Statement pre and power vs 552 DR active 3x NAP 500 DR - which one wins?

Perhaps a price list, a calculator and the search facility might help. 

Statement wins...

Statement pre+amp are 3 boxes the other kit are more boxes and also the full loom comprises many mains, ICs, etc.

Hungryhalibut posted:

Perhaps a price list, a calculator and the search facility might help. 

I think the question was about which is better, active triamped 500DRs or passive Statement.

Darke Bear has posted his view on another thread earlier today Active NAP500 DR upgrade)

Hungryhalibut posted:

Perhaps a price list, a calculator and the search facility might help. 

So you saw the, ahem, statement of Naim's official stance on this question in the Naim Audio 1984 Price List:

It should be noted that a passive system using a better amplifier will normally sound superior to an active one using less good amplifiers.

Consciousmess posted:

I have noticed that some fortunate ones have active 500 DRs fed by 552 DR and this cost must be exceeding the Statement - if there's a SNAXO and SC DR to boot.

Considering diminishing returns and all, how do these set ups compare?

Consciousness, good timing, the 500 Active Club haven't been so Active!

Ok, to the point, I had the pleasure of attending a Seminar hosted by the Esteem Manu, earlier this year. 

Simple set up:

2 x 555PS DR > NDS > Statement > Full Loom & PLs > Lawrence Dickies Giya GT3s

Don't quote me on the Speakers, but they were 2014 Stereo-phile Speaker of the year.

Now we have some qualified Members on the Forum, with years of Experience, and I value their views, but lets see what Lawrence Dickie, had to say about Active Systems:

"Laurence Dickie: "I have always been a keen advocate of the active approach to loudspeaker design, believing that the direct connection between amplifier and voice coil offers the purest route and that the precision and linearity of active electronics give a clear advantage over passive alternatives. However for pragmatic reasons we felt it unwise to go to market with only active speakers. An important part of the design phase of the first Vivid Audio products was a re-evaluation of passive crossover design. It has to be said that the use of computer-aided circuit analysis has really changed the game. The accuracy possible to meet target responses while presenting a safe load is quite remarkable. This coupled with drivers which present constant impedances across a wide range of drive levels, non-polar film dielectric capacitors and air-cored inductors has permitted us to create passive designs which really challenge the active alternatives.”

Also, for pragmatic reasons Naim had to stop production of their Active Speakers! 

Well, it doesn't take a genius to figure out, I'm a Active Fan! 

A certain ease in delivery, an effortless delivery of Music, at least it was with my Active Karin/Linn XO with Bingo Card/Briks! 

By going Active, one can eliminate the phase distortion, associated with the crossover, even in the most expensive Speaker in todays Market!

Just Allante's & Lawrence Dickie's Two Cents! 

Bert Schurink posted:

Statement wins...

I have heard exactly this comparison at the Naim head office. And with my ears it was a clear win for the statement. Not something I expected though......

Bert Schurink posted:

Bert Schurink posted:

Statement wins...

I have heard exactly this comparison at the Naim head office. And with my ears it was a clear win for the statement. Not something I expected though......

Wow! 

Must be nice!

"I was smitten by the Giya G2 and determined to have these active. Lawrence, wanted this too!  We agreed a price and he had an active pair made whilst liaising with Roy George at Naim for a modified SNAXO 362. The Giya G2 is a 4-way speaker, so it was a challenge. When complete, the result was a system sounding better than I've heard anywhere. The system is now

552/NDS x 2 DRPS/3 x 500 DR

if you contact Lawrence Dickie at Vivid Audio, he would help I'm sure. Of course, Naim now have the design specs for the SNAXO 362 (Vivid Audio).

At the time I bought my speakers only Giya G1 & 2's were available. Nowadays, the new Giya G3 is out there to much critical acclaim , as is most of the Vivid Audio range.

hope this helps."

Specifications for G3

Description: Four-way, five-driver, floorstanding loudspeaker with vented enclosure. Drive-units: 1" (25mm) aluminum-dome tweeter, 2" (50mm) aluminum-dome upper-midrange driver, 4.9" (125mm) aluminum-cone lower-midrange unit, two 5.5" (135mm) aluminum-cone woofers. Crossover frequencies: 220Hz, 880Hz, 3.5kHz. Frequency response: 36Hz–33kHz, ±2dB on reference axis. Frequency range (–6dB): 33Hz–36kHz. 

Just Curios Bert, was there 3 500's with the G3s also?

Was it close, or did the Statement, blow the 552/500s away? 

Would have been nice to here an S1/500s Active with G3s

you Lucky chap! 

Allante93!

This comparison's a difficult one. For those of us who favour Active, going back to passive isn't an easy step to take. Another configuration needs to be brought into the arena, that of Active 3X500DRs, with the Statement preamp.

I just wonder whether it's retrospective justification after the listener forked out so much money!

And then the Russian Oligarchs whose money is in abundance don't perceive the same quality in their active statements and own power stations as us plebs would, so no one is better off!!

tonym posted:

This comparison's a difficult one. For those of us who favour Active, going back to passive isn't an easy step to take. Another configuration needs to be brought into the arena, that of Active 3X500DRs, with the Statement preamp.

Of course just to confuse things further Tony, a passive system opens you up to a much wider range of speakers than active.  I wonder how much of the passive/active gap could be closed by going for better speakers driven passively?

