Well, at least some of it is.
1 Like
I think naim will have set out to build a very capable phono stage which easily accommodates both MM and MC cartridges, whilst offering an upgrade path via PSU and connectivity to 222/332.
Now some people are saying it’s not as good SQ wise as SuperLine, but I still think naim will think job done!
I doubt we will see anything else in the phono lineup.
1 Like
Being objective, I’m sure you’re right…
I guess I’m in disbelief. Like @Yeti suggests, the discovery that Naim might replace a thing with another that wasn’t better.
Never-the-less the NC phono is a perfectly capable product, more flexible, which works well with other NC pieces, for a vinyl source, etc.
As you rightly point out, it “ticks all the boxes” for vinyl users and the next NC period.
While it’s unlikely to be used with an MM magnet (given the cost), the settings on the NVC TT for MMs are fixed. The input capacitance is still 470pF - unsuited to most modern MMs, which are optimally loaded at less than half that value.
I hadn’t appreciated that and compared to every other adjustable phono stage on the market seems a strange decision.
1 Like
Not so! Naim finally fixed that issue with the NVT – there are 16 capacitance settings starting at 100pf.
[EDIT: I was wrong and @sktn77a is right!]
That’s for the MC only. The MM is fixed.
1 Like
And you’re right, it does indeed say 100pF (which has become the MM standard of late). Not sure where I got 470pF from (that was the old Naim MM loading standard for internal boards and Stageline N).
1 Like
NSC 222, released after the TT, (bizarrely) uses 470pF again.
That is strange! The NVC-TT is 2 years old (as introduced with the Solstice) and they got it right with the MM input specs back then, but to release the NSC222 with the older standard MM loading does appear to be an odd step.
3 Likes
What is your actual experience with various cartridges on a Stageline N or Naim MM cards with a similar loading?
Which cartridges have you enjoyed despite the capacitance and which haven’t worked.
1 Like
Nait 50 is 100 and sounded very good at my demo.
1 Like
It might take a bit of digging into the posts 110db was replying to, but listening tests still seem to be the thing driving MM input capacitance
Sure, but the exact effect will be cartridge dependent. And I don’t think Naim recommends any specific one. Plus, it can easily be raised with cabling, but you can’t really lower it.
And the effect of a too high capacitance, so with nearly all modern carts, is high frequency roll-off. I don’t assume Naim’s idea is that what isn’t there can’t sound bad, so that leaves me wondering what is.
Is it designed around a specific cartridge? If so, which one?
2 Likes
I’ve tried the Shure M97XE and AT VM760SLC. Both sounded dull with the Stageline N. With the Lejonklou Slipsik, the highs returned. Having said that, I think the Stageline would be fine with a cartridge designed for a higher capacitance load (older Shures, some Ortofon and Grados, Nagaokas). I think these high values are a hangover from earlier days when RF interference was more of an issue.
Thanks, worth knowing what to avoid with the N.
Not sure RF interference has improved over the years and Naim seem particularly vulnerable to it. My superline for the first couple of years doubled as a radio tuned to some Russian station, a little capacitance reduced it but didn’t cure the problem, strangely moving to Fraim Lite did the trick after I’d given up worrying about it.
The stageline has also had its moments but I’m asking for it with a Decca anyway, mostly its just a mild hum but when it was near a party wall there was a definite neighbour effect that changed over time but at its worst made it unlistenable.
This is very strange indeed, on two fronts. First of all the loading for the top ends on MMs is quite delicate and if you were doing it in simulation (it’s about as easy a simulation as there is) then, from memory, you tend to be moving the main C value about 20pF at a time to squeeze out all the top end possible. It’s surprising how well this system works, given the huge inductance, but you are not there or thereabouts with just any value. The second reason is that if you have capacitance to spare, then it could be worth spending that capacitance on better shielding of the cable. There’s value in the standard practice of having 100pF to ground the moment you get to the casework, along a nice low impedance path, so you can’t just burn it all up on the cable, but there would seem to be some scope left if 470pF is the alternative (though that value seems far too high to me, not that I have looked at this for a number of years). Going into such sensitive circuitry you could reap more of a benefit keeping out RF than you got initially by choosing low capacitance cable. And if you are running out of allocation for capacitance then there is always the option of having a “specialist” shorter cable.
Incidentally, and this is quite fun, the other place this sytem works in is the Stratocaster. Put into your simulation all the standard/published values for the inductance and resistance of the pickups, the rolloff cap and the pots on their mid setting, into a 1 Meg load, and you get a ruler flat response out to something kHz. I can’t remember how high it went but I remember being astonished at how dead flat it was.
1 Like
It’s all very cartridge dependent. The Shures and AT’s appear to be the most negatively impacted by an overly high capacitance load. Here’s a figure showing the effect of of increase capacitance on the frequency response of the Shure M97xE (courtesy of TNT Audio):
Try not to focus on the downward drift of all plots above 2000hz as this appears to be an artifact of the changeover from a laminated core to the solid core of the xE cartridge.
There are some good theoretical simulation posts on this subject (I believe on Vinyl Engine) but that’s probably a bit over the top for a general forum.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.