Having just got a new pair of Quad 989 ESL speakers due to listening to
so many people say the room and the speakers are the two most important
factors in good Hi Fi, what do I say to a friend of mine who has just
added a Naim CDS 3 player to his Naim equipment and swears by the
difference it has made.
In conclusion, two questions, first of all the importance, (or
otherwise) of the Player in a system and Secondly, what is your opinion
of the new Naim CDS 3 player.
--
Derrick Fawsitt

"Derrick Fawsitt" wrote in message
...
Having just got a new pair of Quad 989 ESL speakers due to listening to so
many people say the room and the speakers are the two most important
factors in good Hi Fi, what do I say to a friend of mine who has just
added a Naim CDS 3 player to his Naim equipment and swears by the
difference it has made.
In conclusion, two questions, first of all the importance, (or otherwise)
of the Player in a system and Secondly, what is your opinion of the new
Naim CDS 3 player.
--
Derrick Fawsitt

Whether or not the Naim CD player made a difference does rather depend on
what was there before :-) However, if we assume that whatever was there
before was also a decent quality player, then I doubt if changing to the
Naim would make all that much difference. Every CD player of any consequence
has a flat frequency response, vanishingly low distortion and low noise, so
what else is there? For several years now, A-D converters have been of such
a standard that the differences between them is vanishingly small.

On the other hand, there is still a very considerable difference between
loudspeakers, none have a flat response or low distortion when compared to
electronics, and their dispersion characteristics can interact more or less
with the room , such that by far the greatest difference to a hi-fi system
will be inchanging the 'speakers. Congratulations on the 'speakers, BTW,
they should sound great provided you can give them plenty of air to breath,
especially behind.

Regarding your specific question about the Naim CDS3, I have no personal
experience of this player, but there was an extensive review in HFN in
October 2003, where the lab measurements were all pretty much what one would
expect except that noise was a trifle high at -93.5dB and frequency response
was down by 1.2dB at 20kHz. However, even if these figures are a bit less
than one would expect in a modern player, they are very unlikely to be
audible. Output impedance was low at 25 ohms, so there should be no problem
driving any sensible length of cable and subsequent amplifier. If you like
the look and facilities of the Naim, I can't think of any technical reason
not to buy one, other than the price.

S.

Rubbish in, rubbish out. No matter how good the speakers are they can only
reproduce what they get. Rubbish in, rubbish out. Front end is ALWAYS the
most important.

--
John the West Ham fan

"Serge Auckland" wrote in message
...

"Derrick Fawsitt" wrote in message
...
Having just got a new pair of Quad 989 ESL speakers due to listening to
so many people say the room and the speakers are the two most important
factors in good Hi Fi, what do I say to a friend of mine who has just
added a Naim CDS 3 player to his Naim equipment and swears by the
difference it has made.
In conclusion, two questions, first of all the importance, (or otherwise)
of the Player in a system and Secondly, what is your opinion of the new
Naim CDS 3 player.
--
Derrick Fawsitt

Whether or not the Naim CD player made a difference does rather depend on
what was there before :-) However, if we assume that whatever was there
before was also a decent quality player, then I doubt if changing to the
Naim would make all that much difference. Every CD player of any
consequence has a flat frequency response, vanishingly low distortion and
low noise, so what else is there? For several years now, A-D converters
have been of such a standard that the differences between them is
vanishingly small.

On the other hand, there is still a very considerable difference between
loudspeakers, none have a flat response or low distortion when compared to
electronics, and their dispersion characteristics can interact more or
less with the room , such that by far the greatest difference to a hi-fi
system will be inchanging the 'speakers. Congratulations on the 'speakers,
BTW, they should sound great provided you can give them plenty of air to
breath, especially behind.

Regarding your specific question about the Naim CDS3, I have no personal
experience of this player, but there was an extensive review in HFN in
October 2003, where the lab measurements were all pretty much what one
would expect except that noise was a trifle high at -93.5dB and frequency
response was down by 1.2dB at 20kHz. However, even if these figures are a
bit less than one would expect in a modern player, they are very unlikely
to be audible. Output impedance was low at 25 ohms, so there should be no
problem driving any sensible length of cable and subsequent amplifier. If
you like the look and facilities of the Naim, I can't think of any
technical reason not to buy one, other than the price.

S.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:41:43 GMT, "housetrained"
wrote:

Rubbish in, rubbish out. No matter how good the speakers are they can only
reproduce what they get. Rubbish in, rubbish out. Front end is ALWAYS the
most important.

A sub-two hundred pound Pioneer DVD player was indistinguishable from
an expensive Meridian CD player in a double-blind level matched test
according to a recent report here. (Meridian have a reputation for
producing very well engineered and sonically accurate products.)

What you say might have been true thirty years ago, but today any
competent CD/DVD player will be indistinguishable from any other. Any
differences will be due to the manufacturer deliberately distorting
the output to make in sound more attractive. This is especially true
for so called "high end" niche products, which will not have benefited
from the extensive product engineering skills of the major
manufacturers.

