A new Naim product must deserve a thread...

[plastic penguin]

Agree with TB and Chebby. One thing that gets up my hooter is people making premature assumptions on a single product. I appreciate that Naim won't appeal to everyone (I'm not a huge fan myself), but you can't tar every model with the same brush.

 

[busb]

Busb, your first paragraph is pure prejudice against Naim and it's customers. Is that a reasonable position? How can you know they all have "too much money" and part with it "far too readily"?

True Blue (posted above) and myself both have (or have had) Naim systems and I know for a fact that neither of us have "too much money" and both of us listened to our Naim equipment - and much else besides - in both dealer demos and at home before purchase. (In my case everything from Arcam to Rega and Cyrus and Yamaha before trying Naim.)

Am I allowed to form an unreasonable prejudice against you based on your signature system?

I won't, especially given that I own or have owned some elements of it. (Beresford DAC, iPhone, Pure Evoke Flow, PX200s, iTunes).

I agree on the looks though 🙂 I find Naim equipment is ugly.

Hell, of course I'm being biased!! The point I'm making is that I get get fed-up by being proffered the same make every other time I go to a HiFi shop. I rail against marketing, markets or players that seem diminish choice. I've even had to say "Look - I'm NOT going to buy Naim, is that clear!?" Some dealers are taken aback & some react as if I've passed some undefined test.

OK, my post was a little too personal for some but I know a lot of both buyers & dealers who are just BORED with Naim! I don't willfully avoid well-known brands & knowing a make is going to be around several years after purchase is plain common sense but there are, have been & hopefully will be a lot of lesser known brands that get ignored - even Naim had to penetrate the market at some point.

I also worry when PMC, Dynaudio & ATC get mentioned so often on this forum for exactly the same reasons (fashion?) Do I always make the right choices? The hell I do! The SL6s were good 20yrs ago but I should have retired them long ago. The borrowed Bereford DAC is great for my TV but lacks imaging & my plasma set buzzes!

One thing that has changed is that people these days are far more willing to admit to being concerned with looks than they once did - maybe Naim should use a bit of imagination & update their appearance!

"Am I allowed to form an unreasonable prejudice against you based on your signature system?"

Of course - that is a given!

 

[altruistic.lemon]

OK, my post was a little too personal for some but I know a lot of both buyers & dealers who are just BORED with Naim! I don't willfully avoid well-known brands & knowing a make is going to be around several years after purchase is plain common sense but there are, have been & hopefully will be a lot of lesser known brands that get ignored - even Naim had to penetrate the market at some point.

I also worry when PMC, Dynaudio & ATC get mentioned so often on this forum for exactly the same reasons (fashion?) Do I always make the right choices? The hell I do! The SL6s were good 20yrs ago but I should have retired them long ago. The borrowed Bereford DAC is great for my TV but lacks imaging & my plasma set buzzes!

Funny, I know even more dealers and buyers who aren't bored with Naim! Seriously, mate, that's like saying you're bored with your fridge. Doesn't stop it chilling the beer, nor, in the case of Naim, stop it producing good sound.

Dynaudio etc fashion? Hardly design icons, are those brands. I think it's more to do with what forum members are familiar with, and can therefore comment. Mind you, that isn't to say there aren't products one shouldn't criticise on this forum - people are very loyal to their own brands.

Not me, by the way. One of the reasons I picked Naim was because they hold their value, nothing to do with the sound. Whether they'll do so PTO remains a moot point.

 

[Anonymous]

One of the reasons I picked Naim was because they hold their value

How much do they hold BTW?

For instance what would you expect to lose/gain when selling on a year later say a Nait XS?

 

[Ajani]

I could put together a

1TB USB HDD

Squeezebox Touch

Harman Kardon HK3490 Stereo Receiver (with DAC)

for about a fifth of the price of the SuperUniti... and many other options for less than the price of the Naim

BUT

WHO CARES???

The issue is not whether I can put together something cheaper... A child could do that... the question is whether I prefer the sound of the Naim combo... Since none of us have heard it yet, then there really is nothing to debate...

 

[chebby]

How much do they hold BTW?

