I have a mental image of a sheet of some different coloured self-adhesive dots. One dot goes on the socket, the matching one goes on plug! 
Ah, but will the dots stay on fir 10 years, and might they effect SQ 
Even the āprosā are wary (to the point of abstinence) of leaving powered cables unlocked.
One might, perhaps, benefit from not attempting to hand weld them into place but they should not be left vulnerable to a jerk.
4 Likes
Jerksā¦ can be a problemā¦ 
It would be a mistake to underestimate the deliberateness of my word choices.
6 Likes
James. It is. I recently had it recapped so that when I built this system I could compare the SB+, NDX and Squeezebox Touch to see which I wanted to drive it. I came down on the side of the NDX (which I drive via UPnP/LMS) not because I could discern any sound difference (I couldnāt) but only because it does not play 24b/96hz encoded files, and I have a good number of 24/96 PBThal needle drops of classic albums that I am rather attached to. The Touch sound was obviously different. It sounded āhardā and unattractive so I use it as a now-playing display screen and near-field touch/remote controller for the NDX now.
I must get around to selling the SB+ (but should probably try it with the 82 first just in case I can tell any difference now).
1 Like
Hi Graeme
I am running the power amp from the hicap now but it will also run from the pre-amp with the hicap still powering the pre-amp.
Have you any idea what the qualitative/technical difference is between connecting the amp in either way? I have some small knowledge of electronics and it seems to me that a signal is a signal and that if anything it would be better for it to be run directly from the pre to the power ampā¦ running it via the hicap only seems to add extraneous uselessness.
There is obviously something Iām missing.
And thanks for your help btw.
-
The Hicap powers only a preamp, viz. the 102 or the 82.
-
The 180 has its own integral supplies for the power amp section. It also has a single +24V supply which may be used for a preamp. In this configuration you use a SNAIC4 from preamp to 180. No Hicaps are harmed in this configuration.
-
The Hicap can provide 2 +24V supplies to the preamp. In this configuration, you use a SNAIC5 from preamp to Hicap, and a SNAIC4 (which does not carry power) from Hicap to 180.
It is generally held that in Naim small signal units (preamps, crossovers etc), then the more regulated supplies you have, then the better the sound.
2 Likes
But if you connect both HiCap and NAP180 to the preamp you end up with the 24V supply in the 180 being connected in parallel to one of the HiCap 24V feeds. Bad idea!
4 Likes
Yup, bad idea and will impact performance and may precipitate an early component failure.
4 Likes
Iāve relented and gently locked both SNAICSā¦
And also the DIN4 to the 250.
1 Like
There is.
The Snaic4 runs between the HC and the NAP180 as per Neil.Sās and Graemeās earlier posts. Snaic 5 stays where it is, as shown in your published photograph (above).
Please switch off your NAP180 before you make any changes.
1 Like
I see you have already received the correct advice, that is, donāt do it. Cable it up according to Naimās instructions and enjoy your system.
3 Likes
Good move. All mine are āgentlyā locked - excerpt for the DIN in my CDX2ās output socket, which has is collar partly releasedā¦
1 Like
Hi Lewis.
Thanks for this. I think you may have hit the nail on the head. Now I have the wiring correct, cables sorted and replaced 5.5m lengths of Nac5 with 4m lengths of Nac4 I have played a wider range of music (sober) and itās become plain to see that the NAC82 pre-amp is much more āin yer faceā or āintenseā than the 102. It is more revealing, at certain frequencies at least and the music sort of leaps out of the speakers more (easy with Arc 1s I think). Generally it is a huge improvement. I am quite surprised to see that old Bill Broonzy recordings (i.e. Trouble in Mind from 1957) seem to have been brought to life. Iād have thought this pre-amp would have brought out all the flaws.
However, some music has become hard to bear, possibly due to an exaggeration of certain treble frequencies. Some cymbal hits now sound like they are made using very cheap cymbals and some simply but well produced acoustic music the sibilance on the voice has become quite pronounced.
I am particularly saddened that one of my all-time favourite albums has suffered from this:
Arrogance, Ignorance and Greed by Show of Hands
On the other hand some modern electronic music has really improved.
Angel by Massive Attack is particularly noticeable
I think you are probably right, the combination of Arc 1s and NAC 82 has led to this ābrightnessā. Iām unsure about the NDX though as Iād never considered to to be 'bright, but will experiment by comparing it with the Squeezebox Touch and SB+ at some point.
Again, thanksā¦ and many thanks all.
power supply XPS or even better 555ps would go a long way to improve your overall sound and most likely tame the harshness that you describe. Of course it is more $ but second hand ones or dealer demos can save you fair amount.
David
1 Like
My recent attempts to arrange the cables more carefully helped improve this for me.
I realise itās not easy but maybe worth trying.
Keep power cables away from signal. Try to keep them off the floor.
Do a search on ācable dressingā
1 Like
Why have you gone back to A4? And has the Hicap been serviced?
There shouldnāt be any harshness, if anything it should be the 102 that was a bit forward in its presentation.
I have reverted to NAC4 as the length I have is about the recommended length (3.5m) and that is all I need (do not want to cut down the 5.5m lengths of NAC5). Also, it was the cable made for the olive amps and has a resistance required by the amp (or something). Anyway, I asked Naim which I should use and they said the NAC4.
Also, itās bendy.
All has been serviced except NDX (which when I bought it 6 months again had hardly been used), the NAPSC (Darran at Class A said it was not worth it) and of course my old NAC 102.