Just so you know the 500DR is not a power house amp. It is good and has 140 watts per channel into 8 Ohms but isn’t a massive power amp!
It’s a good upgrade on 135s. Depends what you want.
1 Like
Really happy with NDS/LP12 552 into 350s and Obelisk II. Big uplift from 300 but not heard 500.
2 Likes
What about in the control department? Which one: 135, 350, 500 has the most vice like grip that gives the greatest speed during fast musical passages?
1 Like
Defintely 500DR over 135s. 350s I have heard in dealers. But can’t comment as have not home demoed.
2 Likes
I reckon you may need to go 52 Supercap with 500DR. Or stay put tbh. What you have works great. As you go up the 72 HiCap may be lacking. It may sound amazing though. @Igel is your man here. He has done the lot I believe!
1 Like
@snarfy has my old 52/SC and has them paired with a 250 into SL2s. I might shouldn’t have moved them on, but as long as he’s (immensely) enjoying them, all the better I say! 
Now the question we’ve pondered is whether the 52’s natural partner in the 135, or the non-DR 500? Hard to find non-DR 500s, but they are out there!
3 Likes
Get the 500DR if you can. I reckon it can be paired with 72, 82, 52 or 552DR or non DR very well.
All I can say is 52 and 500DR worked beautifully. As has 552DR. I think 82 would have been wonderful as well. Can’t see any issues with any of those pre amps.
2 Likes
I do have a medium tall Fraim shelf!
1 Like
I think Nac 82 with Nap 500 is much faster and fun than Nac 52/Nap 500.
But 552/500 is an amazing combination
fast , fun ,timing ,just music.
1 Like
You have experience with them all so maybe an 82 500 would be fun for @OliveAmps ?
1 Like
One thing Dan hasn’t mentioned yet is that the 500 was developed and demonstrated using a 52. Few doubt it’s a great match.
Otoh. While I was a big fan of both 72 and 82 (and still have an 82/HC in Tasmania), even a 300DR was to our ears a bit wasted with an 82.
If you can’t get back your old 52 or easily find another, then I would suggest hearing a 552 (which I have with 300DR rather than a 500) before stumping up the cash for a 500. Or just stay as you are for now…
1 Like
500DR made more of an impact than 552DR. Got lovely 52 first after having 82. Then the 500DR.
Biggest impact on my system has been
- Focal Sopra 2s
- 500DR
1 Like
There is control and power. Not always the same thing. A speaker that simply responds to more transient power is likely to be controlled better by the 500. But a speaker that presents a difficult reactive load with low impedance dips is almost certainly going to respond better to the 350s.
This was true even with the old 250. Because it isn’t bridged, there are speakers a 250 can cope with better than a 500. Bridged designs raise the impedance comfort zone of an amp.
So for raw power, a 500. For highly reactive loads, a 350.
3 Likes
Damn this was confusing. I hope my incoming Scala is neither heavy load or transient demanding 
. How do one even know that. Via spec reading?
1 Like
Unless a speaker manufacturer publishes graphs showing phase angles and impedance curves you yourself won’t know.
This is where an experienced dealer comes in. They will have some idea from practical knowledge of how hard speakers are to drive and in what way (power hungry versus extremely reactive impedance dips).
1 Like
I had 20 yrs in technical marketing for a large corporation which manufactured tech products.
I can see a similarity, that Naim marketing has carefully named its NAPs over time to ensure product positioning is carefully observed.
Prior to the introduction of NC I roughly saw the following sequence for the premier range :
500DR > 500 > 300DR > 300 > (2x 135 = 270) > 250OC > 250.2/Olive/CB
Obviously Statements are the ultimate product.
So I speculate that Naim is positioning (2x 350 = 700) for existing 500 customers as a consideration when the NC replacement to the 500DR is announced, my guess a NAP1000.
This is purely speculation on my behalf and accept there are flaws in my logic.
1 Like
The NAPs are named after power output into a 4 Ohm load. There is some variability but a NAP250 was (when first released) delivering 250w into 4Ohms stereo. The new 350s deliver 350w into 4Ohm mono.
3 Likes
Hi… it all depends on your future structures of how you want your systems to be . If you like going down the road of having/ exploring different brands in your systems using balanced , then you got your answer . And also , indeed the new NC 350 delivers a lot of power if you are hungry for a bigger more demanding speakers .
2 Likes
Yes, spec-reading helps, as does reading reviews by Stereophile and Theaudiobeat. The cited efficiency of a 'speaker is often misleading, as the Be tweeter is very efficient, so you get sound with little input but, as @feeling_zen identifies, when you play louder load characteristics can change markedly, especially when the woofer starts responding in earnest. From a legacy review, it seems the Scalas may dip down to 3.1 ohms, but that’s only one part of it, as phase angle demands play, and this is also what places demands on amps.
This is where the amp v 'speaker aspect gets complicated, and ‘power’ (the ability to deliver current) becomes a necessity. IME, it’s always better to be over-amped than over-speakered, within the language of this hobby.
1 Like
Size and how demanding a speaker are unrelated
1 Like