Updated 272

Man with no Naim posted:

372 or 572 will come a lot hater , if ever. I would suppose, that will depends on what drops out of the new range of analogue pre- amplifiers, whenever that happens.

 

If I recall correctly, with the introduction of the 272, Naim indicated that - as far as integration goes - the 272 is as far as they could go so I really doubt if we will ever see a 372 of 572 ...

Klout10 posted:

Man with no Naim posted:

372 or 572 will come a lot hater , if ever. I would suppose, that will depends on what drops out of the new range of analogue pre- amplifiers, whenever that happens.

 

If I recall correctly, with the introduction of the 272, Naim indicated that - as far as integration goes - the 272 is as far as they could go so I really doubt if we will ever see a 372 of 572 ...

The NDS used to be the best Naim could do in one box. Things move on...

best

David

David Hendon posted:

Klout10 posted:

Man with no Naim posted:

372 or 572 will come a lot hater , if ever. I would suppose, that will depends on what drops out of the new range of analogue pre- amplifiers, whenever that happens.

 

If I recall correctly, with the introduction of the 272, Naim indicated that - as far as integration goes - the 272 is as far as they could go so I really doubt if we will ever see a 372 of 572 ...

The NDS used to be the best Naim could do in one box. Things move on...

best

David

??????? Surely thats 2 boxes ?

NDS is one box and so is ND555. Or if you prefer, no doubt NDX was as good as they could get it with a PS built in, but NDX2 is better.

What I mean is that the best you can do one day is not necessarily the best you can do a few years later.

So just because 272 was the best they could do three years ago, there is no reason to think that is it for ever.

Of course whether Naim call it 272-2 or 372 is just marketing.

best

David

Things move fast with new technology 

My dealer is moving on his 272 (and not replacing it), as reportedly most of his customers looking for a low box count system are choosing NDX/Supernait 2 system as sounding better to their ears than 272/power amp combo.  Just another perspective I guess and each to their own?

Please don’t shoot the messenger - I know there’s a lot of 272 love ???? on the forum!!

ATB.  George.

GeeJay posted:

My dealer is moving on his 272 (and not replacing it), as reportedly most of his customers looking for a low box count system are choosing NDX/Supernait 2 system as sounding better to their ears than 272/power amp combo.  Just another perspective I guess and each to their own?

Please don’t shoot the messenger - I know there’s a lot of 272 love ???? on the forum!!

ATB.  George.

If I move my Nova to my second system, I’d be looking at the NDX2 and SN2 option over the N272, as the new architecture is probably much better and the NDX2 is certainly a better source.

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

SPE posted:

If Naim don't introduce that line of products I think it is likely I will become an ex-customer at some point in the future, which would be a shame after 10 or so years of buying only Naim equipment (aside from speakers). The analogue preamps are too outdated in their design and functionality to interest me, and frankly, the cost of a separate Naim streamer and preamp (and associated power supplies) is too expensive, no matter how good it may sound.

I hope this doesn’t come across as patronising, but perhaps Naim is not for you... Naim focuses on SQ and enjoyment as a primary goal.. Their preamps are arguably world leading, and certainly world class, and it took the Statement NAC to better the 552 ... The Naim many of us appreciate are not going to compromise that for a bit of tech bling that will be forgotten about in a few years time... I suspect if you want consumer lifestyle fashion products with built in obsolescence then the market is full of such manufacturers .. so take you pick... but if SQ is the most important then Naim should be on your audition list.

One of Naim’s key design considerations is separation and decoupling... quite common in the world of precision electronics, less common in consumer electronics...  so I very much doubt, especially at the top end we will see products with lots compressed in as SQ will suffer. The 272 was a real challenge  at the time, and I suspect still is, and was as far as they could go with compression with out having an unacceptable impact on SQ.

 

Hmmm, I feel that deserves a reply.... please take what I say here as debating a point of interest. Maybe you are entirely right, but I have to say that I see some of it differently.

Perhaps Naim is not for me? Well, yes, that's what I said in my post, if I had to choose my next source/preamp upgrade from the Naim range as it is today, I don't see anything that appeals very much to me. But as I also said, I think that is a shame. When I first bought a Naim system about 10 years ago there were plenty of things in the Naim range that appealed to me, as there were through the years between then and now, and my Naim system has gone through several iterations in that time. The sentiment behind my post was that I hope Naim can extend/adapt/evolve their offering such that I don't feel compelled to go elsewhere in the future. Does the hifi market have to be segmented into those who want good usability and functionality over sound quality and those who want good sound quality over usability and functionality? Why not both?

