Quite aside from the fact naim have said here they think the PCM1791 sounded better in this application, by using same DAC chipset as NSC222 the R&D costs were shared/reduced. So the saving of a tenner per box probability pales into insignificance compared to that.
We’re happy 1704 users 
No. Tape. Out. 
It does. Relax.
Input 8 (5 pin DIN) has line level outputs mirroring the currently selected source.
That’s from the 332 manual.
You had the explanation for the choice of the PCM1791 straight from the head engineer (see his post above).
Again, I will repeat its here for those who either may have missed it, don’t believe it, or perhaps, for whatever reason, just don’t want to believe it;
"The 222 and 333 use the backend of the PCM1971A, just the DAC array part.
When used with the SHARC DSP for the integer oversampling we found the 1791 to sound better than the 1792."
Example. A customer would normally pay something around x5 from the BOM cost. So a 13 USD difference in the BOM would mean you pay 65 USD more in store. Sum up the total BOM and all these choices make a big deal.
DAC chips can be a bit like cable discussions 
. It’s all over my head, but I trust the designers to know what they are doing.
Managers and bean counters are all about budgets and results - they dont care which DAC-chip is used. They just look bored when implementation details come up at meetings, and they just want to know the effect on the budget.
If R&D and Deaign had free hands to build what they want I guess the 333 would cost 50 000 USD. Minimum
It’s a balance act to build a product for years that should come out with margins targeted for healthy business and USP values against the available market at that time.
That’s the straight chip costs. Given the 1791 is used here just for its DAC, the cost of integrating (it requires all the DSP development etc.) the cheaper chip may well actually be more than the more expensive one!
Anyway, for those pointing to this difference, I’d be more interested in asking Naim about their choices around the architecture in the NSS - to me it looks like they might be valuing separating the digital electronics from parts, but maybe not all, of the pure analogue. The interior layout of the NSS as shown is certainly intriguing. And I say that as one who was perhaps a bit too obsessed about DAC chip choice on previous NC threads!
I’m in love with 1704U 
Sure Django84… By my own admission I’m not great at describing differences in sound etc. but happy to share my observations… others will undoubtedly have/have had different impressions.
From an overall sound perspective I prefer the 200 series (three boxes) to my previous (NDX2 (bare),282 (hicap),250DR) system, so for me it’s better…. I absolutely loved my previous system which would still be an absolutely joy for me to own were I still to have it today, but differences I’ve noticed (most of which are incremental rather than life-changing) are:
Non-sound related points:
I hope my observations are helpful but do take with a pinch of salt as I’m no expert, just an everyday music lover!
Just out of interest I looked PCM1704U-K prices for this obsolete part and in the hundreds of $ per chip, and that’s a part in a ND555/NDS/nDAC
Apologies for being off-topic, in the middle of the posting about the new 300 range.
They look good, btw and with the 200, Naim are realising the “Designed in the UK, built in the EU” model to stay current as a mainstream manufacturer.
Look forward to having the opportunity to hear them - is there a dealer Roadshow planned for later ‘23 and in to ‘24?
Fantastic! Thank you so much for your effort. Really appreciated and a really good write-up. Have great fun with the shiny new things!
Sloop, the information I have is that the following kit will no longer be available to order from the end of this month; NAC 282 + NAPSC, NAC 252, NAP 250DR, NAP 300DR, XPS DR, SUPERCAP DR, HICAP DR. Quantities are limited so allocations are on a first come first served basis. Obviously, after sales support for these products will continue as per normal.
The ND5XS2 and NDX2 continue and remain part of the range. Also still in the range of separates are the NAIT 5SI, NAIT XS3, and the Supernait 3, Statement, and 500 series. Unitis and Mu-Sos all continue as before.
The Naim NSC 222 streaming pre-amp has replaced the NAC-N272.
The Naim NSS 333 streamer appears to currently sit somewhere between the NDX2 and ND555 in the range.
I’ve only just caught up with the New Classic Range - Part 1 thread…
Crikey! What on earth have you been doing?! 
New product gets announced, within 24 hours everyone is suddenly an electronics engineer with a realtime readout of the component level supply chain!
No one is buying this kit on a silicon spec sheet, or a readout from an oscilloscope, of course it has purpose to highlight specifics and debate the design choices but to challenge these complex decisions in the product design process, made by those qualified to do so, based purely on a data sheet or market component costs seems short sighted and ignorant at best.
All that done without even hearing it as well which is obviously the aspect of what the product is designed for that we make a purchasing decision around.
I’d be panning out much wider here and looking at the range design overall, from simplified power options and external upgrades, to lower energy use and more efficient standby modes, improved antenna placement and design for RF data/control, much improved volume control implementation and so we go on.
There’s still more to come as well as a bonus!
I think most on the forum are of this mind but to me it’s clear there are some with another agenda.
I’m genuinely interested and appreciate all contributions but particularly from the design team accepting they are not going to say it’s crock of……
Looking forward to another announcement.
I would say the NAP350 … is probably epic value in relation to its performance I would be willing to bet that they as good if not better than a NAP500…time will tell…get your orders in!!! Have you heard them yet Richard…