Which would give the better SOUND reproduction in an AV setup? A Naim AV2/150X/175 or a Naim N-Vi?

The n-Vi all-in-one was replaced by the AV-2 pre/proc.  The latter has more configuration options, and more surround modes than its predecessor.  

I have never heard or seen an n-Vi — owners seem to like them.  I own an AV-2 myself, and would not want to go backward, to a less flexible box.  The AV-2 was the last surround processor Naim made.

I have no reason to suspect the n-Vi is preferable, other than due to lower box count.  Never saw anybody here say it sounds better.  

Why do you ask?  An AV-2 and NAP-V175 in hand is a lucky thing, IMHO, if they meet your requirements.  Rare birds.

Nick

Hi Nick. Yup, I have the AV2, 175 and 150X. I had thought that the n-Vi came out during the latter years of the AV2 period, and wondered if it might sound better because a) I thought it was a newer item, and b) its DAC is apparently 192/24 rather than the 96kHz one that I understand is built into the AV2.

Obviously there may also be benefits to the TV image due to the n-Vi's video processor.

It was just a thought, really....and I'm still wondering!

What do you use in addition to your AV2, Nick?

Hi VintageAxeMan, no talk about AV2 without me!

I was looking for an n-Vi. Then I found an AV2. My regular dealer - not having one for sale - said that the AV2 was a more 'musical' surround processor. Since I watch and listen the Berliner Philharmoniker on my TV (it's most of my TV Time), it was the direction to go for.

So based on the judgement of my respected dealer, and my impression that there are more technical issues with the n-Vi, I choose AV2. Lucky bet, I love it.

Currently connected to a Nait 5, so only 2 channel. Later I'll add a Nap 100, but need to save some money for my office system first.

There are some folks on this forum being happy with the n-Vi though. I think that is can be a very satisfying unit as long as it is in technical good conditions.

I would not focus too much on the 192/24 vs 96/24 specs. Personally, I cant distinct it and optical connections start to be flaky higher than 96/24.

I stand corrected — I see the n-Vi came out later than AV-2, and they finished together in 2010.

I find the LACK of video on the AV-2 as an advantage, as video technology has moved on.  You would probably want to bypass n-Vi video if you use 4K.

Currently, I run my AV-2 as 3.0.  One day I may run it 5.0 or 5.1 through my NAC.  

Nick