For instance what would you expect to lose/gain when selling on a year later say a Nait XS?

In my case...

Nait 5i bought for £750 brand new. Sold for £560 after 26 months.

Naim CD5i bought for £750 brand new. Sold for £550 after 26 months.

Naim NAT05 bought for £450 used. Sold for £450 after 22 months use.

Naim nSAT speakers bought for £450 (ex-demo) sold for £420 after 18 months use.

None of those figures included the p&p (about £25 per item) that I added on.

Had I bought the entire system used/ex-demo (rather than just the tuner and speakers) then I would have hardly lost any money at all.

All but one of my components sold on "buy it now" which - under the old tarriffs - meant my ebay/paypal fees were quite low. (That has changed now.) In the case of the Nait 5i, I put in on "buy it now" for £480 but (accidently) left the option to bid, so it went on to get £560 instead.

 

[nopiano]

In my case...

Nait 5i bought for £750 brand new. Sold for £560 after 26 months.

Naim CD5i bought for £750 brand new. Sold for £550 after 26 months.

Naim NAT05 bought for £450 used. Sold for £450 after 22 months use.

Naim nSAT speakers bought for £450 (ex-demo) sold for £420 after 18 months use.

None of those figures included the p&p (about £25 per item) that I added on.

Had I bought the entire system used (rather than just the tuner and speakers) then I would have hardly lost any money at all.

All but one of my components sold on "buy it now" which - under the old tarriffs - meant my ebay/paypal fees were quite low. (That has changed now.) In the case of the Nait 5i, I put in on "buy it now" for £480 but (accidently) left the option to bid, so it went on to get £560 instead.

That's very impressive, chebby. I've only latterly begun to appreciate what holds its value and what doesn't. Had never previously bought any kit on that basis, but realising my 6 year-old Denon AV kit is virtually worthless, whereas 14 year-old Krell has good trade-in value, has brought this home.

It matters less when you have a good job, and maybe a nice bonus from time to time, but when you have to save hard (as I did in my youth) then long-term value is a big factor. These days, ebay seems to provide an unoffical but very visible guide to what sells and what doesn't. Naim kit always seems to have a following, and items like power supply upgrades are ideal for buying used.

 

[matthewpiano]

There are a lot of factors involved here and I find myself sympathising with the thoughts of several different people on this issue.

Personally, I'm not a huge Naim fan. I like the Nait 5i and CD5i although I wouldn't swap my current Marantz electronics for them as I believe the Marantz kit to be better looking, better featured and to offer a significant proportion of the performance at substantially less money. I generally haven't been all that impressed with more expensive Naim kit that I've heard and with a bigger budget I'd much rather give my money to Sugden for a beautifully constructed and designed class A design with wonderfully involving and fluid sound.

However, that isn't to dispute the quality of Naim's kit and I can perfectly understand why many people are so attracted to them. I do think you pay a premium because it says 'Naim' on the box, but then that is true of many brands, including Apple and it is an individual's right to pay that premium.

In the case of the SuperUniti I can see how much more cheaply you could gain the same functionality patching together a system from multiple boxes and at one time that would have been very attractive to me because I enjoyed having lots to play with. However, for anyone whose hi-fi hobby is mostly in service of a love for music (as it is for me), the idea of having all the functionality combined in one high-performing box is very attractive, as is Naim's legendary reputation for reliability, longevity and customer service. We don't all want our living quarters to look like a recording studio and now that superb sound is available in more conveniently packaged products I'm not surprised they are popular. As for Naim taking advantage of this popularity I don't blame them one bit. They are, after all, a business and would be crazy not to.

As for dealers pushing the same old brands I can understand that this is annoying. I've certainly experienced it myself - one store I frequent is obsessed with B&W and Rotel products, another Cyrus, and another with Naim - and sometimes it can be hard to get a sales person to listen to what you actually want. On the other hand, where a sales person has genuine passion for a particular product and can demonstrate the reasons for this it does give me confidence that I am dealing with people who care rather than mere box shifters.

 

[Anonymous]

In my case...

Nait 5i bought for £750 brand new. Sold for £560 after 26 months.

