There and back again – NACA5 to SuperLumina and back to NACA5

Or it actually could be. My findings from trial with the stuff, exactly.

gary yeowell posted:

Or it actually could be. My findings from trial with the stuff, exactly.

Glad to see I'm not the only one

Thank you Adam, thank you, thank you

... this could save me a fortune

Allan

Allan Milne posted:

 

 

Thank you Adam, thank you, thank you

... this could save me a fortune

 

Allan

Certainly saved me - I actually had a second SuperLumina set at home for a 2 week demo with my main system. Put my NACA5 again last night and fun returned. And a smile - imagine how much music (or as my dealer calls it - software ) I can buy with that money.

Adam Zielinski posted:

Been playing around with speaker cables between my two Naim systems.

I was always impressed with SuperLumina speaker cables – one of the early adopters. The level of details they present is simply stunning.

Recently during some box swapping and moving I thought I would try my trusted NACA5 on a ‘better’ system (NDS /252 /250DR into Ovators S-400).  Suddenly fun returned.
Don’t know what to attribute it to.
But it surely cannot be due to this cheaper garden-hose lookalike thing…

Or….???

did you notice this reduction in "fun" the very first time you installed the SL speaker cables? i assume they replaced the NACA5?

enjoy

ken

ken c posted:

Adam Zielinski posted:

Been playing around with speaker cables between my two Naim systems.

I was always impressed with SuperLumina speaker cables – one of the early adopters. The level of details they present is simply stunning.

Recently during some box swapping and moving I thought I would try my trusted NACA5 on a ‘better’ system (NDS /252 /250DR into Ovators S-400).  Suddenly fun returned.
Don’t know what to attribute it to.
But it surely cannot be due to this cheaper garden-hose lookalike thing…

Or….???

did you notice this reduction in "fun" the very first time you installed the SL speaker cables? i assume they replaced the NACA5?

enjoy

ken

Correct - I've done it twice now. SL certainly did bring increased resolution - it does sound fantastic. But somehow NACA5 sounds fun. It seems to open up mid-range too.

If I remember things right, Jon Honeyball posted something along that line a few weeks ago.

Adam Zielinski posted:

Correct - I've done it twice now. SL certainly did bring increased resolution - it does sound fantastic. But somehow NACA5 sounds fun. It seems to open up mid-range too.

interesting... i dont have SL speaker cables (yet?) but when i can afford them it would be interesting for me to see if i experience same in my system...

a sense of "fun" is critical to my enjoyment of music, but of course, as we know, "fun" can mean different things to different people...

how long did you use the SL cables before you decided to switch back?

enjoy

ken

its what ive found. But other people might disagree, which is fine.

as i said before, SL speaker cable is *streets* ahead of NACA5 in every single area. Except one, which is the musical timing. 

If you find all the other attributes to be beguiling, then great. I couldnt live with SL as I have heard it because I wouldnt end up listening to my system. 

But... remember I am used to 6x135+DBLs which focus like a laser beam on timing. 

ken c posted:

how long did you use the SL cables before you decided to switch back?

I've had them in my music room on and off for around 8 months. Even tried a second set of SLs from my dealer - had it for 2 weeks on a home demo.
Tried both SL and NACA5 with my two systems connected to Ovators S-400 in the same room. Same conclusions.

Adam Zielinski posted:

ken c posted:

how long did you use the SL cables before you decided to switch back?

I've had them in my music room on and off for around 8 months. Even tried a second set of SLs from my dealer - had it for 2 weeks on a home demo.
Tried both SL and NACA5 with my two systems connected to Ovators S-400 in the same room. Same conclusions.

 

are you using SL DIN XLRs?

enjoy

ken

ken c posted:

Adam Zielinski posted:

ken c posted:

how long did you use the SL cables before you decided to switch back?

I've had them in my music room on and off for around 8 months. Even tried a second set of SLs from my dealer - had it for 2 weeks on a home demo.
Tried both SL and NACA5 with my two systems connected to Ovators S-400 in the same room. Same conclusions.

 

are you using SL DIN XLRs?

enjoy

ken

Nope - Chord Tunned Aray. Interconnects: SL for NDS to 252 or TQ Black Diamond for nDAC to SN2).

jon honeyball posted:

its what ive found. But other people might disagree, which is fine.

as i said before, SL speaker cable is *streets* ahead of NACA5 in every single area. Except one, which is the musical timing. 

If you find all the other attributes to be beguiling, then great. I couldnt live with SL as I have heard it because I wouldnt end up listening to my system. 

