NAP250.2 with Dynaudio Focus 160

the 300 got only a few watts more than a 250, but costs double the price.

why is that 

I would choose an Olive or CB era Nap 250 anyday over first generation 250.2

Most of them (up to mid 90'ies) have Holden & Fisher trafo, making above (AL as usual) bullocks quite unassuming.

Even with a service cost they are a cheaper option than s/h 250.2, and it will whipe the floor of a 200 too.

There's a reason non DR 250.2 amplifiers not holding their s/h prices very well, it was not their finest hour

I thought somebody on the forum recently added a 250 DR to a SN2,and was impressed with the improvement,so kept it,was it FINKFAN?It is also an upgrade listed in the SN 2 manual.

Perol posted:

I would choose an Olive or CB era Nap 250 anyday over first generation 250.2

Most of them (up to mid 90'ies) have Holden & Fisher trafo, making above (AL as usual) bullocks quite unassuming.

Even with a service cost they are a cheaper option than s/h 250.2, and it will whipe the floor of a 200 too.

There's a reason non DR 250.2 amplifiers not holding their s/h prices very well, it was not their finest hour

 

 

if that makes you happy Perol, whatever floats your boat. I'm happy for you 

Since Richard Dane owned all the 250s (CB,250 .2 and now 250DR), I'm curious what he thinks...

Richard?

No quarter posted:

I thought somebody on the forum recently added a 250 DR to a SN2,and was impressed with the improvement,so kept it,was it FINKFAN?It is also an upgrade listed in the SN 2 manual.

 

 

No quarter, here, I'll say it one more time, pay attention!

Not saying the 250-2 isn't technically the better amp, what I am saying is that when each amp is tested into different ohm resistance, neither amp puts out any more power than the other!!!! And both put out more power than the 200!!!!!!!!

Oh brother, forget it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I give up.

Ok gotcha!

 analogmusic,

SN2 interior, notice size of transformer, same as 250-300!!!!!!!!

so what? 250 got the same transformer as 300.

it's not the size of the transformer, it is the complexity of the regulation, and the SN2 is a unregulated amp

It doesn't stop me from enjoying my unregulated  202/200 so keep enjoying your SN2 

Anyway sources, and cables used to connect those sources to the preamp as quite important too, but you don't believe in cables either.

analogmusic posted:

Perol posted:

I would choose an Olive or CB era Nap 250 anyday over first generation 250.2

Most of them (up to mid 90'ies) have Holden & Fisher trafo, making above (AL as usual) bullocks quite unassuming.

Even with a service cost they are a cheaper option than s/h 250.2, and it will whipe the floor of a 200 too.

There's a reason non DR 250.2 amplifiers not holding their s/h prices very well, it was not their finest hour

 

 

if that makes you happy Perol, whatever floats your boat. I'm happy for you 

Since Richard Dane owned all the 250s (CB,250 .2 and now 250DR), I'm curious what he thinks...

Richard?

I really don't care what other thinks or who you think we should ask to underscore your statements

As opposite to you I express my taste and choice based on my own experiences

Not based on spec, marketing blob, others etc.

Have a nice day

I'm having a nice day perol, don't you worry about that.

 The thing about listening to a lot of the Naim range myself, is that I really don't care about this strange and nostalgic obsession with CB and olive kit either, I trust my ears and I do try to understand the reason Naim charge more for the range and also the complexity of their engineering. You got more as you pay more, and to reduce noise, more complex regulation is needed. When I compared my 250 DR to a Non DR 500, well I understood why Naim charge a lot more for the NAP 500, and why they went to such lengths to eliminate the speaker return currents from signal earth.

I've heard and read all these comments on the internet whatever 135 and 250 Olive are better than the newer range, whatever, who cares, I know what I hear with the current range is very musical for me and full of the rhythmic fun that I love about Naim.

