I think you should be a bit more cautious in your conclusions, as the NC250 was also replacing 250.2s. Was it three of those and one 300dr? So I think all you can say is 4xNC250 is way better than one 300dr and three 250,2?
Sorry if I have misunderstood 
Tim, it’s new box enthusiasm; convince oneself, then (attempt to) convince everyone else.
I’m itching to do my shoot out - well audition of NSC222 with 250DR, NC250 and NAP300DR, all of which are run in. I may have mentioned it a few posts earlier!
Surely 4 monoblocks would be replacing 2 stereo amps not 3? So replacing either 2 nap300s, or one 300 and one nap250?
Either way, if the part of the spectrum covered previously by a 300 is improved, it can be concluded that the nc250 is better than a 300, though of course only known for the frequency range covered…
Nope - I think he has Keltiks which are 4 way speakers so 4 amps. Never come across that possibility before
Oops, when I saw he had 4 I was thinking of the 350 monoblocks. But same point - if the frequency range previously covered by one (or more) nap300 sounds better, then it can be concluded nc 250 is better, at least for that frequency range
Well another intriguing factor is that Keltik last year, had a thread running about taking (needing help with…) S600s active, together with a photo in situ.
Do we conclude that the S600s went, to be replaced by Keltik speakers?
Mention on the thread about previously having Isobariks, so perhaps Linn won out, on the speaker front, with NC doing power duty; not a set up I was expecting, from earlier posts.
According to their profile @Keltik now has Linn Keltik speakers, with four NC250’s and a Linn active crossover.
I am not really sure about that - but maybe it’s just me that would struggle to separate the different effects on different frequencies. (Though plenty of people have said that subwoofers benefit the whole sound range for me to think that it wouldn’t be easy to split it out)
Yes - that was what I was thinking of
Indeed, reading back through the thread I mentioned from last year, DarkeBear posted he went from Isobariks to S600s, before going on to his S800s. While I had Keildhs and then Ninkas in an av system, neither were in music system, which was all Naim. I heard Isobariks around the time I bought my first LP12 in 1977 - seems almost a bygone age of speakers, at least that era, which was the starting point for many of us, sometimes via aspirations v budgets.
There is also a concurrent thread entitled Organik upgrade time, where a member is turning in a number of black boxes for a single new one from Linn. I would be more favourably disposed to Linn, which I have had, if the service option didn’t see to cease, almost as a product is discontinued. Top marks to Naim, continuing service, where practical.
I’m assuming he/she would either have the more powerful amp on bass, so relatively easy to tell, otherwise in Naim fashion posdibly on mid, probably next easiest to tell.
I’ve heard demos using the NC 250 a number of times now and I continue to be staggered at how good it is - clearly better than my 250DR. It is not disgraced with the 200 or 300 series in front of it and IMO would be a significant set up, and long term good bet, from a straight 200 power amp.
Never having heard NC until recently, and having read multiple views expressed here , I was fully expecting the 250.3 to be good but markedly surpassed by the 350.
Although it was one demo, with one speaker model, the 250.3 was surprisingly close to the 350 for me…
`That’s really good to hear, as the 300DR really impressed me when I tried one passive.
Presumably you’re using non-identical amps in an active setup, something I might consider in the future with the SBLs.
Maybe it’s the point you’re making - if the new power supplies can’t power older kit then the older power supplies are desirable as there’s no current replacement?
As an aside, and I probably 'don’t get the logic’ I’ve always thought it a bit of a shame that the external power supplies diversified so much that items which didn’t need one to begin with but could be enhanced would not necessarily be be able to work with any Naim boxed power supply, it would have just given more upgrade options at different price points if some basic functionality was common to all of them.
That’s not trying to be contentious and perhaps reflects the fact I didn’t follow evolution of the product lines after the release of the NAC 52 too much until around 2016-17.
That’s exactly what Naim have now done with the NPX 300. The idea of XPS for sources and Hicap and Supercap for preamps is no more.
I probably never even understood/appreciated that as simple as you make it seem. 
In some ways the new ranges show they’ve diversified significantly, the downside is that it’s tricky for ‘old-timers’ to directly link current products with older equivalents. Maybe that’s because many of teh older ones are relatively defunct to new Naim users.
A revamp of older/Classic pre-amps without so many record options would probably have been ideal for many of us, but not for those who desired in-built streaming source capabilities.
I would take any result that you heard at a public demonstration with an enormous pinch of salt.
In my experience, no ‘out of home’ test of sound quality is even vaguely reliable, compared to a test of sound quality of the same exact pieces in your own system at home.
Because almost always, even including dealers demo rooms at their own premises, the systems have never been properly set up, nor properly left to settle and warm up, and have not been tuned to the room, and the listeners taste for weeks, months, or years – which is the case in a well set up home system.
Also, I don’t think people listen in quite the same way in a hotel bedroom or in a dealers showroom as they do in their own house.
Was that Home demo or a demo in a shop?