250.2 vs 300 or maybe 500 DR

Hi there Zoot, I have had NBL's active with 2 x 250 DR's and a standard 300 on the tweeters.

I now have these amplifiers on DBL's and I think this wonky arrangement works very well. First chance I get , I will DR the 300.

Thing is that I think the 500 has higher gain than all the other amplifiers so their may be a volume imbalance on the tweeters if only one 500 is used in a wonky arrangement.

I'm not 100 percent sure about this but hope someone else will confirm.

The 300 and 250 have the same gain so no problem there.

Regards,

Mario.

I read that too about the gain of a 500 but can’t the Snaxo adjust for that?

Only passive 500 here on NBLs, no space for active. Bass coherency not a problem but plug order hac an influence on coherence in general so try a few variations around that. easier with a passive setup admittedly. Getting the plugs of the Naim boxes on the same block is a good start as is proritising the signal earth which in your case will be the CDX2’s ps if they haven’t screwed up in the ps. then sources, pre and power. Is your NDS set to floating?

Bear in mind I have a passive setup though, DB likes his active system proritising power, when I’ve tried it it’s great for separating instruments but the sense of ensemble is lost but maybe it’s an active/passive thing.

I dont get on with "wonky" active. Cant see the point really. 

supercapDR was a significant improvement over olive supercap on my snaxo362 with 6x135s/DBLs

Why not DR the 250.2's?

jon honeyball posted:

I dont get on with "wonky" active. Cant see the point really. 

supercapDR was a significant improvement over olive supercap on my snaxo362 with 6x135s/DBLs

Why not DR the 250.2's?

Agree with all three.

I did try to live with a wonky setup on my DBLs, 2x500s & a 250.2 in various combinations, but it just didn't gel at all. Getting your 250.2s DRd would be the obvious way to go.

Hi Jon,

When you have a 300, getting two more is a real stretch so rather than miss the opportunity of active operation, get another 2 x 250's instead and discover a whole new world that passive can never go - providing your source is good enough. That is the point! with the best amp on the most important driver - the tweeter! I know Zoot is already active, but many people end up wonky for the reason stated above,

Cheers,

Mario.

Wonky is based on the premise that there is a need to compromise and not have the three amps all the best availabke. But the best approach to it is not definitive:

One argument is that the best sounding amp should be on the section where ears are most sensitive, though personally I would have thought if doing for that basis then mid might be better than top that is more commonly suggested.

Another argument is that the amp with better control of the speaker is best  on the bass driver.

Another argument is that the amp with greatest power capability should be on the bass because that is where the greatest proportion of energy is needed.

Of course, for anyone trying, they are easily swapped around to see what sounds best.

And yes, the 500 has greater gain than the other Naim power amps, so needs the active crossover adjusting to compensate.

I've used various wonky amp-mixes with the active DBL's once I started off with 6x135. The first was to replace a pair of 135 with the wonderful Exposure XVI monoblocks. Sounded great on the midrange and allowed a somewhat greater degree of organics with a very small reduction in swing. But they sounded horrible on the bass -although when driving speakers passively they were better at bass transients and extension than the 135s. 

So I loaned out the XVI to a friend and reverted back to the 135s realizing that they could be a bit better in crucial midrange reproduction. 

When the NAP300 first was introduced, I bought one almost immediately and replace the tweeter pair of 135s. This seemed a little cleaner than the 135s but nothing huge, or even moderate. Not too much later I got a NAP500 which just left me floored by how massive an improvement it was over the 300, which was moved over the the midrange section leaving me with 500T, 300M, 135B. 

I did try the 135T, 300M, 500B but instead of bass getting better, it got considerably worse than having the 500 on the TWEETERS. It looks like the snap and transients of bass notes find themselves into tweeter territory and by allowing the 500 to reproduce those gave the subjective impression that its benefits were full range. 

But no matter where the 500 was, I could here where it was-and more importantly where it WASN'T. So with extreme reluctance I got a PAXO just to try, jettisoning an active setup for the more plebian passive one. And then I realized the benefits of having the 500 doling out its magic too all of the drivers, not just a selected pair of them. The DBL with one 500 passive was quite in advance OVERALL (but not in every way)  to driven actively with the wonky tower of power. 

But I missed the purity and abundant details that was being swallowed up in the PAXO that was making it through the Snaxo/Supercap. So instead of getting two more 500, I found a PAXO more to my liking and then had the best of both worlds. 

