Where to go (if anywhere) from NAC52?

fordy posted:

A friend and I have used PI in hifi dems for years and years. I’ve never not been able to hear the breaking glass.

I use two tracks when testing one is PI and the other is dark side of the moon track eclipse and if you crank up the volume towards the end you can hear ticket to ride.

naim_nymph posted:

Beachcomber posted:

my previous active SBL/135s...

 

Beachcomber,

Do you ever wish you'd upgraded the 52 to 552, and NDX to NDS instead of swopping out the four pack & sibbles?

Debs

 

No, not regretting it at all.  The sibbles were good, and active is excellent (I first went active in mid to late 1970s, and this is the first time return to passive for the main system).  The treble is superb on the S600s (particularly for female vocals; listening to Alison Krouss singing Sister Rosetta Goes Before Us last night and it sounds as though she were standing right next to you) - and the extra bass is nice.  I would love to hear the S600 active but I don't imagine I'll ever be able to afford that.  I had S800s on loan for a while, and they were amazing. Years ago I heard active DBLs and they were probably better in some ways (but the S800 was passive).  I would love to see what would happen if the DBL mid/treble were replaced by the S800 BMR.  

I sometimes found the SBLs to sound a little harsh, which I don't find with the S600s.

Innocent Bystander posted:

Curiouser and curiouser. Foot Tapper hears  the breaking glass loud and clear, but Hungryhalibut doesnt. The OP did, now doesm’t. More significantly, the OPs experiences are with the same CD. 

I’m a bit unclear as to what has changed when in the system: CDX/SPS to NDX, 135s/active SBLs to 500/S600. It might be helpful to detail the change process, including timescale. And when in that timescale did you first become aware that the glass didn’t break anymore (or other concerns about what you were hearing if Private Investigations isn’t aired frequently)? On reflection would you say it was a gradual deterioration, or something that suddenly became apparent, and if the latter was it after an upgrade or all by itself? Or is it so subtle that it could go for months without realising until you happen to notice in pne recording that something is missing that used to be there (e.g. the glass sound)?

I also have the vinyl version, but can't play it now as I sold my Planar 3 a while ago.  I'm wondering whether the glass was more obvious on that, but can't remember.

Out of curiosity I played PI on my office system - CB NAP 90/NAC 42 into ATC SCM10, from PC using Audition through Scarlett.  Couldn't hear the glass at all, though the volume on this system is rather less than the main one, of course.

HiFiman posted:

fordy posted:

A friend and I have used PI in hifi dems for years and years. I’ve never not been able to hear the breaking glass.

I use two tracks when testing one is PI and the other is dark side of the moon track eclipse and if you crank up the volume towards the end you can hear ticket to ride.

 

Doesn’t need to be cranked up ... or maybe I always play it at what to you would seem cranked uo!

Just played it on an ordinary PC but with OPPO PM-3 headphones,  Audible, but not as noticeable as I remember it.  So there are several possibilities.  Poor memory (can't remember whether that's the case).  Deteriorating hearing (though I'm not particularly aware of that in any other ways).  Active SBLs emphasised those frequencies.  I'm remembering it from playing on vinyl, and that had different emphases. 

All very interesting

Beachcomber posted:

naim_nymph posted:

Beachcomber posted:

my previous active SBL/135s...

 

Beachcomber,

Do you ever wish you'd upgraded the 52 to 552, and NDX to NDS instead of swopping out the four pack & sibbles?

Debs

 

No, not regretting it at all.  The sibbles were good, and active is excellent (I first went active in mid to late 1970s, and this is the first time return to passive for the main system).  The treble is superb on the S600s (particularly for female vocals; listening to Alison Krouss singing Sister Rosetta Goes Before Us last night and it sounds as though she were standing right next to you) - and the extra bass is nice.  I would love to hear the S600 active but I don't imagine I'll ever be able to afford that.  I had S800s on loan for a while, and they were amazing. Years ago I heard active DBLs and they were probably better in some ways (but the S800 was passive).  I would love to see what would happen if the DBL mid/treble were replaced by the S800 BMR.  

I sometimes found the SBLs to sound a little harsh, which I don't find with the S600s.

