I have an interest in one day finding out what the NAP 500 sounds like, though I would only likely buy if I unexpectedly came into some money. (And I’d need three for tri-amping, or have to change speakers as well…) But as I have no interest in also adding a NAC to the system does that mean it would not be worth hearing the 500 because it is not a stand-alone amplifier that can give its own best with a signal from something other than a NAC?
I would say just trying to find out what a NAP500 sounds like on its own wouldn’t be at all worthwhile. It’s just a power amp and requires to be part of a system in order to recreate musical sound at all (source, pre-amp, NAP500, and speakers). Flippancy aside, it’s designed to be used partnered with a pre-amp, preferably a NAC, and also preferably one that is at a similar or higher level in performance.
However, there my also be other pre-amps from other makers out there that will also work reasonably well with a NAP500, so if you really don’t want something like a NAC52, NAC252, NAC552, S1 or similar then, on another thread, others have mentioned using an autotransformer pre-amp like the Allegri with great success. Just be a little bit careful as the 500 is a bridged design and that can sometimes cause problems with some pre-amps.
But if you’re really interested in finding out what a NAP500 sounds like, I would judge that it would be best to listen to it within its proper context. To that end, I would say that listening to a NAP500 without a pre-amp likely would be waste of time as it would not be performing at its best, unless of course you really, really wanted to find that out for yourself.
2 Likes
It would be an interesting shootout, and an easy one to demo. If you had £20k to spend on an amp, you could get a 252/300 or just a 500 for the same money.
Of course, Naim don’t really intend that anyone does this, so they may not have devoted their usual attention the the quality of the variable volume output if it was only included to keep Apple or Google happy. Other manufacturers perhaps put more effort into providing quality digital volume controls.
My own musing is in the context of Dave as my DAC, presently feeding Bryston power ampsvia an active crossover. Received wisdom is that my speakers would probably benefit from Bryston’s higher model amps. Meanwhile Naim’s approach to power amp design avoiding paralleled output transistors I find interesting, so if ever I had the money to contemplate upgrading my Brystons I would be interested to hear what the Naim power amps bring to the table before committing.
I have a 52/SC into ATC 40a active speakers. I recently picked up a Linn Klimax DSM with Katalyst.
I tried the Linn directly into the ATC’s using a Mogami XLR to XLR cable and using the Lin’s variable volume control. I then tried the Linn using its fixed output into the 52/SC.
It sounded way better with the 52/SC in the chain.
I also have a Chord M Scaler/Dave… using the Chord directly into ATC’s vs having the 52/SC in the chain is a closer call. I’ll have to do more listening but I think having the 52/SC in the chain will get the nod.
With the 52/SC in the chain I hear a greater sense of authority, weight ( in a good way) and energy with the music.
2 Likes
Your system is top-notched 
How do you find Chord Dave vs. Linn Klimax DSM?
My honest opinion is the Chord Dave has an edge over the Linn Klimax DSM (with Katalyst), but I decided against it because of the form factor.
In the comparison, one thing to consider is the streaming source. The Linn is nice since it’s a one box streaming solution. I have an Innuos Zenith mk2 ( which I love btw). I was running the Zenith vs USB out into the M Scaler/Dave.
The Chord gear sounds amazingly real on some music, very detailed and and atmospheric.
I just got the Linn recently ( a used item) so I haven’t done a ton of listening but the Linn has a bouncy sound and I think what I’d say is a very tight knit sound. I’ll have to do some more comparisons and get to know the Linn better. Back in the mid 90’s I had a Linn Karik cd transport into a Linn Numerik dac and I loved that combo… that led me to scratch an itch and try the Linn Klimax.
At this level the Chord and Linn are both excellent choices and both sound superb.
1 Like
For some reason I don’t just jell with Linn Klimax sound, . I can hear it’s accomplished but it leaves me cold…
with regard to Dave… I owned one for a while, again very accomplished and exceptionally detailed. I played using my 552(DR) but in the end I returned it… and brought my Hugo original back. I found after long listening sessions I missed the sheer enjoyment of the Hugo. The Hugo has a musicality and an appealing natural softness and incredible ‘Mandelbrot set’ type insight without drawing attention to itself. Yes it was not as authoritative as the Dave, but I largely resolved that with a third party two stage powersupply for Hugo. The Hugo and the 552 seem to have a wonderful synergy. I have heard a few system with setup now, and they do share a common appeal.
To this day I still use my Hugo original … I have returned to it a couple of times now. That and my 552 preamplifier are the best ever Hifi components, closely followed by my ATC SCMs I have ever owned 
2 Likes
I am into most genres yes… with regard to jazz, I love Dixie and Big Band, with regard to classical I adore Chopin, Satie, Shostakovich, Bach and Beethoven.
I very much like jazz, but dixie, big band, new orleans are not my types.
