advertisement


Hifi News Review of Naim Statement

Good post.

Back in the eighties even high end audio like the Krells that Tony mentions were purely functional.
 
The CD2 was 650UKP in 1989 so 1560 now. Add in a mid price Creek/Rega/Exposure and you are looking at 5k++

Yes, except a mid-priced Creek of the day would struggle to work with the Gale 401, and the Yamaha NS1000 would sound better with something a lot better (and IMO, preferably something that would bring out the mid and top rather than just make it bark).

Also, I wouldn't put either speaker as relevant (or in the case of the Gale, available) 25 years ago.

A typical £2,000+ system of 1990 would have been an Linn LP12/Akito/K9 and an Arcam Alpha into a Linn Intek and a pair of Indexes or Heybrook HB1s. I think that wouldn't be too hard to beat.
 
At what point does money spent on hi-fi become "ostentatious greed?"
When the technical performance of the product is no better if not actually worse than products costing 10% of the price it is pretty safe to assume the purchase is being made for reasons more to do with status than getting a job done well. Personally I don't see much of a problem with this and wish all the British companies that are trying to grab a piece of the action good luck.
 
There's an assumption here that the Naim Statement (and other bits of hi-fi exotica) are designed mainly for bling value rather than their sound quality. For sure, the Statement is rather more attractive than the monolithic black boxes of old (and some new) such devices, but that doesn't stop its design being prioritised around sound quality.

Seems as usual people are judging without hearing.
 
I know you weren't replying to me, but as I kind of started this particular thread tangent I'll try and clarify what I was on about: back when I was a kid lusting after audio kit the high-end 'statement' kit was very expensive. I knew I'd never be able to afford it, but even so it didn't cost multiples of a decent house the way so much does today. Almost all of it was actually much less than the average annual salary. As such it stood as a realistic beacon as to what was technically possible, and those buying the normally priced kit lower in the range really felt they were getting something via technology trickle-down. It served as a great advert.

The current 'statement' market (not just Naim, I'm talking generally here) seems aimed from the outset at Russian oligarchs, footballers, oil sheiks etc. It lacks the relevance and is IMHO more likely to create a reaction of "f*** off, you have to be kidding!" from normal audiophiles than one of aspiration. It smacks of vulgarity in a Harry Enfield 'Loadsamoney' kind of way, and in a way something like say Tannoy Autographs or a KSA100 never did. They were just what a big 15" corner horn or 100 watt class A amp looked like, they needed to be that big, heavy and expensive to function. There was an honesty and integrity of design/intent that I fear is lacking in today's ultra-high-end.

But Krells and Tannoy Autographs weren't 'statement' grade in the 1980s. They were just 'high-end'. Statement was Goldmund and Cello and Infinity IRS. By those standards, the Naim Statement is both cheap, and understated.
 
+1 and by paying a little more a modern UKP2000 digital system system can run rings round something costing far more 25 years ago. There must be a lot of mid price system owners who can upgrade by paying a lot less than they did before and that is an ego problem

We still haven't seen mention of this £2K system that is supposed to be better than whatever 1990 system at far more than £2K we might consider to be pretty good!

So looking at WHF let's go for:
Marantz CD6005
Arcam A19
B&W 685S2 or PMCTwenty22
 
I've no problems with very expensive gear and I have no jealousy for those who aspire or even buy them. I'd love to listen to a "great" system, but I would never buy one.

It's for the same reason that I have no problems with people who can afford to run a Ferrari, Lamborghini or the like. I could buy a ferrari if I wanted to, but I don't because my little VW up! is much the better car for my circumstances. My bmw stays on the drive most days and only comes out for motorway drives.

I have a great deal of enjoyment from my mid-priced systems.
 
The audio market has upped and moved its tents to a different square altogether. Too bad some are still not aware of it.

It lacks the relevance and is IMHO more likely to create a reaction of "f*** off, you have to be kidding!" from normal audiophiles

Sums things up neatly, I think.
 
A typical £2,000+ system of 1990 would have been an Linn LP12/Akito/K9 and an Arcam Alpha into a Linn Intek and a pair of Indexes or Heybrook HB1s. I think that wouldn't be too hard to beat.

It wasn't hard to beat it back then either!
 
We still haven't seen mention of this £2K system that is supposed to be better than whatever 1990 system at far more than £2K we might consider to be pretty good!

So looking at WHF let's go for:
Marantz CD6005
Arcam A19
B&W 685S2 or PMCTwenty22

How about an Arcam CDS27 player, A19 amp, and PSB Imagine X1T floorstanders? That comes to a little over £2,200 list as a complete system (excluding cables and tables).

I'd happily put that up against a system that cost around £2,000 in 1990.
 
How about an Arcam CDS27 player, A19 amp, and PSB Imagine X1T floorstanders? That comes to a little over £2,200 list as a complete system (excluding cables and tables).

I'd happily put that up against a system that cost around £2,000 in 1990.

Alan you are still missing the point (perhaps deliberately so) - david said
"something costing far more 25 years ago!

For the hard of understanding, that means - a lot more than £2500 in 1990.
 
Speaking of beating something costing far more than £2K 25 yrs ago how about from 1991:

PT Export / RB300 / Denon DL304, £1000
Exposure VII/VIII, £800
Epos ES11's, £300

It's not even far more than £2K - it's just £2,100

Wonder what would beat that now for <£2,000?
 
Alan you are still missing the point (perhaps deliberately so) - david said
"something costing far more 25 years ago!

For the hard of understanding, that means - a lot more than £2500 in 1990.
But not quite what I meant :confused:

I was excluding vinyl from this comparison as many modern decks and cartridges are not good value for money
 
Alan you are still missing the point (perhaps deliberately so) - david said
"something costing far more 25 years ago!

For the hard of understanding, that means - a lot more than £2500 in 1990.

Yes, I didn't necessarily say that. My take is a system costing £X today is very likely better than a similarly priced system of 25 years ago.

I could very easily put together a system that would sound truly awful and cost more from 25 years ago. How about Audio Research and Naim IBLs? Late Chrome Bumper Naim and B&W Silver Signatures? Or an Ongaku and Apogees? I could even create a system that wasn't stacked in my favour that didn't sound any good that cost a lot more and won't sound as good as that Arcam/PSB system I mentioned (anything that ends with the words 'Linn Sara 9', for example).

If you are determined to be pedantic about this, remember that we are in 2015. 25 years ago is 1990. Not 1979. By 1990, a pair of Gale 401 were long gone, and the NS1000 were already an anachronistic throw-back to the 1970s by then, so hardly relevant to the 'of 25 years ago' comment. A loudspeaker of 25 years ago isn't a loudspeaker of 37 years ago, and I think if you are wanting to take this to task you should stick to designs launched within a few years from the relevant date.
 
Speaking of beating something costing far more than £2K 25 yrs ago how about from 1991:

PT Export / RB300 / Denon DL304, £1000
Exposure VII/VIII, £800
Epos ES11's, £300

It's not even far more than £2K - it's just £2,100

Wonder what would beat that now for <£2,000?

A Pro-ject Xpression Carbon, with a Creek Evo 50a, and a pair of Russell K Red 50s would give this a run for its money.

The Export would sound better when on song, but the Pro-ject will be more consistent. And the amps would be less likely to go up in flames, compared to early 1990s era Exposure.
 


advertisement


Back
Top