Slam that is a very good point.
IMO this is another one of those things that have been repeated so often on the forum that they have become erroneously accepted as true.
I ran my 282 with - over the years - one HC, two HCs and finally a SC. It was a significant improvement over the 202 and I was - still am - a fan.
The 252 is just waaay better. It is more detailed but is also more controlled and has both clout and finesse - as it should at its price point. It is every bit as dynamic as the 282 but this is balanced by its improved control.
1 Like
To me it has always made sense for the 202 owner who hankers for a 252, though I admit that that is a different conversation.
Same goes for the Unity Atom HE: the Pre amplifier part you might call the best part of it.
Not sure how easy it is to make a judgment on that, as you are always using the DAC on the Atom on all inputs.
Huh? No, i use it for as a pre for my turntable. The streophile review points this out as wel: its really that good. There is no DAC there needed because the signal alrdy analog. The combination with Vertere is magic.
The Atom digitises the analogue signal and passes it through the DAC, so it is always in the signal path.
Really? I wonder how that makes sence. Anyway, I indeed did refer to the Analog entry.
Doing it that way is probably more economic in addition to offering a digital out for active speakers accepting SPDIF. The preamp can be implemented in software and probably run on a low-cost phone-SOC and you reduce the number of analog circuits and power supplies.
The pre and volume control are still analogue. There is no digital output except for multiroom which is the reason given by Naim for doing this.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.