NAP 200 + Unitiqute 2 - no changes in sound

Never mind, and thanks anyway. I haven't heard this combo either, but wondered whether the SuperUniti would make the race. In any case, it would provide a "tidier" solution. 

Hungryhalibut posted:

You are still feeding it with the Qute though. As Timo suggested you'd be far better doing nothing until you can afford a 272. If that is too expensive, try the 172 instead of the Qute instead. 

think Qute is just a streamer and  and DAC V1+Nap 200 are sound forming parts of system. Or here are underwater stones ) ?

Other might correct me, but the Qute would be no more than the transport/renderer. Lots of unused Qute...

Dmitriy posted:

I'm in stupid situation : added nap 200 to Unitiqute 2 and hear  no difference in sound. Maybe small changes but no huge upgrade at all. 

My wife also says that UQ2 is has more life in sound. Something goes wrong )

So there is a difference ... just you prefer the sound without.  Adding a power amp to the UnitiQute isn't a universal panacea (though for me it improved when using B&W speakers).

i agree this is not the best and optimum setup but i already have qute and sell\change to 172 XS is more expensive then just add dac v1 via coax. Do you think qute +dac v1 would be worse ?

I don't think it would sound worse. It just doesn't make sense!! And I am not sure whether you have your numbers right...  

I had a quick listen to a 172/200 a couple of years ago, and was very impressed. A clear step up from the Superuniti I had at the time. 

HI. I have moved from a Unitiqute 2, to a UQ2 +Nap 100. I then changed the NAP 100 for a 200 (used but just serviced)  and then changed the UQ2 for a N172XS. With having the NAP 200, I wasn't sure why I needed the amp functionality of the UQ so went for the Preamp/streamer option.

I love the sound, and think its a much better set up than my UQ2+100. There is just more of everything in the sound. Bigger soundstage, tighter and deeper bass, and can hear more detail in the music.  Very happy with the upgrades.

I didn't listen to the Superuniti, since I did upgrade in stages, since the jump from Uq2 to Superuniti was too much in one go.

ChrisSU posted:

I had a quick listen to a 172/200 a couple of years ago, and was very impressed. A clear step up from the Superuniti I had at the time. 

Oh, that's interesting, Thanks for sharing your experience here!

T

Simoncarr posted:

 

I didn't listen to the Superuniti, since I did upgrade in stages, since the jump from Uq2 to Superuniti was too much in one go.

 

In your house, it looks as if the dog is the one for the big jumps. 

Dmitriy posted:

i agree this is not the best and optimum setup but i already have qute and sell\change to 172 XS is more expensive then just add dac v1 via coax. Do you think qute +dac v1 would be worse ?

Why would it be more expensive?

Given the price of a 172 or a V1, and taking into account the resale value of the UQ, which only applies if going for 172, they come out roughly the same don't they?

18 months ago I sold my multi box Naim system in the hope of a single box solution and used the UQ I already had as my primary setup.

Upgrade bug bit again, tried a NAP200 with the UQ but did not sound quite right, then tried a NAP100 and preferred the latter.

Ran with the UQ/100 for a few months then acquired a 272 so now run a 272/100, so ended up with a 1.5 box system

272 is in another class altogether and so it should be considering the cost.

I ran a UQ (v1) into a V1 for a long while and while quite good, it didn't hold a candle to my current set up of microRendu with an Uptone LPS-1 into same V1 with a NAP 110. The UQ is now in the office. As a casual all in one the UQ is pretty hard to beat (though in some ways I actually find the Mu-So even more fun), but as a source for a mature sounding system one can do much better for not that much money (well, in relative hifi terms). 

Dave***t posted:

Dmitriy posted:

i agree this is not the best and optimum setup but i already have qute and sell\change to 172 XS is more expensive then just add dac v1 via coax. Do you think qute +dac v1 would be worse ?

Why would it be more expensive?

Given the price of a 172 or a V1, and taking into account the resale value of the UQ, which only applies if going for 172, they come out roughly the same don't they?

Maybe you are right...

