282/HCDR/250DR vs 282/HCDR/250DR X 2 Biamped

Then for your system and your musical tastes, you've answered your own question.

It's an odd Biamp mix but if it works for you then great. Two 250DRs would probably be better but not great value for money probably. A Supercap on the 282 would be much more noticeable. Note that some people prefer the HCDR on the 282 though, but not me. 

Why you say biamping does that mean something like  active?

Biamping uses two amps, and two sets of speaker leads, driving passive speakers. It's why many speakers have two sets of terminals. Naim generally don't recommend it, though some speakers do seem to benefit. 

Huge posted:

Then for YOUR SYSTEM and your musical tastes, you've answered your own question.

And a fine system it Is! Ryder LOL....

Naim & Linn, have not abandoned, the hand full of audiophiles that still believe the Active Route is the purist path to Hi-Fi Utopia!

With that being said, I have experienced Full Blown Aktiv Briks, with Bingo Card.

Not Bad, but Linn is also In Streamline mode:

Ceased it's Reference CDP, about 10 years ago, about the same time my Linn XO expired.

At least, Naim still services it's Naxo, CB, and Olive boxes.

That's why I'm posting on a Naim Forum vs a Linn Forum.

Ok, to the point, 282 HCDR with 250.2 on the Mids/Bass, and 200 on the tweeter, was nice.

However, the regulated 250.2 was working to hard with my Briks, and would shut off when rocking at 10 o-clock, showing off, for an half hour or so.

So, I switched, and put the 200 on the Mids/Bass and the 250.2 on the lone tweeter! 

No more heating problems. Did I notice a difference in SQ, not really, but I couldn't play it as loud. The 200, not being a regulated amp would slip on the job.

And trust me, that's when the Briks are at their best, ROCKING!

Soooooo!

My 401K was hit up!  Upgraded in Stages, first Upgrade, 8 tier Sound Factory Tri-Pod > 7 Tier Fraimlite. Did I notice a difference in SQ, the amps appeared to stabilize, resulting in a SLIGHTLY lower noise floor, but noticable.

2nd Upgrade, Wonky Passive Briks > Passive Tri- Amped {3 x 250.2} Briks, Did I notice difference in SQ, not as noticeable as the Fraimlite!

Point being, I wouldn't consider bi-amping, or tri-amping, unless I was considering taking the XO, out of the equation!

Super Naim Active Crossover(XO)

Snaxo technologies, external active crossover!

The part that  gets me, Speakers ain't cheap.

That's a lot of $$$ spent on XO technologies within the speaker, to render non void!

Hence, Active Speaker aren't popular these days. The gap has narrowed with computer technologies aiding in better quality crossovers within modern Speakers!

But here's the  Deal, an old pair of SL2s, DBLs, NBLs, Briks, WAY less than 20K, and you are pretty close to Hi-Fi Utopia!

And if the $$$ ain't an issue, Grab a pair of Ovator 800s, or Kudos 808s, 707s.

JMHO!

Allante93!

PS. NAIM SNAXO & KUDOS, not focal.

That's a comprehensive and detailed post Allante93. Thanks.

Perhaps the design of the Briks is different from the Harbeth. I tried putting the NAP 200 on the LF terminals and 250 DR on the HF terminals and the bass lost a bit of punch and impact. In the end I settled with the 250 DR on the bass and 200 on the treble.

Marksnaim posted:

It's an odd Biamp mix but if it works for you then great. Two 250DRs would probably be better but not great value for money probably. A Supercap on the 282 would be much more noticeable. Note that some people prefer the HCDR on the 282 though, but not me. 

Yes, it's surely odd as I don't think anyone has tried biamping two 250 DR looking at the responses here. I am not keen on the Supercap as it will surely open up the possibilities to the NAC 252. I am staying put with the NAC 282/HCDR.

ryder. posted:

Marksnaim posted:

It's an odd Biamp mix but if it works for you then great. Two 250DRs would probably be better but not great value for money probably. A Supercap on the 282 would be much more noticeable. Note that some people prefer the HCDR on the 282 though, but not me. 