Naim CD5i bought for £750 brand new. Sold for £550 after 26 months.

:

etc

That's a very good record, they do hold their value indeed!

 

[Anonymous]

I am very much over "traditional" hi-fi companies.

Now that the age of the computer is upon us, they are busy re-packaging commonly available components from PC World but trying to ascribe to them the same old audiophool nonsense that we have heard for so long. And plenty of people are falling for it it seems. Really, if a DAC is implemented per the manufacturers instructions, why will it sound any different from another using the same DAC? Your imagination of course. What do audio companies do to HD's they have bought in, or any other component bought in from technology OEM's? There is some value to bolting it all together in one box, but really, anyone technically savvy must be chuckling at the RRP's. We now have the nonsense of "audiophile USB" cables as well and so it goes.....

While you are preaching from the holy book, could you keep an eye on your language please? – MODS

 

[chebby]

I am very much over "traditional" hi-fi companies.

Obviously not quite yet.

You use a pair of wooden cabinet speakers with very traditional design made by a small specialist company in Gloucestershire with a track record (including seperates) going back 20 years or more.

If they are wood veneer finish versions then the cabinets are made by Timberworx in Sheffield (along with those made for Spendor) and they are packed with bespoke (class A/B) amplification made for AVI by a company in Wales.

The very nature of the product and it's origins, it's design, the size of the compnay making it and the price almost define 'traditional' in the sense you use the word. They are even hand assembled, and hand tested.

My goodness, they even got a 5 star review in What Hifi and an excellent write up in Gramophone 🙂

 

[Anonymous]

It is the way the products are implemented and the objective ethos of the company that appeals.

 

[chebby]

It is the way the products are implemented and the objective ethos of the company that appeals.

Their only departure from the norm of any other active speaker made in the last 50 years is the addition of a DAC.

That does not make them Apple or Sonos or Logitech.

 

[Anonymous]

I am very much over "traditional" hi-fi companies.

Obviously not quite yet.

I think the difference is that the source used to be start of the hi-fi chain, now with digital being a stream of ones and zeros the hi-fi really starts further down the chain, around the DAC.

I.e. the source used to be vinyl records and magnetic tape, now it's digital ones and zeros coming down an optical toslink cable. I.e. in the digital world hi-fi companies useful contribution only start at the DAC.

 

[chebby]

It's just a matter of topology.

Since 1983 the traditional chain started with a box containing a DAC, it's just that the box happened to contain a CD transport.

Then the DAC hopped into a box of it's own (sometime around 1989 when the S/PDIF equipped Arcam Delta Black box appeared). 20 years on and people have swapped the CD transport for a computer (or a bunch of other stuff like PS3s and Bluray players and TVs) but the DAC remains as it has always since 1983.

Some bright spark (Meridian was it?) threw a DAC and a preamp into an active loudspeaker and the 'topology' had another expression.

Whether the DAC goes in with the speakers, or in with the CD player, or in the amp, or on it's own, or in the sock drawer, doesn't change anything really. It doesn't make one company 'cutting edge' or another 'audiophool' or 'traditional'.

What is a Project USB turntable? It has digital technology to enable one to rip LPs to play on iPads and iPhones (even with AirPlay) or to stick on one's NAS. Is that 'traditional' or something else?

 

[noogle]

:rofl:

I.e. the source used to be vinyl records and magnetic tape, now it's digital ones and zeros coming down an optical toslink cable. I.e. in the digital world hi-fi companies useful contribution only start at the DAC.

Repeat that heresy on the Naim forum and you'd be burnt at the stake. There are endless discussions about the "sound" of servers e.g. UnitiServe. :rofl:

 

[noogle]

I.e. the source used to be vinyl records and magnetic tape, now it's digital ones and zeros coming down an optical toslink cable. I.e. in the digital world hi-fi companies useful contribution only start at the DAC.

Repeat that heresy on the Naim forum and you'd be burnt at the stake. There are endless discussions about the "sound" of servers e.g. UnitiServe. :rofl:

 

[Anonymous]

I think the difference is that the source used to be start of the hi-fi chain, now with digital being a stream of ones and zeros the hi-fi really starts further down the chain, around the DAC.

