2 systems

Posted by: Charlezz on 10 December 2001

According to you , which is the best of these two systems:
1)CDX/XPS -Nac102/Supercap -Nap180
2)CDX -Nac82/Hicap -Nap250

Thank you for answering.

Charles

Posted on: 10 December 2001 by Top Cat
The CDX/XPS with 102 should sound better - source first and all that.

The 82, whilst fine, doesn't justify inclusion over the XPS (based on what I have heard) and the 250 isn't going to really improve things all that much over the 180. Plus the fact that the XPS can be used with your CDS-II that one day you will no doubt buy...

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

Posted on: 10 December 2001 by Top Cat
No brainer, really...

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

Posted on: 10 December 2001 by Scott Mckenzie
Surely the SC is wasted on the 102....and an 82 2*Hi would be better, and about the same price....def. a no brainer then!! It may even leave enough cash to get a 250 over the 180.

Scott

Posted on: 10 December 2001 by Bob Edwards
Charles--

Wouldn't even be close--system 1 by a mile. In point of fact, if the speakers are easy to drive and you're buying a system from scratch, a CDS2/102/Hicap/PSC/140 would be better than either option. While I am far from a fan of the 102, a 102/Supercap is quite a bit better then a 82/2 hicaps, especially given the large disparity in source quality.

Cheers and good luck,

Bob

Posted on: 10 December 2001 by Phil Barry
This is an experimental question. Odds are that the CDX/XPS system would prevail, but it's not a sure thing. I suspect a sizeable proportion of listners (20%?) would prefer the 250, especially if the speakers were a non-Quad tough load.

Phil

Posted on: 10 December 2001 by Simon Matthews
"a 102/Supercap is quite a bit better then a 82/2 hicaps"

Have you demmed these two combinations against each other? Having gone from a 72 (similar to 102) to an 82-hicap, then 82-double hicap, then 52-supercap, I am surprised at this conclusion. I have not done this dem myself and I am not saying you are wrong but I do think the 82 outperforms a 102 in every dept by a massive margin (all other things being equal).

Posted on: 10 December 2001 by Bob Edwards
Simon--

Yes--I've demmed both (and too many other combos). As I said, I am not a 102 fan--it gets really confused with complex mixes, among other things--but have demmed the 102/Super v 82/2 hicaps and the 102/Super was noticeably better. I attribute that to the quality of the Supercap v the hicaps--the SC is massively better. Of course, putting the SC on the 82 is a whole 'nother ballgame.

Cheers,

Bob

Posted on: 10 December 2001 by Charlezz
"Surely the SC is wasted on the 102...."
Perhaps but i didn't have the choice... I had a Nac102/Nap180 and i have found a used(???) supercap at 1100£ so i bought it....
Next upgrade (after adding xps) will be a Nac 52!

However i am very intersted in the dilemma: Is the Nac102/Supercap better than a Nac82/2*Hicaps ?
I am waiting for your answers.

Charles

Posted on: 11 December 2001 by Mike Hanson
quote:
Is the Nac102/Supercap better than a Nac82/2*Hicaps ?

No. The Super-Cap adds a "sweetness" to the 102, but the 82 is still heads and shoulders above the 102, even with only two Hi-Caps.

As to your two systems, much of it depends on the speakers. If they can be driven easily by the 180, then the 250 doesn't become "crucial". The CDX/XPS system will sound much more musical, while the amp-heavy system will sound initially more impressive. If you don't want lots of volume, then the CDX/XPS will be more satisfying in the long run.

-=> Mike Hanson <=-