Naim IBL
- Thread starter Clothears
- Start date
Good to hear that you are still around Andy, I dropped you a PM a while ago about Superreg boards/kits and didn't get a reply so I was thinking you didn't come here any more.
Interesting viewpoint about the IBL's I heard them a long time ago (1988) and thought they were a bit lightweight compared to SBLs but they have much smaller drivers and are missing the large resonance chamber that the SBL's have so it's not entirely unexpected. They were compared a lot to Kans in those days, probably more to do with the fact that they were both released at similar times than anything else but I do remember thinking they sounded somewhat similar.
david ellwood
Kirabosi Kognoscente
Kans were introduced a decade before the IBL and they could not sound more dissimilar.
I stand corrected on the release date, I had no idea they were first on sale in 1979.
It's all pretty subjective though isn't it. My memory related to when I bought my first Linn/Naim gear in 1988 and it started off with a 140/62/Index and Kans, the IBLs came out in 1988/9 I think and were often referred to as 'Kans on stands' IIRC. I heard some during that time and thought the statement was fairly accurate but then again I don't recall what was playing through them and the owner has them a mile away from the wall, so too many variables for a proper comparison of course.
Pacha
New Member
Interesting thread. I totally agree that IBLs and Kans sound completely different from each other. I run two systems in the house one with IBLs the other with Mk1 Kans. (Both on Naim amplification) . The IBLs were bought out of curiosity (having previously used Kans on both systems) and I’m about to receive a second set of IBLs to replace the last pair of Kans. I love my Kans and TBH I am a little disappointed that they have been knocked of their pedestals. In my house (small rooms / sandstone walls) and to my ears it wasn’t even a close run thing! After one month of swapping kit around from one system to another and carrying out as much AB comparisons as I could; the openness, transparency, imaging and mid range of the IBL quite frankly made the Kan impossible to listen to!
gary yeowell
pfm Member
As i said earlier in the thread, i loved my IBLs, performed wonderfully in my small office space, and bettered Kans that they replaced.
Moving on a few years after a surprisingly great sounding pair of Kabers, i now run a late set of SBLs. These are as good as my SL2 (which i ran in same space for 3 years) albeit different, and would actually be my pick of the bunch. Some time and effort in setting up, new gasket seals and they are singing.
Moving on a few years after a surprisingly great sounding pair of Kabers, i now run a late set of SBLs. These are as good as my SL2 (which i ran in same space for 3 years) albeit different, and would actually be my pick of the bunch. Some time and effort in setting up, new gasket seals and they are singing.
I agree, a well set up, sorted set of SBLs takes some beating. I am going to try them with a Neurochrome Modulus 686 next.
Dinovector
pfm Member
Interesting thread, I must admit to having dismissed IBLs as just entry level and left it at that, my loss it would seem, I really should have made more effort to hear some. I did hear a pair in a HiFi show been driven actively by a NAC92 and a pair of NAP90s in the late 90s but that was immediately after hearing some SBLs been driven by 4 x 135s (launch of the CDX and XPS) which was a bit of a shame, probably in reverse order would have been better? Ironically that was the first time we had listened to Naim at all having been on a quest to find some sort of valve setup. It only took another 20 something years to try Naim speakers for ourselves