That’s interesting (profile is hidden) - thank you for pointing out. I can’t currently find a “publish” or “hide” option in profile, but will take a further look.
Front end is currently a modified Sonos Connect into nDAC/XPSDR. Unfortunately, not a brick wall at present.
This current experiment certainly makes me wonder what the options might be if I were to consider a different speaker. I sometimes think the Allaes are a bit large for the space and therefore think if there is a mid-ground between n-Sat and Allae (arguably not from Naim at that point - which is a whole different path).
Thanks @mook for reminding me of the differences between n-Sats and Allaes. I think if I was unable to settle for one or the other, as you might be, I’d have a look at ATC. Possibly their SCM11.
Thanks @Christopher_M. Yes, I’ve read some of the frequent threads about ATC here and admit to some curiosity. In reality, the electronics will take priority right now; besides, I am beginning to thoroughly enjoy the scale and “warmth” the Allaes present. Bass is still taking a little tweaking, so am off to do a little more discovery on speaker placement and tuning. I discovered a thread on getting the torque numbers for Allaes and may try that first before any further placement tweaking (I don’t think they’ve been adjusted since they were built).
Thanks, well it is great that you are enjoying the Allaes. They are very fine speakers for me and quite a few others here. It is well worth playing with positioning imo, both in terms of distance from the back wall and how far apart they are. For instance mine have benefited from moving wider so that I am listening more in the near field. (There is a thread running about this at the moment).
As for the torques, the bass driver is 3.6nm. A forum friend kindly tightened mine and it does make a positive difference. The tweeter has been advised as ‘best left alone’ but I can’t remember where I read it. Also, there are no user adjustments to be made in the suspension. The speakers should oscillate slightly fore and aft when the front of the top box is lightly and smartly tapped with the knuckles. Then they are right.
It’s been a while since I’ve had this whole set running, so I don’t have much to compare with at the moment. I’m certainly enjoying what I’m hearing and hope I’m reasonably close to completing some of these final tweaks.
Thanks for insights on positioning. I’ve certainly found improvement with wider spacing, relative to the n-Sats. They’re currently about 1.96m apart, mid-point to mid-point. I don’t have much further to go, though, so this might be the limit. Depth is an interesting one. This is the bass “bloom” optimiser for me. They’re currently 16.5cm, from rear wall but see some that have placed at 25cm or more.
For me, any closer and the bass starts getting uneven and boomy at certain frequencies. Interestingly, further distance resulted in a non-linear change. Certain distances had more bass in some areas and uneven response. Current distance seems to be best so far with generally no excessive lumps. There still remain some tracks where it starts to bloom; for now, the distance will do. (There’s only so far out they can go, plus not infinite time to tweak )
Hi Mook,
If you get the opportunity to hear Allae’s active, personally I would jump at the chance.
IMO, in theory at least, active operation at any level makes perfect sense, if you can accommodate the extra box count. Passive crossovers degrade the signal from the amp, a lot of energy is wasted as it gets converted to heat, active driven amplifiers run in a narrower bandwidth/frequency range (Bass, Treble) therefore have to work less hard and lowers distortion, amplifiers are directly coupled to the drive unit.
For whatever reason multi amping with a powered crossover seems to have gone out of fashion except for very high end systems which is a pity. In my experience/system once active theres no going back (see below)
I’ve owned Allae’s since they were first introduced (about 20 years?).
Back in the day Naim used to promote an active system based on the slimline separates
CD3.5 Flatcap
NAC 92 Flatcap
IXO powered crossover
2x NAP 90 amplifiers
INTRO speakers
I initially had the simple NAC92 NAP90 passive combination then went the active route as above.
This is still the basis of my system, the only changes in about 20 years being upgrading to Allae’s and NAC 202, NAPSC, HICAP DR
I’m very happy with this system which has proved itself capable enough of revealing the ongoing improvements to my LP12 - Klimax Radikal, Keel, Karousel, EKOS SE, Dynavector 17D3, Prefix, HICAP.
A few years ago I loaned a serviced Olive NAP 250 (admittedly perhaps a little unbalanced with a NAC202) and found I preferred the sound of the modest baby NAP 90"s in active mode. I’ve had some, who havent heard this system scoff at the idea (HiFi snobs). Whilst I found the passive 250 gave a subjectively “bigger” sound in sense of scale and prescence, I also found it a tad sluggish and warm in a valve like way.