My relationship with Naim started by hearing the current and classic 202/200 and Uniti range. 

whatever, not saying olive and CB aren't good, I'm sure they are, but I like soundstage and 3d qualities in my music which the classic range provides.

analogmusic posted:

so what? 250 got the same transformer as 300.

it's not the size of the transformer, it is the complexity of the regulation, and the SN2 is a unregulated amp

It doesn't stop me from enjoying my unregulated  202/200 so keep enjoying your SN2 

Anyway sources, and cables used to connect those sources to the preamp as quite important too, but you don't believe in cables either.

Try one of these Badlands, it might surprise you and shock you what a difference even a 130 GBP cable can make.

It's awesome !

Complexity of the regulation?????????????????????

Almost as silly as $8000.00 dollar speaker cables.

Enjoy the Kool-Aid!

analogmusic posted:

I'm having a nice day perol, don't you worry about that.

 The thing about listening to a lot of the Naim range myself, is that I really don't care about this strange and nostalgic obsession with CB and olive kit either, I trust my ears .

 

Who said I was worried !?

And you accuse me beeing obcessed !

Ha - I would have thought likewise

I have owned both 200 and 250-2 both driving Dynaudio X32's and although the 200 was a great amp the 250-2 is better.

analogmusic posted:

Perol posted:

I would choose an Olive or CB era Nap 250 anyday over first generation 250.2

Most of them (up to mid 90'ies) have Holden & Fisher trafo, making above (AL as usual) bullocks quite unassuming.

Even with a service cost they are a cheaper option than s/h 250.2, and it will whipe the floor of a 200 too.

There's a reason non DR 250.2 amplifiers not holding their s/h prices very well, it was not their finest hour

 

 

if that makes you happy Perol, whatever floats your boat. I'm happy for you 

Since Richard Dane owned all the 250s (CB,250 .2 and now 250DR), I'm curious what he thinks...

Richard?

I'm not sure what I can say here.  Yes, I have a recently serviced CB NAP250 from 1985 and also a fairly recent NAP250DR.  I have also either used or owned an early NAP250, a late Olive 250 and also owned an early pre-production NAP250.2. I like or liked them all.  They are all NAP250s after all.   And the current NAP250DR is excellent - quite possibly the best of the lot.

As for the NAP250.2.  This is/was an excellent amplifier. It extended the effective resolution and bandwidth of the NAP250 at both ends.  In truth it was a "faster" amp, but it also asked more of the source and pre-amp. Pre-amp wise the NAC252 or 552 were the best partners.  A NAC282 worked OK but a NAC202 with any power supply just didn't work with the NAP250.2. However, the NAP250.2 did have a certain warmth to it, a slight opacity and impression of a hump in the upper bass that was fine on a speaker like the IBL, SL2 or SBL, but which was exactly where so many other speaker makers would give a little boost - I guess because most people tend to like it.  Combined, it could be a little too much that at best could reduce the impression of pace, and at worst could make the sound a bit muddy and stodgy, particularly when compared against its junior sibling, the NAP200.

However, I can observe that regular service within the 10 year period is a must.  It could well be due to their regulated design (essentially two amplifiers where one regulates the power supply for the other) that means that as soon as anything begins to slip out of spec then the effect on performance is considerable.

Oh, and provided they're factory serviced every 8-10 years, there are no "bad" NAP250s of any type or age. They're all fab and they're all bona fide classics.

Thank you Richard, very informative and interesting.

Richard Dane posted:

analogmusic posted:

Perol posted:

I'm not sure what I can say here.  Yes, I have a recently serviced CB NAP250 from 1985 and also a fairly recent NAP250DR.  I have also either used or owned an early NAP250, a late Olive 250 and also owned an early pre-production NAP250.2. I like or liked them all.  They are all NAP250s after all........

And the current NAP250DR is excellent - quite possibly the best of the lot...............

