I wouldn’t go as far as snobbery but I do think there is a dogma stemming from the 70/80s source first theory which in my opinion was always overstated in any event.
2 Likes
Without a doubt that is the case.
The other thing is that yes you’ll get better results from better electronics. But how does that help if you specifically want a one-box system with all the neatness and simplicity that that brings with it? Not everybody wants stacks of boxes in their living space, no matter how good it might sound. So it’s a sacrifice for that reason.
3 Likes
I like the S600s, even in a relatively small room where they are constricted (LH speaker just 80 cm from a non parallel side wall). The sound they make seduced me. I can imagine that a modern Naim amp, such as the Nova, would be worth listening to at home with them.
1 Like
You are so convinced that you are right. It’s no different to me or others saying it’s not a good idea. What should I do? Agree with you? I don’t care what the OP gets, it’s just my view. Why do you get so exercised? You’ll raise your blood pressure.
1 Like
Personally I think you are going to have to try and see.
As I am sure you are aware the traditional 1970/80s Naim/Linn approach was based on the idea of ‘garbage in garbage out’. I am not saying the Nova is garbage it was just the idea that the majority of the budget should be spent on the source, then amp, then speakers. Based on this the idea of matching the Ovators with the Nova is a ‘No’ as the Ovators are just going to show up the Nova’s shortcomings.
However, the world has moved on and many people use streamers instead of turntables which sound very good and are not crazy expensive like your Nova. I have heard it partnered with Sopras and Kantas which are more expensive than the Nova and it sounded very good. Others on here have the combo you are suggesting and think it sounds good.
Anyway, that’s my two-penneth. Sorry I can’t be more helpful but I haven’t got your listening room or ears for that matter. Also I haven’t actually heard the Sopras - never been a big fan of Naim speakers.
1 Like
Well OK - you’re right about that HH. And I’m already on long-term medication for it - have been for the past 30 years.
So yes, you should agree with me for the sake of my health! Stop me getting so worked up about things.
Seriously though, it’s not that I’m so convinced I’m right as such. More that I’m convinced that you’re wrong. But only because you seem unwilling to consider anything other than systems must be built on the ‘source first’ philosophy. We’ve been through it all before so no point re-hashing it here. There is evidence though, even in this thread don’t you think - from other people’s experiences, that other ways are possible and do worK? Work in the sense that they bring musical satisfaction and reality. Which makes me wonder why you adhere to the ‘source first’ dogma in the face of clear evidence to the contrary. But you have your reasons and of course you don’t need to justify your position to me.
I suspect we’ll just have to agree to differ on this. No worries - there are much worse things happening in the world.
I’ve had my tablet for the day so I’ll just have to wait 'till I open a nice bottle of wine tonight to relax!
1 Like
Yes indeed. That was the very phrase that Linn used to use in their adverts.
It’s absolutely and unrefutably true of course, and makes complete sense.
The trouble was that Linn wanted us to believe that anything other than an LP12 was garbage. Nothing else could create musical satisfaction. And there lies the roots of the source-first dogma that still persists more than 40 years later to this day. You have to hand it to Linn Products - what an absolutely inspired bit of marketing.
Source is important. So is amplification. So are speakers.
You need an adequate source for a given system. Not a top-flight source.
Hi-Fi folk-lore has us believe that the LP12 was the deck that changed everything. Suddenly turntables, arms and cartridges mattered with regards to sound, rather than just spinning records at the correct speed and not damaging them. Curious then how many people use things like Garrard 401’s - which pre-date the LP12, because they believe them to sound better.
But many peoples’ minds are stuck in the dark-ages. Long may the cult of Linn rule!
2 Likes
Regarding small amps and expensive speakers , all bets are off with me .I recently ( couple weeks ago ) nearly bought a beautifull pair of B& W 802 D2 .
These were to replace my Ovator S600.
The dealer who is fantastic brought them to the house and because of wiring issues and a brand new amp ,to check all was ok we hooked up my Nait 50 . Now the current version of this speaker is 25 k .And guess what . It sounded great .
That was not the issue for me though .
The Ovators just do something the B&W couldnt…and as a result the 802D2 left one week later.