I ran a UQ2 for around 18 months into Neat Motive 2's and really enjoyed it, its a great piece of kit! Then added a NAP 100 which gave more of everything, and i was happy with that for around another year or so, but still something was missing. So recently swapped the UQ2 for a N272, it really is in another dimension than the UQ2. i never thought the little NAP 100 would sound so good, so it just shows how much of an effect the pre-amp has - source first rule! The UQ2 is great on it's own but does start to show it's limitations when used with a better power amp. 

cbren posted:

I ran a UQ2 for around 18 months into Neat Motive 2's and really enjoyed it, its a great piece of kit! Then added a NAP 100 which gave more of everything, and i was happy with that for around another year or so, but still something was missing. So recently swapped the UQ2 for a N272, it really is in another dimension than the UQ2. i never thought the little NAP 100 would sound so good, so it just shows how much of an effect the pre-amp has - source first rule! The UQ2 is great on it's own but does start to show it's limitations when used with a better power amp. 

I agree completely,I started with a UQ2,tried a 100 with it...a little better,went to a SN2,and used the UQ2 as a digital source,this was better,added a Hugo to the UQ2...even better.I eventually traded it all in,except the Hugo on a 272/250 dr,an like you say,another league entirely.The UQ2 is best left alone,if you want clear improvements across the board,save your money for a 272/250dr.

Experiments: tried to add dac v1 as dac and preamp. Sound became flat and lifelessness,  can say "digital".  UQ2 alone is the best option for now. Next step:  272+200, but think maybe the Naim sound not mine at all. A lot of people recommend exposure instead. 

Dmitriy posted:

Experiments: tried to add dac v1 as dac and preamp. Sound became flat and lifelessness,  can say "digital".  UQ2 alone is the best option for now. Next step:  272+200, but think maybe the Naim sound not mine at all. A lot of people recommend exposure instead. 

Hmmm, not my experience at all, even when I was running a UQ into a V1. Is the V1 firmware up to date? What cable were you using? I noticed a big difference between a basic Chord SPDIF and a much better Atlas. The V1 needs lots of time to burn in as well if you're demo'ing one straight out of the box. And USB is really the best input. All that said I think one can do a lot better than the UQ as a source for less $. It really does excel best at what it was created to do. 

Bob the Builder posted:

I added a Nap 150 to my Qute too but it wasn't until I added a Nac 122x that I heard a real difference I then traded in the Qute for an ND5XS and had a real improvement again.

I added a 202 to my Qute and heard a lot of amazing differences, i just need to work out how to disable the remote control volume on my UQ

djh1697 posted:

Bob the Builder posted:

I added a Nap 150 to my Qute too but it wasn't until I added a Nac 122x that I heard a real difference I then traded in the Qute for an ND5XS and had a real improvement again.

I added a 202 to my Qute and heard a lot of amazing differences, i just need to work out how to disable the remote control volume on my UQ

Set the UQ's maximum volume to 0. Problem solved. 

charlesphoto posted:

djh1697 posted:

Bob the Builder posted:

I added a Nap 150 to my Qute too but it wasn't until I added a Nac 122x that I heard a real difference I then traded in the Qute for an ND5XS and had a real improvement again.

I added a 202 to my Qute and heard a lot of amazing differences, i just need to work out how to disable the remote control volume on my UQ

Set the UQ's maximum volume to 0. Problem solved. 

but how to make UQ transparent to DAC v1 remote control ? It controls both devices

You can't, but if the UQ is set to 0, then the remote will move the volume on both but only actually increase it on the V1 (or 202?) as it won't be able to go beyond 0 on the UQ. When I had the UQ running as source only  into the V1 I actually preferred the much better remote from the UQ vs the V1 dinky one, so set it up that way. 

djh1697 posted:

Bob the Builder posted:

I added a Nap 150 to my Qute too but it wasn't until I added a Nac 122x that I heard a real difference I then traded in the Qute for an ND5XS and had a real improvement again.

I added a 202 to my Qute and heard a lot of amazing differences, i just need to work out how to disable the remote control volume on my UQ

Set the 202 up using AV bypass mode. Then the Qute controls the volume and the 202 volume control is fixed when using that input.

This is how I have my 152xs setup and it works well. The only confusing part is when you leave to pre-amp muted and switch to the AV input, the pre-amp remains muted, the light on the mute button turns off and pressing it does nothing.

Doesn't that mean that the signal is going straight from the Qute to the power amp, and that the addition of the preamp is largely pointless? Surely it would be better to set the volume of the Qute and use the full functionality of the preamp?

Turn the Qute off then back on again.  When the splash screen (Qute logo thing) comes on, press Aux, i and 5, and this will change the code set.   

If you want to reset it to the current behaviour, Aux, i and 1 will do the trick.

This will allow your 202 remote to just control that and not the Qute.