Thanks Richard. Very insightful. I wasn’t sure if it would’ve more like the 12 or the CB 32.
Do you (or anyone) think the 32 / 42 are voiced more for CB110 / 160 than the 32.5 / 42.5. I think the later preamps are more musical but do the original versions match better in terms of balance, assuming 80s LP12 and Linn Kan / Sara / Brik?
One downside of my Bolt down 160 is that the bass is a bit slow and seems a millisecond behind the beat. The CB 160 doesn’t have this drawback but it doesn’t have such a lovely midrange either. The BD 160 was last serviced by Naim in 2003 so maybe this accounts for the bass, although I’d be interested to know if other owners experience the same.
Absolutely, a CB 250 would be of interest if it would give something beyond the 160. I had the opportunity for a 250BD that’s why I was asking. I also have the opportunity for a pair of CB 135s. My concern is that it would be a lot of investment for little gain. The 160BD is lovely and I’ve never noticed slow Bass.
I’ve not had a BD 250 or 135s so can’t comment on those. The BD 250 is supposed to have the lovely midrange of the BD 160 but with more grunt/control.
Tbh, I prefer the unregulated amps so far especially when the preamp is fed directly off the power amp but I’d never put anyone off trying a 250 since we’re all different. Just don’t sell the 160 until you’re sure you want to keep the 250.
I don’t know the 250BD, but 135 is another league, faster presentation, more punch, but I would say it’s less musical than the 160BD, medium is not so nice. Really depends on what’s you are listening to, if it’s mostly vocals and instruments you will be probably disappointed by 135 compare to 160BD.
Never sold your 160BD before you are sure that you find something that can replace it.
I don’t really get the whole thing about “voicing”, sorry. The main difference between the very first NAC32 and NAC42 against later examples, including the .5 updates, was the change in the way the PCBs were tracked. The earlier units had what we call “artwork” tracks, which are quite “swirly” looking. They tend to lend the sound a slightly different feel - perhaps a bit softer? Hard to describe really. All should pair brilliantly well with a NAP110 or NAP160 though.
My concern is that a large investment may not bring any noticeable gains. The reason I say this is that I don’t listen to music particularly loud, and have noticed, like speakers, some amps like to be turned up to get them working most effectively. The 160, much like the Nait1 and Nait2 can create well at low volumes and wondered how the 250 and 135s faired. It is not about what is better, more about what would work best for me.
hmmm… this is probably a matter of taste, but i have currently all of them: 135CB and Olive, 160CB and BD, all service by Naim or
Class A. For my hears 135 are not the best amp for instrumental, even in active mode with SBL.
regards
I would share your concern too. No point in spending the money on more expensive power amps for no benefit.
This is why we should audition first, whenever possible. We have and were convinced that the 135s are crushingly better at both low and high volumes. We very rarely play music loud. Well, apart from Deep Purple or Stevie Ray Vaughan. The volume knob on the 52 rarely goes above 9 o’clock.
I run a Nait 2 and more recently a hicap/32.5/250 cb set up. The 20 plays low volumes with extra detail and clarity over the Nait 2 on both the A5’s and the Dali Oberon 5 I have. The Kans on the other hand prefer the Nait2. With the 250 the Kans sound a bit thin and weedy by comparison. All heard in the same room.
It’s going to depend on speakers and the room but I’d go for a 110 and upwards unless you have a well matched speaker for the Nait 2. I don’t think the 90 is going to add anything over the Nait 2.
I haven’t noticed that with my BD 160, though when I got it, it had what was probably an 18awg at most power cable barely soldered onto the original small tin pins of the bakelite bulgin connector, and having Sean Jacobs make up a Powerblack cable with a new bulgin not only removed a proverbial ‘veil’ but also seemed to snap it more into focus, esp. the midrange. Might be worth a try.
Anyone know what the final version of 322 card was? I’ve got /1 and /4 but know the 323 went up to /5 so wonder if the 322 did the same.
Also, I can’t find any record online as to when the various iterations were released. I’m guessing the original 323 / 322 were released late 70s. Anyone got any info on this?
Just listening to CB 32.5/160 into passive Briks with Valhalla/Ittok/VM95E front end. The timing is just awesome especially as the amps have been powered on for several days now. So pinpoint on it all the time. Playing Black Pumas self titled album a lot this week and it just sounds great. Top album btw for anyone that might like something a bit funky and soulful and just the one LP so no flipping over every 12 mins.