NAC 282 and 2 Hi-Caps

Hi David
All I can say is...... come round and have a listen.I'm in Hyde and if you want too come round for a couple of hours it;s fine by me.

Yours
Mike

David

Take Mike up on his invitation and make up your own mind
BUT
For what it's worth I had 2 HiCaps on my 282 (of different vintages which can unblalance the sound). I went back to 1 HiCap because it seemde to have better clarity than 2.

I now have a Supercap and all I can say is if you can afford it go for it. It is in a different league from any Hicap configuration.

regards
GEOFF

When I bought my 82 from a guy advertising on audiogon he had two highcaps and was a musician. He liked the 2 hicaps better than one, and better than a supercap, said it was a "fatter" sound with each of them powering a channel each. Since they were matched and I was not planning on going to a 252 for quite a few years I bought them also. I'm very plesed with the sound tho I have not tried my 82 bare or with just one cap. I'd agree that a super would make the most of your 282 but that leads you on to buying a 252

glenn

Life is analogue

quote:

---

I'd agree that a super would make the most of your 282 but that leads you on to buying a 252

---

Glenn

Some of us can resist temptation like that ( well at least for a while).

regards
GEOFF

Action - I have sent you a private mail - would love a dem of the 2 hi-caps

Well, after buying the 82 and 2 hicaps I was thrilled with the music I was hearing. But then I got back on this forum and now planning other upgrades. I think I should just trash my computer so I don't read about other equipment. I have low resistance to upgraditis. Now saving for that CDX2 and a 250-2. That will be a long time off. I dare not listen to a 252.

glenn

Life is analogue

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chris Koster, nana:
I noticed an interesting effect the other day. It seems that if two hicaps are sitting side by side, even moving them a few extra inches apart made a rather important difference. The transformers must be interacting magnetically, or maybe there is some other reason.

Has anyone else tried this? If not-try it.

chris

C Koster

---

hmmmm... interesting. i wonder if the effect is the same when one is above the other? what about say a NAT02 side by side with a geddon, which is what i have -- i will experiment a little and see/hear what the effect is...


enjoy

ken

quote:

---

Hey Geoff, this thread sounds familiar, I know we've discussed this before! FWIW, I recently did this demo, and thought that the 282+2*HC2 was just rediculously good (granted, did not compare to 252...). That said, one question for Geoff P and/or anyone else, and one comment for Mr Greenwood:

- Geoff et al... why does a SC2 sound materially different than a SC2 when used on a 282? My understanding (albeit neophyte) is that a SC2 is in essence a half dozen HC2s, each dedicated to a different part of the 252... but that a 282 only uses say 40% of these, basically replicating the effect of PSC2 and a pair of HC2s. Is there (a) anything that the SC2 powers in a 282 that is not powered by a pair of HC2s, and (b) if not, then is the power supplied by one of the component supplies inside a SC2 materially different than that from HC2?

- David G, depending on your answer to the above, I would suggest you determine answer by upgrade path: if you are NOT going to try to get a 252 anytime soon, the 2nd HC2 seems much more "efficient", but if you are going to swap it all in anyway, then clearly there is less trade in "friction" by getting the SC2.


(Only your ears know for sure)

---

Kid

Your memory serves you correctly. I also recall a thread where a discussion was had about exactly how the power from 2 HC's was used inside a 282 vs a SC. There was no final absolute answer. Consensus was that 1 HC powered 1 channel and the second HC powered the other channel BUT we had a problem with the fact that the stereo signal out of the 282 (or 82) was only delivered down one of the SNAIC's which makes for a difficlut finish to the signal path inside the pre-amp.

Why should a 282 sound better on an SC, especially since as you say you are only using about 40% or less of the total power supply circuits and as far as I can tell their is no radical difference in the voltage regulator topology compared with the HC's. Sorry but the answer is I don't know, unless you can reverse the argument and think that using less is running the SC in a very "easy" way with no stress.
At the end of all that the fact is an SC definitely brings something more to the resulting sound of a 282. The one thing I can put a finger on is stronger bass with better defintion. There is also an intangible feeling of greater delicacy to the portrayal of the music, as though the 282 is doing a liitle more to separate the signal out and play things in their intended relative positions, which does'nt happen with eithe 1 or 2 HC's. It is insiduous and beguiling rather than a "hit you in the face" difference.

Incidentally the NAPSC comes "free" with the 282 and should be kept as far away as it's lead will allow because it is a noisy little bugger. I have done it over and over again and am absolutely sure taking the option to switch off the lights on the 282 also makes a subtle audible improvement.

ALSO I read the comment from Chris at Nana with ineterest. When I ran my admittedly "unbalanced" pair of HC's I had them on the same shelf right next to each other with about a 1/8 inch gap between them. I never tried separating them so maybe my comment about the slightly "muddy" sound I got was due to the transformer fields interacting!

As your final comment says only YOUR ears know for sure. David et al should do the demo.

regards
GEOFF