[ Hypotheticals ]

But if you'd upgraded the front half of the system instead, it may have led to an even bigger lack of regrets : )

NDS+555PS, 552/PS, 4 x 135s, SBLs

vs

NDX, CDX/XPS,NAC52/PS,NAP500,Ovator S600.

It would be an interesting shootout either way and to find out what the four-pack & sibbles can do with such a front end. The SBL harshness you heard may of only been a symptom of the limitations of the NDX / CDX front-end on such a powerful active system (?)

however it's nice to know you've happy with the Ovators, i can only think you're lucky enough to have a listening room of generous size with acoustics agreeable for the S600s : )

Debs

Beachcomber posted:

Current system is NDX/NAC52/NAP500/S600.

The NAC52 is pretty old and has not been serviced.  Nonetheless it all sounds pretty good - but I have a bit of a NaimNiggle that things might be even better if I do something about the NAC52, or possibly the NAP500.  Options are Service the NAC52 (it is pre-POTS 8, I believe), change to 252 or (I don't think I can do this) 552 (2nd hand in either case - can't afford new) or some other NAC, or go to a passive pre-amp (in which case I have no idea what) - I use the NDX almost exclusively as source now, haven't touched the CDX for a long time (could sell the CDX and its XPS power supply to help funds).  Or I could DR the 500.  Or stick with what I have (after all, I'm not unhappy with it - I just speculate that it wouldn't take a huge amount to improve things even more - I feel that there is something missing in the mid-range.  For example, on Dire Straits' Private Investigations, the breaking glass is barely audible, whereas on my previous system (active SBLs using 135s) it was very audible).

What does the team think?

Had a recapped nac52/52ps thought I needed a 552 yes the 552 is better but the 52 is so good and just fits i. better to put the money in the  500 for the DR conversion  You do have many options but for what a used 552 will cost ,  you can have you 500 rebuilt AND upgrade to NDS/555ps two big upticks?

Very interesting the "breaking Glass" comment. I've known this track for years but never really really taken much notice of the breaking glass. After this thread I listened to the cd via cds3 555ps and the glass is there (faint) at 5:40 in the right channel. It is much clearer and obvious with vinyl, (LP12 aro armageddon  krystal superline supercap DR) but now  it is most definitely in the left channel - clear as a bell ???? My cd is the remastered edition where vinyl is original issue. Can anyone check and see if they have the same thing?

Thanks

Mario.

Yes. It's in the left channel. This is streaming via Apple tv from apple icloud Music. The 'cat' noise is a guitar I thought too. I too thought it should be more obvious than that but maybe the video MTV mix makes it more obvious and that's what everybody is remembering? I have the CD too so I'll have to check that.

The 52 is the best bang for buck. Changing speakers changes any system the most so if you want to upgrade or just have a different sound then I'd do that personally. I have a very early 52 and had it re-capped. It's magic. There's nothing else. I can't see the point in spending thousands just to get something that's basically different or perhaps a few percent better. Buy more music instead

 

[ Hypotheticals ]

But if you'd upgraded the front half of the system instead, it may have led to an even bigger lack of regrets : )

NDS+555PS, 552/PS, 4 x 135s, SBLs

vs

NDX, CDX/XPS,NAC52/PS,NAP500,Ovator S600.

It would be an interesting shootout either way and to find out what the four-pack & sibbles can do with such a front end. The SBL harshness you heard may of only been a symptom of the limitations of the NDX / CDX front-end on such a powerful active system (?)

however it's nice to know you've happy with the Ovators, i can only think you're lucky enough to have a listening room of generous size with acoustics agreeable for the S600s : )

Debs

It's possible, but I'm not convinced.  The SBLs, while excellent, just didn't have the depth of bass that the Ovators have, and the Ovators treble is so good.  It has all the clarity of the sibbles, but more immediacy (I'm struggling for the right words here).  My other option would have been dibbles, which I know are amazing - but would never have got them past SWMBO.  The Ovators caused enough ructions.  

The room is quite good, though not ideal.  It's an odd shape - imagine a large square but with one corner cut off (there is a small shower-room in that corner).  The ceiling goes up into the roof space, so a bit like a ridge tent.  The room is basically about 6 metres square, and is about 3 metres or a bit more into the peak of the ceiling.  The back wall (from the speakers) is somewhat complex, with the shower room in one corner and an enclosed platform in the other, plus stairs down to the room below.  