But... remember I am used to 6x135+DBLs which focus like a laser beam on timing. 

yes, i remember you mentioning this some time ago. are you able to say how one would detect "poor timing". i assume this defect shows all music material -- in which it will be easy to pick up. or does it only manifest with certain pieces?

enjoy

ken

Adam Zielinski posted:

Nope - Chord Tunned Aray. Interconnects: SL for NDS to 252 or TQ Black Diamond for nDAC to SN2).

would you also describe the lost sense of "fun" as poor "timing" ?

enjoy

ken

ken c posted:

Adam Zielinski posted:

Nope - Chord Tunned Aray. Interconnects: SL for NDS to 252 or TQ Black Diamond for nDAC to SN2).

would you also describe the lost sense of "fun" as poor "timing" ?

enjoy

ken

Not sure if it's timing. When I think about it it's more down to presenting music as an organic whole in case of NACA5. With some music SL somehow could appear to be over-analytical.

But it's nuances...

ken c posted:

Adam Zielinski posted:

Nope - Chord Tunned Aray. Interconnects: SL for NDS to 252 or TQ Black Diamond for nDAC to SN2).

would you also describe the lost sense of "fun" as poor "timing" ?

enjoy

ken

In my humble opinion, yes. Timing is the most essential part of music. By far. This is one of the things our students learn on conservatory and is the distinction between avarage and good. 'Fun' as one would say.

Same counts for hifi I came to learn when I joined the naim society a year ago.

Did the demo- Naca5 stays.

If you could long term trial the full loom perhaps the " fun" will return but more " funnier " no ??  When I see some ducks all flying in a row it always looks and sounds as if they're having fun.

Adam Zielinski posted:

ken c posted:

Adam Zielinski posted:

Nope - Chord Tunned Aray. Interconnects: SL for NDS to 252 or TQ Black Diamond for nDAC to SN2).

would you also describe the lost sense of "fun" as poor "timing" ?

enjoy

ken

Not sure if it's timing. When I think about it it's more down to presenting music as an organic whole in case of NACA5. With some music SL somehow could appear to be over-analytical.

But it's nuances...

Thanks Adam -- i understand what you mean...

enjoy

ken

Ardbeg10y posted:

ken c posted:

Adam Zielinski posted:

Nope - Chord Tunned Aray. Interconnects: SL for NDS to 252 or TQ Black Diamond for nDAC to SN2).

would you also describe the lost sense of "fun" as poor "timing" ?

enjoy

ken

In my humble opinion, yes. Timing is the most essential part of music. By far. This is one of the things our students learn on conservatory and is the distinction between avarage and good. 'Fun' as one would say.

Same counts for hifi I came to learn when I joined the naim society a year ago.

interesting. still not sure i fully understand how i can tell if a piece of music exhibits poor timing. when i used to play in a brass band, i recall an obvious aspect where a musician would start playing a little too early or too late. of course, it is almost impossible to play precisely "together", but the musicians should maintain a sense "coherence". with excessive incoherence, music, to me anyhow, sounds uncomfortable, stressful,  to listen to.

But extra clarity of reproduction could highlight the fact that its natural for musicians no play 'not exactly together'.  Its also interesting to try to understand what poor timing means for a solo artist -- rubato -- where the artists exercises some rhythmic freedom...

sorry, its evident i don't really know what  i am talking about... 

enjoy

ken

for me, it was classic "PRAT". SL just didnt make my foot tap. I adore everything else it does. But it doesnt make my foot tap in the way that NACA5 does. This was on context of NDS/500DR/300DR etc system.

What would happen on my 52/6x135/DBL system I have no idea. But im not prepared to spend that much on speaker cable -- there are downsides to a 6 monoblock active system :-) But remember that said 6x135/DBL is incredibly revealing, and took to the S1Pre with huge gusto. 

jon

if i was spending money, it would be on superlumina interconnects and the Allegri preamp.

is there a superlumina for preamp output on phono to snaxo? I thought we were still waiting for snaxo SL cables? Or maybe I'm wrong. Again.

ken, come listen some time. I can show you easily. 

ryder. posted:

"Not sure if it's timing. When I think about it it's more down to presenting music as an organic whole in case of NACA5. With some music SL somehow could appear to be over-analytical." I can imagine what you are saying. In summary, there is less detail and separation with the Naca5. The Super Lumina is more detailed and better separated. As the detail and separation of the Super Lumina are better, that will translate to analytical. Music will sound looser with the Super Lumina. On the other hand, the Naca5 sounds more organic and "together" since there is less separation. It can be a case of personal preference and also system matching. I am not sure if the speaker cable is more amp-dependent or speaker-dependent. I suspect the Super Lumina will sound better if matched with warmer and less detailed speakers.

food for thought ryder -- i think i see what you mean. i agree that system dependence could be a key factor too. but i still would like to be able to experience a piece of music and be able to assess the timing issue in isolation -- and be able to say - that's well timed or poorly timed.  of all the groups i have seen live, some good some bad -- never felt for the bad ones that timing was the issue. for the good ones, i could hear a lot more than i hear from my hifi system -- any reproduction system that gets close to that is a good thing in my view.

or, is "poor timing" an artifact of reproduction systems?

enjoy

ken