I thought as the they are made by Naim.. 800 w 4 Ohm
but okay have no complaints about a six-pack Nap 135’s ,6x135 w 4 Ohm..
I think you can safely presume if they were of the quality of other Naim gear they wouldn’t be priced to be so affordable. Naim wouldn’t shoot themselves in the foot.
1 Like
I see,yes I agree active is superb,Naim have not supported active enough.
I have found for an example,that active Nap 140’s beats both Nap 250 and Nap 135’s passive on IBL and Kan.
5 Likes
I am sure @Darkebear will disagree on that, from memory he has already shared about that.
For myself I haven’t heard any of them.
Is it possible to go active with 160? I know it isn’t the ideal match with DBL but funds will be low after my healthy investment into the DBLs so I just want to get up and running. And it’s not a shabby at all now is it.
I only ask as it only has one socket which is used to power the NAC 12S.
In all my decades of ownership, I have never tried my iBL loudspeakers in active mode. However they have been powered by the NAP350s mono’s for the last 22 months and sound amazingly good → their best ever.
5 Likes
Than you sir. Did you ever manage to do a 500DR -350 comparison on the IBLs?
1 Like
No, I have never used any 500 series components in my system, but I’ve no doubt they would be very good indeed. Before the 350’s I used a NAP250DR and that worked very well.
For context → my NC journey started with the NAC332 using only the 250DR (with appropriate cable), then just over a year later, I had a demo of adding an NPX300 Power Supply with a new NC250 Power Amplifier versus the 350’s with no power supply for the preamp. The mono’s were way ahead, even without the PS, so with the relatively small extra investment, an easy decision was quickly made.
1 Like
I remember my Kan’s not being thin fronted by an early LP12 on CB amps 32.5/psu/135.
Anything else source failed(well maybe not a CDS1), not sure its mentioned here what’s the source?.
I’d imagine the NC350 will be an entirely different approach., listen first.
1 Like
It is but then you’ll need three of them as well as a NAXO/SNAXO and a pair of power supplies (1 for the NAC, one for the X-over).
1 Like
I did audition S800 against DBL both driven Active with NAP 500 before I opted for the S800. It was very interesting and I fully-understand the love for the DBL, but I did find the S800 a lot better in terms of openness top to bottom. Unlike the DBL which is a boundary speaker placement, the S800 is somewhat (although not overly) sensitive to placement, but once a sweet-spot is found they click into place sonically and everything sorts iteslf out and the Bass is fast and deep. They are a very revealing speaker in the deep bass textures, but is a beautiful way, just layering it out every strand.
Both great speakers and both needing some attention to placement and system tweaking - and both excelling driven Active.
DB.
5 Likes
I imagine both speakers sound amazing when partnered and setup well. Having said that, I buy with my eyes first and for me the vintage boxy aesthetic as I’ve said many times is so attractive.
Another point is I think ported speakers lose out on a lot and gain very little. Every speaker that I’ve owned that’s ported sounded so much cleaner the moment I’ve plugged the ports. It boggles my mind that designers still port speakers. And for what -efficiency and the illusion of more bass?- because let’s face it - properly done bass is hard hitting powerful and extended with all the articulation one could desire. I get the impression that the DBLs are more hard hitting and punchy without extending as low as the Ovators. Just a guess.
That’s a good guess and how I tend to hear them. I’m always a bit surprised at how lightweight DBL’s sound for their size and what makes them so fast when listening to live music. I completely agree with DB that the S800 Ovators are technically far superior to the DBL’s. They go down lower and have this fantastic seamless quality between the midrange and high frequency that makes music sound very real. My earlier comment on the bass differences between the two is more a personal preference than a criticism and only appears on certain tracks.
3 Likes
Off topic, is it ok to use different speaker cables in an active system?
Say if you find a particular speaker cable produces a sweeter treble than NAC A5. Is it ok to put that on the amp running to tweeters on dibbles? Or does that cause some sort of timing issue due to gauge of wire differences.
Timing is so good in DBL’s ,so they will expose the difference.
DBL’s have excellent treble with NacA5,never sounds harsh if you have good sources and amps.
1 Like
Good to know.
That I do 
1 Like
@Igel id love to read your point of view on the similarities and differences between IBL and DBL. Also compared to other speakers like Linn Kans
I moved from IBL to SL2 to DBL. If I had to give up the DBLs I’d prefer to go back to the IBLs. Part of this may be that, for whatever reason, the SL2s didn’t achieve their full potential in my room. Heard them in another environment and they worked better there.
Willy.
4 Likes
I agree.
I think that IBL and DBL are similar in many ways,but the DBL is the big star,with it’s life like presentation,you really feel the music.
1 Like
It will be interesting to compare DBL to my SW1X Monitor 963 Field Coil speakers as well. The two speakers are for different rooms but I will have to scratch the itch of putting the DBLs in my small listening room.
as of now the M963s FC’s are sounding glorious. I just had to plug a Naim device into the setup lol.
System as it stands. ABBAS DDC > SW1X DAC 3 balanced SPECIAL > SW1X PRE 3 SPECIAL > Naim NAP 160 BD > SW1X MTR 963 FC.
The new monoblocks are sitting aside for now while my shorter speaker cables are being built. The 7.5m lengths of the furutech are too long for a tube power amp. It sounds good but I want the immediacy which I’m told is to do with the damping factor.
2 Likes