NAC 52 Sound Quality and Possible Shortcomings

Could it be warmup? I can't imagine a 52 sounding less "full" than a 72 with your CDS2, unless the pre-amp were either cold or not broken in, or both. Mine took more than six weeks before it reached its prime.

Presumably you were using the 72 with the Supercap? In the few weeks I lived with a 42.5/Supercap combo I found its colourations very euphonic.. compared to the 52 it was somewhat compressed, congealed, truncated at frequency extremes and quite 'warm' sounding- sorta like a mid-grade cartridge! Yes, almost (dare I say it) round earth. It is possible that this relatively relaxed presentation may be superficially the more suitable on some systems, with some music and for some listeners. With 'only' a Hicap feeding the 42.5 the sonic merits imploded into a dense amorphous mass.
The 52 in comparison is(or can be) starkly revealing and quite devoid of the warm, fuzzy and comfortable perspective the 42.5 imparts. And when the set up is right cannot fail to please. I have listened to old, old cassette tapes through the 52 that were given a new lease on life, for instance. The 72 I imagine is far closer to the 42.5 in its signature, so I would induce that it would compare with the 52 in similar ways.

Ron
Dum spiro audio
Dum audio vivo

I too have been listening to a 52/super and 72/super, and 72/hi.

Whilst there is no doubt in my mind the 52 is the best, the 72 is very, very good and astonishing for the price. In my book, there aint no competition between the two on a VFM basis!

The 72 is subtly smearier and the lower registers may seem superficially fuller becase theyre not quite so well resolved. Its also a little brighter which occasionally gives the (wrong) impression of more detail. I think the fuller body is merely a layer of crud that is removed by the 52. It aint much of a layer though! I love my 72.

Steve