Source First kills Active

Mario,

I would not be surprised if an LP12 into a ghetto blaster would out-time and out-tune a P3/Nait/Intro.

However, the P3/Nait/Intro may have a bigger soundstage (due to the spacing between the loudspeakers), and wider bandwith. It depends on what your priorities are...

Given a reasonable and cheap-ish combination of a Nait and a pair of Royd loudspeakers, we can still tell the difference between an LP12 and CDS2. Thus proving that a cheap-ish amplifier and a cheap-ish pair of loudspeakers do not impose a ceiling where improvements in the source cannot be noticed.

Now, if bass extension, volume and scale is what you're after then go for bigger loudspeakers. However, if you want more clarity and expression to the tune and more accurate timing then upgrade the source.

Going active should be the "icing on the cake", but will never be better than a passive system with a bigger power amp.

Andrew

Andrew Randle
Linn Binn Sinner

Mario

Don't believe it until you've heard it.
What does your current system comprise of ?

I went active with an IXO with just a 92/Flatcap/140s, it was by far the best move I made in that period. This was demo'd against going for a cdx or 102, active just makes so much sense (Bruce/Thomas/etc... where are you)...

Active to me is what Naim is all about - it transforms the levels of PRaT, but can be a little too clinical for some.
I have trodden a backwards approach, going active, speakers, preamp and lastly the source, but going active early was something i would never change.

naheed

"Active is what Naim is all about"

This statement does not align itself to the six recommended systems and upgrade paths detailed in the main section of the forum.

I think the gains from going active are different to what you get from a source upgrade, you just have to see for yourself which you prefer.

This is how I characterized 'active' a year ago:

"I believe you get more ‘music’ (boogie factor) from a source or a speaker upgrade, but good active is: OK, baby, you show me … It makes that sleek dress a bit tighter, but it won’t turn a plumpish girl into Heidi Klum."

I'm not even sure about that first statement anymore - in the past year I got more boogie factor out of getting my setup right (speaker placement, supports) than from anything else. In any case, active is sexy, and as Naheed mentioned, many here are very happy with the sounds they're getting from their active setups (particularly SBLs ... drool). You just have to remember that further costs may follow for cables and rack space.

Thinking back to my source upgrades, I wouldn't rule out the possibility of having mistaken more detail for more boogie ... perhaps that would all change if I went vinyl, but that's out of the question right now.

Thomas

Contrary to what Andrew said, I'm pretty certain that I would prefer my active 140s setup to a passive 180, but I must admit that I've never done a straight A/B dem.

Thomas

I added to my CD3.5/92/90/Credo IXO, another 90 and 2 Flatcaps. It was really "the" upgrade! Later I upgraded CDP and TT...

- Jun

I went active (SBLs, 250s) with an LP12/Ittok/MC25FL/Prefix into a 102 pre. Huge improvement; even with my modest Paganini CD player it is more music, but with a few minor flaws revealed more clearly.

Get your dealer to lend you a snaxo/hicap/power amp for a few days and make the decision yourself.

Jo

This is all a bit pedantic surely? All improvements in the chain are worthwhile.

Going active, with Credos via IXO and now SBL/SNAXO (all with 2 x 140's) changed the sound and changed the pleasure. I have no doubt that changing the source altered things hugely too-but perhaps differently, I have gone from a Meridain 506 to CDX/XPS in that time too.

The Credo set up answered some of my critcisms of the speaker by making it sound faster and improving an otherwise slightly boxy bass.

The SBL set up was tried vs a single 250, The sound is different and in many ways my choice was tailored to my small room size. At low/mid volumes I felt active was more delicate and precise, the 250 seemed to have a little more weight and be a bit juicier, especially at high volume. the detail was perhaps not as clear and special, but it was still very fine sounding and may well have been preferred by some.

So I reckon that active changes the character of the presentation to a degree. In the end this may make a mediocre source sound as good as it can, but it is never going to make your CD player sound sweet natural and rythmic if it is unable to produce that.

Bruce

Interesting thread since I am toying with the idea of going active with my SBL. It is an intriguing thought; do I upgrade by changing the components for the next higher one in the heirachy or do I move towards an active system. Most of the contributors here have said that going active was the best decision they ever made. So the question is, with the most basic (Series 5) active setup, at what level Naim passive equipment can it compare to?

Stephen King said:

quote:

---

Mr Randle. The CDS2 properly set up in certain respects blows the LP12 away, so there. I am tired of you saying otherwise, please get on a another band wagon.

---

Stephen, are you an utterly stupid moron, blind or both?

Quote to me where in my text above I stated that an LP12 is better than a CDS2??? In fact quote to me anywhere where I said an LP12 is better than a CDS2.

I have yet to make the direct comparison, and therefore formulate an opinion. In the post above I wrote that it's possible tell the differences between sources like an LP12 and CDS2 - i.e. differences in presentation, although in your case I doubt you have the powers of perception to tell.

