Is NAIM gone mad? Or the value of sticking what we have...

Agreed. I have both the Hugo and an LP12. The Hugo has the benefit of a SuperLumina IC. My LP12 is top spec but I'm still using a lavender IC. If and when a 4-5 SL IC is available then this will likely replace the lavender. 

The Hugo with SL IC is absolutely superb and, with newer digital music, is on a par with the equivalent vinyl version but, and it's a big but, with the majority of my record collection of original vinyl the LP12 remains on top and therefore will stay and it also has the potential to improve more with the SL IC.

analogmusic, i don't wanted to start an analog digital discussion maybe we can live with a peaceful coexistance of both...

It is more a cost issue for me. The Hugo is 1400 GBP, and a top spec LP12 costs multiples of that along with all the hassle that it comes with including cost of the replacement of the Moving Coil cartridge/Stylus.

but never say never.... maybe I'll buy one someday

There is ample room on the market, and, as Steve has shown, sometimes even in the same house, for both types of playback.  For those of us who don't want the attractions/hassles of LP12 playback, at 1400 quid the Hugo is a bit of a no brainer for high quality playback of digital files but I can well understand why it has limited attraction for those who love their vinyl.  Live and let live

Amen!!

Agreed.

I used to feel that analogue had at least the potential to sound better than digital, and certainly in the early days CD players left a lot to be desired SQ wise. How exactly the two compare, especially wholly analog vs wholly digital up to the preamp, becomes a moot point once audio has already at some stage been digitised, such as in what I assume are now the majority of modern recordings, the arguments as to why vinyl might sound better go out of the window, as a DAC is still required, and that before any of the mechanical limitations of the medium. But recordings that have wholly remained analog

But that is quite aside from personal preference, and where anyone has an extensive vinyl collection, and good playing gear, if nothing else it is a major commitment of either cost or time to convert to wholly digital. And it is no-ones's loss other than the manufacturers of each type of player.

Analogue v Digital.

• Does the format enable you to buy the music you want ?
• Do you prefer (the limitations of) one presentation over the other ?
• Can you afford the medium of your choice ?

I don't understand why so many people argue, and seem to get so vexed about it.

Its a Generational thing.

For me when reaching record buying age the vinyl era was already over. I never got to own an LP player and any bought music was on cassette and then compact disc.  There were a couple of LPs I managed to buy but it was immediately dubbed to cassette on the family hi-fi system to be able to listen on my own Walkman.

If you weren't part of the 'vinyl generation' then it hardly matters, music was cassette or eventually CD.  There are vinyl revival movements in subsequent generations but all the attention is on Technics SL 1200, the iconic turntable for youths.

And then of course Sean Parker came along to change the rules for music (re)distribution..

Now the SL1200 was kicking around in the 1970s, fave among numbers of hifi reviewers, though some of us preferred our belt drive simple but well engineered designs - such as the Thorens TD150, to which the LP12 bears a remarkable resemblence. Then came that revelatory moment (that actually took a whole weekend for the reviewer to hear, so was actually more subtle than others later suggest) when the clarity that a TURNTABLE could bring was first recognised by the HiFi press. It was a revolution, as before that the focus was increasingly on technology, with direct drive leading the way, with people reading the specs not listening to the performance.

Having ignored all else turntable-wise with my TD150, unless or until I could afford an LP12 (price always cincreased faster than salary - and there were other more pressing things to upgrade, until, to me, vinyl had had its day), I'm amazed to learn that the SL 1200 has survived alongside the LP12! 

is the SL1200 vs LP12 today also seen as a generational thing, just as for some people vinyl is, it's [perceived] new technology against old, or is it simply that one is much more affordable than the other?

Innocent bystander,

I couldn't see many younger people buying an LP 12 these days as its £ 2000 in basic form ?

But  they could get a 2 nd hand example for £ 500.I recently went to a Statement event promoted by my local dealer and out of 80 people there I only spotted a couple of teenagers.Most of the people there  where in their 40's - 50' 60' s.

I am lucky to have a LP 12 - Ittok  and a Decca Supergold cartridge which I enjoy alot,but also run a Technics 1210 with a Linn K9 with no mods.The Technics is so well built you can even adjust the arm height when the record is playing ! I think a new 1210 is £ 400.

