Linn Forums

Current time: 2014-10-23, 07:38 Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Linn Forums / Linn / General Hi-fi v / Active Ninka to passive M140?

Post Reply 
Active Ninka to passive M140?
2013-01-13, 00:29
Post: #1
Active Ninka to passive M140?
Hello,

Is changing from active Ninka to passive Majik 140 a worthy upgrade or a side move? Amp is dynamik 4200.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2013-01-13, 07:33
Post: #2
RE: Active Ninka to passive M140?
I am not sure it is worthwhile doing.

It may be an improvement, but I don't know it justifies the cost.

I would aim for the Majik Isobariks instead

Akubarik Exakt, AEDSM, 225 Centre, 212 Surrounds, Classe SSP-800, 2 X Akurate 4200(D), Linn Silvers, K400, Cat7, OPPO 105 on Still Points
Power: Shunyata Triton, Shunyata Zitron Cobra Power Cords., EP Digiplugs
Room Acoustics: SubDude HT's, Curtains, Carpets, Acoustic Panels
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2013-01-13, 10:39
Post: #3
RE: Active Ninka to passive M140?
What move to make in order to make the most of the invested money depend on what equipment you are using feedin your amp. Could you just comment on that and it would make it much more easy to elaborate about the alternatives.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2013-01-13, 10:49
Post: #4
RE: Active Ninka to passive M140?
(2013-01-13 00:29)gxleetw Wrote:  Hello,

Is changing from active Ninka to passive Majik 140 a worthy upgrade or a side move? Amp is dynamik 4200.

I have active Ninka with 6100, and have tried M140 at home.

I prefere active Nika over passive Majik. On the other hand the M140 are very different, so you might come to another result. M140 are more presice and analytical in my setup. To me the active Ninkas played more music.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2013-01-13, 11:04
Post: #5
RE: Active Ninka to passive M140?
Having owned Ninkas in the past (with CD12/5103/Solos), and had a pair for a month last summer (with KDS1/KK1/Tundra), I rate them extremely highly. I have only listened to 140s once so can not really comment on them. Certainly, the Tundra system was so musical and made me think about why do some of us spend so much in looking for perfection. Don't get me wrong, my current system is phenomenal, but when you consider that it is over £40 K more than the Ninka/Tundra system I was listening to, you do start to question your own sanity !

You do not say what your front end electrics are - you maybe better off upgrading them, mind you the cost of changing from Ninkas to 140s would not be a huge amount of money. Can you try the 140s at home ?

Main: Exakt Klimax 350, Oppo 105.

Second: Majik DSi connected to 109's in the kitchen, and Akurate 212's in the office, both driven by Tundra Stereo 1.2.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2013-01-13, 11:21 (This post was last modified: 2013-01-13 11:40 by charlie1.)
Post: #6
RE: Active Ninka to passive M140?
(2013-01-13 00:29)gxleetw Wrote:  Hello,

Is changing from active Ninka to passive Majik 140 a worthy upgrade or a side move? Amp is dynamik 4200.

I made the same step to 4200/D+140s. I was never 100% sure which was more musical. Quite different. The 140s sound more like 242s, although not nearly as good. If pushed, then I'd say aktiv Ninkas had the edge in terms of musicality.

But there were a few factors that guided me to keep the 140s:

1.) I got the 140s for an amazing price. They were end-of-line Maple and I was able to sell my Ninkas, polymer bases, aktiv cards and make a profit.

2.) I was having a slight issue with the Ninkas tweeters. If the source material wasn't great, then cymbals could be a bit harsh and sometimes distracting. It had been much improved since upgrading from Majik to Akurate amp, but it was still there to a lesser extent.

3.) I thought passive 4200/D+140s sounded better (overall.) The bass was a lot deeper and could get out of hand with some records, but the treble and mid were both much better. I also figured that any drop off in musicality could be easily recovered upstream, such as adding a Dynamilk PSU to my pre-amp.

I must add that making the 2db cut to the bass output (Linn modification) helped the 140s sound better in my room. Again, wasn't convinced it was more musical, but they sounded great. However, the upgraded basses are definitely more musical and a must-have for 140s. I delayed due to their cost, but they are worth it in terms of performance gain (both musicality and sound quality.)

The 140 bass can still get out of hand with some material, but the 2db cut, upgraded bases and careful positioning have minimised this and it's rarely a problem.

So, overall a bit of a sideways step with mix of pro's and con's, although no regrets from me. I think HCL and Flatcoat's point is valid, i.e. 'What is the rest of your system?' because if you don't have any particular issue with 4200/Ninkas combination, then the funds might be better off spent elsewhere. Certainly, if the cheap 140s hadn't turned up, then I would have happily stayed with the Ninkas (despite the occasional mild treble harshness.)