Andrew

Andrew Randle
Linn Binn Sinner

A well set up CDS2 can better an LP12 - at least in terms of surface noise and convenience...

Regards
Steve

and for this reason my CDS2 probably just has the greater number of hours playing, but when I can be bothered to go and get the vinyl the LP12 rules the day.

Hello all, this is a good response, and I'm sort of happy to see support for active operation without the supremo front end. Logic always leads me to front end first, but who doesn't like a bit of "icing on their cake"?
Bottom line though is that if you think of an amplifier as a magnifing glass, getting more magnification will eventually show up flaws in the thing your making bigger, so I really can't disagree with Andrew R and his cds/lp12 example.
I think that we can probably conclude that our favourite sources (LP12,cdx,cds1,2or3) can go a little further before we replace them. Source components all get an overhaull once in a while as needles and lasers all eventually wear out. Going active a little early at least maximises this misfortune as time usually brings improvements at all prices.On the other hand,Simon M. correctly notes that naims recomended systems all favour an excellent front end and their recommended upgrades never point to active untill the 500/DBLs are mentioned with their finest source components.So I'm still unsure, at least I have lots of time to work this out.
Mario.

A couple of years ago I acquired a spare Hicap & 250 in a deal with a friend. I sourced a SNAXO & thought I would try my IBL's active. I had only a 32.5 (72 boards) Hicap as my pre amp. I expected a sort of 5 steps forward 3 steps backwards result. I could not have been more wrong. Going active was just a wholesale improvement.

The improvement was in a different league to all my other upgrades over the past 20 years, I'm not saying that it was like adding a better PSU but more so, it was just 'different'.

The difference was that the music just became so much more dynamic, in the room & more real. All other upgrades to this point just went further down the same well trodden road, going active somehow made the road much wider. Please excuse my fanciful analogies here, but I am a little lost to find the correct words.

Over the past year I have had my system in passive mode again & the loss of musical enjoyment was HUGE, to the point where I was playing the system about half the usual time. I have now gone back to active & I can't get enough of it again.

I wish I could explain what going active at this level does, but I can't. I just know that it transforms my system. I gather that when one gets to 52, Supercap level the 500 blows the 6 pack away. I am quite prepared to believe this but I know that IMO my active 250's blow away 135's in my system.

Bob

Do your sums (more amps, cabling, rack space, etc...), but do the demo, our comments should be seen as guidance to filter out options, then get to a good dealer with plenty of CDs and enjoy, or ask for a home loan of your shortlisted options.

naheed

Mario,
Add me to the list of people who've gone active before heavy source-first.


Can anyone name me one person on this forum who has a 52(or 552)/90 combo? You can't because IMO, the pre-amp/power-amp combo needs to be balanced and even the source-firsters wouldn't think it's a good combo unless used as a stepping stone.

I use 2 140s active into Kans and have done a direct comparison between them and a passive 250. No question; is this case, active rules! I have used a pair of 135s briefly and even though in certain respects they sound better, overall, I would choose active 140s.

Active is better for other reasons too. For instance, if you're in a bad RF neighborhood like me, active 140s or 180s are much better than a single 250 or 135s because they don't have the RFI problem associated with those amps.

Also, if you intend on future upgrades, going active is usually far advantageous because you aren't looking for a specific amp to improve upon. You can upgrade one amp, or the crossover, or the crossover power supply, or the pre-amp, etc. as good deals come along. It is actually a much more cost effective way of using the "Free Hi-Fi" approach to system building.

I also think that it should be realised that we are speaking of using Naim or "classic" Linn speakers and that 2-way is generally the way to go unless you find a killer deal on a set of PMS and a crossover.

I'd also like to sort of repeat what Bob A. said above; When I first heard the IBLs, I thought they were a joke. They originally sold at the same price the SBLs did just a few years previously. As I thought Kans were in many ways better than SBLs, I didn't give the IBLs much of a chance anyway. When I told JV of my feelings, he asked if I'd listen to his IBLs active(with 250s). After I heard them active, he was grinning. He said, "sound a lot better active, don't they?". Even though (if purchased new) I still didn't think they were a good value, they sounded FAR, FAR better active than passive with 135s.

Ron The Mon,
Needle-Freak

You know whom I'm talking about. Your credibility regarding all things hi-fi would be taken more seriously if you'd refrain from conveying aggression in every fucking posting on every fucking forum.

Dr Randle knows what he's talking about, and even if he didn't, he gives a better impression of the above than you do.

Mr. Attention-seeker,

Change your (confrontational) style of posting, or everyone is just not going to be arsed to feed the proverbial energy monster.

Lets just ignore gonads-bigger-than-brain types hey chaps?

With reference to Stumo, your first name is definitely WAN...

Regards,

Steve.

It's just a pleasure to hear music as it was intended to be heard.

The IXO is self powered, and has no option for an external power supply. As for it being the week link-I'm not sure. I can say that an IXO with my active SBL's was trounced by the SNAXO/HiCap. I never tried the same with Credos though.