Just before returning passive with the 500, I played around with 6x135s active and wasn't even close to the 500 passive. 

Moral for the OP....don't try to mix amps with greatly different capabilities. The advice to DR the three 250 is extremely sage and should not be dismissed without serious consideration. 

Would one do better with a passive 500 on NBLs, or three 250.2DRs active.....Maybe a moot point as I understand that the gear needed to go passive on NBLs no longer exist. I bought the speakers active and never received the passive setup?

Would one do better with a passive 500 on NBLs, or three 250.2DRs active.....Maybe a moot point as I understand that the gear needed to go passive on NBLs no longer exist. I bought used speakers that were setup active and never received the passive loom.

many will say 500 passive will beat 3 x 250 active, I would have to hear the comparison to believe it, I think active is a different presentation of the music which is always better to my ears. Even what I hear with statement confirms this for me any way.

Active rules

I lived for years with active Briks on a diet of 135's but would agree with Ron that a passive 500, now on my DBL's, is preferable. The similarity to watch out for is the attention to set-up detail. Both systems give a level of transparency that will crucify any imbalance in source quality, cable dressing or stands. When you get things right you will be rewarded with such a natural and realistic sound that hifi descriptions become a bit pointless.

zoot posted:

Would one do better with a passive 500 on NBLs, or three 250.2DRs active.....Maybe a moot point as I understand that the gear needed to go passive on NBLs no longer exist. I bought used speakers that were setup active and never received the passive loom.

 

IMO, no you won't. A few months ago, just out of interest, I popped the passive crossovers on my DBLs. It would have been handy If I could have gotten used to the passive presentation using one of my 500s, I would be able to lose six black boxes. I planned to persist for a couple of weeks, but in the event I swapped back to active within a day or so.

DBLs driven passively by a 500 is hardly shabby, but there really is no contest between this and active. I found exactly the same thing with my previous SL2s, and the SBLs before them. Active brings a level of control, speed and clarity you can't achieve with passive. 

I think I read somewhere (more than likely this forum) that the passive crossover for the nibbles wasn't naim at its best which makes me suspect that active should be optimal for them.  Having said that, mine with a 500 passive could sound fantastic.

Peter

Tony, I agree that active will always be better than passive with the same amps and I can understand why you'd be disappointed with one 500 after three in active mode. If I could afford another two 500's I would absolutely go active.

I think the real issue is at what point does passive become better than active with different amps. It's a question I asked the guys at Naim when the first 135's made an appearance; was it better to go passive with 135's or active with 250's. They suggested that 135's passive would be better and I tended to agree when I listened although I quite understand why some love the active appeal but in my system and to my ears the better amps passive always had a slight edge over lesser amps active.

tonym posted:

zoot posted:

Would one do better with a passive 500 on NBLs, or three 250.2DRs active.....Maybe a moot point as I understand that the gear needed to go passive on NBLs no longer exist. I bought used speakers that were setup active and never received the passive loom.

 

IMO, no you won't. A few months ago, just out of interest, I popped the passive crossovers on my DBLs. It would have been handy If I could have gotten used to the passive presentation using one of my 500s, I would be able to lose six black boxes. I planned to persist for a couple of weeks, but in the event I swapped back to active within a day or so.

DBLs driven passively by a 500 is hardly shabby, but there really is no contest between this and active. I found exactly the same thing with my previous SL2s, and the SBLs before them. Active brings a level of control, speed and clarity you can't achieve with passive. 

TonyM and Geko my sincere thanks- hifi on this level can make for serious decisions it greatly helps to hear from people who care!

I had very mixed results when I tried wonky-active. I found that wherever the 500 went you could hear it's effect and it was so much better than the 300, 250 or 200 I was playing with in the mix. This was back in the non-DR days.

But some wonky Active combinations worked very well: 200T, 300M, 2x135B was incredible - the 'old Naim' sound but very seductive and involving.

In the end at that stage I went for 3x300 for my then Briks I was running. Later when I'd accumulated the funds I swapped to 3x500 and it was a magical performance lift. Then came the DR days and I'm very happy with 3x 500DR with my S800.

Active is something that is hard to come back from when you get used to it. Probably some combinations of the latest DR amps will work wonky Active until funds permit all to be the same.

The 500 is slightly higher gain (1dB) but that can be easy taken out in the Snaxo gain-pots, but I think the 500 does not mix well with the other amps in Active mode.

DB.