Martyn Miles
pfm Member
The 405 was (is?) used in recording studios to drive the monitor speakers. A recording studio; the place where music is made, and mixed by engineers using what they consider good kit. Like Quad amps...
Quad v Naim
- Thread starter skito
- Start date
The 405 was (is?) used in recording studios to drive the monitor speakers. A recording studio; the place where music is made, and mixed by engineers using what they consider good kit. Like Quad amps...
Analog addict
pfm Member
When replacing my old Sansui receiver, back in the early 80s, I was stuck between Quad and what turned out to be my eventual purchase, an A&R A60. I would have bought Quad 405s & pre-amp, but the budget holder didn't like the looks
Nowadays I've got three 405s that I've modded, plus a 405 clone (handbuilt by a Siemens apprentice), modded by myself to eliminate transformer hum. I use these as power amps for my mobile disco (yes I know it's akin to heresy) and they drive my two sets of Eminence loaded speakers very well (I've had many comments about how well my rig sounds). I also run one into my workshop speakers (upgraded Monitor Audio Monitor 1s) and with the TL 071 updates and re-capping it sounds sweet, with a surprisingly low noise floor. I've only ever heard one Linn, Naim amps & Naim speakers system back in the late 70s and it wasn't for me.
Nowadays I've got three 405s that I've modded, plus a 405 clone (handbuilt by a Siemens apprentice), modded by myself to eliminate transformer hum. I use these as power amps for my mobile disco (yes I know it's akin to heresy) and they drive my two sets of Eminence loaded speakers very well (I've had many comments about how well my rig sounds). I also run one into my workshop speakers (upgraded Monitor Audio Monitor 1s) and with the TL 071 updates and re-capping it sounds sweet, with a surprisingly low noise floor. I've only ever heard one Linn, Naim amps & Naim speakers system back in the late 70s and it wasn't for me.
Robert
Tapehead
Agree 100% with that.
The pre amps are fine if working properly. Some will be older than their users by now so benefit from a service.
My collection is getting there - 33,34,FM4,306,405-2,ESLs.
tones
Tones deaf
A vote here for Dave Pritchard and Net Audio. My 303 finally rolled over and died after 28 years' faithful service. So I packed it off to Net Audio for the full treatment, including that nice new faceplate, and it came back rejuvenated and ready for the next 28.
Quad and Naim have totally different sounds and I would say are aimed at totally different markets with both giving a very enjoyable sound but in a totally different way. My first proper introduction was with the 33/303 combo with Rogers LS1 speakers. It gave a wonderful warm sound but very un-dynamic. I then went down the 42/110 route and found the Naim detailed and dynamic with a much better tempo and I found I was enjoying the music far far more. I wouldn't say the Quad was muddled but definitely nowhere near as detailed as the Naim combo, it's a softer more "gentlemanly" sound and one I found not as enjoyable.
The build quality of both are superb and I can see why both enjoy a healthy following especially as they can be tweaked and more so with the Naim's upgraded along a very defined path. I would happily live with both in the sense that it's like owning certain cars. One will make your senses tingle when driving it whereas the other will happily get you from A to B. Me - I like the one that makes me feel alive - hence my liking for Naim's amps.
The build quality of both are superb and I can see why both enjoy a healthy following especially as they can be tweaked and more so with the Naim's upgraded along a very defined path. I would happily live with both in the sense that it's like owning certain cars. One will make your senses tingle when driving it whereas the other will happily get you from A to B. Me - I like the one that makes me feel alive - hence my liking for Naim's amps.
Rob,
When you said you had the Quad 34 'in circuit' for some of your nice needle drops, just how much of it actually was 'in circuit'?
I mean, did you take the output from the tape-out, or did you take it from the main output (thus including all of the pre-amp circuitry, and not just a phono stage and tape-out buffer).
Mr Tibbs
<still trying to figure out where I went wrong with both the (new) 33 & 34 pre's I briefly owned>
Robert
Tapehead
Hi Mr T,
Tape outs only. Not compared that to a full signal path recording.
Sounds perfectly fine though in normal use, ie I can't find anything negative to comment on.
The 34 and 44 went through several versions and mine is very late (serviced), so perhaps the early ones were less good.
Interesting. The 34 I had was one of the first off the line, so you might have a point there. OTOH, I'd like to hear for myself the result of a needle-drop taken from both the tape-out and the main-out of a later 34.
You could always 'blind-test' me with a pair of WAVs
Mr Tibbs
That could well have been due to old electrolytic caps (though apparently even when serviced the 33 cannot be used in the same sentence as "dynamic").
The 303 is pretty good as long as it had been serviced and is not used with a 33 - I wonder what would result from using a Naim pre and Quad power amp, or vice-versa?
Robert
Tapehead
Interesting. The 34 I had was one of the first off the line, so you might have a point there. OTOH, I'd like to hear for myself the result of a needle-drop taken from both the tape-out and the main-out of a later 34.
You could always 'blind-test' me with a pair of WAVs
Mr Tibbs
I'll do that for you at some point over the next few weeks.