There both great decks but I do think the Technics is a great value for money deck,just like Rega.And not susceptible to going off like my Linn does.

Personally I find digital a bit soul less compared to vinyl but they have both got there strengths and weaknesses.

Yes indeed, John Coltrane will most certainly enrich your life. But like music storage and replay technologies, other great jazzmen are available!

Lest not forget the aesthetic differences , more so in subjective visual and physical engagement : you move and see when the music starts, the travel of the sinuous movement of notes - like watching a band play almost -but good vinyl sound still costs more than digital !

Easy conclusion when you got a Decca Supergold... 

Interesting to know whether the same applies to music that had originally been recorded digitally?

Indeed, which has been most music recorded or mastered in the last 20 years. Most LPs have been mastered and cut digitally for probably just as long too. 

When I had a record deck I really enjoyed my 1960s and early 70s albums over later ones.. I assumed because the former were all recorded and mastered using tape like 4 or 8 track.

Simon

I've several cases of owning both the CD and vinyl formats of a recent digitally recorded album. Vinyl is better to my ears. This could well be due to differences in mastering or differences in my source gear. Could also be my ears/personal preference as I grew up listening to vinyl.

Technics SL1200 (and then SL1210 plus the mark 2 versions) had become iconic because it was there at the right time and in the right scenes.  It was the game-changer for modern music owing to its use in hip-hop by several of the great turntable DJs.  Once set up as wheels of steel in hip-hop, it became like the Fender Stratocaster or the Gibson Les Paul for the music - as soon as the DJ mastered the art of scratching and beat mixing.  All of their ideas later fed in to other modern electronic music; house, techno, rave, dance and clubland DJs are the modern superstars of music.  In a way it was the natural progression of jazz once hip-hop adopted jazzy sample loops and funky turntable scratching & beat mixing. 

So there's an idea for what to try out with your LP12 - get another LP12 and set up a wheels of steel DJ deck on your hifi. Get practicing now with scratching and beat mixing because on Christmas day when the folks are around they'll be dazzled by your new turntable scratch/ mix skills. Then the kids will be impressed.

Naim Snaic 4 and Snaic 5

Price Feb. 2010: 138€

Price Nov. 2015: 228€

65% for what?

Allowing for the 20% exchange rate difference now compared to 2010, that's about  6% inflation per year. Someone suggested Naim has a policy of about 5% per year? If so, then the price difference seems not unusual, though whether reasonable is another matter, between Naim and its would-be customers.

Do you think that 228€ for such a cable is a warranted (I don't know if that is the right word in english) price?

Another example:

Naim Nait XS2 Feb. 2010: 1.798,-€

Naim Nait XS-2 Nov. 2015: 2.598,-€

It doesn't really matter what anyone thinks. That's the price and you take it or leave it. Have you seen the price of Freddos these days? Only a few years ago they were 5p at the Co-op, now they are 20p. 

That is something what I will never understand, why accept everything as "given", why not criticies it, as we do it right now.

But as long persons are still willing to buy the stuff, even if the prices increases about 200% , nothing will change.

That's my point really. Why expend energy on things that cannot be changed? People don't have to pay the price if they don't want to. 

Johnny Ca$h posted:

Do you think that 228€ for such a cable is a warranted (I don't know if that is the right word in english) price?

Another example:

Naim Nait XS2 Feb. 2010: 1.798,-€

Naim Nait XS-2 Nov. 2015: 2.598,-€

 I have no idea whether anything in the make-up (materials, construction difficulty) of the cables accounts for a significant part of the cost, or of increases in cost, though cost is often more a matter of what the manufacturer believes the punter will pay. There's an awful lot in the HiFi world, especially with things like cables, about which I am unconvinced of the value for money - meaning value to me, as in whether I personally hear a difference, or enough of a difference, or enough from one thing compared to spending money on something else. Assessment of - or importance of - value for money of course are personal matters.

Those Nait prices actually correspond to about 4% per year allowing for the 20% exchange rate change over the period, which is actually less than the alleged 5% PA increase policy... Again whether acceptable to a sufficient number of buyers is something Naim undoubtedly will consider when making any price increase.