New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Views on NAIM amps
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Welcome to the Graham Slee Audio Products Owners Forum

 

Open to all owners plus those contemplating the purchase of a Graham Slee HiFi System Components audio product and wishing to use this forum's loaner program: join here (Rules on posting can be found here)

This website along with trade marks Graham Slee and HiFi System Components are owned by Cadman Enterprises Ltd

Views on NAIM amps
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
Author
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Jan 2008 at 10:05am
My limited experience with Naim amps would be over 10 years ago (?), when I tried some out at home. Initial impressions were good , but eventually I decided they were a bit too forward and aggressive for my ears. However, I was using Tannoy DC3000s at the time and the dual concentric "tweeter" could be a touch on the harsh side with some recordings.
I tried the Naim amps with the Naim CD3.5 and outboard power supply and eventually settled on the Naim CD player with the Audiolab amps ( 8000S and 8000P biamped ) and this was a combination I stayed with for many years, until last year, when the speakers were changed to the Quad 22L2s.
 
I was however convinced of the importance of  quality outboard power supplies, so no doubt I will soon be trying the PSU  for my INTRO when it is fully burnt in !
 
Adrian.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest Group
Guest Group
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 Jan 2008 at 10:07am
Should that be "burned in" ?
Back to Top
dvv View Drop Down
Regular
Regular
Avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Location: Belgrade, Serbi
Status: Offline
Points: 95 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dvv Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Jan 2008 at 4:56pm
My last experience, as I've noted, dates back to a 1989 model. I have heard it connected to B&W, Spendor, Infinity, JBL and JMLab/Focal speakers. To sum it up in brief, the B&W speakers sort of "tamed" the NAIM amp, but at the cost of life and exuberance. Spendor BC3 did very well indeed, giving a more even handed presentation, yet subjectively fast and crisp as it should be, but lacking in some inner detail. Infinity taxed the NAIM, but it did remarkably well with the damn difficult Infinity speakers - it takes true grit to move that 15" bass driver, and the NAIM put the VTL 60W monoblocks to shame there. JMLab/Focal speakers were definitely a poor match, the end result was a bit screechy and taxing on the nerves. The overall best was JBL's 4312 monitor, otherwise a coloured speaker, but one with such joy of life, such readiness to do its job and speed as no other speaker I ever heard can match. The fact that it's also relatively efficient also helped.
 
However, the total sum of that experience was far greater than the simple addition of individual experiences. I have come to realize exactly how much true voltage regulation does for a power amp, and then a transistor power amp specifically. Subjectively, that little 30 WPC NAIM sounds much bigger and more powerful than it really is, putting to shame some objectively far more powerful Japanese amps, which sounded small and constrained in comparison.
 
The only time I can recall what I had a more or less same experience with an amp was with a Karan Acoustics KA-i180 (which I now own precisely because of that), which does not have full voltage regulation, yet manages to sound like a much bigger NAIM, albeit with much more power at hand (rated at 180 WPC into 8 Ohms) and at a much higher price. All of which makes the NAIM even more impressive to me.


Edited by dvv - 27 Jan 2008 at 4:59pm
Back to Top
Graham Slee View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
Retired

Joined: 11 Jan 2008
Location: South Yorkshire
Status: Offline
Points: 16314 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Graham Slee Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Feb 2008 at 1:55pm
Originally posted by dvv dvv wrote:

For over 30 years, I have held NAIM in extremely high regard for the late Julian Vereker's approach, which to me, seems so rock solid stable and reasonable that I wonder why more people have not used a similar approach in the same price bracket.
 


@dvv: I design in isolation from the rest of the hi-fi industry but listen to people's comments regarding design as you of all people know.

I design without regard to other people's designs mainly because I distrust the doctrines of hi-fi in general.

In fact, thinking that other manufacturers designs were far more superior than mine through reading the hi-fi press in the early 80's, particularly about products like Naim etc, I decided not to enter the hi-fi market at that time.

However, after recently needing to look at some Naim designs from that "heyday" for reasons of compatibility - the approach held in high regard by you and others, I found them not too dissimilar to my own of the late seventies and early eighties.

I wonder why then the Press spoke with such a forked tongue?

