Would a pair of olive 250s ( each driving its own channel) perform in a similar manner to a pair of 135s?
The internals if a 135 appear to be the same transformer driving just a single channel plus the fan. So how much difference can a pair of olive 250s be?
Surely then only half the output (ie one channel) of the NAP250 would be used? I very much doubt if you could run the amp like that in a stable condition for long.
You’d do far better to use the NAP250 as part exchange for a pair of NAP135s.
I should think they will probably be similar with the 135’s being a bit better than 250, a pair of 250 DR’s might even be better than a pair of 135’s.
I had a friend who had a 250 and we tried a pair of 135’s in his system which were definitely and indisputably better than his 250.
Better separation of instruments being the most noticeable attribute.
1 Like
I think the unused channel on each 250 would be fine. Redundant, but fine. The transformer just feeding the used channel.
Sorry, I misunderstood your question. Why wouldn’t you want to use a Snaxo crossover?
1 Like
No snaxo. Just use one side of a 250.
The reason for asking the initial question was that i have an olive 250 in my second system. The power amp in my main system is from MF. My dealer always tweaks me about using a naim power amp. As my main system is classic the obvious choice is a 300dr, but a pair of serviced 135s would be cheaper. But adding another olive 250 and swapping bith into my main system cheaper still.
The question was more about getting views from the forum.
Two Nap 250 is not as good as a pair of Nap 135´s but active 250´s easily outperform a pair of passive Nap 135´s,when I have tried.
1 Like
Fair enough, but he doesn’t have suitable speakers AFAIK.
1 Like
I found a single 500 non-DR much better than my 6-pack of 135’s. Also stopped blowing as many DBL tweeters when I made that change.
3 Likes
I’m with you 100 % 
1 Like
Yep. Speakers are PMC 20.26s.
Rather than using one channel of each amp why not bi amp? With ine feeding stereo bass and the other mud and top?
I thought bi-amping was frowned upon by naim forum members? With previous amps i did bi-amp and bi- wire before. TBH, can’t say i heard much advantage. This was when it was all the rage at the turn of the century!
But, it would make some use of the unused channel per 250.
Do you prefer the 250 or the MF?
I don’t think that that is right at all, but Richard Dane, Steve Sells or someone within Naim will be able to confirm one way or another. I fear that you’ll end up with a broken NAP250.
Biamp is an upgrade if you have speakers for it, but not Biwire.
To use one channel of each Nap 250 is also an upgrade over using just one Nap 250,as you say one transformer/channel mono block style.
I have yet to do a proper listen. My MF is a upgraded Nu Vista 300. It will take some beating. I think my dealer is trying to grind me down !
I do need to get the olive 250 in the main system and take a proper listen.
It is right, and perfectly safe. What harm could it possibly do to the amplifier? It just means that part of it isn’t being used.
The (simple) mechanical engineer in me says i have the whole transformer feeding just one half of the amp. Albeit without the fan. So how is this different to a 135?
In a 135 the transformer is feeding the whole amp, so you’d be getting the benefit of the whole transformer rather than half of it. I don’t profess to be any sort of engineer, but it must be best to use the whole of something designed for that purpose. If two 250s, each half used, was as good as 135s, surely everyone would be doing that, but they aren’t.