102/super vs 82/super

Posted by: davidf on 15 October 2000

I have just acquired an 82 to replace my 102 with supercap. Also using cdx/lp12/nat01 with linn 5140 speakers and 5150 sub. After 48 hours with the 82 I have some initial impressions- must bear in mind I have been told the 82 can take weeks to properly warm up. As I had hoped the 82 is much better than the 102. Much deeper bass is present, so much so that I had to turn down my subwoofer`s volume as well as further lower the frequency at which it comes in- down to 40 hertz. In fact I am seriously questioning the need for the sub. Furthermore, there is a life and vibrancy that is immediatly apparent- the music breathes, vocals are huskier and rich, drums and cimbals have more snap and sizzle, plucked strings from a guitar are more there and in your face. Most interesting is that I can tell what the words are in songs where previously I couldn`t tell what all the lyrics were about. Facinating! Also interesting is what I learned about my cdx to 82 interconnect. I had recently switched from naim`s lavender-grey interconnect to Nordost Blue Heaven interconnect because the nordost gave more high frequecy energy to the system with the 102/super. However, with the 82/super using the nordost the music on the cdx became to shouty and harsh. When I switched back to the naim interconnect, the music became more harmonius and just plain better. Time will tell what my final reaction will be to the 82 but suffice to say that at this point I am very satisfied. If it gets better over the coming weeks, all the better! Anybody else have a chance to compare the 102/82 with super? david. Hey Don, how do you like the 52?
Posted on: 15 October 2000 by Don Braid
David, I'm delighted you're enjoying the 82. You impressions are exactly what I heard when I moved from 102/Scap to 82/Scap. The same improvements - and more - become instantly obvious when you go to the 52. But as I've noted, the 52 also demands more source so it's a money pit . . .
These upgrades always make us aware that while the source is the heart of the system, the pre-amp is its soul.
Enjoy,
Don
Posted on: 21 October 2000 by davidf
I continue to love the 82/super and as I had mentioned, I was considering selling my linn 5150 subwoofer. To restate, I am using cdx/lp12/ekos/nat01/250 and linn 5140`s. I thought that if I sold the sub I could easily pay for an xps to go with my cdx. I did an extensive demo with my system: with and without the subwoofer. My conclusions were that the sub is worth keeping. With all 3 sources, especially the lp12, the sub added depth, a 3-dimensional aspect to the music. Without the sub, everything was alot flatter and less exciting. I didn`t notice any negatives nor did my wife (whom I consider a much more objective listener than myself!). I actually wanted the sub not to be good because I was getting excited at the aspect of selling the sub which would almost pay for the xps. Now admittedly, I haven`t demoed the xps but one time (and I was impressed). For now, I will keep the sub and wait and save for the xps at a later date. I don`t know how many on the forum are familiar with the linn sub. It is an active 200 watt beauty in cherry wood (black ash available). It is not cheap at almost 5000 us dollars including tax. Anybody have any thoughts? david.
Posted on: 21 October 2000 by Don Braid
quote:
Don,
This comment sounds very profound. For those of us who are a little less profound, please could you explain this a little bit more?

I dunno, basically I guess I was just trying to impress you with my command of cheap metaphor. But what I mean, sort of, I think, is that the pre-amp lets the full life of the music float through, while the source pumps it out, so that the power amp, also known as the muscle . . . but there I go again.

Don

Posted on: 21 October 2000 by Rico
David

Congrats on your 82 acquisition. Magic bit of kit, eh? I was interested to read of your comparisons wrt keep or ditch your sub. The 82 is great out of the box, and is massively better with SCap.

quote:
Anybody have any thoughts? david.

But do run through the whole comparison again after it's been on for 3 weeks, because: Good as the 82 is, cold out-of the-box, after a minimum of two weeks, it is even better. I've done this a number of times (for various reasons) over the last 10 months), and am almost on week 2 for the latest warm-up, and am truely amazed***.

I'm looking fwd to hearing your final word on the sub, and the sound of your new pre.

*** non-82 owners, do note: if it doesn't Wow!! you stright out of the box, the 82 is not for you. My points here are not in strength of the 'oh give it 2 weeks and miracles are possible' school; it's just that the good does really get better. Let's not get the 52 school out here, 'kay?

Rico - musichead

Posted on: 21 October 2000 by Don Braid
quote:
if it doesn't Wow!! you straight out of the box, the 82 is not for you.

Rico, I beg to differ, mildly. I actually disliked my 82 out of the box; it sounded so clinical and unmusical compared to by earlier 102/Supercap. After three weeks I was starting to enjoy the 82. One day, about five weeks in, it began to breath and sing over the course of an hour I won't soon forget - magic beyond anything the 102 ever dreamed of in its little circuits. The 82 was finally "on song," as they say beyond the water. Maybe 82s are just really damned cold by the time to get to western Canada.
I agree that subsequent warm-ups, after break-in, can take at least two weeks and as much as three

Don