Be interested in the result myself.
Skito - I used to compete in Long Range Pistol shooting where the pistol was a 7mm Magnum Remington rifle cartridge!!!! The recoil made your body shudder. I do wonder what it did to my hearing!!! I always used ear protection so hopefully my ears are just about ok. I always laugh when I see tv programmes where people shoot guns inside rooms and don't even flinch. Trust me - you fire something like a .357 Magnum without ear protection in an enclosed space and you WILL FLINCH!
I just prepared a reply and lost it! I can't type it again with an injured hand. Skito, if you want an answer to your questions and quad advice let me know and i'll send you my uk phone no. as i can't type very well right now.
Hi Steve,
Bad at the best of times doing that, so won't guess the language with a knackered hand.
A really great offer and very much appreciated - i just sent you my first pm so let me know here when you get it as not sure how that works. Look forward to chatting with you after Indochine or wherever!
Skito
skyebridge
Registered User
it is interesting that this thread compares the 'best' of Quad pre/power with the 'least' of Naim.
i had a 'loan' of a Quad 33/303 setup for a period in the late-60's early-70's, long before i discovered Naim. the pre-amp was good but the power amp was very flabby.
neither could hold a candle to comparable Leak pre/power combos of the same era.
i seem to recall that the Quad FM tuner was better than the Leak, but i'm not absolutely sure. i had a Leak Sterofetic tuner, and it was very good indeed.
sadly, Leak was taken over by Rank, and that was the end of that.
i spent quite a few years in america and canada, and had Yamaha, Luxman, Crown, Lexicon, AR, Stax and other equipment - some of which was very good.
i subsequently revisited Quad 405's etc, but by that stage Cyrus was coming on the scene, and i don't think any bit of kit produced by Quad cin the 1080's and after can survive side-by-side comparison wiith Cyrus kit.
i discovered Naim late, in the later-80's. a second hand hi-fi shop in notting hill gate was getting rid of three Nap-135's for £100 each! and a repair shop in oxford had a Nac-12s, a pre-amp power supply, and a Hi-cap.
as i had a real interest and a enough spare cash at that stage i also bought second-hand AMC, Lexicon, Sony and other equipment - whatever was going through the dealers at good prices. i had AR, B&W, and KEF speakers, until i discovered Ruark - the finest sounding british-made speakers of 1980-2000, period.
anyway, coming back to Naim, i bought a 42.5 (mellow, but not exact), 60 (OK), 32.5 (excellent), 72 (superb - with a Hi-cap nothing ever made by Quad comes close), 82 and then 52. i still have my Nac-12s (modified by Naim to run from a Hi-cap), which, powered through a Supercap, is in the same bracket as a Nac-52. this is not to say a Nac-12 is as good as a Nac-52 - just that it will knock the pants off just about anything else.
so, thumbs down for Quad (except for the electrostatic speakers, which treated well are superb). thumbs up for Naim.
the 'worst' Naim pre-amps IMHO are the Nac-42, 42.5 and 60 - but they still compare favourably with the 'best' that Quad has ever made.
i had a 'loan' of a Quad 33/303 setup for a period in the late-60's early-70's, long before i discovered Naim. the pre-amp was good but the power amp was very flabby.
neither could hold a candle to comparable Leak pre/power combos of the same era.
i seem to recall that the Quad FM tuner was better than the Leak, but i'm not absolutely sure. i had a Leak Sterofetic tuner, and it was very good indeed.
sadly, Leak was taken over by Rank, and that was the end of that.
i spent quite a few years in america and canada, and had Yamaha, Luxman, Crown, Lexicon, AR, Stax and other equipment - some of which was very good.
i subsequently revisited Quad 405's etc, but by that stage Cyrus was coming on the scene, and i don't think any bit of kit produced by Quad cin the 1080's and after can survive side-by-side comparison wiith Cyrus kit.
i discovered Naim late, in the later-80's. a second hand hi-fi shop in notting hill gate was getting rid of three Nap-135's for £100 each! and a repair shop in oxford had a Nac-12s, a pre-amp power supply, and a Hi-cap.
as i had a real interest and a enough spare cash at that stage i also bought second-hand AMC, Lexicon, Sony and other equipment - whatever was going through the dealers at good prices. i had AR, B&W, and KEF speakers, until i discovered Ruark - the finest sounding british-made speakers of 1980-2000, period.
anyway, coming back to Naim, i bought a 42.5 (mellow, but not exact), 60 (OK), 32.5 (excellent), 72 (superb - with a Hi-cap nothing ever made by Quad comes close), 82 and then 52. i still have my Nac-12s (modified by Naim to run from a Hi-cap), which, powered through a Supercap, is in the same bracket as a Nac-52. this is not to say a Nac-12 is as good as a Nac-52 - just that it will knock the pants off just about anything else.
so, thumbs down for Quad (except for the electrostatic speakers, which treated well are superb). thumbs up for Naim.
the 'worst' Naim pre-amps IMHO are the Nac-42, 42.5 and 60 - but they still compare favourably with the 'best' that Quad has ever made.