As to the merits of the Naim analog preamps, it is indeed "arguable" that they are world leading, but I agree that they sound very good. I used to own one, albeit "only" a 202, but over the years I have heard them all, 202, 282, 252, 552, S1, in various different circumstances. The reasons that I don't much want to buy another one now, and the reasons why I described them as outdated are:
1. The input sensitivity is too high, which has two consequences, firstly a high level of noise added to the signal at the output of the preamp, most obviously apparent as a hissing noise from the tweeter of the speaker when no music is playing, which can only be to the detriment of the sound quality when music is playing, and secondly a volume control that is difficult to use, as a small movement of the control produces a large change in volume from the speakers. My take on that is that the fundamentals of the design date back to the mid-1970s when Naim first started making amplifiers. Maybe the sensitivity was ok then when the sources being connected were turntables, 8 track cartridges, reel-to-reel tapes, AM tuners, or whatever, but with the higher output levels of the DACs being connected now, and when most recordings are mastered at high levels of loudness, it does not work well in my experience.
2. The absence of a display with a numeric representation of the volume level selected means it is not possible to accurately, and repeatably, choose the volume you are listening at. Ever compared two versions of a recording and realised the reason one sounds a bit better than the other is just because it is a bit louder? Or found that a pair of speakers only seem to 'come alive' at a certain volume? My point is that the volume level you listen at is critical to what you (think you) hear.
3. Six or so buttons to control six or so analogue outputs are not needed today. I'm old enough to have made recordings to cassette tapes, but it is a long time since I last did it, and I doubt I am alone in that. Again, how old is the design?
4. Ditto a large knob for balance control.
5. There is no headphone output... headphone listening is quite popular these days.
6. I use one digital source, six or so analogue inputs is a lot of redundant functionality to me.
Of that list, I suggest that points 1 and 2 are critically important, and I do not believe that to address them would be to deliver consumer lifestyle fashion products with built in obsolescence.

Finally, to the point that separating and decoupling functionality is the only way to the best sound quality, and that the 272 has pushed integration to the limits of sound quality. Really? Have manufacturers such as Linn, Chord, Cyrus, DCS, Vitus, Hegel, Auralic, to name just a few that come to mind, all got it wrong and only Naim know how to prioritise sound quality? Are they all producing tech bling that will be forgotten about in a few years time? Other than perhaps at the very high end, Statement and 500 series maybe, in Naim terms, I just don't find it plausible. I know Naim can give me something that sounds good with multiple boxes at a high price, my challenge to them is to give me the Naim sound quality, or ninety-something percent of it, in fewer boxes at a lower price. That may not be easy to do, but I don't believe it is impossible.

Anyway, apologies for the long reply... enjoy the music whatever way.

It clearly makes no sense for Naim to have all its streaming products except one on the same platform, so in terms of production process, parts, skills and in every other way, they have to either replace the 272 or delete it without a replacement. If they replace it, going much above the current 272 in SQ will be very hard for all the tech reasons mentioned, so IMHO it would most likely be a 272-2 at a similar SQ level to the current model but on the new platform. 

I don't think we'll see a 372 because it's too hard to deliver and other products fulfil that need, or a 172-2 because the first one wasn't successful and it doesn't sit easily in the range. This makes the 272-2 a tricky proposition for Naim - a lot of R&D for a single sku that potentially cannibalises other products. I think they'll do it, but we might see a significant price hike. They would be foolish to announce a 272-2 before the currently-announced products are fully shipping, so I would expect an announcement some time after that, to ship Autumn '19 or Spring '20.

David Hendon posted:

........bearing in mind the ND5 XS2 hasn't shipped yet.......

My dealer received his dem ND5XS2 yesterday, so maybe customer orders not far behind?

ATB.  George.

Has anyone compared a Nova/NAP250DX versus a N272/NAP250DX? That would seem the only close match of the new streaming and functionality with a separate power amp. I think @@Gazza may have compared these?

David Hendon posted:

The NDS used to be the best Naim could do in one box. Things move on.

I am not so sure on this...so I understand  the issue here was that a few seniors in Naim felt the NDS was still out performed by the CD555, and they wanted to build a streamer/DAC that at least matched the CD555... hence the creation of the ND555. 

The new streamers also addressed lessons learnt in usability from the earlier streamers... such as web streaming dropouts etc.

SPE, thanks for your reply.. a few comments ..

