Nap 150 to a Nap 200 upgrade query?.

Based on reading, I suspect most here will tell you a NAP 200 DR will render it broken.

Is your CD5 currently sans Flatcap 2?  If so, add a Flatcap 2 to the CD5 first.  

Hi Richard,

Sorry forgot to add, I am using a Flatcap 2 on the CD5.

Regards

Pieman.

Hmm. I'd say that you should up the CD player first. The logical one would be the CDX2, but you may actually prefer the cd5 with its flatcap. To be conclusively better you are looking at a CDS3/XPS,which is a lot of money. The 200 will be better than the 150, it will make the speakers sound bigger and more controlled. Once the 200 is in place (you don't need the DR version as you have a Hicap, though getting that DRed would be a good plan) the speakers will be the weak link, so Credos or Allaes would be logical. This is the trouble with upgrading, as it takes a while to restore balance. 

Hi Pieman,

I think CDX2, 202, Napsc, HC, 200, Intros is a nice set. If I was making one change at a time from what you have now, I would address the cdp first. Hope that helps.

Regards, Chris

Thanks forum members ,for your thoughts.

The 200 is a logical match for a 202 I believe. I am interested in putting the 200 in my system as I hope that even low levels more control of the music should show through,

Pieman.

That's exactly right. You can pick up a used 200 for £900 or less, so after deducting the price of your 150, the cost of the upgrade should not be too bad. 

Thanks ,Hungry Halibut.

As mentioned, i am going down the pre loved route on upgrading. The 200 DR model has a power supply uplift, that benefits the preamp only, if being powered by the 200 DR, am i right?.

Regards,

Pieman

I have just upgraded from a 140 to a 200.  Now I know the 140 is not a 150. My 140 started off as a 110 and was converted to a 140 in 1997. A Forum search might tell you what about the differences between the 140 and the 150. but I suspect the two are similar.

The rest of the system is CDX2, 202, Napsc Hicap (non DR) with Spendor SP3/1R2s. I found the 200 to be a very significant upgrade. A lot more detail, more agile bass, a richer presentation, poor recordings more ruthlessly revealed.  I play mostly classical music and the 200 reveals, for the first time, the differences between orchestras. The Berlin Phliharrmonic sounds like the Berlin Philharmonic, similarly with the Vienna Philharmonic etc. Fabulous.

The main problem, which is a harsh treble at high volumes, remains the same. That is probably a combined fault of the CDX2, the 202 and the Spendors plus an unhelpful room acoustic so the 200 should probably not be blamed for it. However others on the Forum,  where the 200 is generally admired, have found the 200 to be a bit on the bright side. 

In my view the 200 is a terrific amp, but I would agree that your cd player should probably be upgraded before you upgrade the NAP.

David  

The 200DR also has small changes to the circuitry that are supposed to improve it. That in itself probably doesn't justify its price if you can get a used one for half the price. 

If you want to reduce your box count, it might be worth considering selling your Hicap and getting a 200DR, which should do a good job of powering your preamp with it's DR supply. Obviously, you'd need to audition this very carefully to make sure you don't lose out by removing the Hicap.

I am not fussed about the box count  ,but can understand that some people are. I suppose that it all boils down to choice. The whole world of electronics is shrinking all the time. I am sure that one day given time , a great sound of a HI FI level will be produced from a piece of kit the size of a house brick.

Regards,

not only supposed to, but actually doing so!

is it worth the difference in price from a used 200 non-dr?

some here say no, but this is the forum where having 4 or 5 items to make one source (and may times of over 10k eur) is not that uncommon. but when somebody says that an amp is better than other (older gen), the difference of 1k eur is too much... sometimes, Naim forum is like the world: crazy and strange things happen

and 200 is not on the bright side, as all Naim amps have actually a darker tone, meaning the higher frequencies are slightly rolled of, the cymbals and such are somewhat on the back, but 200 is on the dry side!

the dryness and juicyness (or roundness) has something to do with the timbral attributes, meaning the spectral richness of a displayed instrument or voice, while tonal accuracy means that the fundamental notes, and the frequency spectrum is neutrally or not displayed.

200 is somewhat dark and dry, although in Naim terms is brighter than other Naim power amps, let's say the 250. the 200DR, while having little changed in tonal domain, it did some useful things in the timbral one, getting a bit richer just enough to not be as dry as the desert 200 was.

it also gained in terms of dynamics, separation and soundstage, not massively but easily spottable.

some confuse dry with bright, dynamics with compression, ans so on...

no wonder such recommendations as to put a 8k psu on a 3k source

Having just upgraded myself last week from an older NAP90.3 to a 200, albeit along with a new source component too. I find the sound of the 200 to be spacious and agile with bags of clarity and detail. Vocals especially are very open and highly detailed in presentation. My older NAP90.3 sounds very compressed and shut in by comparison. I don't find the 200 to be dry at all. In fact to my ears its the absolute opposite.

Ian.

These terms are all meaningless. 'Dark and dry'. What the hell is that posed to mean? Perhaps this is a weather forecast. 

I was just trying to explain in regular HiFi terms how various naim amps are sounding, but it seems to me that some here are so far from understanding those basic terms that I will better not bother.

Dry, lush, dark, bright all mean something in HiFi terms.

No wander some of you spend tens of thousands with sometimes no logic at all...

I will retire from this topic anyway

Yes.

Ian,

synesthesia is temporarily banned here, until the Panel Of Notable Members decide that sensory-related analogies are usable again.

Please enclose a copy of your amp's measured frequency response. We'll draw conclusions on your hearing by them, thanks.

N