I'm becoming more convinced that the current lack of breaking glass is partly from the difference between the vinyl and the CD recording (and my poor memory over whether is was as obvious with the CD in the active system as it was with the vinyl) and differences in the SBL/Ovator sounds.  I wouldn't go back to the SBLs though - good as they were I prefer the Ovators overall.

Mario posted:

Very interesting the "breaking Glass" comment. I've known this track for years but never really really taken much notice of the breaking glass. After this thread I listened to the cd via cds3 555ps and the glass is there (faint) at 5:40 in the right channel. It is much clearer and obvious with vinyl, (LP12 aro armageddon  krystal superline supercap DR) but now  it is most definitely in the left channel - clear as a bell ???? My cd is the remastered edition where vinyl is original issue. Can anyone check and see if they have the same thing?

 

Thanks

Mario.

Left channel on mine, not that that matters.  But interesting that it is clearer on the vinyl.  Sadly I can't test that now.

srichards posted:

Yes. It's in the left channel. This is streaming via Apple tv from apple icloud Music. The 'cat' noise is a guitar I thought too. I too thought it should be more obvious than that but maybe the video MTV mix makes it more obvious and that's what everybody is remembering? I have the CD too so I'll have to check that.

The 52 is the best bang for buck. Changing speakers changes any system the most so if you want to upgrade or just have a different sound then I'd do that personally. I have a very early 52 and had it re-capped. It's magic. There's nothing else. I can't see the point in spending thousands just to get something that's basically different or perhaps a few percent better. Buy more music instead

I agree - servicing the 52 sounds like the best VFM at the moment.  Then if funds allow I will DR the 500.  

I also agree with having the 52 serviced - They will change all the tantalum caps  for one thing, so make sure you leave the phono cards in.

I just had another listen to PI streamed from Qobuz, this time from my laptop into my Nait 5si and Motive SX2 speakers.

I can concur that it is from the left loudspeaker around 5.41 into the track and that it is more obvious through my speakers than it was through my Grado headphones. Volume @ 9 '0' clockish.

PI breaking glass left channel for me on all formats, coming from the Proac Tab 10 the glass is really prominent these speakers are so revealing nothing is held back.

Makes me wonder why some cannot hear the breaking glass on far more expensive systems then mine, must be age or ear wax build up!

Mario posted:

Very interesting the "breaking Glass" comment. I've known this track for years but never really really taken much notice of the breaking glass. After this thread I listened to the cd via cds3 555ps and the glass is there (faint) at 5:40 in the right channel. It is much clearer and obvious with vinyl, (LP12 aro armageddon  krystal superline supercap DR) but now  it is most definitely in the left channel - clear as a bell ???? My cd is the remastered edition where vinyl is original issue. Can anyone check and see if they have the same thing?

 

Thanks

Mario.

Do other sounds (on any album) swap sides between vinyl and CD? I so it sounds like your something in your vinyl chain to preamp, is wrongly connected.

Innocent Bystander posted:

Mario posted:

Very interesting the "breaking Glass" comment. I've known this track for years but never really really taken much notice of the breaking glass. After this thread I listened to the cd via cds3 555ps and the glass is there (faint) at 5:40 in the right channel. It is much clearer and obvious with vinyl, (LP12 aro armageddon  krystal superline supercap DR) but now  it is most definitely in the left channel - clear as a bell ???? My cd is the remastered edition where vinyl is original issue. Can anyone check and see if they have the same thing?

 

Thanks

Mario.

Do other sounds (on any album) swap sides between vinyl and CD? I so it sounds like your something in your vinyl chain to preamp, is wrongly connected.

It sounds like to me that the vinyl side is correct. The CD side it seems, is not.

That would be odd as he is probably using the supplied Naim DIN lead for the CDS3 but who knows a late Friday afternoon cable.

Beachcomber posted:

 

I wouldn't go back to the SBLs though - good as they were I prefer the Ovators overall.

...or to put it another way - young perfect condition Ovators sound better than ageing, neglected and worn out SBLs? : /

The only harshness i've experienced from sibbles is when old & defective tweeters needed replacing, and this 'tweeter degradation' seems to become more of an event with active amplification...

