272/500

The unwritten rule is always go for a better pre than your power amp if you need to unbalance your amplification - during upgrading steps for example. Mind you I have never heard a 272/500 combo.

'Power without control, and all that.....'. Bit like trying to stop a runaway train using the heels of your boots.

Yeah I know about the source first, but there got to be someone who tried  Dealers for sure?

I don’t see why not but it’s not the best allocation of funds

a 552/200 would sound much better

Based on my auditions of FACT12 speakers, they could do with a NAP500 to let them know who's boss, so a 272/555PS/500 would be unconventional yet may just be the minimum amp that the speakers need.  Maybe.

I have heard FACT12 with a 300 (non DR), 135s and a 500 (non DR).  Pre amps have been 282/Supercap, 252/Supercap and 552.  So never with a 272.

Best regards, FT 

I remember someone’s done this and they’re on the forum but I forget who, bound to be along soon though.

it was @Richeroo who had one for a while?

Ah, just looked at your profile StigO and as you are trying to drive Fact 12s with a NAP300, I see the reason for your question.

There are many who say the Fact 12s need a NAP500 up 'em to drive them properly. But I still stand by my earlier comments. That means a 500 and a 552 I suspect. The 252/500 is not the best I believe. So the 552 to control the 500 and the 500 to drive the Fact 12s. The alternatives are to live with what you have (which may or may not be satisfactory) or change out the Fact 12s for less demanding speakers.

It will be interesting to see if anyone has heard or lived with a 272/500 combo.

analogmusic posted:

I don’t see why not but it’s not the best allocation of funds

a 552/200 would sound much better

A 200 would not have a chance of driving Fact 12s.

well it is not a sensitive speaker at 84/db/w

but that's not the fault of the 200.

300 is doing more then ok with the Fact12, and I not part of the "Have you ever played your system "really" loud?" tread

I used to have have Devialet and don't miss is it. 500 will be better, how much I don't know, or if it is worth the price. I like my 4 box setup so don't see me going down the 552/500/nd555 road (prices are ridiculous as well). I just thought that if 272/500 sings,  I could look for a secondhand 500.

There have been a couple of people using a 272/500. Both ended up with a 552, if memory serves. From what I understand the Fact 12s really need a 500 to perform as they should. This is the trouble with being overspeakered - it costs a lot to feed them properly. It’s like owning a large, hungry dog. 

Don't agree that it needs 500, but bigger is always better,

analogmusic posted:

I don’t see why not but it’s not the best allocation of funds

a 552/200 would sound much better

No it wouldn’t as he wouldn’t have a source!

hungryhalibut posted:

... It’s like owning a large, hungry dog. 

I resemble that remark!

analogmusic posted:

... a 552/200 would sound much better

An interesting assertion there Analogmusic.  Which Naim power amps have you actually heard driving PMC Fact12 speakers?

Regards, FT

Hi I had a 272 with nap500 and it was excellent... ultimately 272 is the weak link .... but is good for a stop gap until you get a 552...

StigO posted:

Don't agree that it needs 500, but bigger is always better,

Why ?

I thought the quality of the first watt was essential

I remember a Sugden A21 I owned played a lot better than a 200w Rotel amp

Similar with an old Nap 160, I much preferred this to a Nap 250.2

Never heard Fact 12 unless perhaps at shows, I would possible choose active solution

Even on 272 the 500 was better from 1st bar of music.....compared to 250dr

Richieroo posted:

but is good for a stop gap until you get a 552...

...and a NDX or other source of course!

I’m told (by my dealer) that the 300 will cope with a difficult load better than a 500, which makes sense, bridging an amp gives you more watts but not more current capacity, for that you run in parallel. The 500 is about lower noise rather than greater driving ability and is all the better for it but you need to deliverthe right signal to it in the first place. On a 272 it’s leading you to a dedicated pre and there are only two that make sense whereas there are several forumites who are very happy with the 300 on a 272, or so they maintain.

Quite so. If I were to move from my 272 it would be to a 552 and NDS or ND555. Not a cheap option. I certainly wouldn’t put a 500 on the end of the 272. The 272/555/300 does work extraordinarily will, but then SL2s are not Fact 12s. 

if you can afford a nap 500, why not get a 252/supercap/ ndx ex demo . You would have ndx/252/300 , a lot better than 272/500.

hungryhalibut posted:

Quite so. If I were to move from my 272 it would be to a 552 and NDS or ND555. Not a cheap option. I certainly wouldn’t put a 500 on the end of the 272. The 272/555/300 does work extraordinarily will, but then SL2s are not Fact 12s. 

A 272/555/300 makes as little sense as a 272/500 IMO when for a similar out lay you could own NDX/282/SC/300 or NDX/XPS/282/SC/250 and only one more box,  when you are talking 4 or 5 boxes low box count is a bit of a mute point.

yeti42 posted:

I’m told (by my dealer) that the 300 will cope with a difficult load better than a 500, which makes sense, bridging an amp gives you more watts but not more current capacity, for that you run in parallel. The 500 is about lower noise rather than greater driving ability and is all the better for it but you need to deliverthe right signal to it in the first place. On a 272 it’s leading you to a dedicated pre and there are only two that make sense whereas there are several forumites who are very happy with the 300 on a 272, or so they maintain.

Ok, then I don't understand why people claim that I need a 500 to drive the fact12, but it makes sense that a lower noise floor would benefit 'em as they are very revealing speakers.

To my ears a NDX/XPS-282/HC/250 makes for a greater musical experience than 272/XPS/250 but there are many ways to skin a cat.   Of course it would be worthy of consideration.  

Regards,

Lindsay