NAC 72 with Supercap

Posted by: audiogoose on 09 February 2003

How would this combination sound? Is the hookup simple?
Or should I continue to save for a 52?
Posted on: 09 February 2003 by audiogoose
Tom:
Thanks for the input. How close to an 82, Supercap is this combination?
Posted on: 09 February 2003 by Rico
if your 52 might be a few years off, buy an 82 instead.

Good as SC + 72 is (much beefier in the bottom end, greater control, dynamics, and lower noise floor) the 82 sans cap in place of this provides more music at about the same price. YMMV.

Rico - SM/Mullet Audio
Posted on: 09 February 2003 by Willy
quote:
Originally posted by audiogoose:
How would this combination sound? Is the hookup simple?
Or should I continue to save for a 52?


Have embarked on this path myself, adding a supercap to my 32.5 about a year ago on way to a 52. With teh 552 coming along I might even score a s/h 52. Another advantage of this approach is that it also powers my Prefix.

Regards,

Willy.
Posted on: 11 February 2003 by graphoman
it’s the set I’v been using for a month or so and the improvement (after a HiCap) fulfilles all my hopes.

(I wanted to upgrade either to a 82 or to a Scap and the latter came in first.)

Now, saving for a better pre, I’d like to know the difference between an old (even very old) 52 and a newer (even brand new) 82. Any opinion wellcomed.

graphoman
Posted on: 11 February 2003 by ebirah
If you run a search on me you'll find some posts from last year where I amused myself for a while with a 72/82/52/super/hicap in various interesting combinations.

Not surprisingly the 52/super was best and the 72/hi worst but that ignores VFM (where the 72/hi scores hands-down) and the rather uneven incremental gains as one ascends the food-chain. In particular, I found the addition of the supercap to whatever combination generally outperformed the equivalent pre-amp upgrade. To me at least, that confirmed the logic of Naim's PSU ideology. So, yes, the 72-super works very well indeed, just not as well as a 52/super. Intesrestingly, my general feeling was that I'd bypass the 82 in favour of the 52 (ie wait longer while saving up). I didn't think the 82 offered enough of a jump over the 72 (although its clearly better than the 72) Don't get me wrong - it's just that the 52 is sublime whereas the 82 is merely very, very good. At the moment I'm using a 72.hi-cap and have bought loads of CDs instead of keeping all the expensive hi-fi. Go figure.

Steve
Posted on: 11 February 2003 by Peter C
A 72/supercap works fine and the 82/supercap is a very good combination

However, as with the previous post I would recommned you skip the 82 and go for the 52, you won't regret it.
Posted on: 11 February 2003 by graphoman
thank you. Now the question is (I repeat it): how old can a 52 be? And can the 52, even if such an old item, be superior to a brand new 82?

graphoman
Posted on: 11 February 2003 by Wolf
ebirah

its all clear to me now "an 82 is very very good and the 52 is sublime" I've never heard that description with any piece of electronic equipment before.
Posted on: 12 February 2003 by Peter C
The 52 has a different layout to the 82.

The 82 has a single board inside with both left and right channels on it. Its electronics are also powered through a small power supply unit. Its basically a pared down 52.

In comparison, the 52 has a board for each channel and the supercap powers all the functions. This eliminates crosstalk and also more musical.
Posted on: 13 February 2003 by graphoman
well I understand the main rule. However: what if the 52 is 15 year old but the 82 is brand new?

graphoman
Posted on: 13 February 2003 by ebirah
Graphoman,

The 52 I was using was fairly old (?1992/3 IIRC) - it originally had a 52 PSU that was supercapped in 1997. It had no problems beating the 82 at all, none.....and sublime it was. Older 52s are very good value for money if youre in that ball-park. I may well returm to a 52 from my 72 since I am definitely missing it, despite the considerable price-hike over the 72.

Steve
Posted on: 14 February 2003 by Martin Payne
Graphoman,

the 52 was introduced in 1990.

cheers, Martin

E-mail:- MartinPayne at Dial.Pipex.com
Posted on: 16 February 2003 by graphoman
thank you. I did not think the Model 52 was �that new�. I thought it�s something 15 years old or so.

graphoman
Posted on: 17 February 2003 by Frank Abela
Graphoman

If you have the money for a "brand new" 82, then you should have the money for a 3-year old 52, which would annihilate the 82. I would try to keep the age of the 52 you buy below 5 years old. There were some revisions done to it during its lifetime - keeping to somethin around 1998 would guarantee that you've got one of the best.

Regards,
Frank.
All opinions are my own and do not reflect the opinion of any organisations I work for, except where this is stated explicitly.
Posted on: 17 February 2003 by graphoman
thank you. Even if he price of the 52 seems to be terrible high. Maybe with the presentation of the new line the price of the old items will rather sink.

graphoman