Supercap to 82 tweak on ebay
Posted by: Richard Paget on 12 May 2003
Hi
there is an interesting tweak on an 82/sc on ebay. A burndy has been converted to take out signal and supply all 4 regs via the 2 hicap sockets. Is this well known? If not could be worth searching out a S/H burndy for a good upgrade.
Regards Richard
there is an interesting tweak on an 82/sc on ebay. A burndy has been converted to take out signal and supply all 4 regs via the 2 hicap sockets. Is this well known? If not could be worth searching out a S/H burndy for a good upgrade.
Regards Richard
Posted on: 12 May 2003 by Allan Probin
A Supercap can normally supply 4 regulated outputs to an 82 via two 5-pin Snaics so I'm not sure how much of an upgrade this would be unless this tweak is actually a means of delivering 6 regulated outputs to the 82.
Allan
Allan
Posted on: 12 May 2003 by graphoman
I’ve come across it earlier. It seems interesting, the only problem is the dealer who suggested this mod (and whom I had an e-chat with) did not seem a reliable man. Naim Audio may tell us something about the idee.
graphoman
graphoman
Posted on: 13 May 2003 by Richard Paget
The ad said this tweak was made from a guy at naim--I guess must be some sonic gain
regards Richard
regards Richard
Posted on: 13 May 2003 by greeny
I agree with Allan. The 82 only accepts 4 regulated (plus NAPSC) inputs, these are normally supplied by 2 5-pin snaics from the SUpercap (or 2 Hicaps) so if there is any inprovement then it must be due to the use of the Burndy rather than Snaics, not worth the effort I wouldn't have thought.
As for powering the NAPSC i/p from the Supercap, Why?. This could only introduce noise to the SC and affect is audio performance, better sticking to the NAPSC I would have thought.
I'm also a bit confused looking at the picture as to what is connected to the middle Snaic I/P on the back of the 82, this would normally be emply when supplying an 82 from a SC (or 2*Hi).
As for powering the NAPSC i/p from the Supercap, Why?. This could only introduce noise to the SC and affect is audio performance, better sticking to the NAPSC I would have thought.
I'm also a bit confused looking at the picture as to what is connected to the middle Snaic I/P on the back of the 82, this would normally be emply when supplying an 82 from a SC (or 2*Hi).
Posted on: 13 May 2003 by greeny
quote:
Originally posted by ejt:
I understand that the 52 takes its power for the digital circuits from the Supercap, so it should not pose any difficulties.
If I am wrong, please forgive me
I imagine having the power drawn from the Supercap will not cause more noise than running a completely separate transformer (in the NAPSC), possibly next to or above the Supercap.
You are right, and the SC was designed to work like this and power the digital and Audio circuits. But given an 82 with a NAPSC I would still power the digital (control and switching circuits really)circuits with the NAPSC, this would mean these circuits being completely isolated from the Audio circuits, rather than share the same SC transformer. Additionally the NAPSC comes with a very long lead and can be located a long way from the 82/SC (mine is more than 3 feet away).
I'm not suggesting here that the Burndy solution won't work, I just can't see where much improvement would come from.
Still don't know whats connected to that middle socket though!!
Posted on: 13 May 2003 by Richard Dane
Hmmmm,
the eagle eyed among you will of course have spotted that the set-up is incorrect as shown in the picture - the output from the pre-amp should be taken from the Supercap and not from the NAC 82 otherwise the earthing will be screwed up.
As to this being an internal Naim modification, nobody seems to remember such a thing and it's difficult to see any benefits to be had by doing things this way.
Richard
the eagle eyed among you will of course have spotted that the set-up is incorrect as shown in the picture - the output from the pre-amp should be taken from the Supercap and not from the NAC 82 otherwise the earthing will be screwed up.
As to this being an internal Naim modification, nobody seems to remember such a thing and it's difficult to see any benefits to be had by doing things this way.
Richard