An evening with the 552

Posted by: Ron Toolsie on 23 October 2002

As the title implies, this mind experiment became reality today. My 'local' dealer (Sound Image, Atlanta) trekked almost 2 hours up I-75 to make this happen. I confess since installing the Mana Soundbase 3s under the DBLs I have taken on a whole new joy of listening to music, spending hours a day in rapture disk after disk after disk. Well poised indeed to inject and inspect the 552.

First impressions upon unboxing them was how HEAVY the head unit is...it is heavier even than its companion 552PS power supply, which itself is hardly svelte. The Burndy cable is somewhat more flexible and hence easier to work with than that of the 52. The brushed finish on the chasses are also rather more elegant than the powder finish of the earlier series products, although upon shelving them this facet becomes lost to the eye leaving only the fascia to behold. Personally I gravitate to the rather more instinctive lay-out of the 52s front panel, but that may be instinct bred from familiarity. Once the 552s transit bolts are removed it has to be handled rather delicately-a task certainly not facilitated by its heft. Anyway, we let the 552/552PS warm up while we ran lots of tunes through the mere 52 (both the 52 and its Supercap were recapped a couple months ago).

It was then time to pull out the 52 and slot in the 552. This took a little longer than anticipated as the rats nest of cables behind the stand resulted in me trying unsuccesfully to mate the 52 Burndy into the 552-physically impossible. During this exercise in futility I managed to stand up briskly glancing my scalp of the very sharp corner of the Mana wall stand. I bled only a little. Eventually the error was recognized and the correct Burndy inserted with relative ease and no additional spillage of blood. The 52s Supercap was then put to service as a dedicated supply for the Prefix (we didn't try powering the Prefix off the 552 head unit- it was already a cable jungle in the back; maybe next time).

We then played a couple tracks of Phoebe Snows first album and realized the 552 was in its warming up stage-each track sounded decidedly better than the preceeding one- (it have been unplugged for quite some time while I wrestled with the wrong Burndy). So we took a wine break (Phoenix Merlot, Sonoma County) for 30 mins or so while things were re-warming up upstairs.

After the bottle was duly laid to rest we returned to the music room and proceeded to put the 552 through is paces, starting off with (why not) the CDS2. Now... thats more like it!!!
The 552 has a consumate sense of ease and sounds so very unforced, uncoloured and absolutely linear. Discontinuities that I had absolutely thought to be room acoustics disappeared leaving behind a tremendously insightful sound, full of inflection, nuance, microdetails and a credible tonality- so much like the real thing rather than just a reproduction. I swear Jennifer Charles (Elysian Fields) was standing between the speakers and whispering temptingly in my ear- I could not only hear her breath, I could feel it too. The track in question ( the title track from Bleed your Cedar) has a very tight plucked double bass in it which took on a new degree of precision and resinous tonality. Although it was somewhat more extended than the 52s, it appeared paradoxically lighter as there was less pervasive boom and a much more defined leading edge. I can see that this (on long term use) would require subtle changes in the Snaxo settings, but there was no time for ultra-tuning in the course of one evening. Disk after disk was played. The excellent XRCD of Tiger Okoshi took on a great delicacy of the brushed cymbal work with little variations in brush pressure being faithfully rendered, and his Milesesque trumpet tone having the brassy bite and microinflections that sounded good enough to eat. Very subtle time variations away from the absolute beat greatly increased the intensity of this piece.
Returning to vinyl was an enriching experience, no doubt fortified by the dedicated Scap on the Prefix. Linda Ronstadts voice became even more beautiful and breathy, and the sweet string arrangements (as noted by Richard) seemed far more consonant with the production. Piano notes had the sharp attack and long delay that made them more than just a 'keyboard'.

And so the show went on... after returning from a dinner break (courtesy of fellow afficionado Mahmood)things were incrementally better again. We finished the session with Billy Joels 'the Stranger' album. The strummed guitar on 'Just the way you are' and the expressive breathy sax break were JUST right, the relatively slow sweeping guitar strum resolved into attack envelopes of each individual string with discrete tuning instead of a quick succession of 'plink, plink, plink'.