1. Levels of inputs seem consistent in my experience with several other manufacturers... I suspect Naim’s design is part of their performance optimisation. If you look at the data specs the inputs can take a very large input signal before distortion... so yes for SQ reasons the Naim inputs are sensitive.. but the inputs allow a huge dynamic range. As far as volume travel with my inputs on my 552  I tend to use between 8 o’clock and 12 o clock depending on source, media and volume level.. works for me. I don’t have any problems with hissing etc... as my amp is usually left on that would be unacceptable and it would have been returned a long time ago.

2. True there is no display.. but to me this is probably a good thing.. as depending on  displays they can be inherently noisy.. however using Naim one can use their automation facility to provide a preamp display via the streamer display. It’s what I do.. so my streamer indicates what the preamp is doing if I control my streamer via the streamer/Naim amp.. 

3. The NACs offer great flexibility on inputs.. especially the higher end NACs.. where you can assign inputs to channels.  These NACs are for the enthusiast that may cherish and value multiple sources in the characteristics they each bring.. such as my self.. I certainly wouldn’t want any less and very occasionally would like an extra one.. but that’s just me. But if you don’t need them that is fine... don’t use them... but if you need them and they are not there you are snookered. 

4. Not sure on your point of balance.. yes I know the 202 doesn’t have an external one, but the other NACs thankfully do.. and certainly the 552 has a led indicator to allow for easy visual setup when offsetting required.. which you can then fine tune by ear. True it has all to be done by ear with the 202.

5. True no headphone amp is included.. but as quality headphone amps really need to be matched with headphones in my experience I am not sure I would use a bundled compromise headphone amp.. but I can see this might be a drawback for some who are after casual headphone listening. I use the NAC aux output to drive a valve headphone from time to time.. but yes I have to share this output with my DAT recorder if I want to capture audio ..

6. This point aligns with 3 in my mind. As you know digital to analogue reconstruction is a compromised process and that design choices are made on how this is achieved. This means different digital sources have different characteristics which can suit certain genres and styles especially in the higher end ... certainly not the case of one size fits all unless you want to miss out on potential enjoyment in my opinion.   I enjoy multiple ‘digital’ sources with their different flavours... but again one for the enthusiast as opposed to one who simply wants to play back some tunes...

So in summary perhaps it’s a case of Naim give the enthusiast  options on how they can enjoy thier  audio and  music rather than constrain one to enjoy it a particular way... perhaps that’s why I am drawn to many of Naim’s designs.. However as you say enjoy your music and audio in what ever way suits you.

cheers

Simon

Mike Sullivan posted:

Has anyone compared a Nova/NAP250DX versus a N272/NAP250DX? That would seem the only close match of the new streaming and functionality with a separate power amp. I think @@Gazza may have compared these?

I happened to be collecting a part from a Hifi shop before the Nova was launched and they were playing 272/250, which sounded really good. Naim rep then dropped by to give the dealer a prelaunch Nova demo. Dealer told me to drop by later, and I then heard the Nova......I thought it got close to the 272/250, albeit slightly different presentation. IMO the 272/250 still edged it, but as a stopgap I decided to get the Nova. I subsequently added a 250, then a 300 while waiting for the new streamers. The Nova got a bit more tightness to the percussion and bass with the 250 added. Probably on par with the 272/250......not much in it to be frank, IMO.

Gazza interesting.. I have wondered if the Nova would be equivalent to the 272... though I assumed the 272 would have the edge because of the extra space provided by not needing the poweramp.

Just to add I think where the 272 really has one over on the Nova is the analogue inputs. The Nova does a ADC to DAC conversion......and no matter what quality input you give it.......it all sounds the same.

SiS....perhaps it’s the new streaming board that helps the Nova, as above I was a little disappointed with the analogue inputs on the Nova. Albeit I never actually intended to use them seriously so I did not see that as affecting my purchase decision. 

If Naim can do the following the current 272:-

i) Match or improve the sound quality of the 272.

ii) Incorporate latest streaming module.

iii) New display fitted.

iv) All updates will be by Ethernet or WiFi, not by usb.

v) Can be powered internally or external PSU.

So Naim, if your reading this and can do at least the above with current 272, then put me down as customer No.1. Over to you Naim.

That, to me, would be pointless. Any replacement would need to improve sound quality over the current model by at least the scale of improvement from the NDX to the NDX2. That would be the 272.2. 

I think it’s a mistake to assume that a combined streamer/preamp cannot assume a significantly higher place in the hierarchy, as a previous poster has said. Other manufacturers can do it and I think it’s healthy for we users to pressure Naim to push the boat out. 

