advertisement


Avondale Pre Amps

I

ian1948

Active Member
Hi everyone
I’m canvassing advice, opinions, facts and help.

Currently using a Naim NAC 102 with a NAPSC 2 powered by an Avondale APX 2 into a Naim NAP 140 into Naim Credos. Inputs are a Naim CDX and a Cambridge CXN V2 Streamer. I only ever play at low volume levels.

I’ve wondered about changing my pre amp and I’ve been drawn towards Avondale. I understand that there are 3. An “entry” with 321 boards, an upgraded version with 821 boards and finally a Grad 1.

I’ve several questions:
a) what’s the difference between each and does sound quality increase as you move up the range
b) would they all improve on my existing NAC 102
c) can they be used with my APX 2
d) what are the dimensions of each (sorry)
e) do they all perform well even at my low volume levels

Every thought you can offer is extremely helpful so please do voice your opinions and comments and experience.

Or should I get rid of my Naim amps and buy a decent secondhand integrated and if so what?

Thanks in advance I’m really looking forward to anything you have to say.
 
Hello,

I had the full Avondale kit, Grad 1, TPX2 and 130 monos.

I will answer giving my opinion.

The Grad 1 and TPX2 are very very good, there is in the classifieds a Grad 1 and TPX2, if you sold your pre amp and APX2 you would be a good way into the cost of what is being asked.

A well designed pre amp, and the Grad 1 is a stunner, will give you more of what your sources are sending to the pre/amp and therefore out your speakers.

However in the scale of things don't expect this to transform things by a huge margin, yes it will be better but then you will most likely would want a better amp, then maybe speakers.

In my opinion speakers give the biggest change that any part of the HiFi system can give, however you have to have the pre amp/amp combination to let the speakers work well, and some speakers are not good being played low level and some speakers may not suit your room.

If you already are happy with your speakers playing low levels then the Grad 1 and TPX2 I think would give you an improvement over what you have, so yes, once you have those, your next step might be a better amp and keep your speakers, the better amp in the future will drive the speakers easier.

One thing to note, having a better pre amp will show what your sources are giving out and that extra detail in some case can seem to sound too clinical, only you will tell once heard.

Basically it is like the LP12 of old, many prefer it over the latest LP12 because it plays music whereas the latest LP12 can sound a bit too accurate and clinical.

Hope this is of some help, does not answer many of your questions, but it should give you an insight into my opinion on things.

All the best with your journey.

Cheers

John

PS...

If the Grad 1 and TPX2 are outwith your budget, sell the 102 and get a Naim 32.5 or 72.

Pre amps do not make any difference to playing at low levels, it only gives the amp and speakers some extra information it gained from the sources.
 
I have only ever seen the grad1 heard of the 821 it used the top spec 821 boards I believe.
The grad1 was his master piece Les words not mine haha small form case same as tpx1 etc.
Never seen a 321 spec Avondale pre.

As much as I enjoyed naim the avondale power amps are to most a bigger step than the preamps.
I had a 180 and moved up to an Avondale 260z with a 102 it was quite a jump.
Many will say a 72 with either NJ cards, 821 or RSL is the more widely used upgrade.

I had a nait 5i and currently have a nait XS, neat and less boxes certainly and not bad by any account but if you don't mind the very unfashionable multi box approach then potential is huge.
 
Other point is the 102 is way better than what I sells for and not THAT bad.
How you find the credos are they the external crossover ones or internal?
 
Avondale used to upgrade the NAC102. The hyperbole used to claim that it was as good as a NAC52.

That aside, it may be another option for you if Les still offers it.

regards

Kevin
 
I can also vouch for the Avondale pre amps with the grad 1 being superb, I would be using one now but I need 5 inputs for my system and the Grad 1 only has 3 if I remember correctly so that's about the only limitation.
I presently use a DIY version 821A, dual mono, 6 inputs Via Elma switch, TPR4 regs, and a Goldpoint stepped attenuator for Volume control
It also sounds superb very 3D and transparent

821A PreAmp by Alan Towell, on Flickr

Alan
 
I’ve got the fabled A102, powered by a pair of Tpx2’s. It’s good. I’ve only compared directly to an 82 which did the Naim thing, prat and foot tapping in abundance but becomes tiresome (to me)

same story with 12, 32 and 72, much more to my taste with 821’s installed.
Last up Grad 1, a recent acquisition, frustrating without remote, and only 3 inputs but it’s a wow product. Hearing old favourites like never before, it’s reputation is well deserved.
 
I'm going to throw in a few thoughts for consideration. I used to run this in my two primary systems:
  • My main system had a NAC52 supplied by a Super-Cap.
  • My secondary system had a NAC102 with 18VDC linear supply for NAPSC duties, and a SNAPS2 with two Avondale LM317TPR modules providing dual 24V rails to the NAC102. This is not quite as good as the APX, but certainly similar to what you have.
Therefore, I'm very familiar with the relative qualities of these. I can say with certainty that the NAC52 combo was very much better than the NAC102 combo (as one would expect). The NAC52 was fuller, more fluid, more palpable, and wonderfully revealing and natural. In comparison, the NAC102 was completely capable, but missed many things, and didn't bring the music nearly as well.

I've read that the Avondale Grad 1 is better than the NAC52/Super, which I can easily believe. Les does a fantastic job with his kit, and I've got many Avondale amps around here to prove my appreciation for this craftwork.

