Now that you mention it…….was it something along the lines that the output stage was powered from the other Hicap? It’s been some time since I ran my 82 from 2xHC, and my memory ain’t wot it used to be.
But the FAQ seems clear. 
1 Like
The NAC 82 is 30 years old. Over the years, many things have been written on this forum whether a supercap is better than 2 hicaps.
From what I remember reading, a Supercap is better because it has a better transformer and a more stringent selection of other parts.
Don’t know if it’s right but considering the price of a Supercap that must be true.
I cannot help but feel like the gist of this thread is that the OP bought an expensive piece of equipment; didn’t get the expected result on day one; and half the responses are suggesting to throw even more (a lot more) money at the problem before doing anything else.
Scratching head here.
9 Likes
The idea of (substantially) upgrading your preamp and getting worst SQ because the source all of a sudden became inadequate is ludicrous, even contradictory to well established Naim orthodoxy of “in the Naim world is all about the preamp”. It only resonates within the walls of the Hi-Fi Corner…
6 Likes
I think it is just a case , as others have said, of getting used to the more detailed presentation. I find it takes a while to get accustomed when that happens. Sometimes you lose the musical cohesion for a while as everything appears less homogenised and each instrument becomes more identifiable in the mix.
I am sure it will all click into place.
I’d call it acclimatisation.
Wine, beer or whiskey sometimes helps. 
Obviously, there will of course be further improvements to be had with a better source later.
3 Likes
So the upgrade is so good, that it sounds worse … I understand 
.
It’s like a customer once said, you are too good for us, we are going to look else where.
1 Like
Many of us were indoctrinated with the ‘source first’ philosophy when we started our hi-fi journeys decades ago and while it was to some extent plausible, I do sincerely believe that once you had a quality source the amplification and speakers could potentially offer much better value upgrades compared to diminishing returns on the source.
There were always sweet spot combinations of separates, but I really dislike the ‘mullet system’ descriptions we often hear.
Naim amplification, even at lower price tiers has always punched above its weight and this is one reason why I think seemingly expensive speakers with less expensive amplification can actually work very well in particular system contexts, even though traditionally we’d have said to do something else.
I know most contributors even if critical of various combinations are earnestly trying to be helpful, but it can be very off-putting to users who may be quite new to hi-fi or enthusiasts of many decades standing to be told they’ve got it all wrong.
Many of us I suspect look at vintage budget separate combinations too that simply sounded wonderful and enjoyable at a fraction of the price of current higher end components.
We often lose sight of the music, and that is another scuppering factor as a sublime jazz performance on a given system will mean little if you have no interest in jazz, but your ‘rock’ sounds rubbish.
How much do we base our decisions on the music we actually gravitate to most?
4 Likes
Go with gut feelings on this stuff if you ask me, I wouldn’t do SC on my 282/250DR as the outlay seems disproportionate to the benefits
2 Likes
I’m far from convinced by the SC DR on my NAC 282 primarily from a VFM standpoint but that’s hardly surprising, but it was intended as a stepping stone to NAC 252, though I’m considering it on an impending SNAXO 242 instead.
1 x Olive HICAP on NAC 282 sounds good.
Demoed that with an additional HICAP DR - technically not at all balanced but did sound much better to me. Decided as I was likely to go to a NAC 252 at some stage that the HICAP DR would be a sideways step and went for SC DR, now not so sure.
Well said, totally agree with your remarks, quite thoughtful. I was also schooled with the source first philosophy by my local Linn dealer back in the early 80s, a theory I’ve challenged many times as it is always dependent on context as you pointed out. Nevertheless, a quick look at my system will make evident that I do practice source first, at least to the extent that it makes a difference subjectively speaking. So no issues with the source first philosophy, my beef is with the bold claim that upgrading your preamp will actually make your system sound worst, and that the only way to fix it is to replace all your source components. I believe that for the benefit of the OP and the community, such farfetched statements should not stand unchallenged, even if they were meant to be helpful. And I don’t mean to aggravate anyone, my apologies if I did, kind of hard to sugar coat this.
2 Likes
There was also Linn’s ‘single speaker listening room’ push for demos which made no sense to me at all once we got 5.1 surround sound etc.
Yes, those other speakers may have affected room characteristics in some way but perhaps that just shows how hard it is to know how a speaker in a demo room will sound in your own, which is perhaps more relevant.
1 Like
Driving off topic a bit but this interested me.
The theory is when the air in the room moves from the playing speakers, other cones in the room move in sympathy and you end up with a sort of shadow playback with the characteristics of another manufacturer’s cones.
When we moved to surround in the demo room, to satisfy the single speaker requirement, we had to ensure that all unused speakers were at least connected to a powered on amplifier to resist movement from external pressure.
Whether this is nonsense or not I’m not in a position to say. However, just from a quality of demonstration perspective it was absolutely the right thing. Single speaker demonstrations with a nice clean uncluttered room are great. Then I emigrated to a country that routinely crams 20 pairs of really high end speakers in the same room, rammed in next to each other, not positioned properly using switchboxes to link any speaker to any amp. Utterly awful and quite frankly, you might as well skip the demo and buy on a punt in that case. I’m convinced that for whatever reason you choose, single speaker demonstrations are the only meaningful demonstrations.
There is a medium between those extremes 
I get the theory of the cone movement but obviously the wall of poorly positioned speakers on switchboxes is bad for other reasons alone. My dealer always positions a pair properly, but they don’t carry every other speaker out of the room. I wonder if having two or three pairs in the room against the wall really makes a difference due to cone movement.
I remember Ivor T of Linn starting this idea way back. While there is a certain logic to it I have not found it to be an issue of consequence personally. Same with guitars in the room too. I have no doubt that having single speaker dems is very worthwhile as the alternative as you say is horrendous.
In my listening room I have speakers on my mobile, tv and IPad, two acoustic guitars, one electric. Add devices brought in by wife and visitors etc and it becomes impossible to control.
Remember, Ivor claimed that even his Casio watch had a detrimental effect on sq.I am glad it doesn’t seem to be an issue here!
1 Like
My dealer only has one pair of speakers in the dem room. I would prefer it this way otherwise is looks like you are in box shifter’s paradise while trying to evaluate you chosen speakers.
Well in a largish room, one pair positioned for listening and 2 pairs pushed to the side, up against the wall, are visually not such a big problem
Being but a young lad when I worked in the trade, I remember sweating buckets till my limbs shook taking speakers in and out of the dem room, sometimes in rapid succession, for a customer. Nothing like the yell from the manager to make my day. “get up here and swap the Kabers for the SBLs… which are downstairs, and be quick about it.”
Ohhh fun times.
5 Likes
Of both the dealers (Lancashire and Yorkshire) I’ve used since the 80s the dem rooms were representative of what UK living rooms were like. I know Paul at Moorgate deliberately designed his dem room to be the size that it is.