Progress?

Nait 1 into Kans...... Tells me all i need to know about 'progress'.

Gary

A fair and interesting response but not really the point I am making.

Let me put it another way, walk into a Naim dealer 10 years ago and ask for absolutely the best system they can supply and do it today. So then:

CD555, 552, 500x3, Active DBL

now:

NDS, Statement, Sopra (or alternative) passive.

Putting the cost to one side what would you rather have?

Define progress?

I personally think that despite convenience Digital playback represents a retrograde step compared with vinyl.  But I do get many hours of enjoyment from my CDP. 

Regarding Statement i guess I'm sanguine as I'll never be considering such a purchase.  However, so far I have to say that I'm yet to hear it with a source - top TT or CDP - or speakers that do it justice.  

Anyway that's my take for a Sunday evening.  Have a good week chaps. 

Regards,

Lindsay

Ok put that way, the former, by far.

In terms of the quality of reproduction, progress has been minimal, though not unimportant, since probably the 1990s.  Not just for Naim, but for home hifi in general. 

For my part, I have never heard a more emotionally involving system than Chris Koster's active DBL setup (IIRC, CDS1, 52, 6x135) in a stucco house in Ft. Collins, CO.  It was, simply put, magic, and I have never heard a system that bettered it, even if his later DBL/active 500 setup was obviously better from a sonic perspective. 

Its just that they couldn't sell high numbers of their NBL and certainly not DBL, doubt they had acceptable margin on these

Ovator hardly a success

Statement was developed as a status symbol and to compete to other high priced brands, maybe voiced accordingly

Plenty of Focals need to be sold and that count for high profit on each pair

Naim has moved in another direction during last decade or two, first Focal ownership now investment Co its more about buttomline less about playing the heart and soul out of the records

b_

Naim has moved in another direction during last decade or two, first Focal ownership now investment Co its more about buttomline less about playing the heart and soul out of the records

Notwithstanding my previous post I think there is a risk of rose tinted glasses here. Just take a NAC 272/XPS/250DR/Sopra 1 - perhaps not my first choice but an outstanding music making system. 

Quite so, especially with some decent speakers. Such as SL2s. I believe the combination is quite good. 

At $20K USD for the three Naim bits one would hope it would be good! 

Bob Edwards posted:

In terms of the quality of reproduction, progress has been minimal, though not unimportant, since probably the 1990s.  Not just for Naim, but for home hifi in general.

My kind of post, being an Active fan, and yes I tend to agree with both of you gents, OP, and Bob.

Furthermore, I think the the 250 is Naim's darling amp, but producing a modest 80 watts per channel can be a lot to ask, depending on which Passive speakers are being driven.

You've heard it before, Naim's Achilles heel is lack of power, 80, 90, 140, and Naim's answer is increasing power and Active Systems.

2007 CES, Naim debuts it's CD555

CD555/282/Snaxo/3 x 250.2/DBLs

If those components can be used in the above System, it might suit me just find.

Cdx2/282/HCDR/3 x 250.2/Briks

 Next purchase, SCDR/Snaxo 362

I would still be rocking Full Blown Linn Aktiv, but Linn doesn't service their vintage gear.

 Lp 12/Genki

Karin/Dirack PS/Linn XO w bingo card

LK 280s/ Briks

Didn't sound Bad, can't wait to see how Naim Active compares.

Naims passive tri amped Briks, ain't Bad, but it's not Active, appears to lack the effortless flow of music.

 Just some thoughts, no hands on experience.

Personally, once one have reached your level, and Active, gains are marginal at most.

Forgot Nice System OP, think I checked you out on System pics.

 Allante93!

The best sounding system I heard of late was an Olive 72/HC/250 playing into Quad ESL 63s.

So much for progress...

Adam Zielinski posted:

The best sounding system I heard of late was an Olive 72/HC/250 playing into Quad ESL 63s.

So much for progress...

Better than:

Music room: NDS, 555PSDR, NAC 252 / SCDR / NAP 250DR, LP12, Ovator S-400!

Say what!

Allante93 posted:

Adam Zielinski posted:

The best sounding system I heard of late was an Olive 72/HC/250 playing into Quad ESL 63s.

So much for progress...

Better than:

Music room: NDS, 555PSDR, NAC 252 / SCDR / NAP 250DR, LP12, Ovator S-400!

Say what!

 

It was the Quads that made the day. Unfortunately no space in my music room for them. In a way I see Ovators 400 as a modern day successor - there is a similar sound signature to both.

Allante93 posted:

Adam Zielinski posted:

The best sounding system I heard of late was an Olive 72/HC/250 playing into Quad ESL 63s.

So much for progress...

Better than:

Music room: NDS, 555PSDR, NAC 252 / SCDR / NAP 250DR, LP12, Ovator S-400!

Say what!

 

Depends on the source, but if the source is up to snuff, you bet. 

I've been disappointed every time I've heard a 272/250DR - give me a 72/HC/250 any day.  Might not be as "accurate," but a hell of a lot more FUN to listen to.  And that is, after all, the point, n'est-ce pas?

Camlan posted:

Gary

A fair and interesting response but not really the point I am making.

Let me put it another way, walk into a Naim dealer 10 years ago and ask for absolutely the best system they can supply and do it today. So then:

CD555, 552, 500x3, Active DBL

now:

NDS, Statement, Sopra (or alternative) passive.

Putting the cost to one side what would you rather have?

I feel you Camlan, in the same vein, I would think your System is on par with the 2007 CES show:

CD555/282/Snaxo/3 x 250.2/DBLs

Well, the Speakers!

Point being, I agree, minimal gains in Hi-Fi during the last decade.

Quiet as it's kept, I would like to compare DB's System against the Statement.

Allante93!

This all makes total sense. 20 years ago when I was still in the trade, a main selling point was that when you buy really good stuff it is better for longer. And if customers were talking timeframes we were pretty upfront about the fact that 30 year old Quad system based around ESLs was still good today and if you bought a similar system now it will still be stonking good in 30 years time.

The resale value might not hold in all cases but well maintained gear will still sound good next to the current entry/mid range stuff decades down the line. From that perspective hifi is a real investment in enjoyment - if not financially.

I think the expectation gets messed up with all the new products in between the years that offer incremental changes. Reading on the forum each time a new product is released is enough for any halfway intelligent person to realise that there is a lot of hyperbole in what we say. Each new product trounces what came before, makes it obsolete, sound broken, makes people feel that "the difference was not subtle" etc etc. Except when you put on your sensible cap you realise that these products are all incremental shaves closer to the ideal - not the giant leaps that get gushed out in the words on the forum and in the press.

I know a lot of people may take excepton to that view saying that product X is night and day better than product Y of yesteryear. But that is not the case. If it were, we we'd all be going back an listening to active Briks on an early Olive system and think it sounds naff compaired to say active SL2s on a 500 system. The fact is, it doesn't sound naff at all - it probably sounds pretty darn amazing.