Start the thread Mike, 
1 Like
Personally, I think a 222/300/250 is the basis of the perfect retirement system, especially when paired with an LP12 for vinyl duties. If I moved to a smaller place I might swap the current ATC SCM40s for SCM20s but beyond that, without a big premium bond win I can’t forsee me changing my system.
4 Likes
I have a single rack system. A smaller system would take up almost the exact same space unless I was to get an all-in-one. I can’t see the point in ‘downsizing’ tbh…
2 Likes
The volume controls of the Statement, 272 and SU all have a common fundamental design, that is that they are switched resistor ladder networks; this is known
However the circuits used aren’t identical as there are several ways of implementing these circuits, and all are based on well established principles. Our understanding is that the SU is a fairly conventional design (probably using CMOS transmission gates) whereas, we believe the Statement volume control is fully implemented using only discrete components after considerable research into optimising the SQ of the design. Our understanding is that the 272 uses an architecture derived from the lessons learnt in designing the Statement volume control.
Perhaps someone from Naim staff could throw some light on this conjecture of ours.
2 Likes
I downsized years ago and have been quite happy with my 3 box systems, 272/555DR/250DR and now 222/555DR/250. And while I have extra shelf space it’s nice to not have so many cables and boxes to plug in. I have some books on those empty shelves now. If I were older and spent more time at home I could probably justify a big stack of expensive boxes but I spend a lot of time with outdoor hobbies including my other expensive interest, motos, which get more of my $$ since I live where I can ride all year round. And thanks to the NC I can upgrade to 333/332 for improved SQ and still only have three boxes. The shift in direction from Naim is just what I was looking for.
2 Likes
If you want more details I dare say Steve might be prepared to elaborate.
All these resistor ladders are discrete, but that doesn’t mean that the switching is implemented using discrete components, only that the attenuator is implemented using discrete components.
Re NSC 222 & NAP 250… Interesting comments from AV Forums reviewer Ed Selley on their latest podcast, essentially as an introduction to the as yet unpublished review. I think the review will be enthusiastic!
For anyone who doesn’t want to listen to the whole thing (understandable), the Naim bit is roughly 1h 18min in…
I have been thinking about this too. I think that, if my daughter doesn’t want it (she probably doesn’t) then she should, as you suggest, take it to a dealer. Shouldn’t get ripped off, anyway.
3 Likes
@110dB Any chance there might be a ‘POTS’ update to the NAC 552 to get the newer switched resistor option (sans mega knob of course)?
2 Likes
NSC-333 still alive and kicking 3 weeks later… just saying 
1 Like
And while I am browsing the website, did you know that the NC range includes the (unfortunately discontinued) NAP 250DR? The NAP 250-3 is nowhere to be seen.
Click below, and then expand the “See all in range”.
Naim Audio Marque Separates | HiFi Separates
PS: Don’t get me started about the random order of the products shown…
1 Like
I know that the NC250 does exist if you search for it throughout other links. However it doesn’t appear in the specific link I shared and I tried to joke a bit about it. Sorry if it wasn’t obvious!
If you click on the New Classics, and then click on 200 Series you get this;
The NC NAP250 is there.
But if you click on Classics, and then on the subsection New Classic, it’s not.
If you go via Marque Separates it’s mentioned but not featured.
Products/New Classics/200 Series takes you right to the 250. No conspiracy.
But the 250DR is featured instead… 
Come on guys, I am just pointing to the issues of the hopeless website. Let’s not overblow this! 
6 Likes