Good Evening, Am looking to upgrade my Naim XS amp. Running a pair of PMC 25/24 with the NDX as my source. Currently have the NAC/NAP for a home audition. The sound is absolutely great and we haven’t even got started as the units are still warming up / running in. Curious to have any thoughts on this set up as against the SuperN 3? Anyone done a similar comparison. Thanks
Hello! I’ve owned and used both over the years. I preferred the 202 once I’d added the optional NAPSC, but the 202/200 is a wonderful combination that I was very happy with (I actually had a HiCap and my 200 was not the DR version). Why, then, do I now have a Supernait 3? With the pre-power, the temptation to upgrade starts you on a trajectory! Next was 282, then 250, then source upgrades. Sound wise, they both rock! The Supernait is a little more punchy and ‘muscular’, but perhaps a little heavier. I think it’s down to your personal tastes (and music), rather than one being “better”… and you seem to really like the 202/200?
Thanks for that, am hoping my local dealers SN3 will be available for a home audition. Seems it’s booked solid and the go to option for many.
The sn3 is cheaper than the 202/200. Maybe go the sn3 way, and get a power supply for your NDX?
Thanks will explore the option .
I have been using PMC Twenty5 23s for a couple of years now. Initially with Quad 34 and 306 combo. Upgraded to NAC202 and NAP200DR in march 20. The speakers work well with the Naim application and have good well defined bass and clear mid and highs. I would recommend the PMCs.
I’ve just gone from a Nait XS 2 to a 282/Hicap DR/200.
If you don’t mind the extra boxes, my view is that going separate pre and power opens your future options significantly. (Although the SN3 would be a fantastic place to stop anyway.)
If you went 202/200 now you could jump to 282/200 later, then a Hicap, etc. But you could avoid upgrading the 202 with a NAPSC if you do think you might go 282 in future as it comes with one anyway.
PS I got the 282/200 second hand through the dealer, including full recapping of both, for about 7/8 the price of a new SN3. (So ok they are second hand but the recapping makes them basically new right?)
I recently upgraded from an XS2. My dealer ranked the options as SN3, 202/200, 282/200 and 282/250. I ultimately went with 282/200 DR, with the 200 DR supplying power to 282. (No HiCap at this time, but it is certainly a possible (and recommended) future upgrade.) My dealer’s view was that the 282 was materially better than the 202. I was able to acquire an ex-demo 282 with full warranty at a discount from brand new. (I used the XS2 as a power amp as an interim step while I waited on delivery of the 200 DR, which worked well.) I am enjoying the 282/200 combination immensely and would recommend it without hesitation.
Thanks for all the replies. Can’t wait to get the SN3 this weekend and see what it brings. Am quite relaxed about the separates . They PMC 25/24 potential is clearly more evident with this introduction of new amplification and power. Enjoying the music🎸
Also with “just” a nd5 xs2 as source?
I don’t think his view was source dependent. My current source is a ND5 XS2. While I’m informed that the differences between this and a NDX2 would be more apparent than when using a Supernait 2/3 (which is how I have previously heard the two streamers), the ND5 XS2 is also a wonderful streamer.
I “downgraded” from 202/200DR/NAPSC/HCDR to SN3/HCDR last year.
Absolutely no regrets at all.
Yes the 202/200 is very slightly more spacious and has more air but I prefer the smaller box count of the SN3/HCDR and the higher input sensitivity which allows me to use a wider range of the volume knob. Above all, SN3/HCDR is fantastic sounding and I do not miss the 202/200 at all.
Interesting, what are your speakers, if I may?
Yes intrigued by the engjoo’s observation on the 202/200 to SN3 path. thanks for sharing.
I am on Proac Response D20 Silk Dome tweeter. Note that I am not saying the SN3/HCDR is better than 202/200DR/HCDR/NAPSC. What I am saying is overall I prefer the SN3/HCDR for the lesser space it occupies without giving up much. Overall it is a more satisfying ownership.
For sure the higher input sensitivity of SN3 rather than any Nac is strong point, IMO
hi, What do you mean by input sensitivity? saw this being mentioned earlier . thanks
It is what @engjoo said 5 messages above…
It means I have a wider adjustment range on my volume control.
With the SN3, I am listening at 9 o’clock whereas on the 202/282, I cannot go beyond 8 o’clock.
I experienced the same moving from SN2 to NAC 282; but I also noticed that, for example, the bottom end of volume knob of SN2 was 8 o’clok while of NAC 282 is 7 0’clock. secondly, even ad very low volume level the music is “full” and the channels perfectly balanced. I’ve never had the same sensation listening to SN2 at very low volume (and I got confirmation of that when, yesterday evening, I switched again to the latter right for a listening test).