advertisement


Witch Hat Naim NAC82 "Superlink" Upgrade

Is there a valid scientific reason for the 102/82/52 to each have a different sound other than maybe they were tweaked to justify different price points? They don’t have tone controls, but the sound could presumably have been tweaked in the same way?

Same question for the 200/282/252/552?

Also, does anyone have any technical insight to give a view as to whether any of these preamps could be considered ’neutral’. The 252 for example is often regarded as lacking character compared to the 282 - could that indicate that the 252 was left more neutral?

Yes, I know that the power supplies should make a difference, or at least I certainly thought so when I put an olive supercap on a 282, but how reliable was my subjective impression? I also know about the sprung isolation on the 552, but scientifically, how much can that contribute to a differentiation in sound compared to the others? Same question over choice of components - can that make much difference?

These are all literal questions, not rhetorical. Having originally bought in to the concept of the Naim sound, I have for some time been asking myself what it really is and why.
 
They all share the same circuit its just layout and more supplys that make most of the difference.

The naim circuit has lots of tantalum capacitors that couple the signal between stages each one affect the sound slightly and that effect adds up, simply changing them to film caps makes a big difference to the sound, some (like me) say for the better, but you do lose some of that Naim sound.

Pete
 
MJS said:
We have merely applied more rails from Naim's own flagship power supply to one of Naim's own pre-amplifiers, just as they did with the leap from the NAC82 to the 52 (or should I say the downconversion from 52 to 82)

As many will know the 52 can take advantage of the 12 separate analogue audio supplies in the supercap. The 82 can use 4 at most, by design. All we've done is found a way to get a load of extra rails into an 82 without butchering it. We have even added a couple of rails in places that the NAC252 uses for example. Not only that but it's backwards compatible with every previous method of powering it, so we can do the mod, and you still power it from a single amp, one hicap, two hicaps or a supercap, so you don't need the big power supply straight away. It's all done through clever link plugs that I designed. We supply the cable that unlocks all 10 rails. And it keeps the power and signal entirely separate.

And it's completely reversible should you want to revert to factory spec.

This will work with the NAC32 and 72 as well (if we lose the 4 pin DIN) so watch this space.
Click to expand...

Let me know if you do the 72.. please x
 
I'm looking for test candidates if anyone wants to try a 72 conversion. I would need a supercap to test it with though.
 
dspatterson said:
The marketing fact is MJS is spot on [and he knows better than many on here for sure] Naim needed the amps to sonically move up a step with each model. The only way with the 82 to end up mid way between 72 and 52 and aid dealers with decent and clearly audible steps while demoing was to hold it back. Goodness the rear of the case had plenty of space for a burndy connection. If the 82 had been fully powered by the supercap, its unlikely a 52 would have made sense in a demo and hence not sold as well. Pure marketing over sound potential.
Click to expand...

I mentioned a few years back that an 82, with boards removed, and use of single source wasn't as far away from a similar condition 52, even my 552 wasn't a huge step up as people made out to be IMO.

The difference is the 52 can accommodate multiple sources and phono boards, and will outperform the 82 in any situation.
 
Will it?

Must have been something with the one I had then!

My 2002 82 left a 1991 52 for dead to the extent that I couldn't even be bothered fiddling with it.

MJS must be modding the 82's circuitry to get 10 rails into it, possibly by incorporating the 102's split supply input buffer, otherwise it would only take 8 rails as has already been done by Naimly Linn.

Seems like a good idea to me but I'd be looking at a better supply than a bog standard SC. Maybe a TPR4'd one?
 
MJS said:
I'm looking for test candidates if anyone wants to try a 72 conversion. I would need a supercap to test it with though.
Click to expand...

You can "borrow" mine but I use an Avondale ps and it has the Avondale cards in but I have the originals too
 
colasblue said:
Will it?

Must have been something with the one I had then!

My 2002 82 left a 1991 52 for dead to the extent that I couldn't even be bothered fiddling with it.

MJS must be modding the 82's circuitry to get 10 rails into it, possibly by incorporating the 102's split supply input buffer, otherwise it would only take 8 rails as has already been done by Naimly Linn.

Seems like a good idea to me but I'd be looking at a better supply than a bog standard SC. Maybe a TPR4'd one?
Click to expand...

Something along those lines, yes.

It sounds great with a stock supercap and sublime with a TPR4'd one. We've heard both now.

Just out of interest an early 52, if you use the internal phono boards, will only be using 8 rails of power. 2 are for the 5 pin powered external phono input and 2 more for the unnecessary output cards that were never fitted. Ours is electrically closer to the 252 than the 52.
 
Custom HiFi Cables has been doing this same sort of upgrade for quite a few years - as well as NAC32/72/102 power upgrades in the same vein. As well as the 202 and 282. Pretty much anything really.
 
joe9407 said:
MJS: can this mod be done to a 282? you know, just curious...
Click to expand...

Yes, we reckon this will work with the 282 although we haven't had a chance to try it yet. The 282 has kept the 82's power arrangements so it should be an easy fix.
 
We can now start to roll this out onto the following pre-amps:

NAC32
NAC32-5
NAC72
NAC102
NAC282

Note that the 32 and 72 will lose the 4 pin output so would only be compatible with a Hicap or Supercap.
 
Yes MK1 52 with PS.

The organisation of the rails was basically the same as an 82 but with extra ones for the various plug in boards. It really surprised me that if you took out all the boards it was electrically identical to an 82 with no phono boards in!

I'd have thought they could at least have powered the tape buffers separately but actually the only time I tried to do that on my 82 it sounded worse (don't ask me why).

None the less got a TSC to play with and it's doing quite well as a substitute for the APX4 (didn't work so well on the Snaxo which is what I bought it for) so I think a bit of fiddling is justified.
 
MJS said:
We can now start to roll this out onto the following pre-amps:

NAC32
NAC32-5
NAC72
NAC102
NAC282

Note that the 32 and 72 will lose the 4 pin output so would only be compatible with a Hicap or Supercap.
Click to expand...

Does the 282 mod make it a 252 in effect ? (Not necessarily a good thing depending on whether you prefer the more laid back sound of the 252 compared with the more exuberant 282.
 
As a 282 owner I'm interested to hear how this turns out mine is probably due a once over soon what is the cost of a service and upgrade.
 
Jonn said:
Does the 282 mod make it a 252 in effect ? (Not necessarily a good thing depending on whether you prefer the more laid back sound of the 252 compared with the more exuberant 282.
Click to expand...

I can't claim to turn a 282 into 252 as there will be electrical differences between the preamps, in addition to routing of tracks etc.
 
Good Morning Fellow PFMers

I started the thread on WHA's modification to the much under rated, in some corners of the HiFi community, Naim NAC82 because I believe from what was described that it was a winning solution and would release the "potential" of the pre-amp.

It was in the hope that those who had allowed their pre-amp to be modified would tell us of their initial findings ..... all of which I expect to be positive ( however one never knows ) ..... and whilst it is early days in the availability of the modification I feel sure there may already be two or three who have had it done.

So WHA NAC82 modified owner/s please share your thoughts ........ it would be unfair to ask MJS to do this at this stage.
 
Anh said:
I mentioned a few years back that an 82, with boards removed, and use of single source wasn't as far away from a similar condition 52, even my 552 wasn't a huge step up as people made out to be IMO.

The difference is the 52 can accommodate multiple sources and phono boards, and will outperform the 82 in any situation.
Click to expand...

Am I understanding this correctly that I’ll get an improvement by removing the boards from sources I don’t use?
I only use CD and phono so if I remove others my 82 will thank me?
Cheers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top