Now here's where it gets interesting! I used to have a CDS2/XPS combo as my primary source, and I started home streaming with a Squeezebox Touch. Initially I had a Scott Nixon Chibi Saru DAC, but eventually transitioned to a Benchmark DAC2. I fed this into the NAC52 like any other source. The Squeezebox/DAC2 combo sounded just as good as the CDS2/XPS, so I sold that (because most of my CDs were ripped and I enjoyed the convenience of not having to find and organize my CDs).

I had been using the fixed output from the Benchmark DAC2 into the NAC52. It just so happens DAC2 has a volume control, and can feed power amps directly. One day I built some cables to connect the DAC2 directly to my NAP135s. What I heard just about knocked me off my feet! Suddenly everything was astonishingly clearer, more dynamic, faster, and more rhythmic. Separation between instruments was vastly improved! This wasn't a minor difference: it was easily as big a jump as going from the NAC102 to NAC52.

I had a hard time believing it, so I switched back and forth a few times, to be sure I hadn't screwed something up in either configuration. Once I confirmed that the difference was real, I packed up the NAC52/Super and sold it.

I should mention that the DAC2 has multiple digital inputs, along with two analog inputs (which are routed separately from the digital side). So it could not only control the volume, but also do input selection and support my turntable and cassette deck. My NAC52 had phono cards, so now I needed a separate phono-amp. (I initially tried the Schiit Mani as an experiment, but eventually bought a Rega Aria which sounds much better than the Naim phono cards in the NAC52.)

Eventually I snagged a used Benchmark DAC1 for my secondary system, and sold the NAC102/SNAPS/Fake-NAPCS. I had only digital sources there, so the DAC1's lack of analog inputs wasn't an issue.

The moral of this story is that if you listen primarily to digital sources, then you may want to drop the pre-amp entirely, and choose a DAC that can switch between digital inputs and control the volume. If you have one or more analog sources, then you have options there too.
 
Mirroring my thoughts exactly Mike. I hear mention repeatedly of preamps mining information out of the source that wasn't there previously, but surely all a preamp can do is apply a fixed (assuming no tone controls) eq on the existing source FR to either emphasise or de-emphasise parts of the spectrum. There is no new information, it's just some frequencies are louder or quieter than before and hence the whole things sounds different.

I run my pi streamer straight into my qudos amp and often wonder what a pre would bring, but surely the pi output has everything already, and the pre can only apply eq that may or may not be preferable to my ears.
 
James Evans said:
I run my pi streamer straight into my qudos amp and often wonder what a pre would bring, but surely the pi output has everything already, and the pre can only apply eq that may or may not be preferable to my ears.
Click to expand...
Assuming the Pi has a suitable hat with a good RCA output quality, and that the output voltage is enough for the the power amp input, then I agree 100%.

mega lord said:
Preamps remove musical information. Just stick a suitable value pot or SA in a box and be done with it.
Click to expand...
Pre-amps actually are useful sometimes. Impedance matching problems can exist between a source and a power amp, and a source may not provide enough voltage. Of course, source selection is handy as well. ;)

If you have just one source, and it's able to control its own volume, and its output voltage is sufficient, and there isn't an impedance matching issue, then there's no sense in adding a pre.

This is a good watch:

 
Very happy with the sound from my 72 with Avondale 821a boards, and 250 with Avondale Qudos and HCR200 boards. The 72 is powered by an Avondale TPX1.5. The source is an NDX and speakers are ATC SCM19 v2. All connected with Witch Hat Phantom and Morganas.The only thing I can say is that I have no intention of further upgrades.
 
The Avondale 102 is different thing to standard one. Full of gyrators, takes 2 caps, one dedicated to 821a’s. Slightly less detailed than a 12 with 821 installed, but wider/deeper soundstage. Been the heart of my system for a decade till the Grad1 arrived. Still in a quandary with its 3 inputs, but happy enough pulling cables atm
 
I have had Avomdale products for about 13 years. The 821A were the first thing I purchased from Les (first of very many) to replace 321 boards in a NAC72. They had me hooked, they blew the 321 away imo. Bought lots of Avondale NCC200, TPR4 , transformers etc etc. Loved it all.

Les said to me when I visited him not to bother trying a passive as I wouldn't like it. A couple of years later curiosity got the better of me and I tried a homemade pot in a box. I thought Les was god at the time and was expecting to be disappointed. It turned out Les was wrong, I much preferred the passive. Much more musucal information emerged and nothing to complain about in my situation.,

People talk about how transparent this and that product is. It's all relative ime and compared to just a volume control nothing is transparent. The experience sent me on a crusade to remove as many things from my system as possible. CD3.5 anologue stage got bypassed - wow and still no impedance matching issues with a passive pre. In stages I removed poweramp input coupling cap, output zobel, Thiele network (with very low capacitance speaker cable) and at each stage my ears thanked me.
 
I use an Avondale built 821 with TPR4-Snaps (set to 31.1volts for each channel) and dual mono Qudos S100 poweramp. This is the most neutral, balanced, detailed and open amplifier combination I have ever had. It has the ability to extract all musical information from any source and shows that the quality of amplifiers is really important. Avondale Audio = perfection.
 
Mike Hanson said:
I had been using the fixed output from the Benchmark DAC2 into the NAC52. It just so happens DAC2 has a volume control, and can feed power amps directly. One day I built some cables to connect the DAC2 directly to my NAP135s. What I heard just about knocked me off my feet! Suddenly everything was astonishingly clearer, more dynamic, faster, and more rhythmic. Separation between instruments was vastly improved! This wasn't a minor difference: it was easily as big a jump as going from the NAC102 to NAC52
Click to expand...

Same experience with nac82, 250 and Arcam streamer. Bypassed the nac and it sounded better. Sold all the Naim stuff and got an Arcam amp. Sounds better again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top