Bruce

quote:

---

do you have to have a power supply for the pre-amp to go active using an IXO

---

David,

I think it would be wise. You could probably still run the pre from one of the two 140s, but that might introduce problems as you'll be drawing more current from the power supply of one amp than from the other, so the sound you're getting from the two amps might be different (wouldn't be a problem if you had one amp for treble and another for mid/bass, but with the Naim Xovers it's usually one for the left speaker and one for the right).

Thomas

David: "two power supplies, snaxo, more cables and another 140"

You could start with one power supply (your preamp will thank you for it), an IXO, more cables and another 140 -- IXOs should be fairly easy to get s/h. Still a big investment, though ...

A SNAXO/Hicap combination is, of course, a good deal better than an IXO, but the IXO is, of course, a good deal better than passive Xovers.

Thomas

Perhaps it was meant to be this way all along. When I came across this thread a couple of days ago I'd just had a call from my local dealer offering me a 2/h HiCap (how often does that happen?) to power the NAXO3-6 I (to my surprise at the time) snipped off eBay a couple of months ago. Added to which the bass drivers in my Ruark Accolades need fitting with new roll surrounds and if I'm gonna take 'em out I may as well disable the PXO's at the same time....

So yes, after weeks of dithering I'm about to go active! Finally (12 years on!) I will get to hear my 3 250s in all their unmuzzled glory. It's going to take a while to get it all set up and tuned to the room but I reckon I'll enjoy every minute.

And that's not all. I'm trading the CD3.5/Flatcap
on a brand-new CDX1 at a knock-down price. In short I'm about to board a starship for a new Audio Galaxy and leave this sorry old world far behind (if only!).

All this and I'm 50 in 2weeks and 5 days. Man oh man....

Great thread by the way folks, it definitely helped!

Ciao Jim

David asked,

quote:

---

Would the IXO be a weak link?

---

Look inside an IXO, then look at your passive crossover. The quality of parts in even the cheapest outboard active crossover exceeds even the best of passive crossovers with few exceptions. Even though an IXO could be bettered by a NAXO (which can be bettered by SNAXO, better power supplies, etc.), it is not a weak link. As I said above, use the IXO as a stepping stone. Naim active crossovers hold their value, so you won't lose money on it.

A better approach if you have a 62/140 would be to buy a NAXO and a SNAPS and power both units off the SNAPS. You could later buy a dedicated Hicap for the pre-amp. As I stated above, the beauty of going active is it allows you to purchase items used as good deals come along.

FWIW, a 42XO can be easily modified to work as just a NAXO. Since these come up cheap from time to time, it is a good value even if just used as an active crossover.

I left out a few other good reasons for going active with lesser power amps instead of just upgrading to a better amp:

2 140s or 180s don't shut down like a 250 when it gets hot. In fact, even at high volumes, my 140s don't get hot AT ALL!

2 250s active run cooler than 135s passive. This means no annoying fan noise with active 250s.

Also, active systems play louder than passive systems.

Ron The Mon,
Needle-Freak

An entire post with the caps lock off! I'm impressed. The tone of your post is also more friendly, even if you are giving me a ticking off

quote:

---

I think in your case its the way you get your rocks off and without messages from peaople like me you would have to pick on someone else, maybe you wife or girfriend, thats of course if there smaller than you

---

No, I don't need any one to act as a whipping boy (or girl.) but you do at times fulfil the role very easily. A recent thread or two on the Mana forum with you present does seem to bear out what I'm saying on this score.

I'm sure you are a nice chap in real life.

Regards,

Steve.

PS: I'm not a Trojan

quote:

---

Steven Before you acuse someone of something you shuld get your facts straight, I have never posted a message on the Mana forum, so there

---

Someone must be sending you up over there then. It happened to Stallion last year.

http://manaforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=462298155&f=172298155&m=6854092342

If this is the case, please accept my apologies.

Regards,

Steve.

It's just a pleasure to hear music as it was intended to be heard.

David asked,

quote:

---

How do you use a Snaps to power two things? Do you need a custom built lead? Presumably you can do this with a hicap or flatcap too?

---

You use two 4-pin SNAICS. One from pre to SNAPS and one from SNAPS to XO. The original stock SNAPS uses two separate (single-rail) 24-volt supplies. A SNAPS-2, Hi-Cap, and Flatcap won't work without modification. A FlatCap2 may work, as I'm not sure about the signal routing. The SNAPS may need slight modding too, but this is very cheap and easy to do.

As your 32/5 is being powered by a single 24-volt supply in the 140, it will be similar in performance with the SNAPS, but the key factor is going active which relieves the power amp from powering the pre as well as the 140 operating only half the frequency spectrum, making it tremendously more efficient.

Just buying a SNAPS on it's own first is worth the cost, making active a box-at-a-time progression. You could also buy another 110/140 and use them as mono-blocks before finally purchasing the XO.

Ron The Mon,
Needle-Freak