I can promise you that a NAP500DR can get very close to the Statement power amps. How do I know? This is a short story about patience, perseverance and reward…
A couple of years ago I sent my 500 to Salisbury for DR’ing and servicing I’d had it back for about a month when I started to notice a drop in SQ on he left channel. Long story short, the amp went back and forth to Salisbury several times but the problem persisted. Sometimes it was caught by Jason on a listening test in the dem-room, sometimes by me having to send it back again.
In a final assault to try to solve the issue, I was told by Jason, that the guy building the Statements was going to tear the amp down to bare-bones and rebuild it. Shortly after it was finished I had a call from Jason saying that they’d had my 500 in the dem-room and it was, without doubt, the finest 500 to ever come out of Salisbury. Apparently it blew their 500 out the water and was keeping pretty good pace with the Statements (on the S1 pre).
He also confirmed that they’d spent hundreds of man hours trying to solve the problem, so unlikely that future 500’s could be built like this as they’d cost more than a Statement!
Naim certainly have my appreciation. It’s this kind of dedication to a customer that has kept me going back to them since 1986.
Don’t understand why it would sound any different just because it was re built?
Unless they put better components in it rather than the normal ones, it would be the same wouldn’t it, and if not then, it certainly asks the question why are normal 500’s not built correctly.
So same boards, same wires, same components, basically just a new built 500, but one without a fault.
Plus they must have had it months running it in afterwards as we all know naim needs months to settle down and sound right when new, or so we are told ? especially to completely knock naims run in demo 500 out the park.
All sounds a bit like trying to hide the fact they sold a faulty 500, had it back many times and couldn’t fix it, and now say this so hopefully the owner will forget all about the past.
Thats my take anyway, obviously could be wrong but it doesn’t compute.
Back in my NAC 52 days in the 1990:es there were always stories about those magic 52’s that were considered special perfected units, maybe it was down to luck or certain skills of the person who did the assembly/soldering. Who knows?
Unless better components used, then they should all sound the same, or certainly very close, to close notice any difference anyway by human ear, maybe they might measure different as every component will have a tolerance.
But doesn’t the 500 gear get the best measurer components anyway, so it guarantees they should all be at there best and sound the same?
In my experience, with Naim and other manufactures, I find differences between the same product. I’ve had several 72’s. One of which I kept and sound absolutely fantastic. In fact it gets uncomfortably close to my 52. I’ve had a few Linn Troika’s, all sounded different. When I had my active 135’s I listened to all three pairs before I sold a couple to go back to passive. Again, all sounded slightly different.
Regarding my 500, I was told they did mess around with a few things, so it’s no longer a completely standard 500, which may be why it sounds so good?
In reality the Statement’s will still be far better than the 500 into difficult loads, so although it may sound close at low levels it’ll be a lot different when pushed.
Funny. It was Jason who said on the Munich hifi show 2019 that consistency is a key at naim. If you buy a product and your neighbor buys it, and your friend too, all three of you are going to have a very similar item (sound).
Like every manufacturer or someone selling something, say what you think fits best at the time and what you feel the buyer will like to hear.
It’s very hard to find 100% honestly in anything these days which is a shame but thats how it.
I completely agree and think they will if they are all bought from around the same time. But anyone who’s had kit serviced by Naim know that they will make improvements from things they’ve learnt over time. Changes to cable runs, they way clips are used etc. I’m sure Naim’s core philosophy, like any manufacture, is continuous improvement. Nothing ever stands still.
Sure, but in your story, it was mentioned that your NAP 500 was more like a Statement compared to other 500s built around the same time, and that’s way too exaggerated.
Just relating what Jason said to me. I didn’t hear it in the dem room, he did. As did my dealer in his shop. Their words, not mine.
Is it really as good as a Statement? No, of course it’s not. I have a friend who owned a full Statement systems, so I do have a reference point. What I can tell you is that it sounds absolutely fantastic in my system.
Me too.
My post wasn’t directed to you. It was a general comment about the fact that I don’t think a full Statement is close vs 552/500, apart in not a full resolving system ( source, speakers, room…).
I find differences between virtually every time I listen to the same system. Either your ears are far more sensitive than mine (which I am happy to accept is possible - very happy as “cloth ears” can save a fortune!), or what you are experiencing is the simple fact that our ears do not hear exactly the same constantly, from day to day and hour by hour.
Jumping back to the thread question, one thing about the spec of the new 350 that instantly grabs my interest is the huge peak power capacity. It is far greater than the old 300 and nearly double that of teh published figure for the 500. And this is the aspect that makes it interesting to me, as I know that the 500W peak capability of my amp is its limiting factor, as its indicator shows it going into clipping on peaks when I play rock music at realistic levels - or the Telarc 24bit recording Tchaikovsky’s 1812, though I suspect that even the 350 would need to be turned down to play the latter!!
There are always differences - had 2 hdx and they had sounded different.
There is always tolerance in it. And if gekos 500 was a bit tweaked with TLC, there is nothing wrong with it. Even if they put in more selected parts or adjusted to tighter specs as usual.
This speaks for a top service a manufacturer is offering - not for bad standard products coming out of the factory.
You can also see it from the other side of the mirror @Dunc