Good luck with the 52/PS service, should make a wonderful world of difference,

and will make an excellent stop-gap while you scratch that 552 itch 

Debs

No incorrect wiring here, CD definitely mastered the other way round, glass in right channel. Checked rip to iPod from same cd (remastered edition) and glass is in the right channel, played cd on another system, again glass in right channel. Even played CD in my oppo udp205 wired rca to DIN to NAC552 that I built myself with mogami W2549 and again glass is in right channel with this cd.

Lp has glass in the left channel. Extremely clear and slightly larger sounding than the cd version. I'd say this is the original way it was. Go figure???

Mario.

Played it directly on the mac with the internal speakers straight from cd rip of my cd and it's on the left. Clear as anything.... this is a mystery

On mine, a 24/88 hires version, it is on the left.  

It is clearly audible, but quite a low volume in the mix, following the meow-like sound and then something reminiscent of paper tearing.  By disconncting the tweeter and mid in turn (crossover 3.6kHz) I can confirm that it is audible through both, maybe a bit louder in the tweeter (I didn’t measure it). Through the mid it sounds like a milkbottle or similar, through tweeter the type of glass is less specific.

As for channel and which is correct, it seems the vast majority here with digital sources say it is on the left, so anyone hearing on the right from CD  ay have channels mixed up somewhere. LP may be reversed, though perhaps not enough reporting that for a clear concensus yet. If it is different between LP and digitally remastered, it begs the question as to which is “right”, or whether it has simply been moved to the other side in the edigital mastering process, implying a deliberate decision. The question there is whether the rest of CD and LP have sounds also reversed - if just the atmospheric effects it suggests the mastering, if everything it suggests that either the LP or the Digital mastering has transposed the channels, either accidentally or deliberately.

Back to the OP question: Overall I think that on balance from people’s observations it seems likethe lack of loud audibility to the OP is most likely to be remembering from LP source not CD. As the original description just gave the glass as an example of what is felt to be missing, can you put your finger on any other examples? Or is it in fact about right?

As already suggested, REW could help identify if there is any significant dip in response. 

If you need a preamp, then servicing it makes most sense, as tha universally seems to be considered to be well overdue and very likely to have significant  effect on the sound. After that you can consider whether to upgrade the source, whether going NDS route or outboard DAC route, or the power amp. Easy to get drawn into spending money, however I suggest it would be appropriate to decide where you want to be in the longer term and what funding may be realistic before taking any upgrade steps.

I agree all IB.     Both of my Private Investigations  are rips,  I assume from the same master,  however one is a CD 16/44 & the other is SACD is shows as 24/44. 

I've always assumed it to be a thrown milk bottle (remember those)  & it lands 'half left' & 'back' in the soundstage,  & with the distance effects added its sounds something like >50m distant.

Innocent Bystander posted:

Back to the OP question: Overall I think that on balance from people’s observations it seems likethe lack of loud audibility to the OP is most likely to be remembering from LP source not CD. As the original description just gave the glass as an example of what is felt to be missing, can you put your finger on any other examples? Or is it in fact about right?

As already suggested, REW could help identify if there is any significant dip in response. 

If you need a preamp, then servicing it makes most sense, as tha universally seems to be considered to be well overdue and very likely to have significant  effect on the sound. After that you can consider whether to upgrade the source, whether going NDS route or outboard DAC route, or the power amp. Easy to get drawn into spending money, however I suggest it would be appropriate to decide where you want to be in the longer term and what funding may be realistic before taking any upgrade steps.

It is quite possible that I am remembering from the LP.  Other things I find are that male vocals seem less forward than was the case with the SBLs - but that might be because there is more bass with the S600s and the male vocals are are slightly masked because of that. 

As for REW I have ordered one of the mics that they recommend which should arrive Monday and will experiment.

I looked up the serial number of the 52 and it was made in 1996 - and not been seen to since.  So 22 years or thereabouts, could be due for some TLC.  The supercap is odd-  the serial number is 4 digits written on in felt pen, so I imagine it was originally bought by a Naim employee.  

If I sell the CDX/XPS then the money could go towards upgrading the 500.  The 500 serial number says it was built in 2000.  AIUI with the DR upgrade so much is replaced that a combined service isn't necessary - not sure whether that is true or not.