Yes, it's surely odd as I don't think anyone has tried biamping two 250 DR looking at the responses here. I am not keen on the Supercap as it will surely open up the possibilities to the NAC 252. I am staying put with the NAC 282/HCDR.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFzMuO3K3ZY

I agree, Ryder! 

The only need for a SC or More than one 250DR, if one desires to replicate the above link! 

CD555>SC>282>SC>Snaxo 362>3 x 250>DBLs

But That was 10 years ago, when Naim was Debuting it's Reference CDP! 

I'm broke just trying to see what Naim Active Sounds Like:

Cdx2>282>HCDR>3 x 250.2>Briks

Hopefully by the end of this year! 

Cdx2>HCDR>282>SCDR>Snaxo 362>3 x 250.2>Briks 

The only reason I'm doing this, because I done Active before, and I like it! 

But with Modern Speakers, I would think, Passive Naim is just Fine! 

But What Do I know! Only a life time of Hi-Fi. LOL.......

Allante93!

PS. That was Brief! LOL......

rather than Bi-amping, I would add Superlumina DIN/XLR to NAP 250 

analogmusic posted:

rather than Bi-amping, I would add Superlumina DIN/XLR to NAP 250 

Right you are again, balance is not restricted to SQ only! Unfortunately LOL...$$$$$$$$

Hungryhalibut posted:

Biamping uses two amps, and two sets of speaker leads, driving passive speakers. It's why many speakers have two sets of terminals. Naim generally don't recommend it, though SOME speakers do seem to benefit. 

The Forum, a wealth of knowledge!

"Currently I think that only Linn and Naim promote active technology in the domestic hifi market, although it is common in pa/concert rigs. It will be interesting to watch developments as to whether the Focal/Naim merger leads to more or less active systems?

This very specialised expertise means that in practice few people will ever own an active system, even thought the rewards are great.

It’s just a shame that the pockets have to be as deep! $$$$...

{Naim's upgrade path towards an Active Systems, Allows it's PS's to accommodate multiple amps i.e. of it's  outputs, until one is ready for a full blown Active System}"

I've noticed some fine Active Systems, incorporating those fine SL2s.

System Pics!

Allante93!

I never understood the theory of bi-wiring or bi-amping.

Bi-wiring...  makes no difference to the frequency range or the output voltages the amp has to handle, but doubles the capacitance and cost of the speaker cable.
(A properly designed cable causes no interaction between different frequencies anyway.  Actually it's quite hard to make a cable misbehave in this specific way and even if it does misbehave like this, then the bi-wired cables would need to be run separately with considerable distance between them to realise the advantage of separating the current feeds - if not then they'll still interact!).

Bi-amping...  makes no difference to the frequency range or the output voltages the amps have to handle (and both amps have to handle the same full range), but increases the complexity of the load on each amp at the crossover point.
The amps MAY work better at frequencies well away from the crossover region, but this isn't guaranteed and will be amp and load specific.  Potentially a sort of HiFi focused setup, sacrificing sonic integrity in the midrange (around the crossover point) for a possible improvement at LF and/or HF.  With some specific amp / speaker pairings, it might be possible to use this to help even out speakers that have a good midrange but have problems at one or both frequency extremes without loosing too much in the crossover region.  May work best with three way systems where the crossovers are well away from the midrange frequencies where human hearing is most discriminating.

Active crossover...  This limits the frequency range each of the amps has to handle and can potentially be made to achieve crossover characteristics better matched to the drivers.  In addition the drivers are connected to a source impedance that's much less dependant on frequency.  I understand this one.  Only worth it for very expensive systems.

Active speakers...  The amps in the speakers can be specifically tailored to the drive units giving further possibilities for optimisation.  I understand this one.

Hungryhalibut posted:

Biamping uses two amps, and two sets of speaker leads, driving passive speakers. It's why many speakers have two sets of terminals. Naim generally don't recommend it, though some speakers do seem to benefit. 