I am planning to get some 989s once I have moved house. However, I
will continue to use my 'cheap' Pioneer DVD player with them because
there will be no audible improvements gained from getting anything
more expensive.

BTW: If the OP is close to Southampton, I would be very interested in
having a listen to his speakers.

--
Chris Isbell
Southampton, UK

Blimey! I am living well in the past. 30 years? Blimey.

--
John the West Ham fan


"Chris Isbell" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 20:41:43 GMT, "housetrained"
wrote:

Rubbish in, rubbish out. No matter how good the speakers are they can only
reproduce what they get. Rubbish in, rubbish out. Front end is ALWAYS the
most important.

A sub-two hundred pound Pioneer DVD player was indistinguishable from
an expensive Meridian CD player in a double-blind level matched test
according to a recent report here. (Meridian have a reputation for
producing very well engineered and sonically accurate products.)

What you say might have been true thirty years ago, but today any
competent CD/DVD player will be indistinguishable from any other. Any
differences will be due to the manufacturer deliberately distorting
the output to make in sound more attractive. This is especially true
for so called "high end" niche products, which will not have benefited
from the extensive product engineering skills of the major
manufacturers.

I am planning to get some 989s once I have moved house. However, I
will continue to use my 'cheap' Pioneer DVD player with them because
there will be no audible improvements gained from getting anything
more expensive.

BTW: If the OP is close to Southampton, I would be very interested in
having a listen to his speakers.

--
Chris Isbell
Southampton, UK

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 09:07:41 GMT, "housetrained"
wrote:

Blimey! I am living well in the past. 30 years? Blimey.

Yes, basically in the vinyl era......................
--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Thus spake housetrained:
Blimey! I am living well in the past. 30 years? Blimey.

Lets get this straight please. Are you saying that if one has a cheap
system - fairly well balanced in that no one particular bit is substantially
better than any other - that using a far better amplifier & speakers won't
improve sound quality? I don't feel that spending considerably more on one
component is a good idea but hell, some of us have to upgrade in stages!

I don't hear Linn using that marketing phrase now they make other than just
source equipment. As has been pointed out, a CD or record is hardly the 1st
stage in the process that effects sound quality. I'm doubtless not alone in
having many poor recordings, especially non-classical ones: garbage in -
garbage out bites back with a vengeance & a top end source can highlight the
warts over & above one with less resolution!

Sorry, I agree that speakers have the greatest impact on overall sound of
any system - even moving them can transform/degrade the sound.

"housetrained" wrote in message
...
Blimey! I am living well in the past. 30 years? Blimey.


'Sonically' you will be living less well in the present, if you have
embraced the 'audio technology of the day' as fanatically and *exclusively*
as one or two here seem to have done!! ;-)

Now, I wonder where I left my MP3 player?

Ah! Here it is - under these LPs.....

:-P

In message , Chris Isbell
writes
I am planning to get some 989s once I have moved house.
Don't hesitate for one minute, don't look elsewhere, don't change your
mind. When you sell your house and if you then cannot afford the Quads,
buy a cheaper house so you can afford them but with a large dedicated
room so you can accommodate the 989's because it will be the last
speakers you will ever want.
Seriously, they are wonderful, they are on a different planet as far as
sound reproduction. Expensive, yes, huge and (some think) ugly but when
you hear music through them....at this spot I am lost for words.
However, I
will continue to use my 'cheap' Pioneer DVD player with them because
there will be no audible improvements gained from getting anything
more expensive.
I use a 909 Quad amp and while it is a Quad, you could not say its the
most expensive out there.

BTW: If the OP is close to Southampton, I would be very interested in
having a listen to his speakers.

Unfortunately I am in Lincolnshire and could not be further away,
however, if you are up this way anytime send me an email and I would be
delighted to give you a demo.
--
Derrick Fawsitt

In article , Derrick Fawsitt
writes
In message , Chris Isbell
writes
I am planning to get some 989s once I have moved house.
Don't hesitate for one minute, don't look elsewhere, don't change your
mind. When you sell your house and if you then cannot afford the Quads,
buy a cheaper house so you can afford them but with a large dedicated
room so you can accommodate the 989's because it will be the last
speakers you will ever want.

A very good bit of advice there.

Possibly the best in the history of uk.rec.audio )

Seriously, they are wonderful, they are on a different planet as far as
sound reproduction. Expensive, yes, huge and (some think) ugly but when
you hear music through them....at this spot I am lost for words.

Neutral perhaps?.. The real meaning of transparency and would be very
good with a SET or two, or three, or more)

However, I
will continue to use my 'cheap' Pioneer DVD player with them because
there will be no audible improvements gained from getting anything
more expensive.
I use a 909 Quad amp and while it is a Quad, you could not say its the
most expensive out there.

Quite sufficient..


BTW: If the OP is close to Southampton, I would be very interested in
having a listen to his speakers.

Unfortunately I am in Lincolnshire and could not be further away,
however, if you are up this way anytime send me an email and I would be
delighted to give you a demo.

--
Tony Sayer