Hicap for CD3.5

If you can push your budget further by a few hundred pounds - you can offload the CD3.5 and get a CDX instead. A late example 3.5 could go for 500-550UKP? The CDX is still pretty much ahead of the CD3.5/Hi or CD5/Hi.

Naimed is right.
The Hi-Cap will really improve the CD3.5, but a CDX is lots better (I went CD3.5->CD3.5+Hi->CDX).
The Hi will separate out things and tighten up the sound. The CDX has more character and depth to start with.

Paul

I put a HiCap on my 3.5 and it really transformed it. The most obvious thing to me was the loss of any digital harshness or glare which the bare CD3.5 does seem to suffer from. In addition to that I agree with Paul, it tightens up the sound a lot, particularly the bass which becomes more musical and easier to follow. Definitely a v.worthwhile upgrade

David

Hi Everyone,

Thanks for the comments/advice. So it does look like a positive step forward. I was just wondering perhaps there may be other ways to put my budget to better use eg. upgrading the NAP140 to a higher model, give the NAC72 a good service, and someone even suggested to me to look at bi-amping with another NAP140(??). Cheers!

Regards,
Tango

As I've upgraded thru 3.5 to 3.5/Flat to 3.5/Hi to CDX and now to CDX/XPS I found that the bare CD players had a top end harshness which the PSUs reduced or eliminated.

As you can probably imagine, I was a little perplexed when hearing the results after making the jump from 3.5/Hi to CDX.

Yes, the CDX was better overall - more PRaT, more detail, more musicality, but some of the the harshness also returned as well. Needless to say, the XPS (with S-XPS burndy) has more or less got rid of this.

So, it terms of your upgrading - 3.5/Hi if you don't plan to upgrade the rest of your system much further, CDX (with a view to adding the XPS later) if you do..

Steve C 01

I used to have CD3.5/flat and a Hi-capped 102/140.

Powering the 3.5 with the Hi-Cap didn't seem top make much difference - with my sistem the 102 benefitted from the Hi-Cap more than the 3.5 did.

I recently jettisoned the 3.5/FC for a CDX2 w/o PS, and the benefit was hard to believe.

To make a long story short, you may also want to consider buying a flatcap and start saving for a CDX2.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steve C 01:

So, it terms of your upgrading - 3.5/Hi if you don't plan to upgrade the rest of your system much further, CDX (with a view to adding the XPS later) if you do..

---

Hi Steve C,

Seeing that you're the man who has gone down this road before, I think it makes a lot of sense to me what you said; and the others too. As I do not intend to upgrade for a while yet after this, I think I'll get the Hicap for the CD3.5.

Claude P: Yes, you make a lot of sense too, but I already have a Hicap hooked to the NAC72. As explained above, I'll get the Hicap for the 3.5 now. Cheers!

Regards,
Tango

I would have to say that powering SBL's with a 140 is OK, but the probably the weakest link. I bought a used FC for £100 which transformed my 3.5. Do that, then put the rest towards a 180, which you should manage for £500. If you have money left from the sale of the 140, put it towards a CDX. With the sale of the 3.5+FC & 140, you wouldn't be far off.
You would then have CDX, 72/Hi, 180, SBL, for not a great deal more than you are planning to spend already.

But hey...what do I know eh?!

Hi, I started with a 3.5 then upgraded through flatcap to hi-cap and now have a CDX.The leap in quality from the 3.5/Hicap to a CDX is huge you won't regret it.