NAC552/NAP135's vs NAC52/NAP500

I was just in Chicago and asked the same question after hearing CDX2/XPS2/552/500/Quad 988's and the consensus was to get the Nap 500 first because it adds the most to the system in terms of bass grip and imaging. The Nap 500 gives so much depth to the music. Just my 2 cents.
Anthony

After going from 250 to 500 and then 52 to 552 I strongly suggert the latter first. Tha 500 is very good but the 552 is magic.

/Erik

Having heard all these combinations, no question, a 552 comes first. I believe it breaks source-first rules as no source can be good enough for it anyway
It is magic - as many people have commented, it makes source, power amp, speakers and room, not to mention music sound better.

Minky,

I've heard 52/500 & 552/500 into NBLs (different systems).

The NAP500 obviously brings a lot to the 52 system, but the 552 puts the system into a different league, and I'd guess it would do much of that with 135s, too.

If I had to do it blind, I'd go with the 552.

cheers, Martin

E-mail:- MartinPayne at Dial.Pipex.com

Hi Mark,
Yes, it was Pro Musica and I agree with you with your opinion. The 552 is absolutely magic but there are no deals for them at this time and I doubt that there will be in the near future. The 552/500 system sound was as close to a live performance as I have ever heard. I have listened to the 52/500 combination and it was very good, a great improvement over the 135's. There have been comments in other threads that suggests the 500 could be considered a source because of its impact on the system.
Anthony

I have not heard the 500 in my system yet, but I have the 552. I can say with great confidence in my system the 552/XPS1/6x135s far, FAR exceeds the performance I am currently getting with the 52/XPS2/1xNAP300,4x135. It is really that good. Towards the end of this month I should have a CDS3 in-house, so I'll be able to see how close the CDS3/52 may approach the CDS2/552 in performance- although I have only the memory of the 552 to cling on to. For now.

Ron
Dum spiro audio
Dum audio vivo

I have heard the 552 and agree with Ron and Martin that this is the way to go. Like Ron I now have a new 250 and XPS2, and a CDS3 in a few months I hope that takes me closer to the 552 experience which was simply breathtaking.

Dev

ps. incidentally I think 2 x new 250 active should be awesome and this is where I am heading.

Thanks for all of the feedback.

Chris brought a 3-4 month old 552 round last night and we did some A to B's
between the 52 and the 552 with the 135's in place (I pretty much know what the 52/500 sounds like now) and then with mutterings of "you don't want to go there" reluctantly hooked up the 552/500 and left me with it.

Before I go any further, mitigating factors are that my NBL's are only a few weeks out of the box, my 135's may need a re-cap, and the 552 had been switched off for 30 minutes.

We agreed that the 52/500 made better music into the NBL's than the 552/135's. The NBL's really thrive on the blackness, grip and power and speed of the 500's. With the 135's back on and the 552 in place you could hear that the 552 was doing a lot of good things that were being headed off at the pass by the 135's. The 52/500 brought a warmth and fluidity to the music that was missing from the 552/135 combo.

Together, the 552/500 is on another planet. The 552 takes everything that the 500 does, does it again, and then adds a level of dynamics that my old active system only hinted at. Individual tracks become a rollercoaster of quiet and crescendo. Put the volume up for the intro of your favorite track and before you know it noise control is breaking the door down. Clarity ? If the 500 gives you half of the previously undecipherable lyrics, the 552/500 gives you all of them and makes you wonder what the problem was. Soundstage ? So huge and shifts so quickly that stuff like Beck and Cassandra Wilson make you feel dizzy. In short, every track becomes an epic adventure, a fireworks display. Stupendous ? Yup. Relaxing ? Nope. I am not sure yet but I am wondering if this system would be like driving an F1 to work every day - too much of a good thing. Anyone else been through this and survived ?

Mark.

Intersting post. If you can't have both the 552 and 500 (and few of us can) then the decision must be made based upon what you want the upgrade to achieve as a power amp has a very different effect on the music compared to the pre amp. There is not a 'correct' path merely what appeals most to you the listener. It is the same as speakers, personally I love everything about Naim except the speakers which make my ears hurt but everyone is different. I would go for the power amp.

