Naim (split from Blowtorch)

[snoopy]

Originally posted by john curl
More like Julian Vereker, the Naim amp designer. but him too.

Mr Curl as soon as you mentioned Naim audio and aligned yourself with its creator your credibility just sunk into the ground.

Those Naim amps are your common or garden variety quasi complementary output stages from the 60's that no serious designer would ever contemplate on using these days or even referring to as a credible design.

And like someone else said you had to use special cables with those amps otherwise the damn things would take off and self destruct. Sounds like they could of done with a bit of L on the output stage

[snoopy]

Originally posted by 1audio
I think the real value to the Naim products in this context was missed. Its not so much the circuitry but the sensitivity and quality of the execution of the details. Despite the simplicity of the circuits the Naim products are very highly regarded. There have been times I thought the external components like connectors, controls etc. would have much more influence than the core circuitry. The high value some find the the "Gainclone" with its compromised performance (the transistors are all fabbed with a power transistor process) ceretaionly suggests that the passives could be most important.

OK with respect to Naim equipment please explain these details. I must have missed them somewhere along the way.

From what I can see there is nothing on a Naim amplifier that is significantly better than a well designed Japanese amp of the day.

[hitsware]

>From what I can see there is nothing
>on a Naim amplifier that is significantly
>better than a well designed Japanese
>amp of the day.

Its niche being its unJapaneseness

[1audio]

As I said, not having one I can't comments authoritatively, however its possible that just eliminating such marketing driven details as speaker switches and streamlining the connections from the output transistors to the speaker with as few things in the way may alone make a big difference. Also there may be tricks in the power supplies that make a difference. Its possible that modifying a Japanese amp with the same type of tweaks could yield similar results. I don't know but I suspect that everything from resistor choice to obsessively fanatic layout are all a part of the process. All things that turn out to be far more expensive than they look to be.

And just because the transistors are arranged the same way as another product doesn't mean they are used the same. Alter the gain at the individual stages and you can get a very different result. This should be obvious to anyone who has been reading this thread for the last few months.

I agree that the Naim stuff looks overpriced and not very special but that should not presuppose the performance it delivers. It can be very hard to separate ones initial reaction to the presentation from the actual performance delivered. Looks can be very deceiving.

[snoopy]

Originally posted by 1audio
As I said, not having one I can't comments authoritatively, however its possible that just eliminating such marketing driven details as speaker switches and streamlining the connections from the output transistors to the speaker with as few things in the way may alone make a big difference. Also there may be tricks in the power supplies that make a difference. Its possible that modifying a Japanese amp with the same type of tweaks could yield similar results. I don't know but I suspect that everything from resistor choice to obsessively fanatic layout are all a part of the process. All things that turn out to be far more expensive than they look to be.

And just because the transistors are arranged the same way as another product doesn't mean they are used the same. Alter the gain at the individual stages and you can get a very different result. This should be obvious to anyone who has been reading this thread for the last few months.

I agree that the Naim stuff looks overpriced and not very special but that should not presuppose the performance it delivers. It can be very hard to separate ones initial reaction to the presentation from the actual performance delivered. Looks can be very deceiving.

There is an old saying. You can't turn a "sows ear into a silk purse" which applies to Naim equipment

There is nothing special about the way Naim used semiconductors in their equipment nor did they have a monopoly over better silicon than other manufacturers. It was very mediocre by anyones standards.

You sound like your trying to say that by some fluke of magic that can only be explained by paranormal science that only Naim used the appropriate parts in the appropriate combinations to get an infinitely better result than anyone else who used them If that is the case then we all should own and be using this old equipment. Somehow it's just not happening

[john curl]

Snoopy, you are overreaching and do Naim a disservice. I KNOW that the output devices were special for the time, I saw the spec sheet. This made the amplifier better, yet powerful enough for people's needs. Remember, Bob's amp is only 50W. My JC-3 amp (designed the same time as Naim's) is only 20W. Naim was making much bigger amps in the 1970's as a commercial product. This is where Glen is coming from, today. He found a quality N channel only power mosfet and is now doing much like Naim did, long ago, with his output stage.

[snoopy]

Originally posted by john curl
Snoopy, you are overreaching and do Naim a disservice. I KNOW that the output devices were special for the time, I saw the spec sheet. This made the amplifier better, yet powerful enough for people's needs. Remember, Bob's amp is only 50W. My JC-3 amp (designed the same time as Naim's) is only 20W. Naim was making much bigger amps in the 1970's as a commercial product. This is where Glen is coming from, today. He found a quality N channel only power mosfet and is now doing much like Naim did, long ago, with his output stage.

John I don't think so. I remember years ago someone having a Naim amp. Looking at the back of it, it didn't even have decent heatsinks and it used Philips BDY-20 or BDY something TO-3 metal can transistors. Like I said nothing special. It's something you'd find in a Mullard application note.

There is nothing special about a quasi complimentary design no matter what quality output devices are used

[john curl]

I think that the devices were German. Probably Siemens.

[stoolpigeon]

snoopy, there will be many Naim amps running long after all that Japanese rubbish you refer to has been thrown in the bin (if it hasn't already).

sp

[janneman]

Originally posted by john curl
I would like to make a few comments about Julian Vereker and Naim Audio amps. Back in the middle '70's, these were SOTA amps. Yes, they were quasi-complementary, but for a good reason. The specific output devices had very good safe area, but were faster than typical devices, yet had no complement. Julian revealed this to me, after I had known him for years. He seemed to make relatively crude circuits, but they competed well in the marketplace, AND they had many design decisions in them that parallel mine. This gave them a competitive advantage in the audio marketplace, that many here cannot yet comprehend why.

The 'secret' of using quasi-complementaries because NPN's have better SOA has never been a secret to anyone half-witted about audio design.

Naims may have been SOTA half a century ago. Two weeks ago I attended a Naim demo at the local hifi club. The week after I demo-ed my 'diy' amp. 28 out of 30 attendants stated that after the Naim demo, it was good to hear some good equipment again.
Maybe you should review your standards, John.

Jan Didden