I have a SN3 with HicapDR and ND5XS2/Qutest as my source. Would I improve my set by replacing the SN3 and HCDR for a 272 and 250.2 (non DR)?
Yes maybe a hair…but your streaming functionality wont be as nice. Imho. I went from 272 250 dr to sn3 hcdr ndx2 and im quite happy with it.
I would keep the nd5 and the Qutest as I’m pretty sure the 272 streaming and DAC part isn’t as good as that of the ND5XS2+Qutest
The first time I heard the 272/250 against the ND5/SN2 into Sopra 2s the latter won comfortably although of course both made good music. The 272 comes on song with an XPS or 555PSU.
So why a 272? Why not a. 282 instead, as you won’t use the streamer neither the dac from the 272?
If your speakers are hard to drive they will certainly benefit from the better grip and control of the 250. That aside, without doubt I would stick with what you’ve got.
Furthermore you are taking a step back to an old streamer which has limited abilities.
282 is out of my budget and 272’s are so affordable atm 2nd hand.
I would use the streaming part of the 272 as my ND5XS2/Qutest would take care of that part
Would adding a XPS shift the scale back to the 272/250 combo?
Yes, an XPS is a big uplift. It wouldn’t be my choice, I’d go for a separate preamp especially given that you already have a Hicap.
Another option is 202/200 replacing the sn3
The chord qutest is a really quite a fine source and I would just keep everything as is and look for a Hugo Mscaler
Why not going step by step. Your source is good. I would not touch it.
Add first a 250 to your SN3. And one day a 282.
Or try a Chord integrated, as you seem to like the Chord presentation.
Yeah perhaps a step by step approach is the better one indeed.
Most users on this forum indicate that this is not really a step forward but sideways or even backwards so I don’t want to go that direction.
I would take a 202/200 in preference to any Supernait. Forum ‘wisdom’ is no substitute for actual listening, get a demo in you can and decide for yourself.
Hi Hifi_Naim, I agree with Ryder, the 202/200 would offer a significant improvement in hi fi & SQ over your SN3, whilst many on this forum may disagree I think there are many memes created by a few regularly contributing experts which are unfounded… the 202 is a great pre amp, it has no inboard power supply gubbins or any other non pre-amp pollution and is upgradeable - one can add a Hi-cap or can be DR’d with a Hicap-DR, and a NAPSC. I bought my first Naim kit back in 2006 - which included a 202/200 both which thrilled me and have served me until very recently, when I (foolishly) stepped on to the upgrade escalator… I recently tried a SN3 and whilst it offers versatile functionality was disappointing - the classic 202/200 combo is way further up the tree than a SN3, most may argue that a hi-capped SN3 is close to a bare 202/200 (I don’t agree) but then a NAPSC’d/hicapped 202/200 would put these even further ahead of the SN3. Naim will concur that reducing separation (by including power sources/streaming boards etc etc) will always compromise SQ. Because of the blindly accepted folklore that the 202 is to be avoided they are extremely good value (202 can be had for £500 for example) - why not surprise yourself and listen to a 202/200 with a good source/pair of speakers - you could save a bucket load of cash and find yourself on the path to ultimate Naim that is the Classic range!
Thanks everyone, I think I will first add a 250 to my setup at some point and later on switch the SN3 for a 282. I like the more muscular sound of the SN3 over the NAP 200 when I heard both.
Unless your speakers are a difficult load 282/SN >> SN/250…
That’s very sensible. The 202/200 vs SN debate has been going on for years.
Around a decade ago, I spent a whole Christmas and New Year holiday playing around with 200, 202, HiCap, SN1 (used purely as amp) and NAPSC, all lent by my dealer trying g to decide what to replace my Nail XS with. Front end was CD5XS/nDAC. The SN certainly sounded different from the separates and I could have gone with either. I really wanted a grown-up separates system, but eventually my ears led me to the SN/HC. I listened to a lot of choral music at the time and, in very broad terms, the SN was what I heard in the audience including the effects of the recording venue, whereas the 202 set gave more details, what the choirmaster would have heard, perhaps. There was a rather belligerent debate on the forum at the time, so I knew I was not the only one who went that way, but that the opposite view was equally strongly held. Perhaps this is, at root, why Naim have now dropped the 202 & 200.
A 282/250 is really the place to go next for a serious improvement over the SN.