The 222 is a transitional source product, it’s based on existing sub systems and priced down features coming mainly from the Statement preamp, such as volume control.
I think a key aspect here is their use of the existing NP800 steaming subsystem.
I’d expect it highly likely the next generation dedicated digital sources (replacing current ND sources as the New Classic equivalents) will use a refreshed version of the NP800 to incorporate numerous improvements that are appropriate based on overall system design and component availability, better Wi-Fi, perhaps optical IP connectivity, better power management and standby capability, faster and lower power memory, perhaps even a radical DAC change to something similar to Chord or Linn’s approach, doing the digital design in house.
There’s also an element of filling in obvious portfolio gaps, primarily from the N-272 install base. That’s also about keeping up with the competition and staying relevant.
The most interesting addition to my mind is the NAP 250, that can find a home in a broad range of systems and will now be on a long product cycle, the new PSU is Naim’s admission that they need to make the PSU hierarchy more clear and more interoperable than it is today with simpler consolidated connectivity options and more universal support for a given PSU relative to what it has the potential to power.
A new NAC at a 282/252 level is the most exciting thing yet to be revealed, I imagine many will pass on the 222.
i am not saying it’s bad. Very probably a wonderfull product. But in general i tend to think that a streming pre is not a good value for long term. In maybe 5 years the streaming board will certainly be obsolete. Personnaly i prefer to separate the pre from the streamer and dac.
I was being very much tongue in cheek 
I think your rework comment is pretty accurate, either way round. Engineering for reuse seems to be a more commonly occurring theme, NP800 board used across the ranges, HE headphone/NSC222 pre stage. Both great moves in my opinion, and if the functionality and interface specifications align, why not!?
[edit: engineering for reuse isn’t trivial, often taking longer than doing two independent products, I’m not surprised it took so long, even if that’s the only reason]
Why? My ancient NDX and UQ2 are still going strong after 9 years (and their release was even older than that). My connection is stable and they stream whatever I want.
Newer and more functional feature sets only makes the old feature set obsolete if it no longer does what you want. And if you want what you’ve got as opposed to always trying to get what you want, it’ll never be an issue.
Plus, Naim publicly acknowledged that the old streaming board didn’t have sufficient overhead to allow improvements over time, something they explicitly engineered the NP800 to be better at/have more future flexibility. If I remember correctly!
Which is fine by me…!!
Reuse of existing proven designs of sub-system makes a lot of sense - and I suspect is what Naim have always done.
I also fully understand that this can take time - to be sure (very sure) that it all works. (Naim have in the last few years suffered criticism over products which were released but contact with reality showed, were not… quite ready, I believe…?)
To a degree my comment on timescale was also semi-serious… 
I completely agree 
Just written something I think similar in the other thread
P.S. I really appreciate your occasional reminders to people to be civil, IAW forum AUP. Just in case you think no-one noticed!
Agreed. I suspect many are curious about that possibility.
Not so obvious…
Maybe it depends on your current system.
So, if you were at NDX2 → 282 + SC and at your “end game system”, ( plus similar or above), there might only be curiosity in the NSC222. Maybe it appears to be a sideway step, at best, to those users.
With NDX2 → SN3, there might be more interest. Although, it might still look like a side ways move. This user might study all the spec’s, find out lots and include an audition to see out how it sounds, with an A/B listening test between the two set-ups ?
Any considerations might include thoughts about your “end game system”.
In my situation, nDAC → XS2, with a desire to add a streamer and upgrade amp / controller (for example, like ND5 XS2 → nDAC → SN3 ).
So, something like the NSC222 is a viable option.
Although, I’m also curious to see what a new pre-amp offer might look like?
There are so many permutations and hifi journeys out there…
Lastly, the attraction of a high quality “one box solution” shouldn’t be discounted in the market place.
I remember when the NAC-N272 first appeared and a Naim dealer saying it had become a very popular product, for this reason.
All food for thought?
KR
R
Thank you… 
I have the required link saved, ready to deploy, when needed…!!
Yes, agreed on your points here, I guess my comment on folks passing on the 222 are generalised, it will be a good fit for many and from my short time listening to a 3 box 200 Series system last week, it offers a lot of performance that seems to exceed its position in the portfolio and relative price point.
I think my logic here as well is that If I did end up changing my own system longer term, I’d still stick with a dedicated digital source and analogue amplification. It then means that the current NDX 2 I have can either be left as it is, improved upon with a NPX 300 or at some point replaced with something else, a 200 Series equivalent of an NDX 2 as one example.
A New Classic NAC + NDX 2 rather than a NSC 222 just feels the preferable path to me at least!
If a ears/hands on demo of the 200 Series is accessible I’d recommend it, it does sound great, especially in the 3 box configuration, alas for me, and at those prices, I’ll be slumming it for the time being where I am.
Sure. I get that point too.
If that was my start point I would probably do same. No problem.
There are so many users, with - Uniti - Si - XS - who are looking up and thinking about their next steps. Also legacy systems, maybe Olive or CB, with users thinking about updating, with latest innovations, etc, etc.
Nice that you have had a listen.
Thanks for sharing feedback. That’s encouraging.
It’s all interesting…
Thanks for sharing thoughts.
Do they? Qobuz? Internetradio in 44.1/16?
There is no Qobuz in Japan. But yes to 16/44 web radio. My connection is rock solid and anything the NDX can’t manage native, the upstream UPnP server can feed it.
There is nothing it did 10 years ago that has stopped working in terms of network services.
My first thoughts when seeing and hearing it being, I can add the NAP 250 to my SN3 and add the NPX 300 to my NDX 2, followed by, I don’t want or need a NSC 222, but adding the other 2 boxes fits my current system and puts me in a holding position for when a New Classic NAC appears to be slotted in.
Once the fog cleared from my head and I stepped down off the cloud I was sat on listening to the new system and I reminded myself of the price of doing all that, I finished my coffee and left laughing and annoyed at how much I’d enjoyed what I heard.
The setup I really want to try and hear is the new NAP 250 in a non 200 Series setup, in particular being driven by a SN3. I got a sense the new NAP was really a very polished and cohesive element in the overall design and synergy of the new 200 Series. I’d expect the NSC 222 in isolation to be a lot of what is already familiar in many cases.
If you have an NDX2 or above already then the 222 may not be appealing but if you have entry level gear, looking to upgrade, box count matters, then it looks appealing.
Hear hear…
I guess that was my simply point too
As does my UQ1. Albeit I need bubbleUPnP to use Qobuz. But as I need an app to access music on most streamers, that isn’t an extra step, just a bit of a sideways one. I’d have to check the internet radio rate/quality, but I was really picking up on the Qobuz point
Agreed, I can only comment from my own perspective.
The chap in the same demo room as me last week already has a 200 Series in his rack at home, it was that good in his case.
In his case it replaced a Superuniti.
SuperUniti → New Classic 200
There go, exactly …
Thanks for sharing that insight
Completely understand all that
FWIW…
Like you, I would probably only be able to afford one piece at a time.
So, (maybe like you) I have to think about all these things and plan ahead.
Consequently, completed systems unfold over several years.
I’m pretty sure so many users are in this exact same situation.
Maybe “real world” situations…
KR
R