Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 7, 2018 8:04:12 GMT
Again, I figured this icon deserved its own thread. I guess I will start with my own experiences,
What can I say? I was around at the time of the Nait 1 working in a shop which sold them. The Audiolab and Cyris 2 sold way better. It was regarded as a curiosity and far too underpowered to be a serious product.
The only people who bought them were those on an upgrade path following the "source first" principle. They would get an LP12 with say, an Ittok and K9, plus a Nait and either Index or Kans. Some never moved up, because this was a satisfying combo, but those who did, usually upgraded the cart and amp first. I left just after the 2 was released. It hadn't made it to our shop but staff who had played with it said it was more mainstream but Slightky inferior to the mk1.
A few years later I picked up a Nait 3 expecting something similar to the 1. What I found wasn't fit to bear the name IMO. It was veiled, weak and un-musical. I've had a couple of others over the years and they too were crap.
I did own a used Mk1 in a 2nd system with an LP12/Ekos and a pair of kans. that was a great little amp, but better in short bursts as it was just a bit too enthusiastic for longer listening.
|
|
|
|
Post by antonio on May 7, 2018 11:10:35 GMT
Sorry Westie, I don`t know what all the fuss is about the Nait. I had a Claymore amp and took it with me when I went to upgrade, and heard the Nait, Exposure and Naim 62/140. I certainly would not have changed to a Nait and purchased the 62/140, later upgrading with a HiCap. My speakers at the time were Epos mk1`s and these really came into there own when I upgraded to 135`s.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 7, 2018 14:19:45 GMT
Sorry Westie, I don`t know what all the fuss is about the Nait. I had a Claymore amp and took it with me when I went to upgrade, and heard the Nait, Exposure and Naim 62/140. I certainly would not have changed to a Nait and purchased the 62/140, later upgrading with a HiCap. My speakers at the time were Epos mk1`s and these really came into there own when I upgraded to 135`s. You see so many people today saying a Nait is better than something like a 62/140 and I can't understand where they are coming from. Thousands of people back in the day heard that comparison and felt the pre/powers were worth the extra to upgrade. I never tried a Nait with ES14s although I had both. I can't imagine it getting anywhere even close to a Naim or Exposure pre/power with them though. Great speakers when driven properly and given a great source though. I kept my first pair about 3 years which is an eternity for me! Edit: just wanted to add that ES14s are also beautiful to behold. I love the lines, proportion and finish, |
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 8, 2018 14:20:07 GMT
Watch out - smart arse mode engaged...
For me in the shop -
The Nait may be better than a non-serviced 62/140, but that's not saying much for either in all honesty when you take the blinkers off and look elsewere as said above. The mk1 was a charming soft-clipper which could drive my Isobariks without melting, but the sound squashed up cosily all the time and didn't really expand at all and the low bass was deliberately curtailed on the vinyl input. The mk2 was more like a 'proper' CB Naim but lacked the same charm despite the slightly increased power I thought, and yes, a 62/140 was a bit less gracious and more 'pointed' in it's delivery (in the shop as well as at Naim themselves). The Nait 3 was awful, but when modified to separate the pre and power sections (Naim half-heartedly made a kit for the purpose) and a Flat Cap was added, it was rather better and then identical to the 92-FlatCap-90 (Naim would rather you spent more money on the twin/triple boxes than modify the internally identical boards in a Nait 3).
The Nait 5 we had, needed two weeks of 24/7 to lose it's harshness, but it was a far better amp I recall.
The last Nait's I heard were several years ago. The mids were lovely but the mid bass could thump a bit and hf was grainy and 'grey' which seems a issue with current models too across the range. Hard clippers to a man, these things hurt if pushed on a singer 'singing out.'
ES14's were superb and Robin had plans for the tweeter too, which is such a shame he sold out when he did, as he was diverted at M-S and had nowt to do with the floor standing and subsequent models.