I’ve found the Linn Klimax is kind of so-so on pop, rock, heavy metal, but is very musical on the likes of folks, Bill Evans, Cal Tjader, Mozart, Bach, Chopin, etc.
Further to my earlier post using both Hugo and Dave without a preamplifier, I didn’t describe anything about the difference between the two. When I first heard Dave I was not planning to buy: I hadn’t even planned to hear (the audition was of Hugo TT vs my Hugo), but made the mistake of doing so because it was there, and I was sceptical of the glowing review I’d read. Dave was a wow! moment – literally! I’d taken my cellist son to the audition with me. Sitting on the sofa next to me when Dave started playing, just a couple of bars into the first piece of music I heard him knows the word Wow! under his breath, which echoed exactly what I felt. We carried on listening to music for an hour or two, and it was just astounding how clear music was, while keeping the natural feeling of Hugo. However Dave was far too expensive – but it made me hesitate To buy TT and go away and think about it.
A few months later I had an extended home audition of both TT and Dave against my Hugo. I had my other son do the blind changes for me, which he enjoys, but unfailingly the effect really was the same. I persevered trying to persuade myself that TT was good enough. A week or so in, while I was having a long session, at one point my wife called out on the adjoining room: “for goodness sake why don’t you get that one, it’s so much better!” I did – and haven’t for one second regretted the cost.
First audition was Mac Mini/Audirvana through Gustard U12 as source, no preamp, Bryston 4Bsst2 power amp and PMC Fact 12 in dealer’s lightly treated room, the only difference on home audition was PMC EB1i instead of Facts, and my own untreated room. My musical taste is a mixture of classical from chamber to dramatic orchestral plus solo piano; prog rock; blues rock; heavy rock; opera - and they all sound good.
I had originally switched to playing you go direct to power amp in preference to swing a preamp, and did the auditions the same way. Subsequently I did try Dave to my preamp that’s preferred without. For reference, as mentioned previously, my preamp is MF’s The Preamp 2A - which no doubt is not as good as the best out there which may add less unintended to the sound. And apparently unlike Naim’s power amps the Brystons are not designed to require their own preamps.
Sometimes I feel my ears may not be as good as some other peoples, given descriptions of what they hear when describing equipment or cable comparisons etc – but I regard having cloth ears as an advantage as it can save money while still getting maximum enjoyment and engagement! Regardless, only each individual can determine whether or not they prefer the sound omitting preamp, whether Naim, Bryston or any other brand.
1 Like
“Yes it was not as authoritative as the Dave, but I largely resolved that with a third party two stage powersupply for Hugo”
Simon, would you mind sharing more on that two stage powersupply for the Hugo? I would think our moderators wouldn’t have an issue with it as it doesn’t involve Naim products.
Hi, it’s made by MCRU of Huddersfield.
Thank you Simon -
Hi Simon
I have seen you use the phrase “…‘Mandelbrot set’ type insight…” before and it’s always puzzled me. I am pretty familiar with the Mandelbrot set and, more generally, fractal concepts such as self-similarity which the M set, and many others, exhibit. What I don’t understand is how this applies to sound reproduction. I’ve looked in the literature and come across an article from someone who used sound waves to create an M set on the screen of an oscilloscope (left channel = real part, right channel = imaginary) but still can’t see a connection with hifi. With apologies to the OP for thread diversion it would be great if you could explain in a little more detail.
Roger
Hi Roger, it’s a term I started using a few years back and I see it referred to occasionally elsewhere too now… it’s essentially describing the ability to listen into the sound, and the more you listen in to the sound the more you hear around that sound. Obviously depending on recording, but it allows you to follow a musician in a jazz band, or hear the gating in a mix, or the reverb profile added to a channel, the acoustic of a cathedral, the position of the vocalist to the mic, etc… so this is about listening into the recording mix rather than listening to a recording as a whole. This is analogous to zooming on a graphical representation of the Mandelbrot set and increasing the iteration count near a discontinuity.
I guess it’s how I enjoy music, I enjoy the craft of making it often as much as the music design itself… and to me certain DACs, possibly ones with higher timing bandwidth, perhaps better enable this.
1 Like
If I may ask you Simon, I think RW refers to the same things as “loudest instrument dominant effect”, which he claims he has significantly reduced or eliminated with the Hugo range of DACS (and those which followed)
according to him it’s one of the greatest problems of hi-fi - the loudest instrument appears and the other ones tend to get modulated/distorted - the constant shift of this is what causes listener fatigue.
hence the separation of each instrument in his Hugo DAC is very distinct…
I guess maybe that is what you refer to as mandelbrot effect?
1 Like
Hi Ali, Rob is possibly referring to the same or similar experience ., though I think I call it more a case of masking or filtering rather than fatiguing in the experiences I have. I have had a few discussions with Rob over the years, and from what I can remember I think he and I appreciate audio in a similar way.