135s vs DV HX1.2

Posted by: Alex S. on 30 May 2002

One of our most charming members has just bought a pair of Shahinian Obelisks (so they're not warmed up, but at least it was a level playing field). As a result, it seemed worthwhile to try out the Dynavector HX 1.2 against the 135s which presently reside in the system. Other components are CDS2 and 52, all sitting on Hutter.

Since I am a fully paid up member of the DV Mafia I considered it wise to oversee the demonstration. This meant we had a new, fully up to speed, HX 1.2, mine, which is older and slightly less powerfully specified, and the 135s for comparison. For the Naims we used all Naim cabling including NACA5. For the DV we had a custom made Chord Cobra IC and a choice of NACA5 or Nordost Red Dawn.

For listening we chose some full-on Vaughan Williams with bowel churning organ, parts of Dreadzone Sound, bits of Nick Cave's Let Love In (in parts a truly awful recording), Hugh Masakela's Coal Train and an assortment of other things - normal music and hi-fi testers and teasers.

First up was the new DV, which had been warming up for a day, with NACA5 - It sounded very quiet, open, detailed, spacious. Yes, these are round earth terms, but this is not some round earth amplifier. It holds the tune, plays music, has groove, has foot-tap-ability, although both of us studiously avoided extraneous movements.

Now the 135s. We tried VW's organ. There was more sound. I'm not sure how much more music there was, there was certainly more noise and a degree of gubbins but, the organ was fuller, bigger, bassier - more like a big full-on organ in fact. Subtleties in the orchestration could be followed easily but a few instruments had gone missing. Now the Dreadzone: Wow! The Naim virtues came at you like a velvet gloved, ferrous fist. It is obvious why the Naim clichés of pace, dynamics, leading edge attack have become the clichés they are: I don't think there's anything out there that can grab you by the throat and shake you like Naim can. With Dreadzone its a perfect match. Naim's sheer excitement factor is surely unrivalled.

So what about my DV (again with NACA 5)? Well, it sounded so similar to the first DV that I wasn't sure I heard a difference. My fellow listener detected a slightly thinner presentation and I eventually agreed that the lower rated amp is indeed slightly light-weight compared to its big brother. Nonetheless, even with rose tinted glasses off I'm certainly not rushing off to buy a newer one.

All the time a coiled silver serpent of Red Dawn was sitting on the sofa. I forced it open, otherwise it would have sat there slumbering indefinitely. Nick, for that is his name, plugged it in whilst banging various body parts for the umpteenth time and cursing a lot, mainly me. On went VW: again Wow! A harpist had entered the room. The woodwind section had doubled in size. Actually, the whole orchestra had grown as had the hall where the music was recorded. We played on, trying to trip the stuff up but each time it seemed to play the tune and get things right. My amplifier had grown in stature by a laughable amount. . .

My main conclusion is that all three amplifiers are bloody good. In a Naim system it would be silly, in my opinion, to chuck out 135s for a Dynavector. Nick's certainly not going to. If one worships at the altar of PRaT then there is no better than Naim. By comparison DV is a tad slow, a bit less exciting, also a bit thinner, but, and for my taste its quite a big but, it also a lot quieter, more open, more detailed and, dare I say it, more musical to my ears; but the differences are subtle - both amplifiers essentially hail from a pre Columbian non-spherical world. For Naim the Earth's flat, that's it. The DV's not so sure - some flatness has given way to some roundness; with Red Dawn the DV is something rather wonderful - Hugh Masekela's Live 'Coal Train' was imbued with a kind of magic hitherto lacking - even the Hammond organ thingy.

With Naim one has far less chance to play around with silly cabling. For many that is a blessing not a hindrance. For my madness I believe in good cabling - not that I'm about to buy Red Dawn (for a grand) for myself of course!

So we have two real heavyweights, and I mean Cassius Clay not Frank Bruno. Strangely enough though, its the DV that floats like a butterfly and the 135s which sting like a bee. Neither is doing panto.