The press was, and still is, dead set against designs that have input, output and negative feedback coupling capacitors, but I see that these Naim designs that the press heaped great praise upon, have input, output and negative feedback coupling capacitors (for those who have not twigged yet, these capacitors are directly in the signal path, and these signals are at preamp level), but wait a minute, these capacitors are tantalum beads! Tantalum bead capacitors are frowned upon in the signal path aren't they?

The press was, and still is, dead set against the transistor sound which is blamed on transistor circuits having gigantic open loop gain and lashings of negative feedback, but I see that these Naim designs that the press heaped great praise upon, are the very same transistor circuits having gigantic open loop gain and lashings of negative feedback!

I wonder if you are actually referring to the late Julian Vereker's design approach or to a different sort of approach - an approach to the press maybe?

Given the tidal wave of abuse such circuit designs get from all and sundry, I find it an absolute miracle that Naim has established such a great reputation.

Please dvv, explain what this simple mind of mine is missing?
That none should be able to park up and enjoy the view without a smartphone and the knowledge in how to use apps
Back to Top
dvv View Drop Down
Regular
Regular
Avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Location: Belgrade, Serbi
Status: Offline
Points: 95 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dvv Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Feb 2008 at 5:00pm
In my view, Graham, there is no simple answer.
 
Before posting a reply, I know you know my background, but for the sake of those who don't, in brief: I have under my belt 19 years of classic magazine editoring in PC hardware testing, 3 seasons of authoring and anchoring my own weekly 45 minute TV show on PC, 4 seasons of my own radio show on audio only, 3 years of audio reviewing on TNT-Audio site, God alone (if even He) knows how many designs (most of which I never liked, and are merely log fodder in my PC) and one small, humble company of me own producing some of me own designs - just like you, plus a few years of on and off wrangling with one Graham Slee, convincing him that he SHOULD do it Tongue. In short, I am an insider.
 
30-odd years ago, we had people like Gordon King and Angus McKenzie, to mention but two, writing for magazines, themselves young and allegedly innocent. People like Bascom King in the USA. They made audio journalist history, for which I for one salute them. They wrote what they measured and heard, compared the two, and typically gave some sane advice. You didn't have to agree, but more often than not, they got it just about right. We also had our share of freaks, like USA's Julian Hirsch, who claimed that if two amps measure the same, then they sound the same, poor soul.
 
On the engineering front, we had people like Professor Dr Matti Otala, who published in 1972 his bombshell IEEE paper on until then unheard of Transient Intermodulation Distortion, which changed our audio lives forever. We had people like Saul Marantz churning out wonderful receivers, we had Bernard Kardon promoting a wide bandwidth approach, we had the giant of power amps James Bongiorno using first ever fully complementary designs, and later on DC Servo control, and we witnessed the young Turks' arrival on the scene of later-to-be-giants, as typically represented by gentlemen like Ivor Tiefenbrun (whom I never liked, but could never leave out), Messers Boothroyd and Stuart, and so forth.
 
In short, it was the heyday of audio. Then, in the late 70-ies and early 80-ies, there came along first the video and its attendent standards wars (VHS, Beta, Video 2000, VH-S, etc), then the PC and, lo and behold, digital audio, courtesy of Philips. All of this shifted public fancy away from audio, and as was to be expected, the audio industry went into a slump. Many also went under - second half of 80-ies clearly spelled the demise of such once great names as Sansui, Akai, and it was obvious even then, soon-to-be-gone names such as Studer/ReVox, Ferrograph, the memorable ASC in Germany, etc.
 
In economic terms, survival of the audio industry was very much in question. Demand dwindeled, supply was great, it was hard as hell to sell anything. THAT'S when it all changed.
 
That's when the magazines decided that they also had to do something in view of their diminishing copy sales, and asked the key questions: if we say X is a good product, the manufacturer will sell and make money, but what about us? Where are we in it all?
 
Because of diminishing mag sales, editors were forced to look for contributors and this led to diminishing scrutiny standards. Contributors started to become stars all on their own and went free lance, one writing in several magazine, both in the UK and in USA. Welcome to the bold new age of audio economics! If reviewer Y says something is good, and it sells, well, he now wants a part of the action. Today, if you want a good review, with prime time names it'll cost you 5K pounds, 2-3K pounds with the middle of the road contributors, plus you leave the product with them. Elsewhere in Europe, it costs 5K euros just to get it tested - results not guaranteed, that's extra.
 