Umm - Forgive me here, but NVA's with ES14's should be a match in heaven!!! I maintain the bargain priced pre and power (inc cables) would see off any early Nait and I mention this as a personal modern reference point, accepting there's no phono stage.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 8, 2018 17:25:06 GMT
Watch out - smart arse mode engaged... For me in the shop - The Nait may be better than a non-serviced 62/140, but that's not saying much for either in all honesty when you take the blinkers off and look elsewere as said above. The mk1 was a charming soft-clipper which could drive my Isobariks without melting, but the sound squashed up cosily all the time and didn't really expand at all and the low bass was deliberately curtailed on the vinyl input. The mk2 was more like a 'proper' CB Naim but lacked the same charm despite the slightly increased power I thought, and yes, a 62/140 was a bit less gracious and more 'pointed' in it's delivery (in the shop as well as at Naim themselves). The Nait 3 was awful, but when modified to separate the pre and power sections (Naim half-heartedly made a kit for the purpose) and a Flat Cap was added, it was rather better and then identical to the 92-FlatCap-90 (Naim would rather you spent more money on the twin/triple boxes than modify the internally identical boards in a Nait 3). The Nait 5 we had, needed two weeks of 24/7 to lose it's harshness, but it was a far better amp I recall. The last Nait's I heard were several years ago. The mids were lovely but the mid bass could thump a bit and hf was grainy and 'grey' which seems a issue with current models too across the range. Hard clippers to a man, these things hurt if pushed on a singer 'singing out.' ES14's were superb and Robin had plans for the tweeter too, which is such a shame he sold out when he did, as he was diverted at M-S and had nowt to do with the floor standing and subsequent models. Umm - Forgive me here, but NVA's with ES14's should be a match in heaven!!! I maintain the bargain priced pre and power (inc cables) would see off any early Nait and I mention this as a personal modern reference point, accepting there's no phono stage. I had ES14s with early NVA and it was a good combo, I preferred the Exposure 7 and 8 myself though. Still, that was old NVA. I know the circuit is meant to be identical but the sound of the new kit is just simply better. I have no idea if it's the plastic case, lack of screws, different wiring or different boards, but something has improved markedly. Again. I'm only talking about past models, but the phono stage in my old NVA preamp wasn't that great, especially on MC. The Exposure amps really showed it a clean pair of heels in that respect. I found the NVAs of the day to love Kans though. |
|
|
|
Post by pauld on May 10, 2018 20:15:02 GMT
I am afraid I am no fan of Naim amplification, and particularly dislike the Nait, which I think sounds thin and unpleasant.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 10, 2018 20:53:15 GMT
Is that the original Nait or a later one Paul? I would really like to pick up a Nait 1 at a decent price, just for nostalgia. But them I'd need some Kans again!
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 10, 2018 20:56:08 GMT
I don't know, but the current NVA circuit may be slightly different - it's certainly differently and more symmetrically laid out I think. I've no idea how the phono stages have evolved and haven't made any for a couple of years now. I do use a Phono 2 with single supply and like what it brings to the musical proceedings even with my vinyl sources.
Back in the CB era, the best Naims were the Nait and 135's and in the Olive era, I preferred the 180. Today, who knows as they all seem to drift badly and require servicing and re-setting up.
Current Naims have revised layouts, surface mount components it appears and I have a sneaky suspicion that the amp circuit caps reported to be 'backwards' have been changed...
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 10, 2018 21:18:44 GMT
You may know more, Dave, but I always just thought the 135s were a 250 in 2 separate cases and with separate transformers. Then I read that John Farlowe had a hand in the original 135 circuit design, but saw nothing to validate this,
Was the 135 just a mono 250 or a different amp? It's something that I've always wanted to know for sure. The JF mention may just have been someone misinformed, but it stuck with me, given my liking for his amps.
|
|
|
|
Post by antonio on May 11, 2018 4:36:01 GMT
I have never heard that Westie, all I can say, 135's were must haves when dem'ed against a 250. Let's hope dsjr can shed some light on your query.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 11, 2018 9:07:16 GMT
When I visited Naim in the mid 80's, I was shown a chap on a workbench selecting input transistors for 135 boards, as distortions here due to mis-matching would be magnified up through to the output stage (as happened badly in the Linn Lk280 and Intek design I remember). The 135's always 'sounded' better even at low volumes, to a typical 250, which in its turn made a 160 and 140 sound crude and scratchy when compared directly.
Now, I can't say with the Olive models whether Naim took more care in terms of component selection on all of them, but *when new,* I believe the Olive models weren't 'quite' as relentless straight from the box. I loved the NAP180 for example - a freezing cold demo example sounding rather less hard and 'tense' as our demo 250 for example (our 250 went back for 'adjustment' and came back the better for it), but apparently they age badly just as the others do...
The amps I have a bit to do with have provision on their single ended? input stage to balance up the supply lines with current mirrors, so half the input side transistors don't actually carry signal through to the driver stage I believe. I don't know enough and it's not my place or expertise to try to comment (bullshit?) further, but the idea as I understand it is to minimise distortion here and help the input stage to set itself up better right from 'cold.' They don't seem to 'drift off' over the years either. Not sure the current Naim's go off the same either, in fairness. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 11, 2018 14:43:24 GMT
Oops my post seems to have gone awol. I was just saying I liked the 180 too and also found olive range to compare favourably ith CB. The 140 had newer transistors too which seemed to help.
|
|
|
|
Post by pauld on May 11, 2018 14:55:30 GMT
I have heard both the Nait 1 and 2 and did t like either, although the Nait 1 would be easier to live with.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 11, 2018 15:34:08 GMT
I have heard both the Nait 1 and 2 and did t like either, although the Nait 1 would be easier to live with. Good job you didn't hear the 3 then! Now that was a stinker. |
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 11, 2018 16:53:19 GMT
The 90 power amp was never any good and we did have some CB ones I recall. They didn't sell particularly well as everyone drove them too hard and they fell apart when over-driven.
