NAC-N 272 Volume Control

I nearly bought a 272, but found the 282 just so much more musical that I had to go for it. My one regret is that the volume control on the 282 is arguably not fit for purpose (using NDX as source) as the smallest adjustment gives a large jump in volume. The 272 has no such problems - very much like the Superuniti I've just sold.

The volume goes from 0 to 100 in even steps, and is a joy to use. 

Hi HH, may I ask roughly what setting do you normally use when you play modern electronic recordings at a reasonable volume level?

oK if you can set the overall gain to give 0-100 covering normal listening range, but not necessarily the case if normal listening range is only, say 20% of total scale.

i can't answer the specific question as I dont have familiarity, however the only experience I have had with stepped volume controls is that invariably I want to listen halfway between two positions, particularly at low end of range.

Yep, very much why I was asking the question!

Huge posted:

Hi HH, may I ask roughly what setting do you normally use when you play modern electronic recordings at a reasonable volume level?

I tend to listen to electronica at 36 and higher

35 low, 45 no one at home, 55 Party! 

ChrisSU posted:

I nearly bought a 272, but found the 282 just so much more musical that I had to go for it. My one regret is that the volume control on the 282 is arguably not fit for purpose (using NDX as source) as the smallest adjustment gives a large jump in volume. The 272 has no such problems - very much like the Superuniti I've just sold.

It's not the volume control. It's  the darn input sensitivity. Newer Naim products use a much lower sensitivity (higher value in millivolts) whereas the 282 design harks from a day where a very high sensitivity input (lower value - 75mV in the case of a 282) was reasonable. The volume pots used for the 282 are excellent quality but the problem is further upstream on the inputs.

One reason I have held back on a 252 is a vain hope that Naim will tweak the sensitivity on a future revision to fix this issue. It is partly the reason why there is also so much hiss on their analogue  preamps. It doesn't affect sound quality but can be annoying and the very good design of the inputs on the 272 seems to be a nod that Naim are aware of the problem.

If it helps I have a 172 and low volume would be in the 20's .....medium/regular listening 30-40.......welly time is 50+ ...

I suspect some of the figures mentioned will also depend on speaker sensitivity also?

volume control is a joy to use either manually or via remote. 

feeling_zen posted:

ChrisSU posted:

I nearly bought a 272, but found the 282 just so much more musical that I had to go for it. My one regret is that the volume control on the 282 is arguably not fit for purpose (using NDX as source) as the smallest adjustment gives a large jump in volume. The 272 has no such problems - very much like the Superuniti I've just sold.

It's not the volume control. It's  the darn input sensitivity. Newer Naim products use a much lower sensitivity (higher value in millivolts) whereas the 282 design harks from a day where a very high sensitivity input (lower value - 75mV in the case of a 282) was reasonable. The volume pots used for the 282 are excellent quality but the problem is further upstream on the inputs.

One reason I have held back on a 252 is a vain hope that Naim will tweak the sensitivity on a future revision to fix this issue. It is partly the reason why there is also so much hiss on their analogue  preamps. It doesn't affect sound quality but can be annoying and the very good design of the inputs on the 272 seems to be a nod that Naim are aware of the problem.

I don't think it's 'hark from a day' thing.. In my experience older preamps were quite lacking in sensitivity on the input as well as some modern ones. For as long as I can remember the  Pro line out standard has been approx 3.8 V pk to pk and the consumer level has been approx 0.9 V pk to pk (for a given impedance). It's just that Naim have designed their NACs a particular way, with huge amount of  head room built into the design of the first stage buffers... no doubt because it sounds better with their sources.. a bit like perhaps why they use DIN plugs.

Having said that I found ample volume control movement on my NDAC, NAT05, CDX2 and NDX with my 252. But unless the source is very low level I rarely go beyond 12 o'clock. Absolutely no hiss on the 252DR preamp.. Unless I put my ear right by the tweeter (foolish I know) and I can just hear a very low hiss.. Probably coming as much from the NAP as NAC... but my components are all relatively new.

Simon I thought the old standard for 0VU was 0.775V RMS for pro use and the convention for domestic equipment was 125mV RMS to 250mV RMS.

Incidentally the much vaunted 2V for CD output is actually 2V RMS at full scale.  The red book standard specified a transfer level (CD equivalent of 0VU) of -18dB, so the 0VU equivalent output of CD players with a 2V (FS) output should be 252ms RMS.  Unfortunately, many recording engineers are eating into the 18dB that the standard provides for headroom and participating in the loudness wars by compressing the signal and then increasing the loudness to get the peaks as close as they can to +/-32765.  Effectively they are encoding the CDs at typically +6dB to+9dB.  This is why with classical music CDs players seem to have relatively normal output whereas with modern music recordings the output is excessive.

GeekSpec2 and Emre,  Thanks that was just the info I'm after.  It sounds like Naim have chosen a very sensible set of ladder steps.

