advertisement


Shahinian Obs 2 & Naim NAP135’s

Thanks Mark, useful info. My 135’s have recently had the Phoenix boards fitted, would that make any difference? Probably not, I’m guessing?
They address many of the shortcomings of the original Naim boards and provide pinpoint vocal accuracy but they don't change the power supply layout. I would expect them to sound a lot better as they won't be affected by any sag in the power delivery due to the regulated front-end.
 
Genuinely surprised as I use this combination (Isis, Osiris, Obelisk). Cabling does matter - with stock Rega power cords the combination sounded clinical & lacking in emotion. Different cable loom and the systems is musically hypnotic - IMO. My room is small - so very tried to drive the Obelisks too hard. There in may be a difference.?
which mains cable do you use?
 
Biggest difference / improvement between Mk1 & Mk2 is the super-tweeters. The tweeters output was increased from 6 ohms (Mk1) to 12 ohms (Mk2). There's 4 super-tweeters per pyramid top; two S-Ts joined in series and the same with the other two S-Ts then the four S-Ts are paralleled up together. With the earlier model (Mk1) Obelisks this meant that at certain frequencies the treble could dip to as low as 1. /1.5. ohm - which is close to a short circuit, hence most amplifiers 'really struggled'. That's why only a few amplifiers were suitable: Dynavector amplifiers being the best because they were designed specifically for Shahinian speakers.
Mk2s: the mid(s) units are different as are the bass drivers front and the rear ABR. Obelisk-2s are a totally different speaker top to bottom. Stiffer/heavier cabinets. The Mk1 Obs top covers were removeable (but with difficulty, stuck on with black sticky putty), the Mk2s the grilles aren't removeable - unless the complete speaker is disassembled - the pyramid roof is attached to the cabinet from inside the cabinet hence the cabinet has to be completely stripped, remove both bass drivers and crossover.

Thanks for the info. So it sounds like the 2s are easier to drive than the 1s at some high frequency point - interesting to know.

I have 1s, and have driven them with 135s in the past without issue. I'm now driving them with Hypex NC400 based amps again without issue. I'm probably not the best person to ask though as i've never heard them in anyone else's system, so i've got nothing to compare against. It could be they could sound loads better with the right amps, I guess, but from experience of other night and day changes that people have said about various configurations that I struggle to tell apart, it could also be that there's little in it. But hey, that's all part of the hobby right?

Non-removable grills sounds odd. I can't see there being any sonic benefit, maybe to the way the cabinet can be constructed helps with rigidity or something. Shahinian although bonkers in some respects have been quite conservative in others, so I guess it's unlikely they changed that aspect unless it did offer an improvement.
 
They address many of the shortcomings of the original Naim boards and provide pinpoint vocal accuracy but they don't change the power supply layout. I would expect them to sound a lot better as they won't be affected by any sag in the power delivery due to the regulated front-end.
Thanks. They sound astounding with Arc 1’s!
 
The Shahinian speakers with single tweeters and more orthodox drive unit arrays are easy to drive in my experience and can sound really good. Having said that all the Shahinian speakers I have owned or heard seem to benefit from good (powerful) amplification.

The general wisdom is that from the Obelisks upwards they need serious grunt to shine and that is also my experience. The Obelisk 2’s seem to be easier to drive than the first iteration and I am currently listening to my Obelisk 2’s being driven by a chunky JVC integrated and they seem fine. Yes they are a bit better with Dynavectors and if you wanted to go LOUD then they would definitely be the amps of choice but my living room is fairly small and I don’t need to drive my speakers that hard.
 
Thinking of a pair of Obs 2. Anyone any experience of driving these with the 135’s? I am specifically looking for experience with Obs 2, as I have direct experience of Obs 1 and know how difficult they are to drive. Thanks.
I have the Obs 2 and have had good luck with the 180. I tried the olive 250, but the unregulated power supply on the 180 seems to drive them more easily.
 
Having read the previous 3 posts I feel compelled to write that, having bought deserter's old obelisk 1s from johnacurtis once John discovered they were too bass heavy in his listening room and then being dismayed to find there was no output from the tweeters and thinking I'd have to return them and ask John for my money back, I came across a post from Linus saying what he's just written above and, having a NAP180 in my annexe system swapped it for the olive 250 I was using in the main system and Bingo!

