That’s pretty obvious.
How could you have source second or third?
In Naim systems it’s chronological advice - upgrade your source before items further downstream on the way to a balanced system.
That’s pretty obvious.
How could you have source second or third?
In Naim systems it’s chronological advice - upgrade your source before items further downstream on the way to a balanced system.
I have a Nait2 feeding a pair of Dali Oberon 5’s at the moment. Do I really need a ND 555 and should I pair it with one or two naps 555 DR’s?
You don’t need anything!
The title was a question that’s my answer.
And because you might (finance/change of circumstances) not end up with a balanced system source first makes absolute sense to me.
Source comes first in the path and speakers choice is most important, tricky, personal and specific (room, preference) to get right, clearly.
What’s there to discuss?
I agree.
You’d have to be nuts not to go for a middle first approach.
If you don’t have an excellent amp how can the Source and speakers Reproduce music with excellent sound quality?
And if you lose it later it there’s no benefit from it having been there earlier!
Better to have than have not
One is recoverable the other has no chance.
I’m sorry guys if Ivor T hadn’t started all this nonsense in the first place this debate wouldn’t ever have happened. It’s plainly obvious that the best approach to building a music system is having balance and synergy throughout, including critically right speakers for room. This might mean that for one customer an Atom and Neat Iotas is best, another a Nova and Titan 606s (yes it’s a brilliant pairing), or perhaps for another a Vertere RG/Arm, Statement amps and Magicos.
And on that I conclude the debate:+1:
Makes no difference! If the speakers are great the source can be improved and you will hear it. If the source is great, the speakers can be improved and you will hear it. But if the character is not great because the speakers (the primary key to character) are wrong, the system will never sound as nice as it could
If it’s not there to start with you’ll never get it later.
Indeed, and as I indicated, if you block it further down the chain it won’t reach your ears either. The old computer data analogy of GIGO is fundamentally flawed here because a hifi system is a chain, and only as good as its weakest link, so in terms of information getting through it does not make any difference which component is the limiting factor. But the character, which is primarily set by the speaker is quite another matter, and, in my view, is far more significant to enjoyment than the amount of detail that gets through. But it depends I suppose on your listening preference - if you want to analyse the music, detail may be critical -but for that you need all links to be equally good, so balance across the whole is more important than either source or speaker. On the other hand if you want to be immersed in the music, character trumps detail. I’m in the latter camp.
As I said it can always be recovered if there in the first place but not if it isn’t.
Better speakers later could reveal more but only if it there to retrieve.
I’m done with this obviously some are having a laugh.
And nowhere have I suggested otherwise! Try again for another laugh!!
I don’t understand how source first can work. It doesn’t really make sense to me and I’ve never heard an analogy to adequately explain it. However, whenever I’ve toyed with it, it’s always held fast, never been breakable, with the one caveat that it relates solely to musical understanding, not the HiFi stuff - i.e., I’m sure you can create a more impressive/clear/transparent system by investing your limited budget in alternative ways.
Source first or system synergy are two opposite matching mindset and it depends on how you want to take it.
My personal experience is when your amplifiers, speakers and cables are resolving enough the source would become very important. I previously owned an Accuphase E650 and Falcon 3/5a, even a tiny change of headshell would contribute difference to the system.
But if you go another route that’s quite different. I previously owned a whole set of Rega before. By experiment, without the Aria, the Rega P3/Elex-R/Couple 3/Duet/RX5 sounds bland and cold, after adding the Aria it got wide soundstage, warm and sweet. Even a change of cartridge doesn’t change lot of the system’s character.
A friend who’s also an old member here is very happy with 152XS and 155XS after having had ‘superior’ gear in the past. My simple opinion is that you should keep what you have - Naim sort of excels in entry levels - and substitute an ND5 XS for the 172. The ND5 XS is a great streamer that won’t make you regret the upper model. I’ve heard them both many times.
And you could keep your elegant, slim 5 series cases.
Years ago I had CD5x, FC2x, Nait5. I experimented with all three combinations for the FC2 (on the CD, on the amp, on both), keeping the configurations for at least one week instead of minutes…
In the end, I kept the FC on the (pre)amp only. My analogy is, for what it’s worth, that it’s better to have less water though a larger and cleaner hose than more water in a smaller and less conductive one.
Welcome - and totally agree with the above comment from @LindsayM . Synergy between speaker / room / amp is so important. Get that very wrong and you are throwing money away …no amount of fancy electronics can recover that. Once you you have a bright clear audio window - then I suggest look at your sources.
I put the pre amp as part of the amp (traditionally called a NAC within Naim)… and not part of the source or anything else. Often the NAC is said to bring the performance up of the connected power amp with it… and I tend to agree with that view.