But ...

Although the performance difference between entry level and top flight is staggering (in the right environmental conditions), the price difference is positively frightening - a CDS2/52/500/DBL active system being 20 times the price of CD5/Nait/Intros. I'm not sure it is 20 times better in musical terms.

Clearly the relationship between price and performance is not linear, but exponential. Hence, for some, the ever present diminishing returns arguments. However, some pieces of kit are seen as exceedingly good value even at their high prices e.g. CDSII, but others such as the 102 aren't seen to improve much on their "lesser" sibling (read 72 based on the ramblings of this forum) despite costing more money.

If there was such a exponential curve for current products at their new prices, which items would you consider to be above (bargain) or below (pricey) par for their price?

James

Edited cos I can't upload an image larger than 30Kb. And I thought ether-based real estate was cheap

[This message was edited by James Jong on THURSDAY 02 November 2000 at 00:04.]

After that the 52 and the CDS 2. Both not cheap, but both adding a magic touch that defies words. But the 03 is special as it is the only entry level naim product that I didn't want to upgrade within a week of owning it and it still gets 50:50 play time versus the CDS 2.

It makes you wonder how good the 01 is.

Daveà

Try the 01, but you'll end up buying it.

I never thought a tuner could sound this convincingly good...

Regards

Philip Pang

naimniac for life

quote:

---

If there was such a exponential curve for current products at their new prices, which items would you consider to be above (bargain) or below (pricey) par for their price?

---

Years back to when I first auditioned Naim with a view to buying, I found that the 62 / Hicap / 140 was the cheapest amp that I liked. I bought the 62 / 140, and added the Hicap as soon as I could afford one. The cheaper 62 / 90 combo was too compromised on drive, detail, and grip for me (I preferred my Onix!). I ran the 62 / Hicap / 140 with a Xerxes at the front, and Kan IIs at the back for over ten years without feeling any need to upgrade. This was a fabulous system, one of the most balanced and enjoyable I have heard.

The optimal amp of that day was the 32-5 / Hicap / 250, which was then outside my price range. It is still one of my favourite amplifiers regardless of cost, give it a good source and it just works in a fundamentally musical way - it draws attention to what I consider to be important, and steers away from what I consider not to be. This amp combo is IMHO one of today's best second hand hi-fi bargains.

My feeling with the current Naim range, when considered as a new purchase, is that the optimal price / performance ratio is probably the 82 / Hicap / 180 combo, assuming that relatively efficient speakers are chosen. In a similar way to the older amps above, I consider this one good enough, and balanced enough to live with for years without upgrading. This to me is the goal. The next combo up the ladder for me would be the 52/SC/250 - a fabulous amp that is totally balanced to my ears.

At the lower end, I haven't had sufficient exposure to the 112 / 150 to form an opinion, and it is also in a very competitive price band. Its weird, but I find the choices of really expensive gear far easier to make than cheaper stuff - I hate most expensive hi-fi! Where as there seems to be quite a few good tuneful budget to mid priced amps around.

As for CD players and speakers, I never liked the 3.5, I like the CDX, and I like the CDS2, though consider it far to expensive - I don't know enough about the CD5 to comment. I've never heard Intros, don’t like Credos (so far), like SBLs, don't like NBLs (so far), and like DBLs. I reckon SBLs are a great second hand buy. I've never heard a Naim tuner.

Tony.

quote:

---

There is no denying that the best Naim is also the most expensive Naim. In the wider circle of the audio market, we know more expensive doesn't necessarily mean better.

---

I don't think I have ever heard any manufacturer's more expensive kit out-performed by its less expensive kit - except for naim when I went to one of their music evenings to hear NBLs, which sounded very poor compared to practically anything.

quote:

---

Although the performance difference between entry level and top flight is staggering (in the right environmental conditions), the price difference is positively frightening - a CDS2/52/500/DBL active system being 20 times the price of CD5/Nait/Intros. I'm not sure it is 20 times better in musical terms.

---

This is at the heart of diminishing returns and only the listener can decide. From what I have heard of the naim hierarchy, and other manufacturers, a 20x increase in price never equals a 20 fold increase in performance.

But there are other considerations e.g. if you want the best reproduction of music you can afford, then you wil spend what you can to achieve that; if you are rich enough, you might buy the most expensive simply because you can.

cheers

Nigel

quote:

---

This is at the heart of diminishing returns and only the listener can decide. From what I have heard of the naim hierarchy, and other manufacturers, a 20x increase in price never equals a 20 fold increase in performance.

---

To me there is much more to this than simply throwing ever more expensive products into a system, there are certain situations where a particular combination is far greater than the sum of its parts. The classic flat earth LP12 / 32-5 / Hicap / 250 / Kan system is a spectacular example of this, it sounds far better than it has any right to. This synergy is what I want when choosing a system.

