Thought I'd invite some comments about why cheap hi-fi system can sound so much better than more expensive systems.

I have heard the basic 3.5,92,90 and credo system sound surprisingly good (better than my CDS,102,180 and SBL system).
I have nearly always been amazed by the music making qualities of the CDX and SBL's. However the CDX in my system was alarmingly poor (too bright,digital edgey and distracting).

At last years hi-fi show in Chester the CDX,102,180 and credo system definately sounded better than the much more expensive CDX,82+hi-cap,250 and SBL system at the same show(both systems were on QS stands).

Why is this ?
Years ago a friend told me he'd been to some hi-fi shows and he always preferred the Linn sound as Naim wasn't as involving.
I assumed we must have different conceptions of what is enjoyable involving music as I'd been stunned by several Naim systems.

Eventually we both attended a Naim evening. The first system was a 3.5,92,90 and credo's and we couldn't stop laughing. The sound hit the spot. It sounded much better than both our more expensive systems. The later dems of the CDX and SBL's were even more magical. My friend commented that he'd never heard Naim sound anywhere near this good at any previous hi-fi shows.

If one doesn't attend several shows and dems one may not be aware how good even a basic Naim system can sound. Even some dealers listening room don't produce the optimal sound.

Why is this? Is expensive hi-fi so temperamental that stands, electricity supplies, room acoustics, room humidity and temperature etc have such a big effect.

or is system synergy the most important factor. i.e a system only sounds as good as it's weakest link with the supports being part of that link?

It could be the power, room, music, recording, stands, your emotional state, etc., etc., etc. In the end, if a 3.5/92/90 sounds better than a CDS/102/180, there are probably a bunch of things going wrong with the better system. There's really no mystery to it.

BTW, I don't really believe in system synergy, per se. I certainly now that Naim pre-amps and power-amps are designed to work together, and their speaker cable is designed to go with the power-amps. Beyond that, I don't think any particular models work better with certain models than with others. Catch you later!

-=> Mike Hanson <=-

Smilies do not a forum make.

Funny - several days ago a dealer here suggested that 3 nap-500 are better then one - now you may suggest that a 90 is better then a Nap-500....

Two things -
1. The most expensive system I'd listened to made by Naim was a Cds, Nac 52 I don't remember the power and SBL's. I think it is a great system and I think it is a better system then a Theta/Mark Levinson/Wilson I'd heard altough the second is several times more expensive of the first.

2. Several years ago there was a stereo show in Israel. Naim room was based on a Cds, NAIT3 !!!! and IBLS, Linn room was based on an expensive active system much more expensive then Naim system at the show. There is no doubt (in my mind....) that Naim is far better then Linn (unless in the last years Naim forgot how to manufacture stereo equipment and Linn went on with giant steps).

Arie

1.- your mood (yes... don´t laugh) just look around at the same place (your home for ex.) under different mood situations.. you´ll be surprised!

2.- AC stability.- some systems (naim included I am sure) are very sensitive to AC quality.

3.- Room setup.- Move your listeniong chair 1mt back and 1 mt left (if room allows it), leave other variables fixed.

Bladesman,

Yes, I was at last years Chester show too. I agree, the CDX/102/180/Credo system that was setup by the MusicWorks people was pretty good. In fact I commented on the Forum at the time that it was probably the highlight of the show. I think I also said then that it was sounding better than my (at the time) CDX/XPS/82/250/SBL system - and their system was in a crappy hotel room.

How did they do it ? I don't know, but clearly that combination of Quadraspire stands and MusicWorks blocks and leads must have helped because I had a similar dem at Audio Council in Oldham (QS Stands/MW Leads) and they too were getting a fantastic result with the CDX. So at least there is some consistency there.

I think a lot of it is down to attention to detail. Stands, mains issues, cable-routing, etc. Its the sort of thing a really clued-up dealer can sort out if you are fortunate enough to have one.

Allan

I have found two factor to be important:

The quality of the power. I put in a dedicated power line and I now realize how sesitive the Naim gear is.

I also believe in system balance. If you have one component that much better than the rest you can expose weaknesses in the sytem.

For example I have compared a CDSII to the CDX/XPS in my 82,super,135's and SBLs and in my friends YBA DT, 802B&W's. The result of the comparisons give you VERY different impression on the differences between the players. I also compared the differences on my system before and after I put in a dedicated power line. The diffences were again very different.

I have never heard a 52 but I have been told by dealers to make sure I have a dedicated line in and warned me that the 52 might push me to needing the smoothness of a CDSII.

Cheaper systems can sound better because they have a lower bandwidth. This makes them less susceptible to room and mains problems. A top-flight, wide-bandwidth system take some effort to sort these problems.

cheers, Martin

P.S. If you're getting bright/edgy sound from a CDX it suggests an earth fault (more than one earthed source connected).

[This message was edited by Martin Payne on TUESDAY 31 October 2000 at 01:41.]

I too have been surprised when I have heard CD3/92/90 or equiv systems sound excellent, I think this is becasue the components are less critical to placement, emf, etc and if you've got the set up basics right they can sound good.

Whereas bigger systems need a bit more TLC to sound superb.

cheers

Dev