Regarding the 'Olive' 140, I think they changed slightly (output devices or just mains sensitivity?) from 1994 to 1998. I changed jobs in '98 and in the new dem room in a different town, the 140 there was fine. despite this, we tended to sell more 180's upwards with 82 preamps over the smaller hobbled ones. I thought the 82 sounded more like a 52 than it did any of the smaller ones and the 72 replacement (122?) was absolutely awful in terms of a 'mechanical' sound with no air at all. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 12, 2018 12:15:44 GMT
I have never heard that Westie, all I can say, 135's were must haves when dem'ed against a 250. Let's hope dsjr can shed some light on your query. I know JF did some freelance work, and I did see it twice by different people. I'd love to know but it's probably too long ago to get the full story. |
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 12, 2018 12:57:21 GMT
JF - do you mean JV?
The one thing JV got right was in beefing up the power supplies to enable easier drive of an often compressed musical signal in the real-world speaker crossovers. I think many speakers in the early 70's were eight to fifteen ohm impedances although this was changing and most amps back then fell apart or blew up into a 4 ohm load. Naims were one brand able to safely drive the 3 - 4 ohm load of Isobariks for example*
In the late 70's, we never took it on sadly, but we had a Quattre/QMI Gain cell power amp to try. 200WPC at 8 ohms, 400WPC at 4 ohms and 800W apparently into 2 ohms. I've NEVER heard early passive Isobariks come to life the way they did with this amp, EVER!!!! KEF 105's and B&W 801's (the latter as used in countless mastering suites worldwide for years) also showed dynamics missing from normal domestic amps. Today, most QMI's have self destructed I gather as they were another one strung out to the edge...
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 12, 2018 13:06:02 GMT
JF - do you mean JV? The one thing JV got right was in beefing up the power supplies to enable easier drive of an often compressed musical signal in the real-world speaker crossovers. I think many speakers in the early 70's were eight to fifteen ohm impedances although this was changing and most amps back then fell apart or blew up into a 4 ohm load. Naims were one brand able to safely drive the 3 - 4 ohm load of Isobariks for example* In the late 70's, we never took it on sadly, but we had a Quattre/QMI Gain cell power amp to try. 200WPC at 8 ohms, 400WPC at 4 ohms and 800W apparently into 2 ohms. I've NEVER heard early passive Isobariks come to life the way they did with this amp, EVER!!!! KEF 105's and B&W 801's (the latter as used in countless mastering suites worldwide for years) also showed dynamics missing from normal domestic amps. Today, most QMI's have self destructed I gather as they were another one strung out to the edge... Nope, there was a mention yonks ago that The 135 design owed much to John Farlowe. I think it was claimed that it was his circuit design. The thing is, the boards look identical to the 250, so I can't see how that could be. Whether there was any grain of truth in his involvement, I don't know. He did do freelance stuff before and I believe during the early exposure years. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2018 7:39:26 GMT
I had a nait3 for a short while with internal 323mc phono boards. At the time i did not know any better. Quickly changed it to 72 and 140, then got another 140 and turned the power amps into mono blocs. Avondale upgrades came along after that and showed me the way to nva.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 20, 2018 9:52:58 GMT
The 135's used the same boards as a 250 and this was the old RCA PA amp cum later Sinclair kit amp circuit minus output inductor I gather. I was shown on the bench at Naim in around 1986, the input transistors were matched for the 135 boards specifically. Apart from that, there were 'tubular' heatsinks and a very noisy variable speed temp controlled fan which became an issue when the boards drifted off spec and started thermally going unstable as many did after a few years. You'd get one of a pair running too warm so the fan on its own would come on with a loud abrasive sssshhhhhh noise. This could be a problem in a six-pack system when at random, one or two of a set would start up, even when idling.
