Naim Olive NAP180 vs NAP250 with Harbeths 7es3

[robdeszan]

Hello All

According to Naim's hierarchy/marketing_scheme one should be be an "upgrade" over the other but going through posts I keep reading about the 250's 'softness/slowness' which, with Harbeths, might not be advised. Even though I am only looking at the olive option, the 250.2 is supposed to be softer still, while the 250dr is devoid of the Naim signature sound according to some, sounding too "hi-fi"...

Is the nap180 vs nap250 only about power difference, the grip of music, at higher volume levels (especially with demanding speakers which my Harbeths are not) or does the latter brings in different sonic signature as well? Is there much difference between the two when it comes to overall character?

There was recently a thread of mine in where I shared some impressions on comparing nac72 and a nac102 (with a nap180). The 72, despite being more "universal" and not fussy about recording quality, lacked both grip on lower notes and a certain sparkle the 102 had, which also results in a generally more forward soundstage on the latter - both are clearly tuned differently. This is just an aside to give a bit more context; I am also in the process of comparing the stock nac72 cards with 3rd party options which changes the character significantly.

The 72 is frequently coupled / recommended to go with a nap250. How come? Do they both share similar character (both "relaxed") or does one compensate the other?

I would like to avoid softening of any dynamics but would welcome more grip on the bass, more detail (if at all possible?) and deeper soundstage which is true to the mix, rather than being a rendering due to the sonic signature/tuning of the amp. Is that something the 250 would give over the 180? Or are Naim just swinging you from one end to the other to then become frustrated with either extreme, which then only a pair of 135s would cure, or nap300 or the 500 series...

What are your thoughts?

 

[Woodface]

Hello All

According to Naim's hierarchy/marketing_scheme one should be be an "upgrade" over the other but going through posts I keep reading about the 250's 'softness' which, with Harbeths, might not be advised. Even though I am only looking at the olive option, the 250.2 is supposed to be softer still, while the 250dr is devoid of the Naim signature sound according to some, sounding to "hi-fi"...

Is the nap180 vs nap250 only about power difference, the grip of music, at higher volume levels (especially with demanding speakers which my Harbeths are not) or does the latter brings in different sonic signature as well? Is there much difference between the two when it comes to overall character?

There was recently a thread of mine in where I shared some impressions on comparing nac72 and a nac102 (with a nap180). The 72, despite being more "universal" and not fussy about recording quality, lacked both grip on lower notes and a certain sparkle the 102 had, which also results in a generally more forward soundstage on the latter - both are clearly tuned differently. This is just an aside to give a bit more context; I am also in the process of comparing the stock nac72 cards with 3rd party options which changes the character significantly.

The 72 is frequently coupled / recommended to go with a nap250. How come? Do they both share similar character (both "relaxed") or does one compensate the other?

I would like to avoid softening of any dynamics but would welcome more grip on the bass, more detail (if at all possible?) and deeper soundstage which is true to the mix, rather than being a rendering due to the sonic signature/tuning of the amp. Is that something the 250 would give over the 180? Or are Naim just swinging you from one end to the other to then become frustrated with either extreme, which then only a pair of 135s would cure, or nap300 or the 500 series...

What are your thoughts?

It’s not a conspiracy, the Nap250 is the better amp & was in the range before the nap180 so...

The presentation will be a little more rounded than the 180 but some find the latter a little fierce.

I have had an olive 250 & a later model for an extended period & the differences are not massive. Olive is perhaps a bit punchier, less forgiving with the later one having a wider sound stage & better imaging.

 

[rbrown]

Agreed. I’ve had both and much preferred the 250. Sounded a lot more weighty and substantial, if maybe a bit slower. The 180, while good was a bit tiring and relentless after a while.

 

[EPear]

would welcome more grip on the bass, more detail (if at all possible?) and deeper soundstage which is true to the mix

appreciate these amps have differences but it’s just that what you are describing here rather reminds me of the weaknesses of the Harbeths themselves, may be just something to consider..

 

[robdeszan]

Thanks for your thoughts. What I am trying to understand is whether the suggested pairing of pre / power amps comes more their sonic signatures rather than some sort of recommended retailer's idea of you throwing money at things within their marketing scheme. I saw someone was selling a nac52 some time ago and noticed they used a "meager" shoebox amp in their system, for example.

Speakers? Hmm, not sure. Never felt that was the weak link, although I am sure they put their stamp on the sound. I've gone through different sources, different cables over the years, now had a chance to compare different pre amps and was able to perceive changes each time. I've heard the same speakers sound both bloated and tight, or noticed substantial soundstage shape changes, all depending on the component I threw in the chain so I know that the potential is there. Hence the question on component synergy, cumulative effects and/or compensation of the pre/power pairings vs the possibility of them being tuned in a more "calculated" manner due to corresponding price brackets.

Finally, I did get a chance to compare a 250.2 with the 180 at home whilst we were also comparing a 102 and a 72 and preamp changes had a far more pronounced effect on the overall sound signature. There was very little difference between the abovementioned poweramps. I also noted my preferred listening volume levels as a factor (they are low to moderate) as perhaps the difference between the two amps would become more apparent if one would drive that 250.2 harder in general or if the speakers were less efficient than the Harbeths?

 

[ryder]

With Harbeth loudspeakers, the higher you go with respect to Naim amplification, the better it gets. This has been a common observation and experience with most Harbeth users who use Naim amps on the speakers. I have used NAP200 and 250DR on SHL5+ and speakers sound a lot better driven by the 250DR. Improvements are mainly in deeper and punchier bass, and nicely textured and layered (as opposed to one-note bass of NAP200), improved detail and refinement in the bass, midrange and treble. Basically everything sounds more real.