Hope that helps.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2013-01-13, 12:06
Post: #7
RE: Active Ninka to passive M140?
Not quite what you're doing, but I went from tri-active Keilidhs to fully active M140s both with Majik amps. Having heard M140s and MIsos passive with Majik amps, I didn't want to go back to passive as it sounded less than satisfactory (a different result may have been heard with KCTs or Solos of course...)

I also found that the M140s worked well in my room when new, but gradually became less musical as they ran-in, until I spend some time over Christmas re-positioning them in my room. Because they're active I've also been able to turn the bass driver down one click on the amp and now, with this tweak and the re-positioning they're sounding brilliant and really playing a tune again. So currently I'm very happy with them. Of course if they'd been passive I wouldn't have been able to adjust the bass output so easily.

So this not the direct comparison you were after, and I don't have any real experience with Ninkas, but I think I'm suggesting that if you go with the M140s you think of it as an interim step to going active with them, rather than the end point. I also used to have an A2200/D driving the supertweeters, but reverted back to more Majik/D channels to bring consistency across all the M140s drivers which I found to be marginally less detailed than the mixed amps, but musically more satisfying. So you'll need another A4200/D to take the M140s active, but that means you could go with one amp per speaker which allows very short speaker cables if you can position the amps close to the speakers, which is said to be a good thing.

Good luck and keep us posted on progress and results.

Main Room: KDS/1; Silvers; KK/1; AK/0/D; Silvers; M5100D/C6100D/Aktiv Majik 140/Aktiv M112; Blacks C6100D/Aktiv Majik 109. P5
Playroom: SBT; V-DAC1; Cyrus6; M773e
Garage: SBT; NAD1240; NAD2155; M773e
www.audiophilemusings.co.uk
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2013-01-13, 13:34
Post: #8
RE: Active Ninka to passive M140?
This is not going to be a tremendously helpful post, but....

I love my active Ninkas!

I actually bought mine from Flatcoat and yes, they sounded amazing with the Tundras. Back at mine, I am now running them mostly with old LK kit (Late Kairn, 2x LK140, Sneaky, Basik/Akito). It still puts a smile on my face - and looks aesthetically pleasing, too!

Doesn't sound as good as with the Tundras, but there's still time... Smile

As a rule of thumb, the best sounding system is always the one you currently own.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2013-01-13, 15:56
Post: #9
RE: Active Ninka to passive M140?
Thanks all for your insightful comments! Seems that Ninka is really quite a special offering from Linn. I like it a lot in general too, not only the musicality but also the simplicity and affordability to go active. It's quite a look too - easily blend into any genre of decors IMHO.

My front end is Exotik, ADS (both non-dynamiked), and LP12 (Ittok, Lingo2, trampoline/2). As I said in general I find Ninka satisfying. My only "itch" is that, I found the sound is a little bit less than "full-bodied". This is more apparent in full orchestral music than, say chamber music or pop. And although the musicality and/or "boggy" factor in general is very nice, the 3D image / sound stage seems to be a little lacking - it sounds "comfortably nice" in general - I can easily listen to it for extended period of time - but the "3D positional resolution" seems to be a little bit lacking. This is compared to Miso, bi-amped by Klimax amps at dealer I heard. Maybe room treatment and better speaker positioning may help, however I doubt if my Ninkas can ever achieve the same level of 3D imaging as Miso I heard. But for musicality - I am not entirely sure. I even thought the orchestral piece I heard with Miso seems to be a little bit "granular" than my Ninka. M140 might be even less than Miso. Hence the question.




especially listening to big orchestra
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2013-01-13, 16:55
Post: #10
RE: Active Ninka to passive M140?
My previous speakers were Aktiv Ninkas, which sounded wonderful to me. They sounded significantly better with a subwoofer attached.

Then I jumped directly into Aktiv Misos, which are in a completely different league. IMHO, they do everything well, detailed, musical, depth, airy and dynamic.

I have heard the 140's, and they are a very fine speaker, but I would suggest going for the Misos someday.

Akubarik Exakt, AEDSM, 225 Centre, 212 Surrounds, Classe SSP-800, 2 X Akurate 4200(D), Linn Silvers, K400, Cat7, OPPO 105 on Still Points
Power: Shunyata Triton, Shunyata Zitron Cobra Power Cords., EP Digiplugs
Room Acoustics: SubDude HT's, Curtains, Carpets, Acoustic Panels
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)