the latter, pre-loved 282, as opposed to an passive pre!
I needed an Hub!
Why not Naim!
You can and it has been done ....some people claiming to good effect...... however, in my experience I have found that the naim preamp and amp must viewed almost as a single unit ...... I have head other preamps and some how it just does not sound quite right...... less life and energy.....
Allante93 posted:Huge posted:In my experience of designing and building HiFi amps, the preamp was much more difficult to get right.
With a power amp you could get about 70% of the way there on paper by applying the right set of principles in the right places (knowing which principles and where to use them is the trick here), and then doing the last bit by tweaking.
With preamps I could only get about 30% of the way on paper and never really managed to get the tweaking good enough for my objectives. I settled on a star earthed passive controller using Alps 'blue' pots (the the same type that Naim use!) and carefully chosen wire and an approximately 'linear' internal layout. I never managed to beat this with an active preamp, simply because I wasn't good enough at tweaking preamps. Unlike power amps, with preamps I never really quite 'got it'.
Going on my third year with Naim, Time flies when having fun!
As one Audio Reviewer put it:
There are two types of components worthy of owning, the best & very close to the best, for a whole lot less!
Clearly the 552, exemplifies the former.
@ Hugh, what's your take on the following thread, posted a few years ago???
"Ok, so it's a deliberately provocative thread title, but in idly considering upgrading my 252 to a 552, it got me thinking about the real-world absurdity of buying an £18k box simply to control volume. I'm only feeding it from my NDS so not using it for input switching.
I know there have been a few threads on here about using the volume control of a dac in place of the pre - the Hugo springs to mind, and with the new TT version having remote control, you wouldn't lose any functionality of a regular pre. I also know a hifi reviewer who runs a 300 amp has a passive pre rather than a Naim pre, so clearly others have also considered alternatives to a pre, but am I missing something?"
Allante93!
PS. Can one use a non-Naim Passive Pre Amp with Naim AMPS?
I'm a little confused, in any event I went with the latter, pre-loved 282, as opposed to an passive pre!
I needed an Hub!
Why not Naim!
My understanding is that Naim preamps are the prime source of the voicing to produce the 'Naim sound', therefore obviating the NAC by feeding a DAC with volume control like Hugo or even Dave to the power amp, or by using a passive preamp between even a Naim source and power amp, you won't get the Naim sound, or it is likely at least to be much diminished even with the remainder of the system Naim.
Also, if the power amp is susceptible to instability or other adverse effect from ultrasonic frequencies, as I understand Naim power amps are, amongst others, then filtering out of such frequencies could be essential with some sources. Whilst some DACs with volume controls do do that (e.g Chord) and so aren't a problem, others may not, and passive preamps in particular may not.
Excellent thread. As a non-engineer I have absolutely no knowledge or insight into the design of hi-fi components but the discussion vis-a-vis the Naim sound or otherwise has me wondering how much of the original design philosophy and DNA of the original Naim amps has endured into the most recent products like the new Unitis, Statement, 272 and even Muso?
Regards,
Lindsay
Allante93,
There's a lot more to a pre than a volume control.
Functional:
Volume Control. Frequency response shaping (LF & HF filters)
System Interfaces:
Input Impedance control
(optional) Buffer amp
(optional) Gain stage
(optional) Buffer amp
Input Selector
Gain stage
Buffer amp
Volume Attenuator / Balance control / Mute circuit
Output Buffer amp / Gain stage
Line Driver
I may well have missed a few things - as I said I wasn't very good at pre amps!
Huge posted:Allante93,
There's a lot more to a pre than a volume control.
Functional:
Volume Control. Frequency response shaping (LF & HF filters)System Interfaces:
Input Impedance control
(optional) Buffer amp
Input Selector
Buffer amp
Volume Attenuator / Balance control / Mute circuit
Output Buffer amp
Line Driver
Those are there to cope with a wide variety of different source so the user can connect almost anything characteristics (within certain limits). Whether all of those stages are necessary -or even any - depends on the source and its output. Some sources may not require a preamp, e.g if it includes a volume control giving an appropriate voltage output range, with impedance and current capability matching the power amp's input requirements, together with any necessary frequency cutoff. The difference then is one of any 'voicing' or 'sound shaping' introduced by a preamp if used.
The Strat (Fender) posted:Excellent thread. As a non-engineer I have absolutely no knowledge or insight into the design of hi-fi components but the discussion vis-a-vis the Naim sound or otherwise has me wondering how much of the original design philosophy and DNA of the original Naim amps has endured into the most recent products like the new Unitis, Statement, 272 and even Muso?
Regards,
Lindsay
Indeed it is an excellent thread, I'm with you Lindsay, being a non- Engineer & clueless about pre amp design.
But having a break in a luckily busy week, I've tuned in an caught this thread which reminds me of an earlier thread last summer.
{Why Do I Need A Pre-Amp!}
As usual I got beat up, because of my lack of understanding. But the OP, came to my rescue, and explained that my understanding of his thread, was on point.
Then HM, dropped the Bomb, and nobody said a word:
=================================
"Hence I’m still confused, Does the Hugo, fall into the Latter category, With it’s own internal pre-amp?
If this is the case, wouldn't it be better to utilize the internal pre-amp within the Hugo, as opposed to by-passing it, and using an 282, 252, or 552 active pre amp ?
Let's not mention an S1!
Just trying to Understand!
Perhaps I'm missing something !
Thanks In advance!
Allante93!
yes, the hugo has its own internal preamp\volume\voltage control. it cannot be bypassed. connecting it to a second preamp will degrade transparancy, even if it was the best preamp ever made."
===================================
Any comments?
Allante93!