I have heard many systems (including Naim) that do some things spectacularly well, though lack any real synergy or coherence, and therefore send their owners back into the upgrade spiral, because at some fundamental level they simply do not work.

For me balance is the key, a simple system can with the right synergy often be far more enjoyable than a really expensive one. I suspect the current trend here for downgrading reflects this. There are also far more complex set up issues with ultra high end systems - the old adage "the further you open the window, the more crap flies in…" holds many truths.

Tony.

Gradually - being a lover of music - I bought better bits of hi-fi (nothing serious) and the one day decided to hear some big stuff.

I think the main reason I'm on the upgrade ladder is that to really appreciate the ultra-expensive high end things, you have to gradually attune your ear and audio 'pallete' to the sound. I guess if you are a good musician you've got a head start hear (fraudian slip) - but good hi-fi is different from just good sound - as the recording / redproduction sequence does colour basic sound. So you listen to a couple of sources - buy the cheaper one on a bang-for-buck basis - but by listening to it over a period of time, it's quality makes you able appreciate the other one more as you 'get your ear in' - so you go for the more expensive one ... and so on.

Having thought about this some, I'm going to buy a CDSII next. Then a 52/supercap ... etc as in the end it will be less cost and more rewarding just to go for the top stuff. Clearly this would have been a much cheaper option pre-NAP500's, and of course there will be new stuff - and one day I might get seduced away from Naim ... etc - but, hey - It's MY rationalisation and I'm happy with it.

Jonathan

I won't argue that Naim's top gear is better than their cheaper stablemates. What I find more interesting is if Naim is the best possible purchase in the different price ranges that are covered with the current line of products.

I'm not so sure about this being the case with the high-end Naim gear but this is probably as a Dutch verb says; "Peeing against the church"...

Richard.

quote:

---

What I find more interesting is if Naim is the best possible purchase in the different price ranges that are covered with the current line of products.

I'm not so sure about this being the case with the high-end Naim gear but this is probably as a Dutch verb says; "Peeing against the church"...

---

Funny, to me it’s the other way round. I think Naim are the only high end choice, at least in electronics - I can't even think of any competition. They do IMHO have serious competition in the low to mid-fi sector from both Densen and Exposure electronics, and Neat and Royd speakers.

Tony.

quote:

---

My feeling with the current Naim range, when considered as a new purchase, is that the optimal price / performance ratio is probably the 82 / Hicap / 180 combo

---

Damn, and I got rid of my 180 for a 250 and soon I'll be replacing that with 135s. At least I'm doing it the Lonorgan way ... used, but Tony has credibility so it's OK.

James

P/S: wooooooo hoooooooo my 100th post !!!

The 52 trounces the 82 (which I finally had the opportunity to check out recently as I went from 102 to 52) and the CDS 2 trounces the CDX/XPS which sounds like an artifact of the bronze age in comparisson. The CDX/XPS seems to have no mid range. It is rather strange. Once I flipped the CDS 2 into place it was like a revolution.

I expect the 01 slam dunks the 03, although the 03 doesn't beg to be changed its so good as it is. Perhaps this one is like going from Yzerman to Gretzky.

dave

I think this question boils down to your perspective. There is no doubt that a 52 is better than an 82, but then it damn well better be given the price differential. Ditto the 82 to the 102, and the CDS2 to the CDX/XPS. In my opinion the new prices for gear (at least in the US) represent fairly well how good the gear is relative to the others.

Also, having seen war up close and personal debating the differences from an 82 to 52 or the 250 to 135 seems awfully trivial. In the grand scheme of things there is not much difference from a Nait to a 52/500.

Cheers,

Bob·

Using your logic then there wouldn't be much difference between a caveman beating a club against a bear skin drum and Bartok's Concerto for orchestra, such is the vast chasm between a nait and a 52/500.

I just don't see it. The nait is forward thin obnoxious, cuts out the majority of musical information to emphasize the leading edge of notes, and is just plain unlistenable in my books. I had a 92/90 for about a week before I realized I had to get rid of it.

The 52 is another story altogether. A glittering firmament of musical wonder.

But maybe I just need to poor ajax in my ears, then I'd get the point.

Davei

quote:

---

such is the vast chasm between a nait and a 52/500

---

The point I think we are all trying to make is that yes a full-house naim system is better than an entry level system but is it 20+ times better, that being the cost differential.

