advertisement


Is a Supercap overkill on a Snaxo?

Yes that figures.

SC on a 102 is a complete waste of money. What you're actually getting is a supersized dual railed snaps since both of the regs you're actually using come from a single traffo winding and one cap. HC is theoretically better since you get one winding and one cap per rail.

When I had SBLs I found the SC was only a very marginal upgrade over a Kendeiled HC on the Snaxo. It was however, a downgrade over the two Kendeiled HC's on my 82 which is what I'd actually bought it to replace.

To Tortoisi, were you using dissimilar Hicaps on your 82? My experience showed mixing H&F with Talema types led to very unsatisfactory results, but two Identical Talema ones with kendeil caps was very hard to beat. The APX4 eventually did but not by much and not until after a bit of servicing.

I haven't actually tried the TPR4 HC on the 82 in place of the APX4, I just assumed it wouldn't measure up. I think I will now.
 
@ Colasblue: I just checked, all my HiCaps are Talemas,
the oldest 87.000, the two which where replaced with the single snaps
where 116.000 & 125.000 ish numbers.

I was told to care the 2 HCs should not differ in age too much, so I kept an eye on that when choosing them s/h. (and recapped)
But I did not know the reason up to now, thanks ! :)

Nontheless, as I said, the snaps with TPR4 & fresh Kendeil cap killed off both badly.
Both, my wife and a hifi friend confirmed it by a mere: "Whow, what the heck did you do ?!" ...and sitting there stunned.

Thus, naturally I am eager to put TPR4 into both HCs and drive the 82 this way.
(Or fit 2 TPR4 into one HC, but I don't know if that is possible..?)
 
Those serials certainly sound close enough! (mine were actually within 1000 but I had equally good results with HC's more widely separated ie 96. 97,97, 02 vintages were all pretty much interchangeable)

Certainly possible to fit two TPR4's into one HC. Order the SC type though!

Theoretically two HC's with 1 TPR each ought to be better, and certainly easier to resell if it ever came to that.

I can feel a journey to the loft in search of the 82 link plug coming on!
 
ehehe...you nailed it.
I caused a mess in the house once the snaps was finished & did not remember where I dropped that tiny link plug thingee.. :)

Is there a SC type ? I didn't know that..
Actually I had intended fitting 2 TPR4 into 1 HC
and fitting 4 TSRs into the other HiCap,
as I have just received a couple of TSRs configured to 24Vfrom Teddy.

Just because I am curious in which kind they differ, what they do in their own way, exactly.
I am convinced both are excelent in their own way, though.

The TSRs I can feed 4 of them by 1 transformer, is that right it doesn't matter ?
So, maybe it's an idea to feed the TPR4 solution by the 2 Talemas taken from both HCs into 1 new housing
and give the 4 TSRs 1 different, new traffo ? (I heard TSRs don't need fancy traffos as long as the specification fits and is sufficient?)

I won't get 2 Talemas & 2 TPR4 into one HC housing..shame. Gone is the optics.
I think I'll go for the traditional 2 HiCaps for the TPR4 then
and make an entirely new unit for the TSRs.
 
colasblue said:
Yes that figures.

SC on a 102 is a complete waste of money. What you're actually getting is a supersized dual railed snaps since both of the regs you're actually using come from a single traffo winding and one cap. HC is theoretically better since you get one winding and one cap per rail.
Click to expand...

Before I went active I ran the 102 from both a Hicap and the Supercap into a 250 driving SBLs. The 102/SC combo wrought a worthwhile improvement over the 102/HC.
 
...and regarding the OPs 3-6-2 which can be supercapped..
I tend to think this would be an optimal field for local TSR regulation.

I don't know how many +-24V rails a 3-6-2 accepts,
but you'd need a few of these matchbox sized pcb's and a sawed off U profile from your local metal-shop, ~ the length of a HiCap.

Then you can 'rob' off the supply lines that go to the burndy-socket inside the SNAXO and lead them to the TSR's instead. (save half of the soldering there with a bit of luck)

You feed the whole thing with raw DC from your existing HC, robbed off it's regulation section via 1 regular snaic.

On the SNAXO side though, you go out from 1 snaic-socket into 2 cables:
1 is the snaic with raw DC from your HiCap,
the second an ic that leads directly to your PRE.

Thus you have a shorter signal path going from pre to snaxo direct & not leading it via the HiCap. (which I think is unnecessary)

If, say Treble, mid and bass each had their own 24V supply, (I don't know)
you'd need 2 TSR's each.. , so 6 in total.
My 2 were ~100€ + 20€ toll, 120€ the pair.
So for 360€ you'd have a locally superregulated SNAXO, which I am sure would be quite ahead any other yet existing solution.
If it is 3 times +-24V, which as I said, I don't know.

Does anyone know how many supply rails a SNAXO 3-6-2 accepts ..?
 
12, really ? Whow.
Do you know where they go ?

For cannel separated supply trebble, mid and bass, each 24V I see 6 rails,
but the other 6..?

Anyways, that'll be probably a bit more U-profile from the metal shop,
maybe 3 or 4 pieces the legth of a SNAXO
and...12 of those TSR bugs, about 720€ then.

Quite a bit of money, but considering it's about half the price of a new HiCap, but for stellar performance result, doesn't sound far off..

Do you know of anyone who has done this to a 3-6-2 SNAXO ..?
 
A standard hicap, or one we've just serviced?

I say that because we only see hicaps that need servicing, so I can compare the TPR4 to a Kendeil freshly recapped Hicap or a tired one.

A freshly serviced hicap with a TPR4 board sounds more dynamic, with more presence. It makes the standard hicap sound a little confused in comparison. Now a supercap or 52PS with them fitted just emphasizes everything the 52 is good at.
 
