Is there a Naim sound?

I don't think that a particular brand sound and neutrality are mutually exclusive. There are more ways than one to present realism. The Naim sound, IMO, puts you in the "front rows", you're very "close" to the players/instruments, which is evidenced in the perceived size, for instance. A good Linn system will also sound very realistic, but it's like sitting in row 12, if not further back. You get a good overview, but you feel at a distance.

The good hifi manufacturers will try to achieve a certain degree of consistency in this and follow it through in their designs. Mix and match and you'll end up sitting in row 8, which may not be bad as such, but you might just end up with components imposing their particular style on each other, which doesn't have to, but could lead to problems elsewhere (lack of 'ease', perhaps?).

Thomas

quote:

---

I have a CD3 and find it good but a bit lacking in realism when compared to my record player.

---

Agreed. Last nite, we put on Pictures at an Exhibition on the Jubilee label (budget record label) and I have not heard a CD player under $5000 USD sound as good as this. I'm using a basic LP12.

To my ears, the lower-cost Naim stuff captures the *energy* of a performance better than the competition (at most any price!) but lacks in the realism/timbre/aptmosphere department. I get less of the "You are There" feeling with Naim but better slam and timing. The mucho expensive Naim kit adds these extra bits and so is a more satisfying overall experience - but at a (steep) price.

Linn and Exposure may be more to your liking. Do know that these companies do not provide the outstanding service that you get with Naim, IMHO.

- Greg

Insert Witty Signature Line Here

quote:

---

The good hifi manufacturers will try to achieve a certain degree of consistency in this and follow it through in their designs. Mix and match and you'll end up sitting in row 8, which may not be bad as such, but you might just end up with components imposing their particular style on each other, which doesn't have to, but could lead to problems elsewhere (lack of 'ease', perhaps?).

---

The key word to note here is might: it's also true that mixing and matching might just be the path to your personal musical goals.

The key thing is that whilst manufacturers have their various strengths and weaknesses, and often a house 'sound', we as music lovers should chose the components which work best to our ears irrespective of whether they are of the same brand, as different manufacturers do excel in the design and production of certain types of product over others - Linn with the LP12, Naim with their CD players, DNM with amps. That's not to say the rest of what a manufacturer does isn't worth considering, it's just that there are certain strengths in different manufacturers, and you can either sail with the wind or perhaps against it, depending on your own weltanschauungen.

TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."

Hi-Fi ain't the real thing and never will be.

Naim have their own view on how things should sound (which I believe is getting less and less 'defined' since the sad demise of Julian Vereker); BUT it's someone's view-point when all said and done and not necessarily 'right'.

Naim kit does certain things very well and others with much less emphasis.

If the sound doesn't blow your skirt up; look elsewhere.

It doesn't make you a bad person!

IMO "real" would light everyones fire. We don't get to hear "real" much so instead people split into different camps depending upon which lack of real or exageration of real they tolerate the most. Naim owners are intelligent and discerning people and like to hear that element of real called PRAT. Krell owners are intelligent and discerning people who like that element of real that's about 3D detail and neutrality. Over-simplified, I know. One day there will be a brand that delivers real and everyone will be united (I have a dream... )

quote:

---

I don't like the Naim sound. I do like music. Frankly, I find the whole thing bewildering. I have a CD3 and find it good but a bit lacking in realism when compared to my record player.

---

Do not blame Naim for the faults of a flawed medium. Frankly, CD has a difficult time competing with the LP at all price levels. IMO it takes a CDS2 to begin to approach the quality of an LP12. My Linn dealer feels that the much more expensive LinnCD12 is also inferior to the LP12 . Yet a top-flight LP12 in a Naim system truly sings (with all levels of Naim amplification in my experience).

Do you like your record player through Naim amplifiers? If so, what you possibly don't like is not the Naim sound but the medium of CD itself.

Paul

It has PR&T, tune, neutrality, timbre, scale, depth, and a taut and tuneful bass.

My own CDX in this system sounds a lot better than it does in my own - notably in the bass department.

My system sounds a little more detailed, but TC's system sounds more refined and fatigue-free, and that bass is definitely more civilised than in mine.

The slight lack of detail in his system may have been due in part to the standard Naim interconnect used into his DNM pre, as well as the low volume levels for much of the time, so as not to annoy his neighbours.

