Naim and TAS

quote:

---

Looking for Naim reviews I searched the archives of The Absolute Sound. I was surprised how little attention this magazin devotes to Naim products. Doesn't Harry Pearson like the Naim sound? Is it the policy of the American Naim ditributor or just chance?

---

No such policy, it's just that an insistence on using our interconnects and speaker wires dulls the cable-feeding frenzy that many American reviewers (not limited to any one magazine, mind you) thrive on. How dare a manufacturer decide what's the best match for its equipment, after all, hmm...

That said, the magazines we do support with advertising (Listener, for example) are often the types we'd want to read ourselves, but we're open to anything.

Dave Dever, NANA

P.S. There's no such thing as a "Golden Ear"...

He then criticized it because Naim effectively prevents its buyers from experimenting with cables.

In other words, Naim is bad because if inocculates its buyers from audiophilia nervosa subtype cable obsession.

I simply do not understand this reasoning.

Phil

Phil's point is that if Harley found the system as it was to be so good, who cares about the cables--the system worked.

As to the original question,

TAS did review the 32/Snaps/250 in the early 80s, as part of a series on the Linn/Naim system by John Nork, who was a big Linn fan at the time. The phono preamp was praised for it's ability to take low output mc's straight in, but as a whole the preamp was seen to be veiled and a bit edgy/transistory I think, and to thus represent poor value. I don't think the 250 was well liked either in comparison to their references (Audio Research probably). They liked the LP12, thought the Ittok was very good at the price but had upper midrange glare, liked the Karma and later the Troika very much. The Naim they didn't like much. The Isobariks were thought to have good slam--Nork thought they had an appeal but didn't make it on classical and were ultimately failures. Unfortunately for Naim, the review was right before the Hicap came out, and of course that really upped the transparency of the preamp in ways that TAS would have appreciated. When the LK1/2 came out, Nork considered these superior to the Naim competition.

Later on, Neil Levenson of TAS (and Fanfare) was a Linn/Naimie. The Nait was praised several times by Levenson and others, and he used a 32-5/hicap/250. But basically he was the lone voice at TAS who had musical priorities. In this time frame (mid to late 80s) Naim did advertise in TAS--I remember one ad in particular with a cowboy in a bar wielding a 32-5 like a six-shooter--quite odd to say the least.

Naim probably hasn't been mentioned in TAS since then, though there was a Mana review recently (not very positive). In Stereophile, Sam Tellig should have natural Naim proclivities and I would sent him a Nait5/CD5 if I were NANA. Fremer obviously has some sympathies with the Naim sound, though he also likes Musical Fidelity. I would send him a 112/hicap/150. Of course these guys have to agree to fit the components into their review schedule. I think John Atkinson may not think much of Naim (he removed the Nait2 from recommended components due to lack of power, despite the fact it sounded more powerful than the competition).

--Eri

quote:

---

In Stereophile, Sam Tellig should have natural Naim proclivities and I would sent him a Nait5/CD5 if I were NANA. Fremer obviously has some sympathies with the Naim sound, though he also likes Musical Fidelity. I would send him a 112/hicap/150. Of course these guys have to agree to fit the components into their review schedule.

---

Listener is a more likely candidate for this type of review, anyway--Michael Fremer (for Stereophile) has already done the Stageline and CD5, as well as the CDX reviews.

It is unwise from a manufacturer's (distributor's) perspective to comment on unpublished reviews--watch this space.

Dave Dever, NANA

Excellent tonal balance.

Dynamic, packs wallop.

Excellent transients.

Good definition.

Midrange lacks fullness. Sounds nasal, and mechanical, honky at worst.

Presence region glare, brightness, hardness (though not bad for solid state).

Upper treble is depressed, soft, but smooth and sweet.

Gauzy texture, lacks immediacy.

Medicore imaging and soundstaging.

Amp is powerful into real world speaker loads.

A bit mushy on bottom, but good wallop, rich through lower mids.

--Eri

Personally I wouldn't try to cut off the Stereophile audience. I'm sure the positive reviews of Naim cd players there has helped get people into Naim dealers, and maybe they hear the rest of the line there. But Sam Tellig loves lowish powered integrateds, and gave the Nait or Nait 2 a Class B rating once, and I think it would be good to have the integrated guru put the Nait against his memories of LFD Mistral, Creek, Musical Fidelity et. al.

I would try to get Mikey on the Allaes too.

--Eri