I'm not sure if the post '2000 cosmetic' models drift off the same way as all the previous ones do and did. A lot of work has gone on in layout changes and also surface mount components rear their ugly head too now. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2018 10:47:10 GMT
Its the regulator boards that go off first i believe. A couple of caps being the culprits. Many prefer the unregulated 180 to the regulated 250 and 135 I believe the 180 uses a 500va toroid with twin centre tapped secondary windings at 27.5-0-27.5V. The 250 and 135 have toroids with higher secondary voltages to allow for the regulator drop out. They really missed a trick by not regulating the front end only.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 20, 2018 13:48:03 GMT
I have it on good authority that when the RCA circuit was updated sometime in the 60's, two coupling caps should have been reversed and weren't, meaning that the revised circuit for newer transistors left them with a small reverse-bias that would cause ageing and value alteration. I can't prove this except to offer the circuit's drifting all over the place as it aged as some form of evidence - you won't get anything like that in an NVA and the NVA doesn't need offset-trimmers and suchlike as the circuit stabilises itself I was told by the proud designer...
Naim also use tants everywhere and I believe this I what you refer to Stu. Tantalums in the past were renowned for iffy service lives and my crown preamps have four in them which should be replaced as a matter of course and sound better for it, even with electrolytics in place of them, but I digress - sorry... Te other thing with Naims is their use of supply caps run at or near the limit, which apparently does shorten their service life, especially when run 24/7 as we were told to do - bloody expensive time bombs the lot of it!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2018 14:22:37 GMT
Running the psu caps at near their limits was probably done on purpose to get more servicing work in. Slurp slurp.
My amps have been running with no cases. Caps should last bloody ages
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 20, 2018 15:58:30 GMT
In defence of their smaller cased amps, the physical size of the available supply caps may have counted against them, as higher voltage ones may have been too big! I'm uing this as an excuse as to how the supply cap in a 1978 vintage Quad 405 mk1 only lasted eleven years before leaking 'mountains' on their tops and this from an amp not run heavily or 'hotly' either. I had another exactly the same and the 303 before this was noted for it!
Early bolt-up Naims definitely suffered too and I've seen 120's, 160's and early 250's with leaking and even blown supply caps.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2018 16:25:47 GMT
Is the 180 a good sounding amp?
S.
|
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 20, 2018 17:25:14 GMT
It was when new I thought - better than our six month old dem 250!!!!
It ages the same or even worse though and goes harsh by all accounts...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2018 17:27:21 GMT
So, does it take 10 years to get harsh??
S.
|
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 20, 2018 18:21:20 GMT
Is the 180 a good sounding amp? S. Nice-ish amp but not on the same planet as the 250 for me. But you know Dave and I have different tastes, |
|
|
|
Post by dsjr on May 20, 2018 19:53:13 GMT
The only difference I knew of was the 250 has a regulated supply. I *think* the transformer size was the same in the 180 but maybe not in the previous 160.
All I can say is that straight out of a freezing car, the rep's stone cold 180 sounded so much more musical than our 24/7 250 which wa six months old. So much better was the 180, the dem 250 was sent back to be 're-adjusted.' It came back sounding much better and then sounded tauter than the 180. This effin' drifting off spec though was an issue as I said before especially with people owning active setups!
A customer inclined to thrash his stuff had a 250 that kept overheating and shutting down (at least the big Naim's had overheat protection). He decided to bi-amp to help share the load and a conversation with Naim had them agreeing with him that the 'looser' supplies in a couple of 180's would suit him better (remember, the 250 and 135's had regulator boards which also run hot if pushed). He changed his 250 for two 180's and he was delighted!
Shane, I can't give the degradation in hours' use, as different people have different sources (the usual Linn-based vinyl causes more problems due to bass bloat and compression in general) and the siting and speakers are very different. Sara's could overheat a 250 in under an hour playing the stuff we did at high volumes. A year of that will cause the amp to drift off. A pair of 135's used only at weekends took a few years to go off - one running hot and setting its fan going after half an hour at first and then five minutes at the end before they went to Salisbury for tweaking. A 250 playing string quartets into BC1's say, would last rather longer as it wasn't being stressed I reckon. |
|
Bigman80
Grandmaster
The HiFi Bear/Audioaddicts/Bigbottle Owner
Posts: 16,398
|
Post by Bigman80 on May 20, 2018 23:38:48 GMT
Regulation is something I don't really understand, but it does interest me.
My first encounter was when I moved from a 160 to a 250. They are essentially regulated and unregulated. Versions of the same amp. The 160 had itself been an "upgrade" from a 140. Whilst it was a weightier sound, it lost some of the urgency of its predecessor and was more of a sideways step to me. The 250 just brought a huge extra helping of grip, drive and drama. I was very impressed and figured regulation was a good thing.
I'm also a big Farlowe era Exposure fan and inevitably climbed that ladder until my Dual IV was replaced by the Dual IV Regulated. It's an accepted view on forums that the Dual IV Regulated is the amp to have, yet I found it too controlled and just not as free and exciting as the unregulated version. Both great amps but my Exposure experience was almost the opposite of my Naim one. I guess regulation is not always predicable in its effects upon different circuits.
|
|
