It would be great to hear whether the New Classics 250 is any different in this regard, though. It’s clearly not the same design as previously, so might well behave differently…
I assume the design team would have tested, so would be able to answer more definitively, hence my question being directed that way in the first instance.
My hope is that it’s less fussy in this regard, as the whole new design ethos appears to be heading in that direction, and towards more standard cabling in general. Part of what attracted me back to Naim as a brand…
I’d have thought a “pass through” option from the NSC 222 would have been available so an existing pre-amp could have been used. I thought the Linn Selekt DSM had that option but I’m probably wrong – usually am!! Thanks anyway.
It looks like, from a post from @110dB, that you can set the output to a fixed level for use into a separate pre-amp if you so wished. As others mention, if this is your plan, then perhaps it will be better to wait for what’s coming later in the year.
Not quite the same as having a traditional line out socket as an alternative to pre out, but I guess if you have a separate preamp that you’re happy to use for volume control it could be a good solution.
The NSC 222 does have an AV bypass mode (turns off the volume control - for analogue inputs only).
This is intended for the L&R channels of an AV processor, integrating an audio and AV system together to share the L&R speakers.
In the above scenario just one input (say AV) is set to AV bypass.
One could set every input to AV bypass and it could be used as a source.
222 does have a very good pure analogue pre-amp stage, so while it is possible I would not recommend as a long term system. A streamer would be preferable.
(EDIT: I’ve just seen this has been answered already. )
As @110dB states, the 222 does already have a very good pre-amp stage so it would be an option to bypass my 202 straight into the 200. Thanks for the advice – I will try to arrange a loan of a 222 (and possibly NDX2) from my local hi-fi dealer.
I don’t really understand why people are so ‘anti’ using the ‘right’ lengths of NAC A5. Its not cheap, but - compared to the kit it connects to, not so expensive. Why save such a relatively small amount, only to (potentially) compromise the end result…?
If you really want to save compared to NAC A5 ‘new’, try A5 ‘pre-loved’…
Nigel this prompted me. I assume there is to be no 200 replacement. This I think a shame. A power amp, possibly shoe box size, at that level would be a good foothold in the Naim hierarchy with either the Atom HE or a 222.
Any return to shoebox-sized units would be fantastic after all this time, and quite possibly a real moneyspinner for Naim.
A much better alternative for Naim users than those ghastly silver-faced units that Focal tried to foist upon an unsuspecting world not long ago. The thought still makes me shudder! I wonder if anyone was foolish enough to buy any of them? If so, I imagine that the resale value would have dropped by 75% as the units left the shop.
I’m not sure, Lindsay. Say a new classic 200 cost £2,000, then it with an Atom HE would be a direct competitor for a Nova, bringing a return to the confusion we had before. Having found speakers that match the Nova, I’ve been astonished at how good it is. I’m not sure you really need two boxes to have a foothold in the hierarchy when one already provides it.
Part of the purpose of all this change is to rationalise things. So a 222 and 250, then a 300 series with pure streamer, preamp, power amp and power supply capable of powering both the preamp and streamer, and able to step down a series to upgrade the 222. That’s just six different boxes - unless the 300 power amp is dual monos as people suspect.
That presents a coherent range of Unitis, 200 and then 300 series, with a new 500 series to follow.
There is of course the question as to what happens to the ND5XS2, Nait XS2 and the Supernait 3. It will be interesting to see how it all pans out in the months ahead. Maybe the NSS333 will be self powered, like the 222, which would make a nice two box setup with the new Supernait. On the other hand, we then get back to it competing with the 222/250. I’m sure those clever people in St Etienne know what they are doing.
For me personally the issue would not be cost - I’ve owned far more expensive cable. It would be about making the installation neat and domestically acceptable.
E.g., just as an example, say the optimum SQ were achieved with 10m pair cable, but I only needed 2m pair runs to my speakers, it might be unsightly, to say the least, to have 16m of spare cable lying around! (As an aside, I actually have had 10m runs of a completely different cable, which I made the mistake of buying “in case I ever needed the extra length” at the time. Well, you don’t realise how much 8m spare per side actually is until you try to hide it! It was this experience which taught me to only buy the length you need to neatly install!).
Looking in the user manual for the NC 250 it does seem as though this requirement might have dropped further than the 3.5m of the past, as it states 2m minimum (and I think I recall 110dB mentioning it would be OK driving 1m).
I guess the thing is without knowing how sensitive it is (if at all) to speaker cable in terms of optimum SQ, one is left to guess/trial and error of goodness knows how many 3rd party cables, if one does not wish to use potentially long lengths of the Naim cable…?
The dealer where I did my demo actually used the lowest end Transparent cable, which, if memory serves, has an inductor in series (in their little ‘magic network box’) so I might not have been experiencing cable length SQ effects in that listening session)…