For me, as I’ve said previously, a higher model without onboard power supply, and the ability to take both supplies from the 555PS would be just the ticket. The ND555 has a large space inside it, into which an analogue volume control could be fitted. Let’s not assume it cannot be done. 

HH I cannot disagree with your wish list. However l think there are two reasons why it may not happe. Firstly, how would this affect sales of the new network players and secondly what would the cost be? I think the 272 has been extremely popular because of what you get for the price and box reduction. 

Well when HH asked in April, I thought the reply from Trevor the MD was positive in that he acknowledged that not everybody wants lots of boxes. He did,not commit, but he went further than he needed to with his comments. Also with Linn offering something similar to the 272, perhaps they will feel a need to compete.

The other side to this is that with the Uniti range and the new streamers, there are a lot of product chasing the customer?

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

 

 

So in summary perhaps it’s a case of Naim give the enthusiast  options on how they can enjoy thier  audio and  music rather than constrain one to enjoy it a particular way... perhaps that’s why I am drawn to many of Naim’s designs.. However as you say enjoy your music and audio in what ever way suits you.

 

Simon, thanks. Yes, having options to meet the wide variety of requirements and preferences we all have is a good thing. We all pay our money and make our choices.
Regards,
Ed

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

 1. Levels of inputs seem consistent in my experience with several other manufacturers... I suspect Naim’s design is part of their performance optimisation. If you look at the data specs the inputs can take a very large input signal before distortion... so yes for SQ reasons the Naim inputs are sensitive.. but the inputs allow a huge dynamic range. As far as volume travel with my inputs on my 552  I tend to use between 8 o’clock and 12 o clock depending on source, media and volume level.. works for me. I don’t have any problems with hissing etc... as my amp is usually left on that would be unacceptable and it would have been returned a long time ago.

 

Simon, for me, the input sensitivity of my preamp (282) was a real PITA, in that volume control was virtually impossible using the remote, and even worse with the app. This was using system automation via NDX. My speakers being easy to drive may not have helped here. 9 o'clock was seriously loud, and the usable range for most listening was between 7 and 8 o'clock, to give you an idea of how small a range of the volume pot was usable. The solution was to use some sort of signal attenuator between source and preamp. A solution much frowned upon in Naimland due to the reported negative effect on sound quality, but I'm pleased to report that I now use the same Chord Electronics variable attenuator that you yourself use, and it sounds great! 

ChrisSU posted:

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

 1. Levels of inputs seem consistent in my experience with several other manufacturers... I suspect Naim’s design is part of their performance optimisation. If you look at the data specs the inputs can take a very large input signal before distortion... so yes for SQ reasons the Naim inputs are sensitive.. but the inputs allow a huge dynamic range. As far as volume travel with my inputs on my 552  I tend to use between 8 o’clock and 12 o clock depending on source, media and volume level.. works for me. I don’t have any problems with hissing etc... as my amp is usually left on that would be unacceptable and it would have been returned a long time ago.

 

Simon, for me, the input sensitivity of my preamp (282) was a real PITA, in that volume control was virtually impossible using the remote, and even worse with the app. This was using system automation via NDX. My speakers being easy to drive may not have helped here. 9 o'clock was seriously loud, and the usable range for most listening was between 7 and 8 o'clock, to give you an idea of how small a range of the volume pot was usable. The solution was to use some sort of signal attenuator between source and preamp. A solution much frowned upon in Naimland due to the reported negative effect on sound quality, but I'm pleased to report that I now use the same Chord Electronics variable attenuator that you yourself use, and it sounds great! 

I hear what you are saying and as a NDX/282 user, I know all too well about the 7-8 O'clock usable range with 9 O'clock being the "loud" setting and 10 O'clock being unbearable.

On the other hand, using automation from the NDX, I have no problem adjusting it accurately. A double tap moves the dial slowly. And some rapid tapping gets it nudged to be just right.

On the sensitivity front, the 75mV sensitivity on the 282 and other classic pres seem a bit high to me too. The 272 has 275mV on the inputs and if this was not more suitable for modern preamps, I would question why the same is in fact used on the S1 pre (well actually 250mV). If 75mV was so appropriate, why does the flagship preamp and the newer stuff all have >250mV sensitivity?

FZ, maybe I’m just cack-handed, but I’ll be sticking with this new arrangement, in which 9 o’clock is ‘normal’ and volume control is much easier. 

I’m sure Statement owners don’t have this problem, I doubt they have an Alps Blue pot. 272 owners will, of course, be wondering what on earth the problem is.