Off topic: What happened to Totoro? I hope he's coming back after the election. My 4-year-old son (half Korean -- Totoro is very popular in Korea) loves your Totoro picture. And Mr Happy... These are the two one he is looking for when he finds me browsing the Forum.

Totoro has gone travelling on the Cat Bus. He'll be back soon. 

I love the Cat Bus, Totoro is a very lucky... well ??

Even after thinking about it I still don't know what he (she?) is!

Hungryhalibut posted:

Totoro has gone travelling on the Cat Bus. He'll be back soon. 

I'll tell Lucas. He also loves travelling.  

Allante93 posted:

analogmusic posted:

rather than Bi-amping, I would add Superlumina DIN/XLR to NAP 250 

Right you are again, balance is not restricted to SQ only! Unfortunately LOL...$$$$$$$$

{"exactly right, the NAP 250DR is quite a fine amplifier, but performance depends on what is feeding it, from the source, to the preamp, which power supply, etc... and also which interconnect from source preamp.

the 250 really likes top quality inputs 

The esteemed Richard Dane, runs a 552 into his 250"}

N A C ontrol!

Allante93!

PS. Can't recall where the above quote came from, perhaps you can help me out,

Mr. Analogmusic! LOL.....

well if SL is not financially possible, there is always Chord, Vertere, Witch Hat cables... at all levels for the wallet

Some forum people made their own DIN/XLR out of mogami 2549 cable too.

Huge posted:

I never understood the theory of bi-wiring or bi-amping.

Bi-wiring...  makes no difference to the frequency range or the output voltages the amp has to....

Well Simon, is busy, and I'm not the guy!

But you do understand the benefits of an An Active System, with Naim's Snaxo Technologies! LOL....

"ADAM MEREDITHMEMBER

9/14/07 12:20 PM

No we don't have a particular beef against bi-amping - rather bi-wiring.

However, bi-wiring seldom show gains over the purchase of an improved amplifier. This may (at new prices) cost no more than the total for the two "lesser" amplifiers and extra speaker cables."

"RICHARD DANE ADMINISTRATOR

1/9/13 9:22 AM

Don't do it.  Naim recommend against it for good reason - For one, the amp won't like it and it could lead to failure.  Worth noting that any consequent failure could be considered to have arisen from abuse and thus not covered under any existing warranty"

As to Bi-Amping, I tend to think of it as a long flight.

I can fly direct from Passive MI, USA to Active UK.

Or, change flights at Bi Amp NY, USA!

May take longer, but I will get there, plus that direct flight is a killer $$$!

X raised  to the (n + 1) divided by (n + 1)

Allante93!

analogmusic posted:

 

well if SL is not financially possible, there is always Chord, Vertere, Witch Hat cables... at all levels for the wallet

 Some forum people made their own DIN/XLR out of mogami 2549 cable too.

 

I'm not commenting on that, but have you considered stand up comic as an occupation!

Allante93!

I'm not sure I understand where are you coming from, as I didn't really address my remarks to you in the first place.

Some esteemed people of the forum - don't particularly like the 250 (yes even 250 DR).

All I'm saying is that to my ears the 250 is quite fine, but in my view limited by the DIN/XLR cable that feeds it. Naim have used this cable for years (decades?) (and couldn't find a cable that did it better from a timing perspective), until Superlumina came along .

After being lucky to try top cables from Chord, Vertere and Superlumina, I would much rather spend the money on a cable, than upgrade to NAP 300DR. Superlumina speaker cable really sounds superb with NAP 250DR.

Now which part of that do you find amusing, I don't know, but I'm only trying to help and share my findings with the forum.

I rarely understand where Allante is coming from, so you are not alone there....

I use SL cables with my 250 and can attest to their efficacy. Though whether cables or 300s are strictly relevant to the OP's question I'm not sure. I'd expect, though, that one 300 would be much better than two 250s. 

analogmusic posted:

rather than Bi-amping, I would add Superlumina DIN/XLR to NAP 250 

I just checked on the price and the Superlumina DIN to XLR is £1,629 which is costlier than the Hicap DR. Perhaps it's more suitable for 500 series rather than the Classic series?