3 Likes
You don’t have to agree with me, but please don’t dismiss my genuinely held opinion as claptrap. It’s intolerant and inappropriate. It’s important that discussions are kept respectful.
4 Likes
For any fixed budget, and starting from scratch, balance is the key. If I spend 95% of my budget on speakers and 5% on electrnics, then it may work fine, but would likely not be the best idea. But the OP isn’t starting from scratch. They’ve simply asked if the speakers will sound good with his Nova. I think they will.
3 Likes
Not at all HH. No disrespect intended. Just, like yours, my genuinely held opinion.
1 Like
A forum member here, RSCH, has first tried his new Nait 50 on his S-600s, and a common friend came to have a listen.
They were both amazed at how balanced the S-600s sounded with the diminutive amp.
3 Likes
Yes the source first concept does make sense although as with most things there is a tendency for some people to take it too far.
I do look back at that time with a sense of nostalgia. Many happy hour was spent sandpapering my stylus with Linn green stuff.
Anyway I will leave it to those who have experience of the Nova and Ovators to continue the discussion.
2 Likes
Was the blood pressure remark intended to be respectful?
3 Likes
The whole point.
2 Likes
And that phrase, coined from the computer industry, is to me self evidently the most ridiculous basis for such an argument! The musical replay process is a chain, and in terms of hifi systems that is starting from the purchased recorded medium through to the air pressure in the room. Every component the signal passes through is part of a chain, and to coin a phrase a chain is only as strong as it’s weakest link: Anything any of those components does to modify, limit or in any other way distort what it is passing through it means the audio is then modified, limited or distorted in some way, whether it happens in the first link or the last link. (And then reality every link does its own bit, the sum of which the listener hears. Only when one component directly reverses what another component has changed will that not be the case.
The question for the system builder/buyer should be which links are likely to make the least difference? They should be considered last in any building/upgrading. And which make the most difference? They of course should be considered first. of course sone things interplay to some extent in one way or another, such as a speaker’s need for the amp to have adequate control, or the source’s need for the preamp to have adequate sensitivity, and that needs awareness.
In my experience, assuming that all other parts are not simply rubbish, (e.g. using bell wire for the interconnect from low level source to preamp), the choice of speaker has a greater effect on the sound the listener hears than is the case with any other components - and it seems we all have different preferences in how we like music to sound. In all the decades since I stumbled across the reality of speaker variation and hence imperfection in terms if fidelity, before “source first” the dogma in some hifi circles - I have never heard any system that challenges my conclusion, all I’ve heard only reinforcing.
2 Likes
I have the 400s and they were good with the SU and much better with a 250DR and even better with a 250NC. I’ve listened to the 600s as I thought I might want them. My listening room is not small and the 400s work great. I’d want a bigger room and amp for the 600s. The Nova will be leaving a lot on the table with the 600s. They’ll likely sound okay with the Nova but is okay all you’re looking for?
1 Like
Whoa ! What a topic great start if the weekend ! I’ll light up the fireplace and the amps.
3 Likes
This is the sort of rationale that doesn’t make sense to me. I mean, yes there will be a lot more to come from the 600’s with better electronics, but does this make it more sensible then to buy an inferior pair of speakers?
Nova + cheaper less capable speakers = good sound, let’s say
Nova + S600’s = even better sound
So you are advocating the puchase of less capable speakers and therefore a less good sound. Just so that the Nova will be exploiting more of the potential of those speakers. To me that simply doesn’t make any kind of sense at all if the object of the excercise is for the OP to end up with the best sound possible from his Nova.
5 Likes
If my memory serves me correctly, this was always the belief before Linn Products came along. Of course, to be fair, all turntables and amps sounded identical back then, so that only left the speakers to make any difference!
But the belief came about presumably because people noticed that changing speakers had a marked effect on the sound. As it still does.
I strongly believe that it is possible to achieve a realism by giving more weight to the speakers that is simply impossible to replicate by improving the source - no matter how much one spends. Of course the proviso that one needs an adequate source always applies. But given that, if the aim is to create something that approaches reality then IMO without a shadow of a doubt getting better BIGGER speakers is the way to go.
Small speakers will never sound real - no matter how much quality you shove up them. They can sound highly musical and involving. But real - no.
2 Likes