In my book, 250DR is minimum for the SHL5+ (and C7ES3 too). Another SHL5+ user thought differently though, citing that the 300DR is minimum requirement for the speakers after moving up from 250DR. Well, I can't argue with that as I do not have experience with the 300DR. Anyway the 282/250DR are my endgame amps with respect to Naim as I won't be climbing up the ladder any further.

Most Harbeth SHL5+ and M30.1 or 30.2 owners use 250DR, 300DR and 135 on the speakers. Anything less than 250DR it sounds a bit meh.

 

[Chefren]

For comparison, if it helps any, my Exposure XXVIII is driving my C7ES3s well enough.

 

[amazement]

Hello All

According to Naim's hierarchy/marketing_scheme one should be be an "upgrade" over the other but going through posts I keep reading about the 250's 'softness/slowness' which, with Harbeths, might not be advised. Even though I am only looking at the olive option, the 250.2 is supposed to be softer still, while the 250dr is devoid of the Naim signature sound according to some, sounding too "hi-fi"...

Is the nap180 vs nap250 only about power difference, the grip of music, at higher volume levels (especially with demanding speakers which my Harbeths are not) or does the latter brings in different sonic signature as well? Is there much difference between the two when it comes to overall character?

There was recently a thread of mine in where I shared some impressions on comparing nac72 and a nac102 (with a nap180). The 72, despite being more "universal" and not fussy about recording quality, lacked both grip on lower notes and a certain sparkle the 102 had, which also results in a generally more forward soundstage on the latter - both are clearly tuned differently. This is just an aside to give a bit more context; I am also in the process of comparing the stock nac72 cards with 3rd party options which changes the character significantly.

The 72 is frequently coupled / recommended to go with a nap250. How come? Do they both share similar character (both "relaxed") or does one compensate the other?

I would like to avoid softening of any dynamics but would welcome more grip on the bass, more detail (if at all possible?) and deeper soundstage which is true to the mix, rather than being a rendering due to the sonic signature/tuning of the amp. Is that something the 250 would give over the 180? Or are Naim just swinging you from one end to the other to then become frustrated with either extreme, which then only a pair of 135s would cure, or nap300 or the 500 series...

What are your thoughts?

I always thought the 72’s natural partner was the 140, not the 250. When I listened to my 200 with a 250.2 the 250.2 was clearly ahead, more clarity and more/better control in the bass.

 

[Woodface]

I always thought the 72’s natural partner was the 140, not the 250. When I listened to my 200 with a 250.2 the 250.2 was clearly ahead, more clarity and more/better control in the bass.

No, 72 was the top pre-amp for the Nap250. It was later surpassed by introduction of 52 then 82 & 102 (arguable).The 250 has been in production for a very long time in various incarnations. Before the 72 you had the 32.5.

 

[Minio]

the 250dr is devoid of the Naim signature sound

Not sure about that, but an RSL'd 72 makes a great partner to the 250DR.
After several system changes including NAPs 200, 250CB, 250.2 the 250DR has the right sound for me and naturally suits the upgraded 72. Tpr4 the Hicap for optimum results.
As above, it sounds like the minimum requirement for the Harbeths.

 

[mega lord]

How about a bit of mix and match. The 250 is totally regulated where as the 180 is not regulated at all. A halfway house is something like an Avondale voyager where the front end of the amp is regulated leaving the driver and output transistors free. That's no use to you if you want to stick with Naim though.

 

[robdeszan]

Avondale you say? Perhaps it is worth auditioning the NCC boards to see what they can bring to the table, without touching the original power supply.

 

[peterm]

I had an early 180 with 82/HiCap for many years and, after changing speakers to sbls, thought I should upgrade to a 250.

I couldn't hear any difference (not that surprising - both used exactly the same amplifier boards, NAPA/6), the only difference was the 180 had an unregulated supply at 38 volts, the 250 a regulated supply a volt or 2 higher.

In spite of feeling a bit short changed I kept the 250 and put the 180 into storage.

3 years ago I tried a pair of Shahinian Obelisks and the 250 couldn't drive them in the treble. Apparently the 250s regulator boards inhibit power delivery into low impedances at high frequencies. My old 180 was far better!

Following a tip from MJS I tried a pair of NCC200 boards in another 180 that I bought for the purpose and found that an improvement, more detail and better control.

Interestingly I found that the 180 I bought for modification sounded rubbish as received but after checking the output stage bias settings and finding them very much below standard and resetting them to the correct figures it sounded just like my original 180!

My experience leads me to believe that in 99% of cases a properly set up 180 (which they should be) is virtually a match for a 250.

Since I understand that your Harbeth speakers are an easy load I doubt that you would notice much if any difference between 180 and 250.

I believe a 180 with NCC 220 boards should trounce both!

 

[MJS]

The 250's refinement comes about because the front end is regulated by the power supply boards. But they also supply the raw power for the output transistors too so performance is related to how well that supply can stand up.
The NCCs/Hackernaps/WH Phoenix all use a regulated front end but leave the output stage connected to the raw supply. The WH boards go a stage further and add extra decoupling between the output and front end and JJ has designed a power supply board that can fit right next to the power amp boards. It's also a reason why the NAP110 can sound better than the 140 because the reservoir caps are right next to the output drivers. He's successfully refitted a couple of NAP200s this way already.