Apparently the power supply regulator boards in the 250 and 135s contain current limiting circuitry that prevents the amps from blowing up into dangerously low impedances. Trouble is the current limiting has an unintended frequency dependent character that restricts current more as frequency rises. The NAP 250 made Naim's reputation on its ability to drive Linn Isobariks (less than 2 ohms at around 50 hz) but faced with similar impedance at high frequencies it may not be able to deliver the required current (depending on sample variation - I must have got an extreme case).

Going from 250 to 180 was like having an on/off switch on the tweeters. With the 250 the switch was off, with the 180 the tweeters were switched back on again, it was that pronounced!

I understand the Obs 2s are more forgiving in that respect, and your Witch Hat modified 135s may be immune from that problem anyway, but I'd be inclined to give John Burns at Pear Audio a call to make certain, I'm sure he'll know the answer!
 
Having read the previous 3 posts I feel compelled to write that, having bought deserter's old obelisk 1s from johnacurtis once John discovered they were too bass heavy in his listening room and then being dismayed to find there was no output from the tweeters and thinking I'd have to return them and ask John for my money back, I came across a post from Linus saying what he's just written above and, having a NAP180 in my annexe system swapped it for the olive 250 I was using in the main system and Bingo!

Apparently the power supply regulator boards in the 250 and 135s contain current limiting circuitry that prevents the amps from blowing up into dangerously low impedances. Trouble is the current limiting has an unintended frequency dependent character that restricts current more as frequency rises. The NAP 250 made Naim's reputation on its ability to drive Linn Isobariks (less than 2 ohms at around 50 hz) but faced with similar impedance at high frequencies it may not be able to deliver the required current (depending on sample variation - I must have got an extreme case).

Going from 250 to 180 was like having an on/off switch on the tweeters. With the 250 the switch was off, with the 180 the tweeters were switched back on again, it was that pronounced!

I understand the Obs 2s are more forgiving in that respect, and your Witch Hat modified 135s may be immune from that problem anyway, but I'd be inclined to give John Burns at Pear Audio a call to make certain, I'm sure he'll know the answer!
Thanks for taking the time to write, very interesting.
 
They address many of the shortcomings of the original Naim boards and provide pinpoint vocal accuracy but they don't change the power supply layout. I would expect them to sound a lot better as they won't be affected by any sag in the power delivery due to the regulated front-end.
Thanks. Any mods that WH offer for the 135’s to make them more ‘Obs friendly’?
 
Just noticed this thread and would like to add that I heard a pair of 135s with NCC300 boards driving a pair of Gales the other day and would suggest a listen to these as they seemed to drive these speakers really well.
Not sure how the Gales compare for load to the Obs but the Avondales didn't appear be troubled and sounded very musical not just in control.
 
Just noticed this thread and would like to add that I heard a pair of 135s with NCC300 boards driving a pair of Gales the other day and would suggest a listen to these as they seemed to drive these speakers really well.
Not sure how the Gales compare for load to the Obs but the Avondales didn't appear be troubled and sounded very musical not just in control.

I had my Avondale Voyagers upgraded to latest spec. with NCC300 boards last year. Within 5 minutes of their being connected to the Obs the Osiris had been retired! The NCC300 had absolutely no problem driving the Obs, the bass was spectacular and the sound amazing. Just out of interest I tried the Voyagers with the Duevel Jupiters where they were also excellent so that's where they currently reside. Only problem with Voyager 300s is it's a bit difficult to obtain a pair.
 
The caveat with demanding speakers is you really limit the choice of amplification you can use, and that usually means the amp that sounds best/preferable for your money may not drive those speakers well enough.
 
I'm not sure if you will find this brand on your side of the pond but I've heard a big Dynavector amp on the end of some obs and it sounded pretty good. We then hooked up an ME 1400 amplifier made by Peter Stein in Aus and then they came to life. Both amps are a bit dry sounding for me, I've also read a bit of chatter about Bendini amps being a good match?
 
Interesting thread. I'm running arcs at the moment with Teddy Pardo MB100s which seems a good match.

I might like to try Obs one day, but I believe the Teddy's are also a regulated design. Does anyone know whether they have the same issues driving the Obs as a 250 or 135?
 


advertisement


Back
Top