I reckon that the Nordost SPMs that he is awaiting will bring back the element of detail that may be missing.

Top Cat deserves the system he owns, because he has taken the time, trouble and openness of ear/mind to realise it.

Regards,

Steve.

The proof of the pudding...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thomas K:
The Naim sound, IMO, puts you in the "front rows", you're very "close" to the players/instruments, which is evidenced in the perceived size, for instance. A good Linn system will also sound very realistic, but it's like sitting in row 12, if not further back.

---

Isn't this more a characteristic of the recording? I've got some recordings that are very close; and others that sound more distant.

Tim

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul B:

Do not blame Naim for the faults of a flawed medium. Frankly, CD has a difficult time competing with the LP at all price levels. IMO it takes a CDS2 to begin to approach the quality of an LP12.

---

Well, I have a little difficulty with this reasoning. If the medium is flawed, then not even a CDS2 will get close to a better medium (as it happens I'm not a great fan of the LP12 itself, although I know it can sound excellent). If the very best CD players cure the problems, then the problems aren't with the medium but with the players.

Tim

bravo!!! my experience too...

enjoy

ken

quote:

---

The slight lack of detail in his system may have been due in part to the standard Naim interconnect used into his DNM pre, as well as the low volume levels for much of the time, so as not to annoy his neighbours.

---

I'd go for the latter, in fairness. Detail is one thing, but the quietest nuances can be missed when the volume's down low.

quote:

---

I reckon that the Nordost SPMs that he is awaiting will bring back the element of detail that may be missing.

Top Cat deserves the system he owns, because he has taken the time, trouble and openness of ear/mind to realise it.

---

...and a lot of stick from various people on this and other forums!

Seriously, however, thanks for the kind words. Next time you hear the system it will be in a different league still, if I end up with a CDX or even a CDS-II, and the DNM 3D Six preamp, not to mention the SPM I'm having reterminated as DIN:DIN - how's about that for committing to the Naim CD player path?

Cheers,

TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."

quote:

---

Isn't this more a characteristic of the recording? I've got some recordings that are very close; and others that sound more distant.

---

Yes, most definitely. But the system does its bit as well.

Thomas

quote:

---

If the medium is flawed, then not even a CDS2 will get close to a better medium

---

This is precisely why the CDS2 is inferior (IMO) to an LP12 - because the medium is flawed. From my perspective, no CD player approaches the overall quality of a top-level record player - at any price, from any manufacturer that I have heard. Furthermore, those that do scale the heights of CD technology do so at extremely high cost. Considering that the CD medium has been around for some 20 years, yet even a modest record player still surpasses the quality of a CD player is remarkable. I think it is very revealing of the CD medium - it is simply flawed and unsatisfactory when compared to the LP.

On the other hand, we should be thankful that Naim (and others) have made CD players that are more than just listenable and do remarkably well with a flawed medium. Therefore, if you want to be happy with your CD player NEVER listen to a record player. The flaws of the CD medium will be immediately apparent. Look how often it occurs on this forum where it is said how much better their record player is compared to a CD player. In fact, this thread was prompted by your comment.

quote:

---

I have a CD3 and find it good but a bit lacking in realism when compared to my record player.

---

Paul

Therefore, if you want to be happy with your CD player NEVER listen to a record player. The flaws of the CD medium will be immediately apparent.

at one time, i considered selling the vinyl section of my system in order (a)to reduce the amount of space taken up by my hifi and the LP's (b) to generate funds for other upgrades.

i have since abandoned the idea completely, especially since i upgraded my cartridge to XX2 and had my lp12 set up @ infidelity.

however, i should say that i enjoy my cdsii thoroughly and i am very pleased i bought it. in fact its only second to the NAT02 in terms of "most used" component. my cd collection is expanding rapidly -- i buy lp's from vivante everyone and then -- but definitely not as frequently as cd's.

its just relatively speaking, vinyl on my system sounds quite different from cd. vinyl is sort of spiritual, organic if you will, whereas cd has seems to have a synthetic quality about it. musical roots are not as deep on cd.

since i went active, i sense that the differences have actually been amplified. i think i would tend to believe that my system is beginning to highlight the deficiencies of the cd medium, but i am not really sure about this. otherwise why would naim be considering a cd player above cdsii? (or are they?? maybe the 552 is the missing link?? we'll hear from bristol reports)there could still be some tricks out there to make the cd medium sing like the black stuff. i guess we will just have to wait and see.

i am thankful to have the luxury to own both and to be able to do these largely academic comparisons in the same system. each is highly entertaining in its own right.

enjoy

ken

I'm watching this thread with a lot of interest, as I've got a top-notch vinyl source and I'm in the market for a top-notch CD source. What I'm intrigued by is the polarity of opinion which is split into the 'CDS-II is as good as/better than' and the 'CDS-II is still inferior to' a fully loaded LP12.