Hard to believe? Too sweeping a statement? Try this - take a look at the system cost of audio reviewers, they often exceed 100K quid. Then ask what they are paid for a text in two or three mags they print one each month. Do not compare the two without taking some sedatives first.
 
Net result is that what is hailed in the magazines is quite often, quite simply junk (not to use the word s**t). The second net result is next to zero objectivity. The third net result is that small, low capital companies are virtually barred from the magazines simply because they can't afford to bribe some git, or pay their steep advertising fees. The fourth net result is that the overall acoustic standards have dropped and the prices of vintage gear are on the rise. Because of all this, sick in my stomach, I disgustedly left the publishing sector in the mid 90-ies.
 
Lastly, look around you. What is in demand today? Quite simply, a 300 quid receiver with no less than 7 channels, no less than 100W RMS per channel, everytning but the kitchen sink built in, and self-adjusting too. 151.2% digital, of course.
 
So, Graham, you do not offer bells and whistles, your products are not self adjusting, they are analogue, their cases do not have the required minimum of 50 lbs of aluminium in them, you claim no wild patents, so what do you actually sell? You (and I) cater for an ever diminishing community of people who are actually interested in the sound, not the packaging. You have a tremendous advantage over me, though, because you are British and make it in Britain - UK press will promote you by default, at my non-UK origin's expense. Chauvinism was always THE hallmark of British press, way above anyone else, even the French (and I did read French mags as well as the German ones).
 
Today, you get nowhere if you use traditional circuits, with (gasp!) coupling capacitors. I admit I don't like them and make do with a Servo whenever I can, but truth be told, they do not necessarily mean poor sound straight off. As any component in the direct signal path, they will have their own sonic imprint, that cannot be denied, but we both know that's not another way of saying it'll sound poor. Especially not these fast buck days, when they use both caps and servos and in both cases have poor sound.
 
Capisce? The press speaketh with a forked tongue because it suiteth them, it helpeth them get rich sooner.
Back to Top
tg [RIP] View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Location: Sydney
Status: Offline
Points: 1866 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote tg [RIP] Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Feb 2008 at 9:54pm
A very informative post, thank you Dejan.  
I for one, am always interested to see things put in their historical context when attempting to analyse the current "status quo".
Back to Top
dvv View Drop Down
Regular
Regular
Avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2008
Location: Belgrade, Serbi
Status: Offline
Points: 95 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dvv Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Feb 2008 at 11:15pm
Not at all, TG.
 
You say "status quo". In a sense, I agree, because there's a slew of small companies out there, living on the fringes of the known audio world, still trying very hard to get the sound right; unfortunately, they are not even a mass, let alone a critical mass needed to push the overall industry as a whole to move on.
 
The mass production industry is very much on the decline in terms of general audio quality, but is moving in leaps and bounds in terms of gimmicks, albeit some of them being useful. But, I find far too often that much touted stereo components, hailed in the mags as wonderful, are of poor sonic quality, and tragically, way below what that same compeny used to sell 20 years ago. Latest example: a sexy looking Pioneer integrated amp, rated at 50W/8 Ohms; poor show from what used to be a higher than average profile company, in my view. Sexy looking low Fi for mid Fi prices - but it has a back lit LCD screen ... in environment friendly green colour.
 
Digital amps are a good example. In theory, they should be next to perfect, in theory, the switching times of the output MOSFETs are way over what we need - in real life, you hear a hell of a lot of switching distortion along with your music. Great bass and then the sound deteriorates as you move up the spectrum. God forbid you should connect it to an oscilloscope - the pornography you'd see you wouldn't believe, not just XXX, but X to the power of X, well within the audible spectrum, as low as 5 kHz. At 20 kHz, it's Hiroshima time!
 
So, in practice, we still have some years before it manages to realize its full potential, because we obviously and in spite of theory need much faster MOSFETs than we have now, their impressive specs notwithstanding.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.070 seconds.