Really? Great news!
I needed another Powerline even if I already have 5 (one for Cambridge audio reading mechanics, one foreseen for Naim 282, one foreseen for Naim 250DR, one foreseen for Naim 555PS, one for Naim HiCap DR, there was still one left for the turntable and one for the turntable preamp).
By the way.
To whom is it in possession, where it is “essential” to use the Powerline and where could it be avoided??
Pre-Amp?
Power Supply?
CD player?
DAC?
I think that the 552 is much more expensive than the 252 + SC
As someone who had a 282/HCDR/250DR and then a SCDR, I can settle a few things. The DIN-XLR signal cable that comes with the 250 is the same whether connecting to HiCap or a SuperCap. Secondly, contrary to what was said about leaving the 282 with a HiCap for balance reasons, I say rubbish. I changed the HCDR to a SCDR on my 282 and it was a wonderful improvement, and I thought well worth it. In the end I got a 252, but I also changed my 250 to a 300. Nevertheless, I consider the 282/SC/250 a solid, well-balanced system that sounds great.
I use three PowerLine cables: SCDR, XPSDR, 300PS. My non-Naim phonostage uses something else, although I plan to try the PowerLine from the XPSDR on it.
You won’t use a PowerLine on a 282, although in addition to the HiCap I suppose you could use one on the NAPSC. I never bothered with anything but the stock power cable for that.
This is surely useful. I wouldn’t want anything that’s more “laidback” than the 282/HCDR or 282/SCDR. I’ve read several posts such as these but understand people have different criteria when it comes to selecting the right amps.
I also went from 282/SCDR to 252/SCDR and disagree with that assessment. Everything about the upgrade to 252 was better for me. The 252 is more open, has better detail, improved soundstage, and more musical and refined overall. It is most certainly not more laid back and lacking boogie compared to my 282, IMO.
FWIW: my 282 was a 2008 MY serviced in 2018 and my 252 is a 2016. In both cases my SCDR is a 2018.
I moved from 282/SCDR to 252/SCDR and my impressions are the same. The 282 does have a more forward presentation but the 252 certainly does not lack boogie IMHO. For example, evidence for that is how people react to music they have never heard before. I often see my kids come into the lounge when I’m playing something new or something not listened to in many years and they can instantly appreciate the rhythm. Just last night I was playing a Heaven 17 album that I doubt I have ever played during the 15 years of my eldest daughter’s life and I had to laugh as she danced to the beat while raiding the fridge. A nice change from “what’s this rubbish?”
“I think that the 552 is much more expensive than the 252 + SC”
It is. That’s why I suggested a second hand (s/h) 552 would be a better sounding alternative to a new 252/SC.
Ah, that old chestnut.
I’m sure you’ve notice the signal from your 272 goes straight to your 300. It doesn’t pass through the power supply.
So. How is such a superb SQ achieved without the apparent need to send the signal through the power supply. 
I suppose the 272 must be wired differently, as in standard form it includes a power supply, just like the Uniti boxes. What I wrote is certainly the case with the standard power amps, and I don’t see the need for your snarky response.
I just thought it was ironic that your system doesn’t follow the rule. 
But. Rules is rules. The signal MUST go from the pre amp, to the power supply then onto the power amp.
Possible reason why the rule has been broken
The fact that Naim have pivoted away from the rule bodes well for the future.
Yeah those idiots at Naim know nothing about designing amplifiers. I’m sure if you offered to help redesign them they’d be delighted to accept 
Oh well. Blimey.
It’s good to see that naim can output a signal from preamp if needed.
I think you’ve misinterpreted my posts.
I’m not criticising Naims designers, on the contrary. I’ve commented that Naim have managed to design a system that does not require the signal to pass through the pre-amp power supply.
The 272, by all accounts performs better than it should. Perhaps that’s down to the fact the pre to power amp signal doesn’t pass through and additional cable, 2 additional connections and a box containing a large transformer. 
FC, I think that perhaps you’re being a little provocative or perhaps a bit disingenuous here. It’s pretty obvious why with the NAC-N272, when you add an XPS or 555PS, that the signal doesn’t run through the power supply. Those power supplies were designed for digital source components not for pre-amps. The NAC-N272 is a hybrid of a streamer and a pre-amp so if you want to add a power supply with enough supplies of appropriate voltage to bring benefits all-round then a standard pre-amp supply won’t do. Its just so happened that the XPS2 or 555PS could be made to work and also bring benefits, so why not design the NAC-N272 to make use of them? Yes, a special dedicated supply that ran the pre-amp signal through the supply might (perhaps?) have been even better yet, but I would doubt the numbers would justify it.
If you’re still unsure why Naim have traditionally run the pre-amp signal through the power supply, have a read of the FAQ here.
Would it be worthwhile to guess the next 572 will need both a digital source supply and a new type of pre supply ?
I’m well aware the XPS2 and 555PS are the only PSU’s suitable for the 272 and that the signal doesn’t run through the power supply . As I posted yesterday, “the power supplies capable (available) of powering the the 272 don’t have the required pass-through hardware”.
From the FAQ
The signal is routed from the pre-amp to the power supply using the same interconnect that takes the power feed from the power supply to the pre-amp. It also connects the two earths together. This minimises differential voltages caused by interfering electric or magnetic fields being generated between the power feed, signal and earth, so maintaining the correct relationship between signal and earth inside the power supply.
The above seems to be only a justification for using a single cable to send the power from the PSU to pre and the signal from pre to PSU, instead of two cables between the PSU and Pre. The problem a single cable overcomes is caused by the fact the signal is inside the power supply.
It’s interesting to note that it actually states interfering electric or magnetic fields are generated between the power feed, signal and earth, which cause minimal differential voltage.
Wouldn’t it be a good idea to remove the signal from the interfering electric or magnetic fields and route it direct to the power amp. (as happens with the 272)
The reason Naim initially ran the pre-amp signal through the power supply, is, it was the only way a PSU could be used without the need to modify the pre-amp. EI 42/110 where the 42 only had one 4 pin din for power in/signal out.
You missed this bit, which basically answers your question.
Anyway, it’s important to consider the whole paragraph, not just bits of it, which reads;
The absolute earth reference for the system is the reference for the pre-amp, which is the SUPER-CAP, HI-CAP or FLAT-CAP earth. The signal is routed from the pre-amp to the power supply using the same interconnect that takes the power feed from the power supply to the pre-amp. It also connects the two earths together. This minimises differential voltages caused by interfering electric or magnetic fields being generated between the power feed, signal and earth, so maintaining the correct relationship between signal and earth inside the power supply. The power amp is connected to the properly referenced signal at the power supply output.
Who on earth told you that? For one thing both the NAPS and SNAPS pre-dated the 42/110 by a number of years.
Hello to the community.
Some time has passed since my last comment in the old forum.
Regarding 282/SC: Recently I changed from 2 HCs to SC. IMHO there is an improvement, but it´s not night and day. I did this because I‘d like to exchange the 282 for 252 in the next months. Also I have to say, that one or two HCs on 282 didn‘t make a big difference. Coming from the 202, already with NAPSC and a HC, the upgrade to the 282 was really dissappointing IMO. Last year I had DR-upgrades on XPS and 250.2 and moved from NDX to NDX2. Plugged them in, first source was plain TV. And it was unbelievable good! 
I would recommend: Isoacoustic Gaias. I put them under my Neat XL6s and they were a real big improvement. Suddenly I heard things in familiar recordings I never noticed before. Give them a try! No voodoo.
The XPS, 555 ps etc are designed for sources with DACs.
Phil