Anyone heard the GBP7000 NAIM CD Player?

Excellent post Wolfgang,

I agree, and as a supplement to my last post would have to emphasise that for 7K differences would have to be more than subtle to get most of us to pay that kind of money.

 

Just for the record, I'm not advocating anyone spending £7K on a piece of hifi equipment.

And also for the record I would easily be able to tell the difference between my old CDP and my new one in a test, its just that I feel its is all too easy to get anal about hifi, and forget the fact that you are supposed to listening and hopefully enjoying the music and not testing/tinkering with kit.

 

but can tell them apart in blind testing

 

so what would a test prove, exactly? That I like my new player better than my old player? I already know that.

 

Hopefully but more important then that is you at least did not imagine it.

Recently I compare my 10 years old CDP with my new toy, a transport with a designer name and price tag which I believe was miles better. When both are fed into the same processor DAC and volume adjusted within 0.5dB, they sound disturbingly similar.

OK. Maybe the newer toy which I have paid for fully is still that bit better. Would you be impress if I says I could tell them apart if un-blind only. If you point your finger at me and says I must be deaf........using my scientific brain ......I would say that is very possible.

I am not implying you are imagining CDPs sounds different. However, you need to explain why you believe SBT/DBT is not useful when comparing 2 things by ears.

 

Ah why do you need organic cotton? Other then they cost more?

 

for more natural hearing after cleaning

 

Without a shadow of a doubt on this one, using the same kit just swopping the boxes (I'll even do the other room bit too)
Are you that 'blind' as to think they all really do sound the same, :cry: To which one is better is purely personal.
How about you come away from the santuary of your keyboard and try it for your self.
The sound they all produce is just so different.
I've a splendid idea, lets test the Blind testers, double blind over a all naim system and all arcam see if they can hear no difference at all. that would be more fun.

 

OK Ok I was just trying to pull Robbo legs.

I guess I just feels a bit leave out since I would not be able to join you. Enjoy your party.

 

Well I have heard Bub's Marantz get disturbingly close to his CDS2, after confusing myself with the remote as to which was which, I would say I could hear a difference but it wasn't huge and certainly nothing like 5Ks worth. Oh and the Marantz was on one level of Mana below the Naim.

I have challenged Mick Parry to try this one when he is in Glasgow, but so far he seems reluctant. Bearing in mind that the Marantz and the Naim use the same transport and DAC maybe this result is less unexpected than it would seem.

 

Paul, I took took the Bub test, and picked out the marantz no probs, did you try it without the mana in the test? T.

 

To do the test, or to go to Glasgow?

j/k.

 

I would like to know that my gear actually serves a purpose when hill walking

Indeed, the stupid thing about buying walking gear in Covent Garden is that you can't go hill walking to see whether it's any good/right for you/waterproof etc.

When you buy hifi and judge it by subjective listening, you're doing exactly what it's intended and what you buy it for (subjective listening); your analogy is therefore useless.

I do agree, though, that high (or other kinds of) expectations can lead you evaluate hifi gear "incorrectly". This is particularly true of A/B dems -- imagine having heard or read that amp B does "way more bass" than amp A. If you concentrate on this aspect and do not hear "way more bass" in the A/B dem, it may well elude you that amp B is much better (or worse) in other respects, say timing, imaging, or whatever. I've fallen prey to this kind of thing many times.

 

Didn't it ever come into your 'scientific' brain that maybe the cause that you cannot hear much of a difference is because of the DAC or maybe the rest of the components you are using?

 

All I wanted to say is that when hunting for a replacement CDP it should actually have a measurable improvement. I guess you are going to ask me what I mean by measurable improvement now. Using the same analogy before, I indeed intended to wear the clothing in the Scotland hills and I hope they will keep me alive if I got caught in a sudden freezing weather. I would like to use my replacement gears to dig deeper and better into the recordings then possible with the older gears before. If you like to discuss this further maybe we should start a new thread. Others may have a low tolerance to this subject considered old hat for them.

 

Absolutely. I think in effect I am comparing 2 transports using the same DAC. The old CDP internal DAC was by pass. Correct me if I am wrong. However, it is only after critical blind comparison I come to the conclusion the big improvement that I thought I heard before was actually the new transport has a higher voltage gain. Once the SPL differences of 5dB is reduce the differences reduce big time. Only then am I force to listen more critically what is it that has improved and if they are still worth the price gap.

 

Delete 'listening' and you're on the right track for what happens in most store or home demos. A 'subjective listening' test would have to be blind...

'blind listening test' is obviously tautological, but the usual practice is 'whole sensory array test' but described as 'listening'.

If I had the resources I'd be tempted by a Linn CD12 largely because of the packaging and mechanics. I presume it would sound adequate.

Paul

 

Paul makes a better transport than a cd player sir

 

Tony,

I didn't try the CDs off Mana, as I said the Marantz was on a level less than the Naim. I did get the two fairly easily as I said it's just that the difference wasn't to me worth the extra money. That Spl meter came in handy doing the test for others, must nick it next time I'm up.

Come to think of it on some programme the Marantz was very very good.