Gaius was asking how a TPR4 Hi-cap rate against a standard Supercap ?

I can't speak for Gaius but I 'm intrigued to know also, due to the relatively low prices secondhand Supercaps are achieving these days

rosie
 
Well I finally bit the bullet and did it!

I now have a Teddy Supercap on my 52 and a freshly serviced Naim Supercap on my Snaxo 3.6.2.

The difference is not subtle!

Virtually everything had improved. Tighter control and grip, more deep, deep bass, amazing additional separation of instruments and real slam and sparkle.

I put this down partly to the acquisition of the Teddy Supercap yet I ran this for several days before replacing the Hicap for the Snaxo 3.6.2 with the Supercap so I could very accurately identify the difference.

I will be staring a thread A/B comparing the Naim Supercap to the Teddy Supercap (on the 52) in a couple of days as I have been so utterly gobsmacked by how much better it is than a Naim unit. I also know that there are several people on here who would be interested in this.

Scott.
 
I just read this thread...seems I was to late to voice my opinions, but here they are anyway....

a). A Supercap is NOT overkill on a Snaxo...rather the Hicap is underkill. The Snaxo 362 requires 8 rails of power and probably benefits more from the Supercap over the Hicap more than any other component that is able to be powered by both.

b) I was going to suggest the parasitized Snaxo supply from the 52's Supercap....take the Snaic and attach it to the '82 only' feed on the 52s Supercap and plug the other end into the Snaxo....much better than a dedicated Hicap.

c) A dedicated Supercap fed with just a Snaic 5 is much better than a dedicated Hicap, showing its not just the quantity of the voltage rails that matter, but the quality of the individual ones.

d) You should hear what a choke regulated Supercap can do...but then again there is only one in existance ;)

I would still compare the parasitized Snaic fed Supercap against the TeddySC, for the simple reason that it is
i) Very much better than a Hicap
ii) You already have all the bits to do it with.
iii) Saves on shelving space and requires fewer hook up cables.

Here is a copy of one other users experience with the parasitized SC.....I can hardly believe its over 15 years old!

Date: 8-Mar-00 12:44
Author: Jon Malnick ([email protected])
Subject: The Toolsie Testament.
To the Reverend Toolsie:

Father, when you pronounced that one Supercap may bring spark and fire to not only a 52 but verily a Snaxo as well, I was filled with doubt and my heart was darkness itself.

But did I not ask myself is this not he who speaks great truths on those black beasts that live 'twixt the sources of power and their kin?

And it was the same man.

Did I not ask myself is this not he of the decoupled boxes of huge and fearsome noise that some say are the size of ten men? Is it not he who has six where lesser men only have one?

And it was the same man.

So did I thus activate my humble offering, eschewing the extra magic power box of which speak oftentimes the wise men of Salisbury. Lo, did I find blissful peace in a sound at once so stirring and soothing as if it were the Gods themselves who play for me.

And so I speak to those who are of the SBL faith yet live in a world of turmoil where all is dark and passive. Though there are verily few men in the kingdom who shall be blessed by the greatness of the Five Hundred, thou must rise up and activate and you will bring lightness into your lives.

Amen.

Jon the Evangelist.
 
@Ron

Count again! Snaxo 3-6 and 3-6-2 use all 12 main rails from an SC plus the 25V digital supply to work the relays and NADI.

Have tried the single SC running a Snaxo 2-4 and SBL's and an 82 at the same time, and even reconfigured the Burndy so that the rails that run the 82 weren't also powering the Snaxo (strange how Naim don't actually do that don't you think and try to sell you two SC's).

Result - crap compared to SC dedicated to Snaxo and two HC's on 82

Of course my HC's aren't "normal" and neither is my 82 or any of its Snaxo's

HC's have Kendiel caps and those make a lot of difference to the HC but as far as I could tell virtually none to the SC.

82 and Snaxos (both 2-4 and 3-6) have Elna Silic II's as decoupling caps and 82 has Rifa MMK's for feedback, but other than that are standard.

Why is a boggo SC better than a boggo HC, well nobody is too sure. Naim attribute it to the SC's bigger box which has the traffo further from the regs and hence less "noise"

Personally I'm not buying that. I think a big thing with the SLCE caps in a HC is that the NADI on the redundant rectifier leg really screws up the rail it shares the rectifier with, but the Kendeil caps aren't so affected (but they are a bit so I tended to disconnect my NADI's).

Also perhaps the SLCE caps are more generally susceptible to EM hum which might lend some truth to the bigger box theory - but actually they aren't much further away in the SC.

The regs are selected to the same standard - MJS said so and he actually used to select them so its certainly true.

But basically I'm pretty convinced that what's really there is a whole load of Naim bullshit and very little actual substance.

So I'll clarify

2 x Kendieled HC's beat 1 x Kendeiled (or not) SC on my 82, and the SC got even worse when you added a (non parasitic) Snaxo 2-4 to its load (never tried the 82 and Snaxo 3-6 all on one SC).

In those days when I ran Active SBL's I started with 2 x HC on the 82 and 1 x HC on the Snaxo 2-4.

I bought the SC expecting to connect it to the 82 and "experience the improvement" but actually it was a downgrade. I attributed the problem to the SC needing a recap so recapped it - no difference!

Eventually got a burndy and put SC on Snaxo - 2-4 - and marginal difference, but I kept it.

Then got NBL's and Snaxo 3-6, and some more 135's.

SC runnjng a Snaxo 3-6 on its own is better than either Keneiled HC or TPR4'd and Kendieled HC running same Snaxo 3-6.

In the meantime an APX 4 had replaced the 2 x HC running the 82, which I felt was only a marginal upgrade.

Might have time to try a single TPR4 HC on the 82 instead if the APX 4 tomorrow but I'm not holding my breath!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top