Calling NAC 282 / HCDR / NAP 200 Owners Who Have Upgraded To NAP 250 DR

Hungryhalibut posted:

Allante93 posted:

Hungryhalibut:

That's a good description of the 250.2, buy absolutely not the new DR. I'd suggest that you are overanalysing the situation and that you should just plug it in and enjoy the music. Comparisons can be odious. 

That's what I Love about the Forum, my vocabulary is increasing by leaps and bounds

1.  

    

I know what odious means, without the need for a dictionary definition. The phrase 'comparisons are odious' was first used (or recorded as being used) in the 15th century, and has been used by various writers, including Shakespeare (an English playwright, to save the need to look him up) over the years. 

Correct HH, I'm the one that didn't know the meaning, Thanks for increasing my vocabulary! 

But I'm with Gary, if the comparisons are odious, send it back, perhaps it could be a bad one! 

Allante93! 

B_lund, I'm not remotely inclined to justify my purchase, just trying to help a forum member out.  

Ryder - suggest you speak to your dealer about this, he got paid a lot of money to sell this to you, so if you aren't happy, take it up with him or contact Naim or Richard Dane for further advice.

There is only so much forum members can do  to help.

I am afraid I also think this extended burn after the initial settling in / stabilisation period idea iis mis guided... I simply don't recognize it.. here with Naim or in my professional world. I do however recognize connections and point contacts vary over time through oxidation and other mechanical and chemical processes .. and we have typically many of those in our audio replay setups ... and these will change the sound subtly over severeal months... but this is not burn in my book..if anything after a few months the electronics will ever so slightly start to deteriorate .. but this is simply normal.. and circuits are typically designed to work as components age. Down at the microscopic levels the circuit will be a wash with the ebb and flow of parameters due to aging and heating components.

I also couldn't understand the comment above about regulated amps limiting power swings... It is precisely the opposite in my understanding and experience, the regulated amp allows the power to be more consistently provided thereby allowing a more consistent performance across the audio spectrum under increasing load.

However it might simply be the OP does not prefer the 250DR ...and prefers the signature of the 200 instead.. there is nothing unusual about this ... It simply underlines the importance of home demonstrating or careful prior listening before purchase.. In the very subjective world of higher end domestic audio replay equipment, it's just too risky to buy blind..thete is a great risk of disappointment.

Simon

analogmusic posted:

I'm not remotely inclined to justify my purchase, just trying to help a forum member out.  

There is only so much forum members can do  to help.

How much do extensive quotes from a webpage, as you did eleven responses above, work to help a forum member? We can all use internet search functions. Any brand can espouse their technology and anyone can re-quote it, but to what listener value? I really don't care about military grade componentry when I'm replaying music.

Chill out guys. Everyone has their own opinions. Whether it sounds right or wrong, a little respect would do a lot good.

An update. I couldn't wait any longer and compared the following combinations:-

NAC 282 / NAP 250 DR

NAC 282 / NAP 200

NAC 202 / NAP 250 DR

NAC 202 / NAP 200

The HCDR and NAPSC are connected to all the setups above. I'll try to keep in short and brief as detailed impressions can sometimes bring more confusion.

In summary, I find both NAC 282 based setups to be superior than a NAC 202 based system. Okay, again the term "superior, "better" or "more enjoyable" etc. may not be exactly useful although the listener is trying to make a point. To expand on that, the comparison between the 202 and 282 had reinforced my earlier impressions on the sonic character of both units. I would like to make it clear that the 202 is a great sounding unit on its own. If one doesn't listen to the 282 he will find the 202 to be sufficiently good.

When the 202 is compared to the 282, the 202 sounds lacklustre, pale or flat. The 282 is more energetic and fleshed out than the 202 especially in the high frequency extension ie. there is a tube-like glow in the mids and highs with the 282 that made the 202 sound flatter in comparison. The sound of instruments take on a higher level of realism with the 282. The plucking of string instruments, thwack of the drums, sound of percussion and hi-hat etc. all these sound more refined and real with the 282.

Now, 282/250 DR vs 282/200. I will choose not to say which is a better sounding system because I find both setups to sound good in their own ways. Both have their strengths and weaknesses.

Main differences:-

1. The 282/250 DR sounds heavy at the bottom. The 282/200 sounds light at the bottom. The bass of the 250DR has more definition and texture. There is more bass with the 250DR. The 200 is lightweight in the bass and sounds thinner in comparison.

2. The 282/200 sounds more extended at the top. The 282/250 DR sounds less extended at the top. The tone of the piano sounds brighter and extended on the 282/200. With the 282/250 DR, pianos sound rounded and warmer.

3. The overall feel or tone of the 282/250DR is warmer and thicker than the 282/200.

For fast rock music, the 282/250DR sounds more satisfying due to the heavier bottom and added control in the bass. For easy listening especially piano jazz pieces, the 282/200 sounds more open with the extended highs (to my ears sound more satisfying). 

I use Bob James Grand Piano Canyon Music (track no. 9) as a reference to test the tone of the piano.

To be continued.

ryder. posted:

 

....The 282/250 DR sounds heavy at the bottom.