Anyway since you have recommended the Superlumina DIN to XLR, I presume you have tried the cable with your 282/HCDR/250DR? If you have tried the cable in your system, did it give you an instant "Wow" factor when the cable was connected to the system, or you had to listen attentively for several minutes or hours to appreciate the benefits? In short, is the difference big or small(in your system, to your ears)? FWIW I consider the difference between the Chord Signature TA RCA-DIN and Flashback RCA-DIN to be subtle. The Chord Signature TA connects the Chord QBD 76 DAC to the NAC 282.

Now we are talking.

I have heard vertere DIN/XLR on Nap 250 and Nap 500, and it was instant WOW! I didn't expect it at all, but a big upgrade.

Bigger soundstage, much more clarity in the bass,  more resolution in the high frequencies.

I know what you mean by the subtle difference between flashback and Chord cables, but this is not subtle at all to my ears.

analogmusic posted:

I'm not sure I understand where are you coming from.

Now which part of that do you find amusing, I don't know, but I'm only trying to help and share my findings with the forum.

SL $$$$$

Music$$$$$$

Veretere$$$$

Witchhat $

Nac A5 $

Home made?

I admire the gentleman making his own Din/XLR cables, wish I had the skills!

I just don't know, how they would compare to list you constructed!

I didn't want to comment, and be perceived as an japer!

That's all!

But we are both familiar with the Veretere Guy, the weakest link!

And as you say, the Esteem Richard Dane drives an 250 with his 552!

Why, because we all know a 552 can drive A Nap 100!

Naim

Audio

Control

But the big picture!

As my father used to say:

If you like it, I love it!

That's all!

Enjoy the Music!

You got Ryder, with your modern speakers I wouldn't bother with bi amping either!

Capiche!

Allante93!

PS. Voice activated texting! LOL...

I hate it!

Huge posted:

I never understood the theory of bi-wiring or bi-amping.

Bi-wiring...  makes no difference to the frequency range or the output voltages the amp has to handle, but doubles the capacitance and cost of the speaker cable.
(A properly designed cable causes no interaction between different frequencies anyway.  Actually it's quite hard to make a cable misbehave in this specific way and even if it does misbehave like this, then the bi-wired cables would need to be run separately with considerable distance between them to realise the advantage of separating the current feeds - if not then they'll still interact!).

Bi-amping...  makes no difference to the frequency range or the output voltages the amps have to handle (and both amps have to handle the same full range), but increases the complexity of the load on each amp at the crossover point.
The amps MAY work better at frequencies well away from the crossover region, but this isn't guaranteed and will be amp and load specific.  Potentially a sort of HiFi focused setup, sacrificing sonic integrity in the midrange (around the crossover point) for a possible improvement at LF and/or HF.  With some specific amp / speaker pairings, it might be possible to use this to help even out speakers that have a good midrange but have problems at one or both frequency extremes without loosing too much in the crossover region.  May work best with three way systems where the crossovers are well away from the midrange frequencies where human hearing is most discriminating.

Active crossover...  This limits the frequency range each of the amps has to handle and can potentially be made to achieve crossover characteristics better matched to the drivers.  In addition the drivers are connected to a source impedance that's much less dependant on frequency.  I understand this one.  Only worth it for very expensive systems.

Active speakers...  The amps in the speakers can be specifically tailored to the drive units giving further possibilities for optimisation.  I understand this one.

Good informative post. The general consensus with biwiring is it sounds worse than single-wire. Biwiring cables exist because some (or most) speaker manufacturers provide biwiring terminals on their speakers. From what I understand, there is no technical advantage with biwiring. The designer of a renowned speaker manufacturer admitted that they provide biwiring because some markets demand for it. It's a commercial thing.

Biamping may not have an advantage when the dual amplifiers are compared to a single amplifier of higher pedigree. Nevertheless, it will eliminate the use of metal links or any sort of jumpers or F-connection between the HF and LF terminals of the speaker. In some ways, the elimination of this link between the speaker terminals can be beneficial in some systems.