By comparison the baby 90’s although presenting a kind of subjectively scaled down presentation were unmatched to my ears in terms of sheer speed, alacrity and timing, the all important PRaT.
I like to describe the 250 in my context as sounding a bit like a dinosaur trying to do the hokey cokey with the little 90’s performing like the musical equivalent of a Whippet out the traps!
The passive 250 sounded HiFi, the baby 90’s sounding to me more musical and on “the one”
I decided to have my IXO & 90’s factory serviced, hooked to the Allae’s I think they produce a sound definitely greater than the sum of its parts.
Despite the 90’s relatively low power output, in combination with Allae’s they are capable of reaching neighbour troubling volume if the mood takes me.
On occasion I have considered upgrading the power amps whilst definitely staying active, however when I forget about the HiFi things and just listen to the music, I can ask myself what would would I be aiming to improve with the amplification and the answer is nothing.
I remember you mentioning it before, I would resurrect it without hesitation, you might be surprised.
The only caveat being, hence my introducing the 202 etc, is that with a class front end the NAC 92 is the weak link
@mook
I just had a look at your system. Obviously my experience is with my more modest system.
For you going active I guess will require another HiCap or Supercap with a Snaxo and another 250. I bet the Allaes will fly on the end of that set up
@Dreadatthecontrols First, thank you for the detail on your journey going active - very useful. I’ve had my Allaes for approximately 15 years now but they have been in and out of use during that time. I now have a moment where I can use the Allaes again and am enjoying the rediscovery.
I’ve always wondered about active but (full disclosure!) have never heard an active Naim set. The various threads and read outs of the active experience make it intriguing to me. I have thought about the easiest way to “try” - I have access to a 180 but then I’m in “wonky” territory with an old amp that needs servicing. Still, might be an interesting experiment. (It would still require the various additional cables, however.)
An area of concern I have is the crossover setup. I’ve seen a couple of threads about Naim factory setup when you buy a SNAXO. But if you purchase second hand, how do you start with ensuring the setup is correct for Allaes?
Hi @mook
AFAIK NAIM crossovers are already correctly set for use with NAIM speakers, again AFAIK the frequency split/crossover is the same for all NAIM speakers. They can be factory pre set for other speakers with different crossover values.
For Allaes you will need a SNAXO 242 for two way & two stereo power amps.
You might even get away with an IXO, I discussed this with my dealer recently in case I ever decide to upgrade my NAP 90’s (maybe a pair of 200’s), although the IXO is designed for the NAP 90 my dealer thinks it would work and in any case to my thinking still better than a passive crossover.
The IXO is an interesting solution in that; whereas a SNAXO IIRC splits the frequencies (Bass/Treble in two way operation) to each power amp with one power amp driving the Bass of both speakers L + R and the other amp Treble L+R
The IXO splits each frequency range onto what normally would be the left and right channels of each individual stereo power amp, cleverly effectively turning a Stereo power amp into two Mono amps in one box, so instead of one amp driving the Bass of both speakers and one amp driving the Treble of both speakers as per SNAXO 242, one stereo power amp is assigned to each speaker with one channel handling Bass & the other the Treble of each speaker. Eg Amp 1 handles Bass & Treble Left channel, Amp 2 Right channel.
IXO requires no power supply, SNAXO does.
With IXO obviously you need two identical amps, however with a SNAXO 242 it is possible to use different spec amps (I was told this at a show by a leading NAIM technician, Paul Stephenson if memory serves), the better spec amp should drive the Treble. So it’s very possible that you could get your 180 serviced and use it active with the 250 and a SNAXO 242.
Or, as I mentioned above, perhaps controversially it may be feasible to get an IXO which can probably be picked up for a song and another 250.
Regarding used SNAXO’s I guess the best approach would be to tread careful and ensure the previous owner was the only owner and only used it with NAIM speakers. Probably better would be to source one from an official dealer and/or have a word with Darran at Class A Servicing, NAIM customer services and of course our host @Richard.Dane who I’m tagging in case any of the above is incorrect.
I hope it makes sense
Dread, the original SNAXO works just like the IXO, it’s the later SNAXO 242 and 362 that allow you to use each stereo amp on each drive unit, left and right. Earlier SNAXOs (and NAXOs) have sometimes been re-wired to do this also (so beware, if so). The advantage off doing it this way is that you don’t need perfectly matched amps.
Thanks Richard, I didnt know earlier SNAXO were configured the same as IXO. My above post is referring to the SNAXO 242 I’ve edited it in case that wasnt clear
)