At what point do you reposition the Harbeths and start to get the best from the NAP250DR?

C.

ryder. posted:

Has anyone here previously on the NAC 282 / HCDR / NAP 200 upgraded to the NAP 250 DR (brand new)? I would like to know the perceived changes you have experienced with the 250 DR when the unit is going through the burn-in process...

...I would appreciate some input from forum members who have upgraded from the NAP 200 to the NAP 250DR (new) on the NAC 282 / HCDR.

I have, but also changed my source simultaneously, so all the wonderful music I'm listnening to - which I perceive to be in truer fidelity than before - may be attributable to synergy of more components than just the superb 250DR.

Put some unfamiliar music on for a while Ryder, and see how you enjoy it then.

G

Christopher_M posted:

ryder. posted:

 

....The 282/250 DR sounds heavy at the bottom.

At what point do you reposition the Harbeths and start to get the best from the NAP250DR?

C.

I have repositioned the Harbeth loudspeakers, moving them in small increments and listening to them in several new placements. Although there are slight differences it doesn't change the basic inherent character of the NAP 250 DR.

we haven't yet talked about your source.

I only felt confident enough to buy a 282, and 250DR later on, when I had a Hugo.

Unless you have a NDS / CDS3 / CD555 or Linn KDS/1 caliber of source, I am afraid you may not get the full benefit of 282/HCDR/250DR which needs the highest caliber of sources to show what it can do.

 I don't know much about Harbeth either, but Dynaudio speakers do need some grunt and current.

My Dynaudio dealer personally uses Krell 600 watt Monoblocs for the higher end Dynaudio in his home.

joerand posted:

I really don't care about military grade componentry when I'm replaying music.

You don't as you don't own a DR amp. We have talked about this issue before, and it may be difficult for you to understand the achievements of Naim with their 009 transistor when you haven't heard it that much or don't own a DR amp.

GraemeH posted:

ryder. posted:

Has anyone here previously on the NAC 282 / HCDR / NAP 200 upgraded to the NAP 250 DR (brand new)? I would like to know the perceived changes you have experienced with the 250 DR when the unit is going through the burn-in process...

...I would appreciate some input from forum members who have upgraded from the NAP 200 to the NAP 250DR (new) on the NAC 282 / HCDR.

I have, but also changed my source simultaneously, so all the wonderful music I'm listnening to - which I perceive to be in truer fidelity than before - may be attributable to synergy of more components than just the superb 250DR.

Put some unfamiliar music on for a while Ryder, and see how you enjoy it then.

G

 

Yes, the 250 DR is indeed superb, and it may just be a case of synergy with the rest of the components and/or loudspeakers. With some tweak ie. change of source or cabling etc. perhaps the qualities of the 250 DR will shine through more. Having said that, the differences between the 200 and 250 DR are now rather clear. I just need to find ways to optimise the 250 DR based system.

Will definitely spend more time with the system.

analogmusic posted:

we haven't yet talked about your source.

I only felt confident enough to buy a 282, and 250DR later on, when I had a Hugo.

Unless you have a NDS / CDS3 / CD555 or Linn KDS/1 caliber of source, I am afraid you may not get the full benefit of 282/HCDR/250DR which needs the highest caliber of sources to show what it can do.

 I don't know much about Harbeth either, but Dynaudio speakers do need some grunt, and Focus 260 can go down to 32 HZ for a modest size speaker, so you do need a speaker capable of that kind of bass to appreciate what a 250 (of any kind) brings to the table

Yes, as I have mentioned earlier in my post above(and much earlier) and that of Graeme, it's a case of synergy. This post is not exactly a criticism of the NAP 250 DR but rather a sharing of experience that I am going through right now in my system with my components and speakers. Similarly, I believe the results will be completely different if a different source or loudspeaker(or even speaker cables) is used.

My dealer's website makes a comment at about the NAP250DR saying (I paraphrase) that it's harder to match with speakers than the NAP200 or the NAP300DR. Seems to be your experience too.

C.

In continuation to my detailed post above.

Between the 202 / 200 and 202 / 250 DR.

There is a forummer here who recently tried the 250 DR in his 202/200 setup, and the detailed description on the differences were posted. Although there are differences between the two setups, personally I feel the 202/200 is good enough of its own. The 250 DR adds a bit more in the bass and may sound more refined and detailed, but in my opinion the 282/200 is a higher level system than the 202/250 DR.

If the speakers are demanding and need more power, then the 202/250 DR may make more sense than the 282/200.

Lordie... we are getting carried away.. 'Military grade componentry'. For goodness sake this is domestic audio replay equipment... that is what it is designed to do.. I suspect if it was really built to military specs it would sound awful.... unless perhaps it was made from thermionic valves.

Surely we should enjoy for what it is.. and if we don't enjoy it move on... we seemed to be getting wrapped up in pressuring someone to like something who clearly doesn't or is not ready to appreciate it.. In my experience, if an introduction is proving so difficult, almost no matter what tweaks you do will result in ultimately disappointing performance that will get in the way of musical enjoyment, end resulting  in listening to less music or selling it all on...