You've got transparency vs character Allante - depends on how you like your playback
james n posted:You've got transparency vs character Allante - depends on how you like your playback
It was an rather interesting thread!
To say the least!
""
You have to think of the Naim amplifier as separated into pre-amp and power amp only so as to give the sensitive pre-amp section the opportunity to live in its own enclosure away from power supplies and main amplification; the pre and power amps are two sides of the one amplifier. Essentially what the pre-amp does is prepare the signal so that it is optimised for the power amp. Naim's design relies to some extent on bandwidth limiting to achieve best performance where ultra high frequencies are steeply filtered beyond 40-50kHz. This is achieved through both pre-amp and to a lesser extent the power amp. So it makes sense to provide the optimum signal for the power amp to make the best with. For this a Naim pre-amp is ideal, because they were designed to be matched together. With anything else fronting a Naim power amp, all bets are off.""
The same way HM, Simon, and Hugh, and the rest of the Forum like their playback!
Off Course, you need a Hub, for your LP 12, CD555, Ndac, etc...
Staying on Topic, would hate to loose this one to the Dreaded Padded Cell!
But which Hub!
282>252>552>S1
Allante93!
PS. If I recall, that thread got a little heated!
HAS the most of todays line inputs at 2v ish ,a passive preamp is all that you should require simple is the new way forward , reduces the cost 2
Allante93 posted:The Strat (Fender) posted:Excellent thread. As a non-engineer I have absolutely no knowledge or insight into the design of hi-fi components but the discussion vis-a-vis the Naim sound or otherwise has me wondering how much of the original design philosophy and DNA of the original Naim amps has endured into the most recent products like the new Unitis, Statement, 272 and even Muso?
Regards,
Lindsay
Indeed it is an excellent thread, I'm with you Lindsay, being a non- Engineer & clueless about pre amp design.
But having a break in a luckily busy week, I've tuned in an caught this thread which reminds me of an earlier thread last summer.
{Why Do I Need A Pre-Amp!}
As usual I got beat up, because of my lack of understanding. But the OP, came to my rescue, and explained that my understanding of his thread, was on point.
Then HM, dropped the Bomb, and nobody said a word:
=================================
"Hence I’m still confused, Does the Hugo, fall into the Latter category, With it’s own internal pre-amp?
If this is the case, wouldn't it be better to utilize the internal pre-amp within the Hugo, as opposed to by-passing it, and using an 282, 252, or 552 active pre amp ?
Let's not mention an S1!
Just trying to Understand!
Perhaps I'm missing something !
Thanks In advance!
Allante93!
Like Reply (1 Like)yes, the hugo has its own internal preamp\volume\voltage control. it cannot be bypassed. connecting it to a second preamp will degrade transparancy, even if it was the best preamp ever made."
===================================
Any comments?
Allante93!
I think that with the Chord DACs which do have ultrasonic filtering it is a matter of personal preference. Some people do not use a preamp with them, some do, and that is regardless of brand of either pre or power amp.
There was a thread early this year when someone directly compared Dave into a 300 or 500 (I can't remember for certain which), against through a 552 (IIRC), and in their case preferred the sound through the 552.
Innocent Bystander posted:There was a thread early this year when someone directly compared Dave into a 300 or 500 (I can't remember for certain which), against through a 552 (IIRC), and in their case preferred the sound through the 552.
This is something that has always intrigued me really about audio from an engineers perspective. The simplest signal path should be the best (let's assume impedance matching etc is taken care of) and from a signal integrity perspective this should result in the cleanest, most transparent playback - end of story.
From a musical enjoyment perspective, this is not usually the case and we tend to like more character in the playback and why some like vinyl, valve amps and characterful speakers. Whilst i don't tend to like excessively coloured systems, i don't enjoy the sterile character of a monitoring system either so i'm in the camp of musical enjoyment over absolute 'accuracy'.
To answer the OP -- why desire the statement pre over the 552?
Because the statement pro is significantly better value for money than the 552 pre.
By that, I mean it delivers more per thousand quid than the 552 pre does. This is not a law of diminishing returns - in fact quite the opposite here.
One problem with eliminating the preamp is that you can't then take care of matching the impedances presented at the input to the poweramp. It becomes the complex sum of the output of the 3rd party preamp and any cables that are used to connect that to the power amp. It will also be affected by the vagaries of how these vary across the audio (and low ultrasonic) frequency band. If you then add the ultrasonic spuriae from DACs and digital volume controls into the mix, the result is, to say the least unpredictable.
When I designed my last power amp, it was specifically designed to be fronted by a passive preamp. This necessitated quite a few changes to the circuit. There were about 7 or 8 just for that one change as I recall, in addition to changing the 0V arrangement and the routing of the input cables. As it happens, the intended position of the power amp circuit boards didn't need to be changed.
Huge posted:One problem with eliminating the preamp is that you can't then take care of matching the impedances presented at the input to the poweramp. It becomes the complex sum of the output of the 3rd party preamp and any cables that are used to connect that to the power amp. It will also be affected by the vagaries of how these vary across the audio (and low ultrasonic) frequency band. If you then add the ultrasonic spuriae from DACs and digital volume controls into the mix, the result is, to say the least unpredictable.
Agreed, though the vagaries of interconnects between pre and power apply in any non integrated amp. I assume you were primarily addressing passive preamps - but it of course applies to sources with volume control such as some DACs. And some sources with volume controls may be well matched to some power amps - the onus being on the person with disparate gear to check. (From its published spec, Dave as an example is likely to have no issues nor cause no issues feeding virtually any power amp with input characteristics in the range normal to hifi products (including Naim ones - but other DACs may differ.)