Only the listener can decide that for his/herself.

cheers

Nigel

I do agree with you on the question of whether the top of the line in any area is really as many times better than the entry level product as the price would indicate. What I am trying to say is that the final leap in Naim is a more cost effective upgrade than those that precede it. The jump from CDX (on a good support, of course) to a CDX/XPS is nowhere near as large as the jump from the CDX/XPS to the CDS2 and for about the same money. My fiance came over a few weeks after I got the XPS and I was trying to show her the difference on a few CDs and she said she heard a bit more weight but otherwise it was the same. Thus, she didn't take too much interest in the XPS. When I got the CDS 2 everything changed and she started to come over regularly with stacks of CDs that she wanted to hear on my system because she said they sounded so much better and finally understood why I have an expensive stereo and now fully supports my descision to by WB ACT 2s. I had the same experience with other "final steps"

Is Chateau Petrus 100 times better than run-of-the-mill Merlot? Is a ferrari 200 times better than a ten year old used honda accord? I certainly see your point. But MY point is that the final step in naim is one to an island of ultimate perfection and is thus the biggest on the upgrade path. All products beneath the top are compromized. Top products from yesteryear (CDS1) are not usually as compromized as second-best products today (CDX/XPS). This is what I think, at any rate.

That last step, it's a loo-loo!

dave

With statements like "there is little difference between a cave man....." you are in serious danger of taking the Snappy that Vuk currently holds for "most hyperbolic description>" I mean, yeah, there is a difference between a Nait and a 52/500, but in the grand scheme of life those differences pale into insignificance. Those differences grow in apparent size and importance as someone gets more and more into something, as you point out with your car analogy. My point was that the apparent degree of difference will vary based on someones interest level.

I should also point out that I am not trying to denigrate anyones system choice, merely to point out that what seems "huge" to us is in fact trivial or nonexistent to others.

Cheers,

Bob

quote:

---

Also, having seen war up close and personal debating the differences from an 82 to 52 or the 250 to 135 seems awfully trivial. In the grand scheme of things there is not much difference from a Nait to a 52/500.

---

I can’t agree more. Real world perspective needs to be held onto here. A Nait 1 or 2 (I haven’t ever heard a 3) gets most of the notes right, the timing almost right, and gives a half decent indication of the timbre – it lacks ultimate power and grip, and needs to be partnered with very sympathetic speakers.

A 52/135 (I don’t yet have enough experience of the 500 to comment) gets the pitch, timing and timbre a fair bit better – probably about 5-10% better, which in hi-fi terms is a hell of a lot. With a Nait I can tell it’s a definitely bass guitar not a synth, that the bass player is pretty good, and I strongly suspect I know what make and model of bass he is playing. The 52/135 simply fills in a few more gaps… the Nait gets the most important stuff right.

In my second hand world, the difference between a 52 / SC / 135 combo and a Nait 2 is about five thousand two hundred pounds. That’s a lot of cash to fill in some gaps.

Dave said:

quote:

---

I just don't see it. The nait is forward thin obnoxious, cuts out the majority of musical information to emphasize the leading edge of notes, and is just plain unlistenable in my books. I had a 92/90 for about a week before I realized I had to get rid of it.

---

Not how I see it, see above.

Tony.

my dealer is MOST impressed with the new slimline stuff.

This has to make it superb value. I'm sure he's looking forward to shifting a bucket-load of it.

The shape of things to come, I'm sure.

cheers, Martin

quote:

---

my dealer is MOST impressed with the new slimline stuff

---

This is what I'm somewhat afraid of. The new 5-series supposedly use 500-derived topology which differs from the classic Naim amps. Whilst there is no doubt the current 52/135s are very VERY good, it does make you wonder if the 'new' amps can do more than their stable counterparts for less money.

The performance hierarchy of the current range (barring the 500 which sits on the top end anyway for now) had been predictable because the designs from the humble NAIT to the 135s are similar. A change in design philosophy, and hence performance envelope, could mean entry level stuff seriously challenging the middle ground, for instance (but not proven) 112/150 sounding better than 102/180, and lower-powered 500 variants wiping the floor on which 135s are worshipped.

I guess the good news is that there'll be more used classic goodies coming onto the market from those fortunate enough to afford the latest and greatest.

James

quote:

---

The jump from CDX (on a good support, of course) to a CDX/XPS is nowhere near as large as the jump from the CDX/XPS to the CDS2 and for about the same money.

---

I think this illustrates my point about the listener's perspective precisely.

I have heard the CDX to CDX/XPS to CDS2 comparison(and in the UK the CDS2 is nowhere near "about the same money") in the, admittedly, less than perfect setting of a naim demo evening but even so I(and others) found the addition of the XPS was a far greater improvement than the CDX/XPS to CDS2 change.

Given sufficient funds I dare say I would buy the ultimate naim system but even then I would not claim it was value for money compared with the slimline series.

cheers

Nigel