[LM]

I’ve been pretty quiet of late on this and the other forums I occasionally frequent, perhaps because one of the better things I have to do is listen to my Soraya 09 based system.  Nevertheless, I have certainly enjoyed reading the enthusiastic comments on the new NAKSA and having heard it myself, it is a real pearler.  However, at Hugh’s place I have also listened to a Maya and his demo Soraya 09 (which I own) a number of times now in direct comparison.  I feel that the one thing currently missing from these forum threads is any comment on how they sound relatively because they are actually quite different beasts and each superb in its own right.

I don’t know how others do it but when listening to amps, I mentally think of a spectrum or linear scale based on the various sonic characteristics that I personally perceive.  This generally has me placing amps with more of a soft, warm, mellifluous character on the left and amps with a more clinical, sharp, thin presentation and possibly even some glare and sibilance at the extreme, on the right.  So for example I would normally place softer, less prominent base and richer midrange to the left and more focus, punch and extended highs to the right. No surprises then but I generally have tube amps to the left and SS amps to the right.

I must emphasise strongly at this point that what I’ve just described is not particularly scientific, however I’m comfortable that it incorporates my experience to date and serves my own comparison purposes quite well.  I have only presented it here so that I can attempt to describe where I think the Aspen Amps fall relative to each other.  Personal taste in such matters is everything and there is no right or wrong position on the scale but I guess I would tend to favour a balance in the middle.

So where on the scale do I hear the NAKSA, Maya and Soraya 09?   All rather tend toward the middle actually as I would expect from Aspen but there are differences.  Starting with the NAKSA first, uncharacteristically for an SS I see it clearly on the left of middle with huge warmth, musicality and engagement.  However, it retains an unusually prominent and solid base for an amp to the left of my scale.  Much more SS like.  Its overall sonic balance is quite tube like and it is superbly engaging for voice and general presence.  A touch forward perhaps but with great staging and is very immersive of the performance.

I own the Soraya 09 and love it for its clean precision, focus and huge detail.  It is certainly a bit to the right of middle but very close to the middle nevertheless.  It is neutral, accurate, fast, punchy and sometimes a little spooky in its clean separation of instruments and vocals, but stays completely clear of the thin, metallic and unengaging qualities of some SS amps.   Beautifully extended treble detail and wonderfully correct mids but not quite the same absolute warmth of engagement of the NAKSA.  I love it paired with my GK1 for that touch of valve warmth.

The Maya sounds remarkably like the Soraya in general first impression terms but I would place it just to the left of the Soraya and pretty much at the middle on my scale or perhaps just a touch to the right.  Maybe it is simply the lack of Global Feedback but it has a small edge over the Soraya in terms of naturalness and refinement.  It presents as a touch softer than the sheer precision of the Soraya but still uber clean and just as detailed, but in a slightly gentler way.  Cymbals for example are slightly less prominent and base and mids are just a touch stronger.  Not as warm or bold in the midrange as the NAKSA but I do find it thoroughly engaging to my taste.  It is a wonderful flagship and probably just edges out the Soraya for my personal vote but the NAKSA for tube lovers at such an astonishingly low price is a corker.

[AKSA]

Great post, Lyn, thank you.   

I like the left of center analogy, bit like me really.     I think you hit the nail on the head.
Any more comments from Aspen owners?  I think this will be a great thread.

Cheers,

Hugh

[Seano]

I second Hugh's statement...keep the comparisons coming. 

I'm one of those unfortunate owners who has only ever heard my own 100N+.....apart from a short blast with a prototype LF100 at Hugh's place some time back.  So I've no concept of what any of the new models bring to the table over the original AKSA's.  And I can't imagine that I'm on my lonesome in this situation

LM...if you've heard the older AKSA models and have some memory of them then it'd be nice to add that into your observations too

[Tliner]

Great post Lyn,

I feel you summed the Aspen range very well. Over the last few years I have had the LF100, origional Soraya and now the Maya11. From time to time Hugh rocks over with the latest prototype amp to give it a workout. It will continue to amaze me how Hugh squeezes that extra bit if quality out of a prototype whe he goes through the tweeking process. My ideal amp would be a Maya with the bass grunt of the Naksa. But I run BEN the bass extender so I have more than enough bass should I want it.

