If you consider the power output on the new monoblocks and the benefits they would bring to a difficult to drive speaker I can understand why some people may have had a demo or even bought and preferred the new 300 series.
My experience has been limited with the 300 series demos but considering I was listening to flagship speakers, I was expecting to be blown away which I wasn’t. I actually sat there thinking ‘my system betters this sound this’ but I’ve already explained that in my previous post. (My system = my preference of speakers etc)
What I don’t understand is when people bash an older product or any product for that matter to promote another. Things to the effect of 500 series is a dinosaur. I mean 52/135 is even older but I have preferred it to “new” gear in the past.
Then there are comments about Naim flagship source component being obsolete. Pfff. Just because another brand has made a product that sounds better to someone doesn’t suddenly take away what Naim have achieved with their product.
Naim amassed a following because people thoroughly enjoyed the sound of their gear. I know that’s exactly how I got here. My first Naim product was bought after almost ten years of being an audiophile so it was clearly my preference of sound.
I think you are the one who is kidding himself, posting in the Naim forum that the flagship streamer can’t play on the same pitch. Ridiculous.
You basically say, in other words, that Steve Sells and the team, the customers who have been with Naim for 30-40 years, and the new customers all don’t know how to listen.
So the options are:
You’re “deaf”.
Sorry, there are no other options.
It’s important to remember that as good as dCS has made its reputation, and it surely has, whenever I hear their products, I get so bored… and I’m not alone on this.
Yes, some magazine buyers purchase it, and they probably don’t know what a good system should sound like; shame on them.
But we are in the Naim forum/world, and our systems are automatically above (almost) everything else in terms of musical enjoyment. If you don’t think like that, what exactly are you doing in a specific comparison of high-level preamps in the Naim world?
We just try to tune our systems to be even more to our liking.
Sorry, but here’s the logic: if you don’t think Naim is the best, I’m not interested in your opinion.
And I advise other people in the forum to do the same.
I’m not entirely sure what you mean here by review “league”. I’m not aware of a league, or even leagues. Most reviewers (and I have known quite a few), whatever the publication they write in, at the very least get to hear most of the relevant front runners enough to form some opinion. In terms of reference digital sources, both DCS and Naim are, and have been for some years, contenders. Some have preference one way, some the other. To say that they don’t “play on the same pitch” seems not just inaccurate but also somewhat disingenuous to me.
Everyone here is entitled to voice their opinion here, whether they like Naim or not, and whether you like their opinion or not. Of course an opinion is one thing, an agenda quite another.
Sorry, Richard, but I disagree. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, which is fine, but he went too far by claiming the ND555 can’t play on the same pitch. Clearly, he exaggerated to make his point, and in that case, his contribution to the forum is zero.
In other cases, he has expressed similar views with the same attitude, which has caused good people to leave the forum - not just one or two.
Dacs have certainly come on massively over the last few years, and it seems that manufacturers are starting to get to grips with digital.
I am not saying the nd555 is bad, far from it, but also it’s not at the top off the tree either.
I am sure the next naim top dac’s will be quite different to what they have now
All this chatter about NC product A being ‘better’ (or ‘beating’) OC product B is getting a bit silly.
I think the motivation here is to construct a clear hierarchy of NC components (without and with power supply for 222, 333 and 332) compared to OC components. It supposedly helps us to decide whether to stick with OC or jump to NC (possibly wholesale change or gradual).
A NC ‘hierarchy’ may offer some form of ‘validation’ to those who have decided to stick with OC or have decided to switch to NC.
We are all trying to to get value for money on our spend on hifi - pound per sound if you will, and an accepted hierarchy helps us.
The problem is that there have been many technological improvements in the NC range over the OC range that one NC £ > one OC £, which is possibly why we see OC now being considerably discounted. So, after OC discount, that value for money equation changes.
There is another problem trying to establish a relative OC to NC hierarchy. The two product ranges sound subtlety but noticeably different. I’m not saying that with OC and NC you are comparing apples with pears, but the difference might be sufficient to have an influence in the choice between OC and NC.
The final issue of course is when someone pops up and says this OC box ie ‘better’ than that NC box (or vice versa), that is only a highly subjective opinion.
So an ‘accepted’ OC vs NC hierarchy is a nonsense. Do your due diligence and listen extensively for yourself.
completely agree. Although In the case of somebody making a buying decision between NC300 series and OC 500 series I can understand the question but again go and listen for yourself would be my final advice.
In my case, I had a decision to make between the NAP 500DR or the NC 350s. I chose the 500Dr to partner my 552dr.
That decision makes absolute sense as we have the other complication of synergy within ranges to consider, which I didn’t even mention in my previous post.
Its difficult not to conclude that this is at play here…
I would suggest, or request, that people try to avoid making ‘hard’ statements. Its fine if in your opinion X was ‘better’ than Y - and so you bought X. But insisting that X is better - and anyone disagreeing is… wrong… (or worse), is not helpful. Or nice…