Passive crossovers are evil, EVIL, I say!

"I was smitten by the Giya G2 and determined to have these active. Lawrence, wanted this too!  We agreed a price and he had an active pair made whilst liaising with Roy George at Naim for a modified SNAXO 362. The Giya G2 is a 4-way speaker, so it was a challenge. When complete, the result was a system sounding better than I've heard anywhere. The system is now

552/NDS x 2 DRPS/3 x 500 DR

if you contact Lawrence Dickie at Vivid Audio, he would help I'm sure. Of course, Naim now have the design specs for the SNAXO 362 (Vivid Audio)."

Interesting! 

All the arguments for active to me hold greater sway than those against. But whether, ata given price point, a superlative amp with passive XO is better or worse than active with three amps at a third of the cost can only determined by listening. Apart from anything else it will depend on the individual speaker design and the passive XO in question as well as the specific amps.

Aside from that, active XOs can be analog or digital. Digital ones have the singular advantage of ease of response tailoring, but in all cases of which I am aware they also have the limitation of their DACs: to be valid for decent hifi the DACs need to be exactly what would be used as a primary source DAC, and if a digital source is used the signal should be kept in the digital domain right up to the XO, while an analog source needs equivalent quality ADCs. This creates a need for an active XO that has outputs to 2, 3 or 4 DACs of your choice, whether they be Hugos, Daves or nDACs. Not cheap, but for those that can afford, the potectial would be there for something quite amazing.

Graham Clarke posted:

tonym posted:

This comparison's a difficult one. For those of us who favour Active, going back to passive isn't an easy step to take. Another configuration needs to be brought into the arena, that of Active 3X500DRs, with the Statement preamp.

Of course just to confuse things further Tony, a passive system opens you up to a much wider range of speakers than active.  I wonder how much of the passive/active gap could be closed by going for better speakers driven passively?

There are few speakers of quality that can't be driven actively even if not designed to make it easy, limited only by the manufacturer making the crossover completely inaccessible and without bi-tri wiring capability, rare these days. The enlightened manufacturers like PMC, ATCs make it easy - I am not caused to wonder why.

The other point here is cost. Although active looks more expensive on a par basis (new) it is possible to put together an active system with "pre-loved" components that may outperform equivalently price 2nd hand passive systems. 250.2s for instance look like a real bargain at the moment. You could get two of those for less than a 2nd hand 250DR, throw a decent serviced HC and SNAXO at it and the price wouldn't be that far different. IMHO my active snaxo IBL with 2 x 250.2 outperformed the passive 250DR into IBL by a considerable margin.

Innocent Bystander posted:

Graham Clarke posted:

tonym posted:

This comparison's a difficult one. For those of us who favour Active, going back to passive isn't an easy step to take. Another configuration needs to be brought into the arena, that of Active 3X500DRs, with the Statement preamp.

Of course just to confuse things further Tony, a passive system opens you up to a much wider range of speakers than active.  I wonder how much of the passive/active gap could be closed by going for better speakers driven passively?

There are few speakers of quality that can't be driven actively even if not designed to make it easy, limited only by the manufacturer making the crossover completely inaccessible and without bi-tri wiring capability, rare these days. The enlightened manufacturers like PMC, ATCs make it easy - I am not caused to wonder why.

Bystander, I think you are saying, when talking Active Systems, there are only two major players. 

One just discontinued production of their Active Speakers, and the other has reached out to the likes of, Kudus, PMC, B & W, JBL, and the 5th I can't recall this moment. But Linn has a host of  speakers that are Active Ready. While Naim is stuck with, IBL, NBL, SBL, SL2, DBL, Bricks, and the new kid on the Block the Ovators, which has been discontinued. 

So the real question, that no one is addressing, with the exception of Bystander, which approach is better?

Linn appears to appeal to the Millenniums, with their digital inputs, in theory, sounds great, preserve the incoming digital signal as long as possible, then once it reaches it's 10,000 GBP, Klimax Exakt, the burden is on dacs incorporated within the 6 channel crossover.  

In others words, Linn's digital In-Analog out, Vs Naim's Analog in-Analog out. 

One Gentleman on the Forum, went through a lot to achieve his Dream System. 

He put together an heck of a team, including Lawrence Dickie, himself, and Naim who rigged up an Snaxo 362, to  Dickie's G2s, the Gentle said it was outstanding. 

552/ Snaxo/3 x 500s/ Giya G2s 

Just thought the Above Information would be interesting to the 500 Active Club!

Allante93, Active Fan! 

Allante93 posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

There are few speakers of quality that can't be driven actively even if not designed to make it easy, limited only by the manufacturer making the crossover completely inaccessible and without bi-tri wiring capability, rare these days. The enlightened manufacturers like PMC, ATCs make it easy - I am not caused to wonder why.

Bystander, I think you are saying, when talking Active Systems, there are only two major players. 

One just discontinued production of their Active Speakers, and the other has reached out to the likes of, Kudus, PMC, B & W, JBL, and the 5th I can't recall this moment. But Linn has a host of  speakers that are Active Ready. While Naim is stuck with, IBL, NBL, SBL, SL2, DBL, Bricks, and the new kid on the Block the Ovators, which has been discontinued. 

 

 

I wasn't meaning to suggest only two major players, though only those two names occurred to me when I was posting  thinking of current production, yes indeed there are others you mention, also no doubt a few more,.