Now, I had a full-monty LP12 for a while, until it sadly met its demise. I have since moved to another brand of TT which is at least the equal, if not better by a fair margin. Whether you believe this or not doesn't really matter, as I'm interested in the LP12:CDS-II thing only (knowing what a full-monty LP12 at Phase 8 Mana sounds like)

I ask you all, is this dichotomy purely down to personal preferences?

There are times when I really question vinyls alleged superiority - despite owning a VPI cleaning machine and having therefore clean, well-maintained LPs played on a high-end table. There are other times when I find vinyl to be uplifting and intimate, seductive and invigorating.

However, more often than not, the limitations of the vinyl pressing seems to be the issue. I find myself playing the better pressings and having a tendency to avoid the lesser pressings, even when I like the music. CD, for all its limitations (which I do believe in in terms of the 'media-defined limitation' of 16/44.1) at least seems to be more consistent in the main. Perhaps it's just the availability of quality vinyl in my area, or perhaps I am predisposed to fuss-free music.

In the last few days I've thought a lot about where I'm heading with my music. I'm bored with the effort to find new vinyl, but excited by the prospect of those occasional wonder-pressings and bargain-basement finds - the likes of which don't seem to crop up so much with CD. I'm looking at a stack of a little over 1000 LPs and a TT which gives me pretty much all of the information out of the vinyl, with next to no surface noise and great dynamic and musical capability. However, that doesn't stop me wondering about the credibility of the statement that 'an LP12 beats a CDS-II'. Heck, I've heard LP12s that have been beaten into touch by 100 quid Technics players (depending on quality of pressing and setup of TT).

So who to believe? My own ears, which tell me that it isn't as clear cut as 'A is better than B by some margin', or the consensus, which seems to either be tapped into a much purer source of consistently good vinyl (and cleaning machines!) or to be somehow biased.

Ahhhh, Friday afternoons... don'tcha love 'em?!?!?

TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."

So who to believe? My own ears, which tell me that it isn't as clear cut as 'A is better than B by some margin',

i couldnt have put it better...

or the consensus, which seems to either be tapped into a much purer source of consistently good vinyl (and cleaning machines!) or to be somehow biased.

i honestly do not believe the situation is so clear cut that we can talk of a "consensus"??

enjoy

ken
ps: very glad i didnt sell my lp12 and records!!!

quote:

---

yet even a modest record player still surpasses the quality of a CD player

if you want to be happy with your CD player NEVER listen to a record player

---

Ridiculous over the top statements rather like those we expect from the Mana fanatics.

I can quite happily say that my CD source sounds miles better than my record player, although I'm quite prepared to admit that some old geezer with failing hearing might think otherwise.

Of courses there is no consensus ... people want different things from their Hi-Fi, so to say one is 'better' than the other is meaningless.

And to imply that vinyl is not a 'flawed medium' is just silly

quote:

---

I can quite happily say that my CD source sounds miles better than my record player, although I'm quite prepared to admit that some old geezer with failing hearing might think otherwise.

---

I do not know you nor do you know me. To refer to me as a some old geezer with failing hearing is really insulting and juvenile. Perhaps you are not mature enough to realize that. If you have nothing but insults to contribute I would suggest you go elsewhere where such drivel may be seen as interesting.
Hopefully not on this forum!

Paul

TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."

my point is that we all look for different things in what we listen to.

I find your blanket dismissal of CD based on nothing but your own biased views equally insulting and juvenile.

As TC says, I wasn't aiming the comment about failing hearing to you in particular. So perhaps you can keep your vinyl Nazi drivel to yourself or (as you say ) go elsewhere !

