OK, sorry to be pedantic here, but is there some specific difference between an XPS and an XPS2 which means that only the latter can be transformed into an XPS-T?
Well, not much is shared between an XPS and an XPS2 - the transfomer for one thing is totally different and much larger in the XPS2. However, itâs of no matter here as Naim never offered conversions - the XPS-Ts had to be built specially.
With policies to the OP but this thread seemed the best place to post this.
A former work colleague who is a very good guitarist called in yesterday when I was listening to Jazz Record Requests on R3 on my Qb. I made some coffee and we went into the lounge and put R3 on the main system. I have an original Nat 05 with standard aerial. He just sat there dumbfounded by how good it sounded but then started posing some intriguing questions.
What source equipment were the BBC using? He said that quite a few years back he visited the BBC studios and he was surprised that they were using standard issue Denon CDPs and we guessed that nowadays they will use some form of server system? Given the orthodoxy around here (the forum) is source first - not something that I necessarily accept as gospel - unless the BC have equipped their studios with high-end streamers/DACs it doesnât really make sense.
We then switched to R4 and it was a live news bulletin which sounded equally clear and organic. We then concluded that a properly miked broadcast was in effect the purest relay you could get. But hold on surely given that the BBC is now broadcast over the internet and DAB isnât the live stuff digitised at source? I donât know the answer to this but I imagine that these days everything is digitised at some point is an FM tuner truly better at broadcast than listening to the same broadcast across the internet through say NDX2.
Answers on a postcard.
Regards,
Lindsay
2 Likes
I think you just have to use your ears. I use my tuner every day. I have tried internet radio twice since owning the ND555, but prefer the NAT01 every time. One thing that astonished me is that I can listen to Record Review on a Saturday morning and hear a track played over the tuner which sounds better than if I stream the same track from my server.
2 Likes
Clive. Exactly that Now we donât know what source the BBC are using but I doubt itâs an ND555 or equivalent.
ND555 vs NAT: if you have a good station streaming in flac/cd qualityâwell, guess thatâll be hard to match! f.ex radio paradise in flac 
Much as I welcome RPâs introduction of FLAC streams, I find the improvement over their 320 streams to be relatively small, and no match for locally streamed 16/44. The BBC showed how it should be done with their R3 FLAC trial a couple of years ago. Sadly, thereâs no sign of them making this available again.
Intresting I prefer the flac stream, it has a less fragile treble and a bit less muddy bass on my system. I prefer fm R3 to the online streams, itâs somehow richer.
There actually was an AM tuner that went as far as prototype and was exhibited at one of the London Shows circa 1978-79. They used a R2R music source and an AM modulator to demonstrate its rather special AM performance-which of course could not be matched by any off-air signal, making its absolute performance a bit of a moot point. But it was kind of cool hearing AM sound like that for the first (and only) time. Early ventures into AM stereo were about as successful as Dolby encoded FM.
The XPS-T is also rather special. The NATPS is probably somewhere between a SNAPS and a Hicap in performance, while the XPS-T is in the Supercap+ bracket. Which still does not diminish the NAT01 performance when ran âonlyâ with the NATPS-even live announcers voices have a degree of realism that is unmatched in recorded music.
2 Likes
Ron, I guess that was the NAT301? Only a few were made. IIRC, it had two separate AM receiver sections, one wideband, and one narrowband. The receiver would select the best mode of operation automatically and could potentially deliver AM sound quality not far off that of the FM section. But, as you say, much would be down to the quality of the transmitted signal.
For those wondering what happened next, the NAT301 developed into the NAT01 and a mooted AM receiver that would each be separate units that could also be powered from the one NAPST. But in the end, the AM tuner never went ahead.
Would love to hear what the XPS-T would bring to the show. Iâd never heard of it until
this thread.
Let me guess, you have one?!
No, I donât, although my first bit of Naim kit was a NAT101, which I still regret letting go.
There are probably no more than a dozen XPS-T worldwide. Thereâs are rarer than Faberge eggs. Historically this came into existence by me persuading a forum member to commission an experimental PS for the NAT, based on the subHicap specifications of the NATPS coupled with the insanely high performance of the NAT01 even with the NATPS. The end result surprised even Naim HQ from what I remember. There is a reason why used NAT are a scarce ,even when high quality FM broadcasts are becoming a rarity.
1 Like
1 Like
Lovely rear view âŚ
I wonder who sold that, not many exist
@Polarbear are the XPS Tâs a conversion of the XPS2 as the serial number on the unit in question is that of an XPS2 and the box also. The T is a sticker placed on the back panel.
Spot on Steve, its a converted XPS2 with a T on the back. However it does take the NAT 01 to another level
1 Like
Thanks for the swift reply. I figured a CB NAT01 complete with PS, all leads and boxed serviced twice (last time in 2012) along with the XPS T also boxed with special Burndy was priced fairly at ÂŁ2k. The last XPS2 I sold went for ÂŁ1299. I will have both serviced before use and have a spare HiLine and PowerLine waiting for them! I wonder if Naim offer a DR upgrade!
Are the internals XPS2 just with a modified output for the NAT01 Head unit?