By this point the hour was getting late. Richard generously offered to leave the 552 with me through the weekend and even come and pick up it, an offer I had to decline. Yes, I was afraid to keep it inhouse because the temptation would become greater than the voice of reason- I just cannot stretch to a 552 at this point.

Following the departure of Richard and Lawson, the 52 was place in the void left behind. We (Mahmood was still there) then listened long and hard. Yes, it was a comedown. There were many elements of the presentation that I just knew were not happening, there were colorations, some slight smearing, a partial loss of soundstage, a lower standard of unflappable poise.. yet, yet..yet the 52 was still a blast to listen to. Which is exactly what we did until well after midnight, pulling disks with almost the same degree of anticipation and enjoyment as we did when the 552 was resident. The 552 is truly a superlative performer, and probably unmatched by any other contender. But the 52 still has a great degree of the boogie factor although in a rather more uncouth and unkept way, but certainly does not need to be apologized about.

The burning question that I am unable to answer is this....if one is (as myself) at the level of a 52/6x135/Snaxo/Scap/DBLs would one get the 552 first and retain the 6-pack, or would it be preferable (in terms of raw performance) to forego the 6pack in favour of a single passive NAP500. I know for a fact the latter has an edge when it comes to the authority of the very low frequency dynamics, yet there is a certain magic and unforced ease that is very strongly conveyed by the 552/6x135 by merit of activation.

I however am choosing neither of those immediate paths. A NAP300 is on order and will be shortly driving the DBL tweeters. It is not lost on me that 3 pairs of NAP300 are not *that* much more than 1x500. Will I eventually get the 552?... very likely to certainly. But I am not ashamed to admit that I am using the now-obsolete 52!

Ron
Dum spiro audio
Dum audio vivo
Posted on: 23 October 2002 by Roy T
Ron,
this will make compulsive reading on the train to work this morning. I know the maths agree that "3 pairs of NAP300 are not *that* much more than 1x500", can't wait to read what your ears say about the equation.
Posted on: 24 October 2002 by Dev B
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Toolsie:
The excellent XRCD of Tiger Okoshi took on a great delicacy of the brushed cymbal work with little variations in brush pressure being faithfully rendered, and his Milesesque trumpet tone having the brassy bite and microinflections that sounded good enough to eat. Very subtle time variations away from the absolute beat greatly increased the intensity of this piece


Ron,

Great review of the 552. Is the Tiger Okoshi CD you played 'Two sides to every story'? If it is I agree it's an excellent album.

regards

Dev
Posted on: 24 October 2002 by Ulrich Hohn
Ron, 4 month ago I hade a home demo with Nac552 and SL2. Your report reminds also of this beautiful experience. Hereby I tested dedicated Scap on the Prefix-Nac552 vs Prefix direct connected to the Nac552.

The dedicated Scap on the Prefix with the Nac552 was nearer to a dedicated Scap on the Prefix with the Nac52 than to a Prefix direct connected to the Nac552.

I recommend to buy the Nac552 and then a Nap500. I heard the abilities of the Nac552 only with the SL2 and not with my SBLs. Therefore I wish that a DBL owner tests once the SL2 with a Nac552 and Nap500.
I think the tweeter of the SL2 sound better than the tweeter of the DBL.

best regards

Ulrich
Posted on: 24 October 2002 by J.N.
I was fortunate to accompany my local dealer to a friend's address to install his new 552 yesterday.

He has 500/NBL's and the 552 replaced a 52.

The 552 sounds like no other Naim pre-amp. Stunning detail is just the beginning. What really impressed me was its soundstage and ease.

I've heard NBL's tending towards stridency in the upper mid and top in the past. Not on the 552. Gloriously easy to listen to, with a wealth of information presented in three dimensions.

A landmark product, indeed.

DO NOT listen to one, unless you can afford it!
Posted on: 24 October 2002 by Joe Petrik
Ron,

Great write-up. Reminiscent of the "Jawed vs DBLs" thread posted ages ago in a forum, far, far away...

Joe
Posted on: 24 October 2002 by DAVOhorn
Help guys

Sound Stage depth etc.