Oh, and provided they're factory serviced every 8-10 years, there are no "bad" NAP250s of any type or age. They're all fab and they're all bona fide classics.

No personal experience here, but exactly what I was thinking, when the 250 DR hit the Market in 2015!

Msrp 250 USD = $6,995

Picked up my open Box 2015 250.2 $4.0K!

Full 5 Year warranty.

Cdx2>282>HCDR>3 x 250.2> Briks

I would imagine the regulated 250.2s in the above System has limited duties, when compared to a single 250, which is forced to handle the whole frequency range.

As usual Richard. Thanks for your Insight!

{As Analog has pointed out, informative & Interesting!}

The Forum At Its Best!

Allante93!

PS. Same Argument raised to the nth degree!

Naim Active System!

S1

552

252

2007 CES Show: Naim Debut Reference CDP

CD 555 > 282 > 3 x 250 > Active DBLs

Richard Dane posted:

analogmusic posted:

Perol posted:

I would choose an Olive or CB era Nap 250 anyday over first generation 250.2

Most of them (up to mid 90'ies) have Holden & Fisher trafo, making above (AL as usual) bullocks quite unassuming.

Even with a service cost they are a cheaper option than s/h 250.2, and it will whipe the floor of a 200 too.

There's a reason non DR 250.2 amplifiers not holding their s/h prices very well, it was not their finest hour

 

 

if that makes you happy Perol, whatever floats your boat. I'm happy for you 

Since Richard Dane owned all the 250s (CB,250 .2 and now 250DR), I'm curious what he thinks...

Richard?

I'm not sure what I can say here.  Yes, I have a recently serviced CB NAP250 from 1985 and also a fairly recent NAP250DR.  I have also either used or owned an early NAP250, a late Olive 250 and also owned an early pre-production NAP250.2. I like or liked them all.  They are all NAP250s after all.   And the current NAP250DR is excellent - quite possibly the best of the lot.

As for the NAP250.2.  This is/was an excellent amplifier. It extended the effective resolution and bandwidth of the NAP250 at both ends.  In truth it was a "faster" amp, but it also asked more of the source and pre-amp. Pre-amp wise the NAC252 or 552 were the best partners.  A NAC282 worked OK but a NAC202 with any power supply just didn't work with the NAP250.2. However, the NAP250.2 did have a certain warmth to it, a slight opacity and impression of a hump in the upper bass that was fine on a speaker like the IBL, SL2 or SBL, but which was exactly where so many other speaker makers would give a little boost - I guess because most people tend to like it.  Combined, it could be a little too much that at best could reduce the impression of pace, and at worst could make the sound a bit muddy and stodgy, particularly when compared against its junior sibling, the NAP200.

However, I can observe that regular service within the 10 year period is a must.  It could well be due to their regulated design (essentially two amplifiers where one regulates the power supply for the other) that means that as soon as anything begins to slip out of spec then the effect on performance is considerable.

Oh, and provided they're factory serviced every 8-10 years, there are no "bad" NAP250s of any type or age. They're all fab and they're all bona fide classics.

Richard - you have articulated my thoughts/experience with the 250-2 in a way that I have failed.  I'd heard it in demonstrations where I thought wow I want that, yet on my then Contour 1.8s it seemed laden whereas the 200 just grooved away.  

Regards,

Lindsay

Richard, your post could  be understood like you think that partnered with SBL's a 250.2 would make a better choice than a 250DR, is that correct? 

I have an olive 250 (badly in need of service) which has been fine with the SBL's, in my room I haven't felt any upper-bass hump, rather the opposite. I have considered replacing it with a new (ish?) 250DR in stead of having the old one serviced, I'm not sure though if the upgrade with 250DR can justify the extra cost. 

Regards,
Claus

All I’d say, which might help, is that with the SL2s I find the 250DR miles better than a 250.2. 

I've spoken to other Naim forum members who say the 250 DR isn't necessarily miles ahead of 250.2....  

And?