Back to listening to a new CD my wife has just purchased.

Cheers,

Laurie.   

[LM]

LM...if you've heard the older AKSA models and have some memory of them then it'd be nice to add that into your observations too

Seano,
Unfortunately it's been quite some time since I've seriously listened to any AKSA model so whilst I'd love to be able to comment, I'd better leave that up to anyone that owns or is very familiar with an older model and has now heard the new NAKSA.  Nevertheless, I can say that I remember the AKSAs being somewhat to the left of my scale but I don't remember being impressed by the base depth and extension anywhere near as much as with the NAKSA.  Beyond that, not much I can say.

[AKSA]

Lyn,

Dead right.  That's how I see it too.  But the amp had a mid range and particularly a top end magic which was terrific on rock music, and this was the trademark sound which I've tried to capture ever since.  However, only the NAKSA to this point has been more than a match, though the LF and Sorayas are very, very good, slightly to the right of center, more a sound leaning towards accuracy and soudfield depth.

Cheers,


Hugh

[lonewolfny42]

A very informative post LM/Lyn....thanks !!

[Afterimage]

Lyn,

Dead right.  That's how I see it too.  But the amp had a mid range and particularly a top end magic which was terrific on rock music, and this was the trademark sound which I've tried to capture ever since.  However, only the NAKSA to this point has been more than a match, though the LF and Sorayas are very, very good, slightly to the right of center, more a sound leaning towards accuracy and soudfield dept


Hugh

"top end magic which was terrific on rock music".  That is what my current amp lacks.  I hope the Maya can perform in this area.

[AKSA]

Hi Kieran,

Yes, no question.  A sense of intimacy, being there, is very evident, and completely natural too.

No disappointment there!

Cheers,

Hugh

[LM]

For any that might wish to know where I think the new NAKSA 100 fits in the scale.

I had the chance to listen to the NAKSA 100 at Hugh's this morning with some music that was quite familiar to me.  What's more, Hugh swapped between it and the 09 Soraya, with which I am extremely well versed, a few times so I had a good reference point.  I understand that 100 was pretty close to the production version though not the final power supply nor set in a case.  As I said in the NAKSA thread, it has the same lovely 'SET like' tonality, solid base and rich mids of the NAKSA 70 but with greater overall drive and snap.  It also has subtly increased refinement and treble extension; cymbals for example have a little more presence than with the 70.  Not a lot but it's there.  Optimising the power supply and encasing it won't do any harm to its final sound either though it's a very enjoyable and musical amp as is IMHO.

So where on the scale do I hear the NAKSA 100 compared to the NAKSA 70?   As with the 70, I see the 100 clearly on the left of middle with its warmth, musicality and engagement.  However, its greater grunt and the slightly expanded treble moves it a bit closer to the Maya and Soraya overall.  It really does catch your attention and demands you to listen, enjoy and get involved.  It still reminds me of a tube amp tonally though the base and grunt are very much SS characteristics.  Not quite as incisive as the Maya or Soraya perhaps but a superb toe tapping musical performance that no one could fail to like and amazing value.

[guest1632]

For any that might wish to know where I think the new NAKSA 100 fits in the scale.

I had the chance to listen to the NAKSA 100 at Hugh's this morning with some music that was quite familiar to me.  What's more, Hugh swapped between it and the 09 Soraya, with which I am extremely well versed, a few times so I had a good reference point.  I understand that 100 was pretty close to the production version though not the final power supply nor set in a case.  As I said in the NAKSA thread, it has the same lovely 'SET like' tonality, solid base and rich mids of the NAKSA 70 but with greater overall drive and snap.  It also has subtly increased refinement and treble extension; cymbals for example have a little more presence than with the 70.  Not a lot but it's there.  Optimising the power supply and encasing it won't do any harm to its final sound either though it's a very enjoyable and musical amp as is IMHO.