I.e. the source used to be vinyl records and magnetic tape, now it's digital ones and zeros coming down an optical toslink cable. I.e. in the digital world hi-fi companies useful contribution only start at the DAC.

As per the whole topic of this thread - doesn't stop them trying. And some may even prefer a menu-based, black-and-green retro user interface stuck on a box. Personally it reminds me of the user interface on my Nokia phone from 1999 and I'd rather use something like the iPad as controller and the appropriate DAC/amplification/speakers thereafter.

I don't think these expensive HiFi streamer things will survive in the long run. As the lines between HiFi and computing continues to blur, there will be areas where the traditional HiFi manufacturers simply can't compete because they don't have the expertise nor the R&D resources.

In the transitional period, we'll continue to see products like the MicroMega WM10 - a fancy case and a power supply wrapped around an Apple Airport Express.

 

[Anonymous]

It's just a matter of topology.

Since 1983 the traditional chain started with a box containing a DAC, it's just that the box happened to contain a CD transport.

Then the DAC hopped into a box of it's own (sometime around 1989 when the S/PDIF equipped Arcam Delta Black box appeared). 20 years on and people have swapped the CD transport for a computer (or a bunch of other stuff like PS3s and Bluray players and TVs) but the DAC remains as it has always since 1983.

Some bright spark (Meridian was it?) threw a DAC and a preamp into an active loudspeaker and the 'topology' had another expression.

Whether the DAC goes in with the speakers, or in with the CD player, or in the amp, or on it's own, or in the sock drawer, doesn't change anything really. It doesn't make one company 'cutting edge' or another 'audiophool' or 'traditional'.

What is a Project USB turntable? It has digital technology to enable one to rip LPs to play on iPads and iPhones (even with AirPlay) or to stick on one's NAS. Is that 'traditional' or something else?

Well, the difference is that the CD transport with its shiny discs is being replaced with more sophisticated solutions that involve back-ends (storage medium, network transports, etc) as well as front-ends (browsers and playlists, album art, etc). Back in the days it was easy for the HiFi companies to buy and integrate CD transports from Philips or Sony - the rest was simple (e.g. building the menus) - but things have moved on. As the "source" gets increasingly sophisticated from an engineering and computing perspective, HiFi companies will continue to lag behind and will need to decide where their core value and expertise lies.

 

[noogle]

Hi-fi companies are already buying in technology at higher levels of integration - for example the Naim UnitiServe uses the DigiFi platform on a PC-compatible motherboard running Windows XP Embedded, so most of the engineering is outsourced.

 

[Anonymous]

I.e. the source used to be vinyl records and magnetic tape, now it's digital ones and zeros coming down an optical toslink cable. I.e. in the digital world hi-fi companies useful contribution only start at the DAC.

Repeat that heresy on the Naim forum and you'd be burnt at the stake. There are endless discussions about the "sound" of servers e.g. UnitiServe. :rofl:

Doesn't mean it's not nonsense. 😉

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/computer-based-music/debunking-myths-objective-and-subjective-observations-from-a-sunday-afternoon

 

[John Duncan]

ob·jec·tive

adjective /əbˈjektiv/ 

(of a person or their judgment) Not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts

 

[busb]

Hi-fi companies are already buying in technology at higher levels of integration - for example the Naim UnitiServe uses the DigiFi platform on a PC-compatible motherboard running Windows XP Embedded, so most of the engineering is outsourced.

LMAO! thought the whole point of using a dedicated music server rather than a Windows-based PC was to get away from Windows that's not really designed to stream anything even with tunnelling protocols such as with ASIO drivers. I'm surprised that Linux hasn't been used in this context.

The tills in my local crashed once - they were running embedded XP! I repair electronic test equipment & many scopes & spectrum analysers run embedded XP - they can take a couple of minutes to boot up then ask for a password that we haven't been given - all to perform a test or measurement that may only take seconds - sigh.

 

[Anonymous]

I.e. the source used to be vinyl records and magnetic tape, now it's digital ones and zeros coming down an optical toslink cable. I.e. in the digital world hi-fi companies useful contribution only start at the DAC.