Naim sound?? Well IMO, it performs best to my ears when it comes to the music I listen to (regardless if it`s cd or lps )wich is rock, pop and jazz.
Perhaps you want a another "sonic signature" instead?? Some people I know don´t fancy Naim at all.
Naim cd players performs IMO best with Naim amps
and I haven´t yet heard better cd players than Naims. They Rock!

regards Gunnar

here are the facts, every one with both CDP and TT say the TT trounces the CDP and that CDs are flawed etc etc.

well this is simply not true, CDs sound f**king great and it don't have to be CDS II doing the business either. New music was made for CD, CD was made for new music, and it sounds great.

Also records sound great, was playing the Beano Album last night on vinyl and loved it, I also know I would love it on CD as well.

Everyone that bemones CDs seem to have a fair collection and a good CDP as well so I am confused.

Face it boys, you know your CDP sounds great, you know your TT sounds great, get over it, it all sounds great.

quote:

---

Face it boys, you know your CDP sounds great, you know your TT sounds great, get over it, it all sounds great.

---

Alex

quote:

---

my point is that we all look for different things in what we listen to.

I find your blanket dismissal of CD based on nothing but your own biased views equally insulting and juvenile.

As TC says, I wasn't aiming the comment about failing hearing to you in particular.

So perhaps you can keep your vinyl Nazi drivel to yourself or (as you say ) go elsewhere !

---

I do not object at all to you disagreeing with me or my viewpoint regarding vinyl/CD. However, I do object to your name-calling when you do not agree as a means of justifying your point of view. Since you quoted me in your posting I could only assume that the reference to old geezers with poor hearing could only be intended for myself. Now to add insult to injury you have called me a Nazi as well which, since you know nothing about me at all, is hardly justified and deepens this public insult. I cannot believe that you would be so ill-mannered if we were to meet in person. Or is this typical of your behaviour and how you choose to win arguments?

Paul

I think that you have a good point. Both mediums can be ruined by a poor 3rd or 4th generation tape when compared to those cut/produced from the original master.

My particular interest is with classical and jazz recordings from the 50's through 70's before the age of digital and before digital remasterings. In my experience, and opinion, an LP cut from an original mastertape (or the original LP itself), when compared to a CD mastered from the same mastertape, the LP is consistently superior. This is not just a question of preferences I believe; the digital remastering loses something along the way.

Now, it is true that the differences may not be such an issue with more modern (post 1980) recordings from the digital era as almost all recordings made now are in the digital medium or are manipulated digitally at some point. Hence any differences between the two media would perhaps be smaller and preferences for one medium or the other could likely be made. For example, Massive Attack is probably as good or better on CD since it is largely digital to begin with.

My preference for the LP and earlier recordings is simply that I find them to be more natural (in classical music), more musical (its difficult to exactly express) than digital recordings post 1980. This reflects my musical preferences as the purpose of my hifi is to convey for me at least part of the live experience of classical and jazz at home. From my limited discussions with professionals in the industry, it seems to me that in many cases today (in popular music) it may be almost impossible to reproduce "live" what is created digitally in the studio (even "live" performances are digitally enhanced though). Therefore, in this situation, there can be no real comparison between "live" and recorded music played in the home. They are just completely different. This is perhaps less true with classical music but undoubtedly digital manipulation or enhancing may take place here, too. IMO as well - although this is another issue - I find recorded classical performances more interesting and more varied in the era before 1980 (although the sameness in performance of the classical repertoire seeps in long before this). Some might claim that you would have to go back before the LP era!! Yet, I am sure there are excellent performances recorded in the digital era, too. I am just not as familiar with them.

Realistically, neither medium is entirely satisfactory as both have serious flaws. However, personally I find the flaws of an LP to be less objectionable (I suppose) hence my advocacy of the LP. Thanks to companies like Naim, the CD medium is certainly now more than acceptable (it was mostly excrement at first), in fact very, very good, and thus provides a choice for the listener and greater access to new recordings. However, my earlier point that one should never listen to a record player -admittedly an over the top statement - in order to be happy with the CD medium is drawn from the seemingly frequent observation made on this forum about how much better we find our record players (and how surprised we often are at the difference). Perhaps what I should have said is that we should stop trying to make comparisons and enjoy the music. This would have been more diplomatic and not have offended the CD contingent.

Paul

[This message was edited by Paul B on SATURDAY 23 February 2002 at 03:55.]