Like IB, I've had experiences with other manufacturer's stepped volume controls where the steps just aren't small enough:  Either because there aren't enough of them (e.g. only going 0 to 25), or (like analogue controls) the useful range is all compressed at the bottom being completely covered by steps 8 to 15 out of 50.

Huge posted:

Simon I thought the old standard for 0VU was 0.775V RMS for pro use and the convention for domestic equipment was 125mV RMS to 250mV RMS.

My recollection for power amp sensitivity is 0.775V and 0.5V respectively.

which raises another interesting factor: at one time that was the input for the rated powerr output, with power amp gain increasing with increasing rated power, so a 100w amp would sound louder than a 50w amp for the same vol control setting. That is no longer the case at least with many hifi amps, with gain the same only headroom increasing.

There is no issue around needing 1/2 steps. The increase in volume between each number is perfectly smooth. I tend to listen at around 32 for normal listening, though 60 has been known on occasion but only for short periods as its really loud. We tend to listen to Radio 4 at around 24 to 26. It's worth noting that you can trim each input to get a consistent level. Upnp seems to be the quietest, so I have this at 0 and then trim the radio by 1 or 2. 

Innocent Bystander posted:

Huge posted:

Simon I thought the old standard for 0VU was 0.775V RMS for pro use and the convention for domestic equipment was 125mV RMS to 250mV RMS.

My recollection for power amp sensitivity is 0.775V and 0.5V respectively.

which raises another interesting factor: at one time that was the input for the rated powerr output, with power amp gain increasing with increasing rated power, so a 100w amp would sound louder than a 50w amp for the same vol control setting. That is no longer the case at least with many hifi amps, with gain the same only headroom increasing.

IB, Yes power amps intended for use with active preamps were often 0.5V RMS for rated power (but not always!), however power amps intended for use with passive preamps were more often 250mV RMS for rated power (but again not always the case!).  Quite often, active preamps would have +6dB gain from line level sources to match a 0.5V sensitivity power amp.  In practice power amp sensitivity could be almost anything as they were usually designed to work with a specific preamp, and so the designer can choose whatever interface he wishes to use between the two (and there were some odd ones!).

The change to using a common gain (rather than common sensitivity) for power amps arose because of the trend for asymetric Bi-Amping.

On the other hand, line in/out levels in domestic equipment were subject to common convention among manufacturers and this is where the 250mV convention for tuners and domestic tape decks arose (and this was subsequently adopted for the '0VU point' of CD replay).  Phono head amps were typically were between 125mV and 250mV RMS output for a specified cartridge output level.

A while ago I had a demo with the NAC272-NAP250DR (With PMC Fact 8).
For streaming music I listened to 35 and when i wanted it really loud at 50 max.

For low level listening I could even go down to 5 and still here the music. Yet 10 was better.
So I think you'll be fine.

If you can, use the naim app to controle the volume.

The standard range is 0-100. But you can set a limit to max. volume. But you still have the complete bar te set the volume. Pretty easy.
Maybe they should add a feature where you can type the number.

Many thanks for the replies, a 272 is under real consideration now, and will be auditioned fairly soon.  If I like what I hear and another consideration falls into place, that will be replacing my ND5 XS.

I'll post updates as I go on.

............  and the power amp will be .......... ????

...initially a Nait XS 2.

My speakers are Spendor SP2s; they are an extremely benign load: min impedance 6.7Ω, max phase angle 42° at >12Ω
As a result of this, provided it's competent, the power amp driving them is much less critical than the preamp (and yes I proved this when I was designing my own amps).

Eventually I'll probably also try a 200 and a 250DR to see if I like the result.

Will the N-272 be compared with a NDX into the XS-2?

C.

Christopher_M posted:

Will the N-272 be compared with a NDX into the XS-2?

C.

I see little point in that, the preamp of the 272 is way above the level of the XS 2.  As a pure streamer, the 272 is closer to an NDX than to an ND5.

In my opinion, NDX into XS 2 doesn't make sense, as it doesn't address the weakest point in the whole system (the XS 2 preamp); to justify an NDX over a 272, I'd also need to upgrade the preamp to a 282.

Sure overall a NDX / 282 + HiCap / 200 is likely to be somewhat better than a 272 / 200, but it's also a considerable increase in cost.  Put an XPS on the 272 and things are a lot closer.

Oh. I imagined a possible two box system of NDX and SN2 for you.

C.

THere is of course an alternative approach, using a separate renderer like microRendu (currently the subject of eveluation on other threads) or Audirvana, into, say, a Chord TT which is a combined DAC & preamp - has anyone done a comparison of that and the N272?

Christopher,

Do you feel that's sonically a better option than a 272 / 200DR or 272 / 250DR?  (£6650 vs £5450 or £6650 vs £7000), even with easy to drive speakers?

IB, an interesting option, but a little hard to audition!