Alex
Posted on: 30 May 2002 by Top Cat
quote:
For my madness I believe in good cabling - not that I'm about to buy Red Dawn (for a grand) for myself of course!


In that case, don't ever borrow a run of SPM. It's RUINOUSLY expensive but is so much better than Red Dawn that you've put a pair on the credit card before you know what hit you. I've only got the interconnects (between CD and pre and again between pre and power) but would not change it for the world. Heck, it's a bigger improvement over my old interconnects than Phase 6 Mana had been over old QS Standard.... controversial, but then I trust my ears and they generally don't lie...

TC '..'
"Girl, you thought he was a man, but he was a Muffin..."
Posted on: 30 May 2002 by Alex S.
Interestingly enough mine seems the same. I do believe the new version is more powerful (maybe the manuals were not reprinted, since I think the one which came with Nick's new dem one said the same as mine, or I could have been given a new manual, who knows). Anyway, AFAIK the new one is about 60 watts beefier; but both shift current!

The Isolda should show up tomorrow.

Also, just as a postscript, I hope there wasn't an earthing issue with the 52 - there was quite a buzz coming out of the Obs tweeters at times.

Alex

PS James, of course the 135s would have shut down had we left them on a second longer.
Posted on: 30 May 2002 by David Hobbs-Mallyon
Interesting comments guys - and slightly at odds with a similar demo I did at a dealer some time ago. In that demo, differences didn't come across as subtle - although, I'd agree it's personal preference to which you prefer. Out of interest, how new was the Dynavector? Mine took somewhere in the region of 3-4 weeks before it showed it's full potential, particularly in the control of the bass.

Marco, I presume you're talking about the Stealth monoblocks - at £8K, I'd hardly call these the budget option!

David
Posted on: 30 May 2002 by garyi
Humm, I have a week off and you two don't live a million miles away from me, i think its about time I heard this 'other' hifi.

I thought only naim existed.
Posted on: 30 May 2002 by David Hobbs-Mallyon
Kit,

I wouldn't worry - the nerw spec is either 190 or 180. The old spec is 130 Watts.
David
Posted on: 31 May 2002 by Alex S.
Stallion, thanks ever so for the compliment.

Nick, do you glow green in the dark?

Kit, if your DV case is cream at the back its a new one - mine's black all the way through.

Garyi, you know you're always welcome. I strapped your DV to my Ittok yesterday and it sounds pretty darn good. I'm not sure its as knackered as you thought - fast little bleeder innit. I'm still working out what to give you in return (apart from money of course).

Alex
Posted on: 31 May 2002 by Don
I totally second Top Cat's opinion on the Nordost SPMs. If Red Dawn doubles the orchestra, the SPM just about quadruples it.
Posted on: 31 May 2002 by Alex S.
and is sounding excellent so far. Even a piano sounds like a piano which is a really good start.

Nonetheless, I have learnt not to pass quick judgements on the real, as opposed to the hi-fi, capabilities of cable.

Will post in a week or two. It does have a few stainless steel tubes on it which apparently guarantee it not to blow up Naim amps BTW.

Alex
Posted on: 04 June 2002 by ebirah
Alex,

Super review, eloquently communicated. It seems your experiences are very much in keeping with the recent dem I did, albeit using a 250. I was left in little doubt the DV was the better amp - it is more controlled, refined and quieter (and does not loose musicians!). Its just that the Naim is so very close given the price differential I feel no need to change. The 135s seem a much more level playing field given your experience and then I suppose its merely a question of taste rather than right or wrong (although information loss - those dissapearing musicians again - it pretty worrying)?

However, the main aim of this post is to ask how were the Obelisks? What did they replace? I'd be very interested in your comments. As you know I have ARCS and have not yet heard their bigger (and more expensive) siblings - more out of pecuniary fear than anything else...

Steve