2 x 140 IXO vs 250

Posted by: sonofcolin on 02 July 2001

I suppose the merits of active v passive systems have been discussed in this forum on many an occasion, but I haven't read them!

So here goes. I have 72/Hi-Cap/140/ Credo, with rega P9 and soon to be proud owner of CDX. My point is this. The CDX costs a lot, so I can't see myself spending too much in the future. I have heard a 180 in place of my 140 and was suprised what a big difference it made in terms of control of the credos. So in the interests of future upgrades, which would be the better investment: 2nd hand 140 + ixo or 2nd hand 250? Of course sound is very important, but is there really a big difference between the passive 250 and active 140's?

Posted on: 02 July 2001 by Jay
When you get your CDX have you thought about getting a 102 to replace your 72 instead of going active?

It would work fabulously with the hi-cap you have....and you get a free remote!

Jay

Posted on: 02 July 2001 by sonofcolin
Hmm..

I heard the 102 a few years ago, although without Hi-Cap and to be honest it didn't really sound too different to the 72...but the remote would be very useful!

I feel that the Credos deserve a bit more grip at the moment, but i think I'll try and listen to the 102 in the new system and see if it does the buis.

Posted on: 02 July 2001 by Bruce Woodhouse
I have been in this upgrade position, and eventually went from 140 to 140x2 plus IXO, 72 to 102 plus HiCap and also bought a CDX/XPS. I am now awaiting my SBLs and SNAXO. All this over several years i might add!

My advice would be based on a question-what do you like/not like? and of course a dem with your own ears.

I have a feeling that active now with CDX will give you quite a dry but lively sound and it has some advantage if you have a 'difficult' room (as i do) in terms of being able to fine tune a little via the IXO.

I have heard a passive 250 via Credo and I remember feeling that it gives you a more solid sound especially at the base end (where credo's are a bit boxy) and overall 'cleans up' the character compared to a single 140, the difference was not small. Compared to active the differences were, well, different and rather based on personal choice. The sound 'picture' i thought was better with active and it felt lighter on its feet but the 250 has a seductive weight and control. i happen to like the active sound and I'm staying that way when the SBLs arrive.

I have a feeling the weak leak in the chain is indeed nearer the source-either paying for the XPS which is a HUGE step forward or indeed buying a 102 plus NAPSC would actually be my next choice.

Interested to hear results of a dem of these options to see how your thoughts compare.

Posted on: 02 July 2001 by sonofcolin
It seems to me that the consensus is with the 102. I'll try and get a dem, but I will have to wait for the shock of the CDX to clear from my bank account.

I don't think I have actually heard the best from the rega yet, so maybe pre amp before power will be more beneficial (and cheaper!)

Can you use the NAPSC with the 102 if you are using a Hi-Cap?

Posted on: 02 July 2001 by Bruce Woodhouse
The NAPSC is a little box which powers some of the circuitry in the 102 such as the display lights and the volume control motor. it is entirely in addition to hi-Cap and worth every penny of the 180 or so pound

Bruce

Incidentally I remember being slightly underwhelmed by a 102 the first time I auditioned it-despite the enthusiasm of the dealer. I think it is because it preserves the essential character of the system and balance so it does not hit you between the eyes as 'different'. The advantages are however very large, best heard after a good listen by then going back to the 72 again for a while.

[This message was edited by Bruce Woodhouse on MONDAY 02 July 2001 at 11:46.]