Equipment Order on Rack ?

Isn't there anyone out there that can give me some advice on this subject

thanks in anticipation

Mark

You should try

1. CD3.5
2. Nac62
3. Marantz CD-R
4. Flatcap
5. HiCap/Nap140 (Sharing a shelf)

Always try to keep your sources and preamp away from big transfo ie: amp, hicap, etc.

Bernard Paquet

Here's what'd I'd do with 5 shelves >

Top
1.Marantz CDR
2.NAC62 pushed to the opposite side of the CDR toroid (assuming it's a toroid)
3.Hicap, opposite side of the 62
4.Flatcap
5.CD 3.5
Bottom

Floor: NAP140

Trade spaces with hicap and 3.5 if you find CD placement on the bottom shelf physically unbearable.

once again: where one can find such contradictory opinions, I think it’s time to hear the moderator’s voice.

graphoman

I'm with Bernard on this one.

Brains at the top, brawn at the bottom.

Cheers,

Steve.

my appreciation for the two moderators. May I read the opinion of a third one (from the administration)?

graphoman

because with a titanium plate/4 screws in my lumber spine, and, since September, plate/4 screws in neck, I ain't putting my CD player on the bottom shelf

Just have to live with that compromise.

Is it more important that the pre or the source is away from the power supplies. My 82 is on top, then CDX/XPS/Super/250, which seemed to sound best on my previous rack.

Cheers
Ade

[This message was edited by Ade Archer on WEDNESDAY 13 February 2002 at 22:03.]

Pete,

You never did respond to the fair rebuttals made when you wrote similar nonsense is this thread:

thread

You're hard to take seriously when you make claims and can't "support" them.

Besides, why get your panties in a knot every time someone mentions supports? Life's far too short for that. Trust me, I'm an anorak.

Great Scott!…
it’s not the best point and not at the best place. Trust me, Peter, I’m a journalist... with plenty of experience with engineers of all kinds. If I’d you I’d deny it instead.

graphoman

It seems like there would be a good principled reason to put a source like the CDP on the bottom. Assuming, as I do, that it's among the components most susceptible to vibrational energy, isn't putting it on the bottom going to best isolate it from the amplified vibratory energy at the top of a rack? I'm thinking here of the sway that the top of a building, pole, etc. encounters as the result of ground movement or other disturbances like wind. Why wouldn't musical vibrations work on the top of a rack in a similar (albeit substantially less amplified) way?

Of course this is complete layman speculation, and I seriously doubt I could hear a difference either way. But if there were one it seems like bottom might be better.

"Trust me, Peter, Im a journalist... with plenty of experience with engineers of all kinds. If I was you I'd deny it instead".

Wow what absolute toss!

I don't agree with Peter but I certainly don't agree with the above. Remove engineering and your little world would fall apart in EVERY possible way. Virtually all aspects of what you consider to be a structured world have been through the application of engineering. Irrigation in Africa built by a journalist? I don't think so!

What principle academic background do you think links all members of naims R and D dept???

Yes thats right , the application of scientific knowledge to create REAL WORLD solutions - yes we call that engineering.

A good example:- the space shuttle is considered
as a "technological and scientific achievement"
yet when it crashes JOURNALISTS call it an engineering failure - HA HA - I rest my case.

Oh yes, I am an engineer, although not the kind who fixes washing machines.

Equipment order: I just upgraded my NAT02 tuner to a NAT01 (less difference than upgrading from NAT03 to NAT02, but as family life has commanded that 50% of my listening is to radio, it was worth it). BUT: Does the point of placing PS's and power amps as far as possible from sources also apply to the NAPST power supply which comes with the NAT01?

BTW: on the respectability of professions, the European Commission just published (in the Official Journal of last Monday) the results of a pan-European survey: engineers are among the most respected (after doctors and scientists), journalists are second last (just before politicians). In continental Europe (such as Belgium), lawyers do however manage to have even less respectability than journalists. Being a Belgian lawyer, I have total empathy with the previous contributor of an equally unrespectable profession, but would urge him not to criticise engineers!

Yes, Matthew, I’m a journalist so I used to give my saying the accent to call attention. Needless to say it has to be accepted with a grain of salt. But what I said is at least 99% correct. Please take into account some facts (to name but a few). And don’t forget we are not talking about the products of the Human Technique. What we are talking about is only whether anybody must be right just because he’s an engineer.

Engineers may have studied 1001 different disciplines: chemistry, textile quality control etc. so they are not necessarily experts in HiFi. Even electrical engineering has many faculties that have nothing to do with audio.

Unfortunately, when we come to electrical engineering, the situation will be even worth. Audio is of seventh importance in the society so students on the university are learning only the absolute minima about our hobby while they learn a certain “feeling of knowledge” about it...

As for the real eggheads, I used to have experience with two named university profs (=heads of departements). The first one (of musical instruments acoustics) did not believe me that modern audio was able to portray depth in the sound picture. He told me: “take the book there, from the bookcase and I’d show you the chapter to proof that it’s impossible!” The second one (of telecommunication) blamed our report on special supports for turntables and called it a nonsense while refusing to give it a listen. He told me he would not believe it until we’d be able to give a statistical proof to our findings. I called his attention to our statistic on 25 HiFi “station” including the university’s own Hi-Fi Club, and that this statistic was to be read in the magazin I kept sending to him. He stopped a moment and then he said: “well, actually I don’t likely believe such statistics...” Get the picture?

Making the circle more narrow: I have to repeat that I used to know many people in the Hungarian sound industry (film, broadcast, tv) and have not found any of them with the faintest knowledge on HiFi.

Moving outwards of Middle-East-Europe, I happened to read many a thousand essays of experts (“engineers”) of different western audio companies (I’ve had to make Press Digest for 14 years) and I found their statements rather contradictory. Therefore, I was not sure which of the many engineers is the one that was to be trusted.

By chance I happened to stick to Naim Audio and their engineers.

In the hope they’ll never state that they are able to give a scientific explanation why turntable supports have their own sound character.

graphoman

An excellent post.

Cheers,

Steve.

thank you. But I feel I should write a PS. The professors referred to in my story were really the best experts on their own territory. That’s why I kept visiting them and asked them to check some of the essays of different authors to be published in our magazine. The point is that they were not able to understand that Hi-Fi audio (where they were absolutely innocent) could not be described by the basic terminology of electro-acoustics.

graphoman