Christopher_M posted:

My dealer's website makes a comment at about the NAP250DR saying (I paraphrase) that it's harder to match with speakers than the NAP200 or the NAP300DR. Seems to be your experience too.

C.

I have some limited experience with that. Tried my existing Monitor Audio GX300s with NAP250DR. Work very well. Somehow the amp and the speakers get on really well.

Then curiosity got a better of me and I moved my Ovators S400 from the other room. A bit of an unhappy marriage with NAP250. 

So back to the resident Monitor Audio.

b_lund posted:

 

FWIW why two setup in this 202/200/282/250 range ? I'd better go up in one setup and just" have some entrylevel gear in the other, you could get a 52/135 and Unity or something,. - the olive stuff will walk over the black boxes, good night

The 202/200 is meant for a 2nd system. I did consider replacing the 202/200 with a cheap integrated from the likes of Exposure or Densen but I guess I am stuck with Naim being a fan. I could downgrade to a one-box Nait but I wouldn't want to compromise too much on sound quality, and for the fact that I tend to keep my old stuff (perhaps only good stuff).

analogmusic posted:

joerand posted:

I really don't care about military grade componentry when I'm replaying music.

You don't as you don't own a DR amp. We have talked about this issue before, and it may be difficult for you to understand the achievements of Naim with their 009 transistor when you haven't heard it that much or don't own a DR amp.

I own a 250DR, but I don't care about military grade componentry. The amp could be full of sausages for all it matters to me. Does this mean that because I'm not bothered about what's inside that I am in some way deficient?

If the amp were full of sausages, or even full of Halibuts, I doubt you would spend 3500 GBP on it 

I don't know about 'dark' or 'warm' as I've only ever heard a NAP250DR in a demo at a show. I found it to sound cool and blue, but then it was playing Stevie Ray Vaughan!

I prefer simply to listen to the music. 

I find it interesting to read of other's experiences and the OP was querying if anyone else has had any similar experiences to him.

I don't understand posters who must criticise other people's opinions - yes correct facts but all opinions are valid (at least to their proponents) - if you don't agree with what an OP is posting in terms of philosophy, approach or whatever then that is fine and you should convey your approach as an alternative ...

... but that is then your opinion and no one should denigrate any one else's opinions, just post alternatives and leave it at that ...

... of course there is the other alternative of just not participating in that post at all !

People come to this crazy world of high-end hifi from all sorts of perspectives and these colour their perceptions, rationales and aspirations:

* I just want the best music that is VFM;

* I have the money and want the best within a substantial budget;

* I scrimp and save to get my next upgrade and can't afford to be wrong;

* I only listen to the music;

* I listen to the music but want to know the technology behind it too;

* I am immersed in the hifi and if a platinum connector is going to be better than a gold one then I want it;

* ... ... ...

Let us all travel our own path and respect those who might be on a different one.

In response to the original OP, I have a run-in 250DR on home demo and it is such an improvement on the 200 as described in the previous posts;

I am therefore interested in the OPs experience with my new 250DR on the close horizon although I think it may be of limited value since this may be an artefact of the speakers being used (I have B&W 803D3).

Let us all continue to enjoy the music without rancour,

Allan

After switching back and forth between the 282/200 and 282/250 DR with some minor adjustments, I now find the 250 DR to be a better amp.

The minor adjustment was the use of Ceraball Spider on the NAP 250 DR. The Ceraball Spider was previously on the Krell CD player and the NAP 250 DR was on rubber feet. I swapped the Ceraball Spider from the Krell CD player to the NAP 250 DR and the rubber feet from the 250 DR to the Krell. Although I was hoping to hear an improvement, I wasn't expecting the (positive) outcome. The tone of the piano is back in business. The piano now doesn't sound soft, warm or rolled-off. It's full of energy. Sometimes these small little tweaks never cease to amaze me.

In the photo below, the Ceraball Spider supports are the ones below the red box. The Cerapucs that come in the red box are supporting the entire rack.

I couldn't describe it as well as Allan (on the differences between the NAP 200 and NAP 250 DR in the other thread). What I can say is the NAP 200 sounds like good hifi, the NAP 250 DR sounds like good music. In areas where the 282 improved upon the 202, the 250 DR brings more of the same detail, refinement and realism in the music.

I am beginning to appreciate the qualities of the 250 DR after switching from the 200. The 250 Dr is a more composed amp with a fuller and more matured presentation. My apologies for the inaccurate reporting earlier on the rolled-off treble of the 250 DR which made the tone of the piano sounded dull. The 250 DR does sound fuller in the mids and bass region but it doesn't compromise on the high frequency extension. Somethings these things are rather unexpected. A small change in the tweak is able to yield such results.

I am happy to report that the 250 DR will now gain its rightful place with the NAC 282 and HCDR.

The NAP 200 sounds more diffused and loose from top to bottom next to the NAP 250 DR. The 250 DR is more focused and tight with higher levels of detail and refinement.

Is the 250DR a pleasure, or not?

C.

Christopher_M posted:

Is the 250DR a pleasure, or not?

C.

Yes, it is certainly a pleasure.

Typo in my post above "...which made the tone of the piano sound dull."