advertisement


Upgrading from NAP135

Naim2

pfm Member
Guys,

Just wondering what are the options (Tube or SS) out there other than NAP500 or NAP300 (DR/Non DR) if I want to upgrade from the 135?

Thanks

David
 
Guys,

Just wondering what are the options (Tube or SS) out there other than NAP500 or NAP300 (DR/Non DR) if I want to upgrade from the 135?

Thanks

David

The important question is what speakers are you going to use? The amp should be matched so that the speakers can be properly driven.

Cheers,

DV
 
The 135 is a very capable amp, is it more power or simply a different presentation you're after? There are many things we can do to a 135 that's far cheaper than a NAP300 for example.
 
I went from NAP 135s to some hypex NC400 amps, which are small, light, and happy down to low impedance loads which suites my speakers (shahinian obelisks), and give me 3 times the available power into 4 ohms.

I'd certainly suggest you check out these sorts of class D alternatives which might not be what you'd expect if you wanted to increase the power and capabilities of your amps (probably expecting to need something even bigger and heavier right?).
 
If you want to keep the house sound, stay with the brand. If you don't, then almost anything will do the job.

WH Audio and Les know how to mod Naim gear and they can tune the house sound in and out according to your tatstes. My taste is for no Naim house sound at all, so that's easy to arrange.
 
EAR 890 - a surprisingly good upgrade from my Exposure 16 monos, with no loss of bass or dynamics.
 
If it's relevant, I went from 552/135s to 552/E.A.R.509s. Speakers were ProAc Response Fours, later changed for Quad 2095 ESLs.

This was not a culture shock (surprisingly?), but the dryness of the Naim was supplanted by the more organic and natural/holographic presentation of the valves. Lost the 135s' crisp bass for a slightly more fruity one. Not much in it anyway. Have now supplanted the 552 with the top E.A.R. pre.; now that's a totally different ball-game.
 
I suggest you consider either a Sanders Magtech or one of his ESL II amplifiers. I used to own 135s, having upgraded from 140, to a chrome bumper 250 to an olive 250 to a pair of olive 135s.

Then I got a pair of ESL63s. The 135s were ok. Then the fellow who sold me the Quads offered me an Electrostatic amp. I had never heard of it, but he offered a trial at no obligation. I tried it out and researched the amp. When I upgraded to an Electrostatic amplifier I was delighted with its sound. The 135s were nice, but the Electrostatic amp was in a different league.
 
Hi All thank you for your responses.

I am using 52/135/SBL for the moment.
About 4 weeks ago I finally received my AVP passive pre and it has been a great listening experience.

It is so good that i want to build another system based on this pre (Bent AVC).
Now i am using it with the NAP135.
I dont want to go with the Naim route , I want another "house sound" that is different than Naim. With the AVC the NAP135 and SBL is "holographic" very nice actually.
But yes I want more of the more organic and natural/holographic presentation.

So yes I am also looking for a pair of speakers...... looking for a 3 way with high efficiency if possible. but want to focus on the amps first.

Thanks
 
I always think it is better to find speakers to your liking, and then find a suitable amplifier.
 
I always think it is better to find speakers to your liking, and then find a suitable amplifier.

I agree. A nice position to be in. As a few other have already said pick some speakers that suit your room first.
 
Guys,

Just wondering what are the options (Tube or SS) out there other than NAP500 or NAP300 (DR/Non DR) if I want to upgrade from the 135?

Thanks

David

I like the Nap 135s. Had 3 pairs over the years. Also 4 Nap 250's. The 135's were replaced with a Densen B330+. Improved everything.More power. More slam. More clarity. More speed. Less physical weight. Less maintenance. I really wanted this not to be the case ( CDS3/Nac52/ WB Arc/Neat 3i/ Epos es 22). The 330+ is now being checked out against a DV Hx 1.2 and a Chord 1200c. All three better my old 135's. The Chord and DV amps were a bit more expensive new than the 135's back then. And a new B330+ currently is hardly cheap. I suspect the above three amps would easily be in Nap 300dr/500 territory. I haven't heard either though. A B330+ vs Nap 300dr would be a very interesting comparison.
 
Hi All thank you for your responses.

I am using 52/135/SBL for the moment.
About 4 weeks ago I finally received my AVP passive pre and it has been a great listening experience.

It is so good that i want to build another system based on this pre (Bent AVC).
Now i am using it with the NAP135.
I dont want to go with the Naim route , I want another "house sound" that is different than Naim. With the AVC the NAP135 and SBL is "holographic" very nice actually.
But yes I want more of the more organic and natural/holographic presentation.

So yes I am also looking for a pair of speakers...... looking for a 3 way with high efficiency if possible. but want to focus on the amps first.

Thanks

I would say all logic points towards going active with that setup

But not really if you want holographic presentation its entirely different kit you need
 
Are they CB or Olive 135's?

I ask because there is a slight difference in presentation between the two types. The Olive versions are more 'open' and forward than the CB. By comparison the Avondale NCC boards are almost holographic in their own right, so you may be able to get the sound you want from minimal outlay to the 135's.
 
I was rather fond of the olive 135s I had, but let them go because they struggled with a pair of low impedance loudspeakers. They were replaced by Densen B-350s and latterly a Dynavector HX-1.2mk2. Perversely, I have reverted to an even punier amp with just 30W per channel. It all boils down to the loudspeakers in residence and which amp works best with them. The Yamaha NS-1000M is a considerably easier and more efficient loudspeaker than the Ergo E-V, that's for sure.
 
I had 52/135s into PMC 20-22. And I always remember hearing active SBLs with 250s in the late 1980s and being blown away by the excitement off the music.
Hence ending up with the 52/135s. But I became aware that the excitement came at the expense of clarity and accurate timbres.
Replaced with a TP integrated which was better and a Devialet 250 which I liked but sold as I wanted a purely analogue option. Now with valves and I don't think I'll go back to solid state. I still have a Naim Unit in the kitchen and it produces a big full sound, but I'm aware that all cellos sound the same (almost) because it can't reproduce those harmonic details that make the difference.
A Unison Research integrated I had was very good but currently using an Audio Research Reference 3 preamp with some cheap Chinese 300b valve monoblocks.

Would love to try a Class A Accuphase amplifier, but the Audio Research is very good. Didn't like their Reference 75 power amp mind. Lots of control, but robbed some of the timbres compared to the single ended valve amps.
Lots of great valve amps out there but I will always choose single-ended designs as I prefer the purity over power.
 
Unless you are listening at very high SPLs I can't image why you would need more than 100 watts for a domestic situation. In most homes power rarely exceeds 5 watts to get a good level of sound in the room. If you can stick to low power amps you will get the best sound quality where just a pair of output devices are required to power each channel. Any more and the amp starts to become complicated and will not sound as good.

I have heard the 135s in a few of my customers systems and they are very good amplifiers.
 
The Yamaha NS-1000M is a considerably easier and more efficient loudspeaker than the Ergo E-V, that's for sure.

Yeah, that is most likely true (I don't know the Ergo's very well), but I still have a load of amplification on my Yamaha's - a pair of 135's driving the mids and upper frequencies and a further 300wpc into the bass drivers.
 


advertisement


Back
Top