Is this the Naim Forum.

I thought you guys were into PRAT.

I will hopefully be visiting the house of the 552 soon and will pass on a NAIM heretic's pointof view.

regards David
Posted on: 24 October 2002 by J.N.
The 552 gives you the PRaT as well.

Naim have discovered how to create a soundstage.

It's only taken them about thirty years!
Posted on: 24 October 2002 by Martin M
quote:
I confess since installing the Mana Soundbase 3s under the DBLs I have taken on a whole new joy of listening to music, spending hours a day in rapture disk after disk after disk.


Which contributes the greatest improvement. The Soundbases or the 552?
Posted on: 25 October 2002 by Ron Toolsie
quote:
Which contributes the greatest improvement. The Soundbases or the 552?


They are both responsible for very significant improvements. It was the Soundbases though that transformed a rather insipid, smeared and boomy presentation to one that is tight, tuneful, involving and very revealing. The 552 took all that was good and made it better. I did not try the 552 without the soundbases, but I suspect it would have ultimately not been as rewarding as the 52/Soundbase combo.

Remember even an entry level system when perfectly set up will sound tight, tuneful, rhythmic, expressive etc... 99% of disatisfaction untimately is due to failure to address one or more set up issues. It is all too common for people to upgrade electronics without giving their room, product placement, cable dressing, equpipment (including speaker) support any attention. I have heard a complete series 3 setup with Intros sound better than many far more ambitious systems-all because everything was working the way it should.

I would not be so bold to suggest that Soundbases are mandatory for ALL DBL setups..my previous installation had them resting (as designed) just on the floor boards and was every bit as good as the way they are performing now.

To answer your question- I think I would much rather the overall presentation given by the 52/DBL/Soundbase over that I think would existed in the 552/DBL/no Soundbase. Never upgrade until you have maxed out the capabilities of what you already have. For instance, I don't plan any further electronic upgrades until I have Fraimed my existing collection. Right now my equipment support is a combination of mid level Roomtune and entry level Target. The mana speaker bases has reminded me in no uncertain way where I should address my future attentions towards- when I have the existing equipment suitably Fraimed, I will then maybe add the remaining 2xNAP300s.

Ron
Dum spiro audio
Dum audio vivo


Posted on: 25 October 2002 by Martin M
Thank you for thorough and thoughful reply.
Posted on: 27 October 2002 by DAVOhorn
Last night i graciously accepted a generous invitation to listen to the 552 pre.

The system is the same one that J.N. has commented on.

I can say that this is the best NAIM system that i have ever heard.

It had depth width and height and the dynamics were wonderful.
The sound was more rounded and had a much better sound balance and was bordering on neutral. A mid bass increase but is probably due to the room.
The leading edge edginess was completely missing so was the stridency that i usually associate with NAIM. There was far more information present than previously heard on the previous incarnation of this system. The vocals were particularly good. The system would play much more loudly without getting hard and upfront than before.
It would play at low listening levels without the sound balance changing markedly, this is not something that i have heard before from NAIM systems. Friends who have NAIM tend to play the system at quite high listening levels only as this then provides the sound they want. This system will now play at low levels as well.

I wish the owner of this system would investigate the use of high quality interconnects and speaker cable as i definitely feel there is more to come from this system and that the cables are now the limiting factor .

A few hundred pounds on cables will be an excellent investment.

So i have now heard a NAIM system that i have thoroughly enjoyed and would very much appreciate another invite to listen to.

The system was able to play a very wide spectrum of musical styles with equal aplomb.

A great evening.

He is coming round to mine, to listen to the upgraded x overs i have put into my speakers, in the near future. It will be interesting to listen to his comments.

regards David
Posted on: 27 October 2002 by JeremyB
Sounds like a good idea. Spend a couple of grand on cables and it might be possible to get the new Naims to sound like a Krell/Revel/ or whatever. Everyone will be happy!
Posted on: 29 October 2002 by DAVOhorn
Dear JeremyB,

tried to email you but the email address not recognised so was rejected.

can you email me your email address please.

regards David
davo@daverine.freeserve.co.uk