So where on the scale do I hear the NAKSA 100 compared to the NAKSA 70?   As with the 70, I see the 100 clearly on the left of middle with its warmth, musicality and engagement.  However, its greater grunt and the slightly expanded treble moves it a bit closer to the Maya and Soraya overall.  It really does catch your attention and demands you to listen, enjoy and get involved.  It still reminds me of a tube amp tonally though the base and grunt are very much SS characteristics.  Not quite as incisive as the Maya or Soraya perhaps but a superb toe tapping musical performance that no one could fail to like and amazing value.

Oh, good, was wondering how the three amps sounded versus each other. Now was this NAKSA was this with the upgraded caps, or the standard version? Not being familiar with the new line, are the other two complete builds, or kits too like the NAKSA? And prices would help. Thanks.

Ray

[AKSA]

Hi Ray,

No, these were the standard version, not upgraded power supply caps.

Prices:

NAKSA 100 built/tested modules:  $USD1420
Soraya CB205 (100W//8R)  plug 'n play:  $USD4800
Maya CB280  (150W//8R) plug 'n play:     $USD6400


At present, the AUD is almost lineball with the USD.

Thanks for the inquiry.

Hugh

[guest1632]

Hi Ray,

No, these were the standard version, not upgraded power supply caps.

Prices:

NAKSA 100 built/tested modules:  $USD1420
Soraya CB205 (100W//8R)  plug 'n play:  $USD4800
Maya CB280  (150W//8R) plug 'n play:     $USD6400


At present, the AUD is almost lineball with the USD.

Thanks for the inquiry.

Hugh

Hi Hugh,

Thanks for the info.

One thing I have noticed and I have to commend you if this is true is that all three of your Amplifiers sound different. "yeah, so, what's your point?" you ask. The differences are enough that each model can stand on its own merits. So as a manufacturer they might have some similarities, but your Naksa doesn't sound worse than the Maya. Now in times past, you might have manufacturers that made equipment that the flagship would sound the best, and the others in the line didn't sound as good. I hope this makes sense. Now, I don't know if that was your goal or not, but from what I read you did it. I would think logically, that the Maya almost three times as much as the Naksa would sound better. But as to that figure, I'll leave that to the reviewers. if anyone bought the Naksa, they would have nothing to be ashamed of, not at all.

Now, just gotta get a pre-amp to run them.

Ray Bronk

[LM]

One thing I have noticed and I have to commend you if this is true is that all three of your Amplifiers sound different. "yeah, so, what's your point?" you ask. The differences are enough that each model can stand on its own merits. So as a manufacturer they might have some similarities, but your Naksa doesn't sound worse than the Maya. Now in times past, you might have manufacturers that made equipment that the flagship would sound the best, and the others in the line didn't sound as good. I hope this makes sense. Now, I don't know if that was your goal or not, but from what I read you did it. I would think logically, that the Maya almost three times as much as the Naksa would sound better. But as to that figure, I'll leave that to the reviewers. if anyone bought the Naksa, they would have nothing to be ashamed of, not at all.

Hi Ray, pretty much spot on IMHO.  One must remember that the Maya and Soraya are fully built and that assembly plus case and transformers etc. account for a fair bit of the cost difference.  And I may add, very well built at that.

The differences are subtle but definite (again IMO) and taste would come very much into it.  I have a wide taste in music and to me the slightly higher detail and refinement levels of the Soraya really appeals to me for orchestral and complex music.  But it's impossible not to smile when the NAKSA starts to bop along with Jazz or Vocals or similar.  Each to me have subtly different strengths but no real weakness and I think that is something that Hugh can be highly commended for. 