CDSII, 52, 135's and SF Electa Amator II's

Minky,

strange results.

I have heard a couple of 52/500/NBL systems and it's definately better than the 135s, but it's 'more of the same' in many ways.

I then heard 552/500/NBL at my dealer. Although the 552 was a day old, and the relatively new install still has a few gremlins to iron out, I was stunned by the 552.

It put a completely different perspective on the music compared to 52/500, and just made the intentions of the musicians so blindingly obvious.

cheers, Martin

E-mail:- MartinPayne at Dial.Pipex.com

Martin,

Exactly. Together the 552/500 are a revelation. Going from 52/500 to 552/500 is such a huge leap, probably even more so than going from 52/135 to 52/500, that the assumption is that the 552 must be the biggest standalone upgrade. To my ears at least, this was not the case, which suggests that the 135's in a 52/135 system are the limiting factor.

Have you just a pair of 135's or are you active and which speakers are you using?

From your referal to active in the past tense I assume you are running all these passive.

So what do you think about 552 in to an active tail with 250's or 135's. I guess no one has tried active 500's as your into megabucks then!!!

I'm a mullet and I love it!

Smike,

I am ugrading from a system that, apart from CDS1 to CDS2, remained unchanged for at least 6 years that consisted of CDS/52/Scap/Snaxo/4x135/SBL. I decided to upgrade the speakers to NBL then had to decide whether to drive them with 2 or 6 135's or a 500. Even with 2 135's the NBL's sounded pretty good but lacked the dynamics of active. I didn't try 6 135's but the evidence was pretty conclusive in favour of the 500, so I got one home and bingo. Then the question that I pose at the start of this thread.

My advice to anyone with active that is tossing up between a 552 into their existing active setup or a 500 passive is to try both at home. Make sure both components are (equally) run-in and warmed up. Try to have each for a weekend when you are more relaxed. There is no doubt that the 552 and the 500 are a quantum leap ahead of the 52 and 135's. In fact the 500 is almost certainly better than a 6 pack of 135's, and the 552 is at least it's equal. I think that the 52 is a better preamp than the 135's would have us believe. The 500 maximizes the output from the 52 and sounds pretty amazing in the process, but it can take much more and the 552 gives it much more.

Sorry, I am not sure that this answers your question ..

Thanks for that - your right it probably doesn't but it helps.

I have triamped briks so it would be a big step (cost) to go 500/NBL and i'm not sure you can get crossovers for briks any more!

I'm a mullet and I love it!

Smike,

brand-new passive crossovers can be ordered from Falcon Acoustics, but will probably require surgery inside the speakers to fit them.

cheers, Martin

E-mail:- MartinPayne at Dial.Pipex.com

Smike,

It occured to me after my last post that one of the reasons that I would choose the 500 over the 552 is that (besides other things) it gives me back the scale and dynamics of an active system. You are already active and I notice from your profile that you have an 82, so I wouldn't be suprised if the 552 gave the biggest improvement.

After spending a week with the 500 and then several days and nights with the 552/500 I decided to see if I could still live with the 52/135's. The short answer was no. It sounded like NBL's had been wrapped in cotton wool and submerged in treacle. The experiment lasted about 20 minutes before I put the 500 back on. Much, much better, but still only halfway there. These boys really do need each other. Darn.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Minky:
Smike,

It occured to me after my last post that one of the reasons that I would choose the 500 over the 552 is that (besides other things) it gives me back the scale and dynamics of an active system. You are already active and I notice from your profile that you have an 82, so I wouldn't be suprised if the 552 gave the biggest improvement.

---

This is beginning to sound like I need to do some serious listening and find some serious cash!

So looks like I need to go CDS3/XPS2 and 552 then leave my mullet tail as it is.

Thanks for the thoughts Minky

I'm a mullet and I love it!

quote:

---

Now, Minky, I warned you, didn't I? But, no, you had to open Pandora's Box...

---

Hockman,

I know, I know.

Satan,

If you are still interested, I am ready to talk.

It's a buyers market for souls round here. I'd try Ebay if I were you.