Urgent advice needed

Not sure this would be an upgrade. The 202 would seem a better choice if you are moving over to the new gear.

Mike

I had a 112 for a couple of weeks and it gave a 102 a run for its money.

I really wouldn't bother with the 112. If you want a significant improvement you should be looking at the 102 or ideally the 82. That said the 72/HC/140 is a well balanced amp and you may want to leave that alone and improve the front end, say to a CDX.

Regards

Nigel

I agree.

Been there, done that.

Look for a CDX.

Hi Mystik

What about this advice needed is so "urgent"?

Have you come into some money or something?

If so, I'd be happy to take that 72 off your hands...

Upgrading that tells you it's urgent becomes a very expensive hobby indeed in my experience.



Rod

I think the 112 is brilliant and better than a 72. So does North Americas largest Naim dealer.

I think the comments above are speaking to another point--what is the best way to spend your money. The cdx will be better but in my experience my 72 was/is a bottleneck even when I was running a cds. I'm not sure replacing the 3.5 would be my priority, but I could see the sense of upgrading the 72. Of course, an 82 would be the best choice but those are more expensive and not so plentiful.
Personally, I've voted to stay content with my 72. I don't worry about it, just enjoy the music.

Markus
--------

Tom

You sound as if you're seeing your "dealer" a bit too often!!!

Doug

I'd like to thank everyone for making me see the light and keep my 72. I'm an impulse upgrader! Dangerous hobbie I'm sure you'll agree. I saw a 112 on Ebay for £410 BUY IT NOW.

Mystic, you pays yer money as Tom says.

However there are many here who resent naim for moving forward an obsoleting the olive kit and as a result nothing will come close in their eye/ears.

To my ears when I had the 112 it was very very good, the only thing I had to get used to was wacking the volume up to 1-2 oclock for decent volumes, however it was comfortably as good as a 102, and therefore a 72. Plus of course you get on board with the new kit, money in the bank, as it will hold its value better than olive kit into the future.

Mystik,

Tom knows what he likes, and sticks to his guns. But he is decidly in the Olive kit camp (read as, he prefers a CD3.5 to a cd5, etc.}. Now I'm not sayingthat you should change a 72 to a 112, but I do think that many of us would disagree with the tenet that a 72 is FAR FAR better than a 112. Many have found the 112 to be the equal of a 102. This was my experience in my system, and it took an 82 to make what I thought was a worthwhile upgrade to 112.

Bruce

We can't listen to everything (most of us can't) but we can talk to those who do...

Bob Levin, owner of Hawthorne Stereo, in Seattle, is either the top or one of the very top dealers in the US, by amount of Naim gear sold. He listens keenly to equipment and, IMNSHO, his opinions are to be listened to. I say this because when I listened to the 112 I was amazed and thought it slaughtered the 72. Bob concurred - "Yep. 'Bout cut the secondhand demand for used 72's in half."

For me personally there are, however, some things I don't worry about. Upgrading my 72, for example. I know there is better. I just don't care. Unless I win the lottery.

Markus
------

Went from a 72 to a 102 , sounded about the same. Then got an 82, Much Much better. CDX, 82, 250. Right now if I were you I would go for a CDX. Ted.