Repeat that heresy on the Naim forum and you'd be burnt at the stake. There are endless discussions about the "sound" of servers e.g. UnitiServe. :rofl:

Doesn't mean it's not nonsense. 😉

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/computer-based-music/debunking-myths-objective-and-subjective-observations-from-a-sunday-afternoon

😉

I'm well aware of people arguing with religious fervor about their ones and zeros sounding different to other people's ones and zeros - ignorance, dogma and hype is never far away from hi-fi it seems, but regardless;- the ones and zeros that come out of any transport or faithful streaming device are all exactly the same.

These same religious nuts brandishing their ignorance of mathematics are also blissfully unaware of how clipped their precious CDs are that they prize with Gollum like love, were they to actually look at the waveforms they cherish one day most of them would be in for a nasty shock, and stop worrying about their ones and zeros on the spot as they look at 200 sample chunks being clipped straight off the top, courtesy of EMI etc.

The sense of stopping the hi-fi chain at the (optical) digital level is that you are free to use decent commodity product machines like NAS drives, Apple notebooks/pads/ipods etc which are a pleasure to use instead of some wallet withering dinosaur from a hi-fi company whom frankly would be better off concentrating on what they do best.

For instance a nice Naim amp + Apple sound system could be got for around £2k, with the bonus that you get a leading edge wi-fi notebook and complete audio freedom, or you could go for the Naim HDX for £4.7k, a ridiculous folly of a product that is massively restrictive in comparism.

For my own system I end up with an industry leading 24bit DAC driven by a nice 88.2kHz upsampled source sitting on a good supply power - routed straight into the grid of a top make (amperex bugleboy) ECC88 tube. There is simply no way Naim could better that inside their £4.7k box, regardless of the fact mine is a modified £115 box. The mathematical concepts and electric fields simply don't care which marketing department was in charge...

 

[Anonymous]

Chebby wrote:

"Their only departure from the norm of any other active speaker made in the last 50 years is the addition of a DAC.

That does not make them Apple or Sonos or Logitech".

You are correct - or are you? The things that the three companies you mention have in abundance are cash and marketing skills. AVI have no desire to market themselves through the mags nor provide samples, so that limits their reach. Nor are they trying to reach the traditional audiophile. However, they are selling all the ADM's they can make.

It may well be true to say that all AVI are doing is adding a DAC. But that is more than anyone else is doing and therefore the speakers are ideal for connecting to a source, such as a Squeezebox or some other digital source - and because amplification is built in, there is no need to go and buy any (all too often underpowered) hi-fi separates. This small addition, of a DAC, makes the speakers unlike other actives. In this respect, they are exactly like Apple or Sonos.

All Apple did was take the principle of the Walkman and apply it to the technology they understood, i.e. PC's, storage and user interfaces. All Apple did was allow you to keep a library of tunes in your iPod. The iPod is remarkably similar in principle to the Walkman except in this one respect. Of course, they have since built an ecosystem around the iPod and have released other products, but all have lineage to the iPod and their traditional computing business. They have consumerised their heritage and it worked for them. Had this not worked they may well have struggled - corporately and domestically they were nowhere. And even today, in terms of the sheer numbers sold they aren't that great compared to the traditional manufacturers. But they do make the most noise.

I don't know much about Sonos, but you could argue they attached an interface to a proprietory wireless routing technology. Routing and wireless have been around for a long time, but it is the application of the technology that has helped them do well. So all they did was wirelessly route audio/video files. That hardly makes them the new Cisco does it?

The final thing I would say is that AVI are are an agile hi-fi company doing well in a declining market for traditional hi-fi. You miss the fact that the market for their products isn't an audiophile one. Their market is one that embraced the digital age long ago and wants the convenience of their ADM system in a domestic or studio environment - at a reasonable (non-audiophool) price. In that market, there is no ridiculous debate over cables, or whether WAV files sound better than FLAC files, or jitter etc. That pony was firmly put back in the stable a long time ago, and all that matters is sound quality and convenience. In that respect, they are exactly like Apple, Sonos or Logitech.