?is the 180 engineered a little lower on the power supply stakes than the larger capped 160 was to make a bigger difference?--or are the 180 (x4) weeny 'caplets' just as good as the bigger 160(x4) /current 140 (x2) ones?

I'm sure the 180 sounds better than a 160 but is this due to better output transistors/transformers
that Naim use now on all their amps.

The point of this discourse??
Well would my 160 sound even better if the caps had been replaced by 110/140 size ones than these.
Don't get me wrong it sounds better now than when it left with dried out caps --I sound ungrateful don't I!

It may not have the largest caps in the world but it has a great personality!
I also have extra storage space at that the back of the case now--I have a small London flat!

Cheers Richard

Richard, although you state that the 180 is obviously better, I would not agree. Having heard the 180, which I do not find that impressive at the price - and the 250, which has the warmer sound usually attributed to the regulated power supply, it takes the latter to make a difference.

Even then, the difference is not so huge as would be imagined. I know that the 160/180/250 dem certainly made a source first nazi of me! I do plan to go to 135s, but only because I have been offered them by a friend who plans to do the NAP500 thing! Ideologically... such a demo is a real wake up call.

Ben

Have you ever seen photos of the inside of a NAP500's power supply ? Those caps are tiny !, much smaller than the ones in my 250.

With this in mind, the total combined power supplies of a pair (or four, or six !) of NAP135's put together makes the NAP500's power supply look puny.

But which one SOUNDS better ?

Allan

quote:

---

I recently had my 160 serviced by those helpful chappies at Naim.--a recap and oil change.
The 160 used 4 of the same large caps that are in the 110/140/snaps--10,000uF I think!
Great chunky purifying cylinders of delight---4 of them attached to the back panel.
The replacements are pocket torch battery size still 10,000uF but about the same size(not quality) as those in my £150 Rotel amp.

---

The smaller black capacitors (10,000 uF/40 V) are made by BHC Aerovox in a variety of sizes and form factors, and are pretty common thoughout the industry. The large light-blue capacitors (STC) were, by the way, never used in the NAP 140, which always used the smaller form-factor capacitors.

quote:

---

Now if size isn't everything (quality not quantity)why does the highcap and the 250/135 use 2x gargantuan family sized beer can caps.

---

Ahh, but rating is--the big black capacitors are rated at 63V, hence the larger size. (They also explode better when put in with the wrong polarity--one of those scents I'd rather forget.)

quote:

---

There is a probably untrue rumour that the 160 was discontinued and not replaced becuase it sounded too close to the mid 80's 250 and was affecting more profitable 250 sales.

---

No, certain people stopped making two-way loudspeakers with silly loads! (Who knows, it was before my time...)

quote:

---

?is the 180 engineered a little lower on the power supply stakes than the larger capped 160 was to make a bigger difference?--or are the 180 (x4) weeny 'caplets' just as good as the bigger 160(x4) /current 140 (x2) ones?

---

The current capacitors are just as good, possibly better, and certainly last...we have updated some customers' NAP 160s with the NAP 180 power supply module.

Note that both the NAP 160 and NAP 180 used the current (at the time) HICAP transformer; the 160 used down-rated output transistors (NA 002s) while the 180 uses 001s.

quote:

---

Well would my 160 sound even better if the caps had been replaced by 110 size ones than these.

---

Not possible, as the larger size is unavailable; would certainly make drop-in replacement easier. Many opt for the 180 update instead.

Dave Dever, NANA

[This message was edited by David Dever, NANA on FRIDAY 19 January 2001 at 22:30.]

I run a 180/82/hi-cap/cds/xps/lp12 set up. What would I hear or not hear to tell me to re-cap?
Fred

Ben--I've never done a 180/160 demo---but I can imagine the 180 may be slighty sharper--similar to a chrome bumper v new 250 demo i did.I went for the new one ----but its was close and the old one did some things better and was just as satisfying musically.
My very recent current set up is a unusual 160(bass) 250(treble) Naxo 2-4 setup--swapping the amps around bass--->treble make some difference(it sounds better through my angst causing SBL's(I posted about these recently--more to follow) with the 250 doing the treble(? becuase the treble has more frequency width than the bass unit)
But the difference isn't big enough to put off my 82 upgrade by swapping to 2x 250's I think.

I went active to try and defibrillate my sullen sbl's--another near future post I think

Cheers Richar

Lotus released a sports car in the 80's that was v.good (the FWD ELAN) but it crashed and burned sales wise as its bonnet was just too short?Any lessons to learn there?
I still think those shoe horned caps on a hicap look much better than a future aerovox(?airfix) replacement.
Ferrari used to put a fake oil filter on its V12 to make the end of the engines look better --so I'm not alone.(By the way I own 4 Minis--small is beautiful-crap for getting sbl's in though)

Richard
First a post on fuses now cap size--I need a long holiday I think.Tell me about the rabbits.

Any other ideas on how to utilise the new space in my 160?

can anyone answer fred's question? i think it's just a matter of calendar fred, 8 years + from date of manucture. i suppose if you listen to only your system day to day, your hearing would attune to the deterioration along with the system and not really notice it(?).

what i'd like to know is how different are the effects of shriveled caps on different units, eg. power, power supplies, pre amps, which ones are more crucial to recap?

(anyway, first cup of coffee here)

shahreza

You're right here, the component industry is constantly striving (particularly in Surface Mount) to make smaller and smaller components, fuelled by the telecomms consumer demand for smaller devices.

This is just one of the many problems I have to contend with on a daily basis, as existing components are withdrawn and smaller replacements offered (that do not fit existing PCB's).

The cost to smaller businesses with low volumes of these changes is huge (redesign work etc.).

I wonder if this is one of the reasons Naim have not embarced SM technology, except for where it was necessary.

Added to this there are severe components shortages in semiconductors and especially tantalum capacitors - I wonder how much this has affected Naim, they must use thousands of them!

Now the smell of a burnt out tant - that's really memorable Dave!

Andy.

Andrew L. Weekes
alweekes@audiophile.com

Cheers
Richard