[hybride]

I agree with Ray. Buying an amp which can't be heard at home first is cumbersome. I bought the LF100, the NAKSA 70 and Vsonic speakers blind from the other side of the world. I personally did not prefer the sound of the Naksa 70 over the Lifeforce, while it was clear to me that NAKSA is a better amp on some aspects like bass. The question i asked myself is; could i have asked Hugh the right questions which saved me from buying another amp which i won't prefer over my present? hmm i think not. Though, i believe that there are some distinctive topology aspects who could help to make a (more) founded choice. For example the effects of different damping factor and feedback topology. A while ago i presented Hugh an idea to make a little guide about these aspects for the Aspen amp range, which properly can help future customers to choose their 'right' Aspen amp. I don't know if he has thought about that in the meantime? Hugh?   

[guest1632]

Hi Ray, pretty much spot on IMHO.  One must remember that the Maya and Soraya are fully built and that assembly plus case and transformers etc. account for a fair bit of the cost difference.  And I may add, very well built at that.

The differences are subtle but definite (again IMO) and taste would come very much into it.  I have a wide taste in music and to me the slightly higher detail and refinement levels of the Soraya really appeals to me for orchestral and complex music.  But it's impossible not to smile when the NAKSA starts to bop along with Jazz or Vocals or similar.  Each to me have subtly different strengths but no real weakness and I think that is something that Hugh can be highly commended for. 

Now, let me throw in a spoon to stir the mix. Now on the Naksa, if you put in the premium caps, i wonder ... upping the anty a bit.

Ray Bronk

[AKSA]

Ray,

Makes no difference, but looks a bit more swish......

BTW, what Lyn said, he's my man!!

Hugh

[guest1632]

I agree with Ray. Buying an amp which can't be heard at home first is cumbersome. I bought the LF100, the NAKSA 70 and Vsonic speakers blind from the other side of the world. I personally did not prefer the sound of the Naksa 70 over the Lifeforce, while it was clear to me that NAKSA is a better amp on some aspects like bass. The question i asked myself is; could i have asked Hugh the right questions which saved me from buying another amp which i won't prefer over my present? hmm i think not. Though, i believe that there are some distinctive topology aspects who could help to make a (more) founded choice. For example the effects of different damping factor and feedback topology. A while ago i presented Hugh an idea to make a little guide about these aspects for the Aspen amp range, which properly can help future customers to choose their 'right' Aspen amp. I don't know if he has thought about that in the meantime? Hugh?   

Really? "I personally did not prefer the sound of the Naksa 70 over the Lifeforce," while that's not a bad thing in itself, why did you prefer the LF over the Naksa? hmmm, I don't know if this is worth persuing, but that would make me wonder if there is still some life left in the LifeForce amps. No pon intended.

Ray Bronk

[guest1632]

Ray,

Makes no difference, but looks a bit more swish......

BTW, what Lyn said, he's my man!!

Hugh

"looks more swish?" Sorry what is swish?

I would think with the premium caps in there, there would be some sound difference, else no need for the better caps. So the sound would be yet a bit closer to the other amps? Ok, judgment call on a subjective topic, so shoot me. lol.

now, on a more practical item, so to get a feel for the cost issues involved here, so if you were to take the Naksa, put it in a case and Trafo, yada yada, what do you figure the price would be?

Now, if memmory served me right, in its description comparison, the Naksa leans to be more SS sounding, versus the other two amps? I presume you are using Bi-polar Transistors not FETS. So could this be a bias issue? I presume you've done your homework, so my question can be taken as out of ignorance of your designs.
Ray Bronk

Ray Bronk

[hybride]

Really? "I personally did not prefer the sound of the Naksa 70 over the Lifeforce," while that's not a bad thing in itself, why did you prefer the LF over the Naksa? hmmm, I don't know if this is worth persuing, but that would make me wonder if there is still some life left in the LifeForce amps. No pon intended.

Ray Bronk

my 2 cents;
Naksa 70; pop, rock, elektronic music, more complex dynamic music. (like classic)
LF100; vocal, jazz, easy listening, acoustic.