72+hi+250 vs 112+150+flatcap2
Posted by: gaby yoon on 08 February 2003
Hi All,
Today, with approximately same budget,one can buy s/h 72+Hi+250 or new 112+150+flatcap2. I've never heard the second system. I know the first one very well : it's my system.
Which is the better choice? One of my friends,a future Naimee, is at a loss which to choose.
Thanks for your advice.
Gaby.
Today, with approximately same budget,one can buy s/h 72+Hi+250 or new 112+150+flatcap2. I've never heard the second system. I know the first one very well : it's my system.
Which is the better choice? One of my friends,a future Naimee, is at a loss which to choose.
Thanks for your advice.
Gaby.
Posted on: 08 February 2003 by garyi
Whilst my 102 was in being checked over I had a 112/150 connected with a hi-cap.
I have to say it came very close to the sound of the 102, infact it was probably better.
However the 150 did not have the low end grunt of the 180 and therefore would probably be the same with a 250. In other words the pre amp section is easily a match iwould say but the power amp is not.
Just my opinion.
I have to say it came very close to the sound of the 102, infact it was probably better.
However the 150 did not have the low end grunt of the 180 and therefore would probably be the same with a 250. In other words the pre amp section is easily a match iwould say but the power amp is not.
Just my opinion.
Posted on: 08 February 2003 by Eric Barry
I currently have a 112 and a 72 (and a 32-5 and a 42-5 and a 42). I compared them directly, warmed up, with phono boards and tape boards (72) and connected to k stageline (112), powered by a hicap (the same one, with a backup to keep the bullpen warmed up), into 250/Spendor S100.
The 112 excels in detail from the midrange up. It is also smoother, though I consider that a different, not better issue. Into my Spendors, too smooth. Into my Briks, probably a good thing.
However, it is looser in the bass, which is not good with either speaker. I wonder if that is the result of it being optimized for Allaes rather than full-range speakers (as the 32-5/72 design probably was).
The biggest shortfall (and we're talking pretty minor differences in all these areas) is in dynamics and pace. The 72 just has more punch in the bass--sounds more solid. And drums sound more physical, more like the real thing (if slightly less detailed). I've noted that the overload margin of the 112 is 35db, whereas all other Naim preamps ever have quoted 40db--and I wonder if that is a)due to the volume set up, and b)the source of the slight shortfall in dynamics.
Overall, I think the 112 and 72 are about equal in quality, and equiped with phono stage they retail(ed) for the same in the US, but the 112 has remote (which is why I got it). However, I have a preference for the 72, and perhaps even the 32-5--more flat earth.
BTW, the 72/hi/250 should be cheaper than the 112/flat/150.
--Eric
The 112 excels in detail from the midrange up. It is also smoother, though I consider that a different, not better issue. Into my Spendors, too smooth. Into my Briks, probably a good thing.
However, it is looser in the bass, which is not good with either speaker. I wonder if that is the result of it being optimized for Allaes rather than full-range speakers (as the 32-5/72 design probably was).
The biggest shortfall (and we're talking pretty minor differences in all these areas) is in dynamics and pace. The 72 just has more punch in the bass--sounds more solid. And drums sound more physical, more like the real thing (if slightly less detailed). I've noted that the overload margin of the 112 is 35db, whereas all other Naim preamps ever have quoted 40db--and I wonder if that is a)due to the volume set up, and b)the source of the slight shortfall in dynamics.
Overall, I think the 112 and 72 are about equal in quality, and equiped with phono stage they retail(ed) for the same in the US, but the 112 has remote (which is why I got it). However, I have a preference for the 72, and perhaps even the 32-5--more flat earth.
BTW, the 72/hi/250 should be cheaper than the 112/flat/150.
--Eric
Posted on: 08 February 2003 by syd
quote:
Originally posted by Eric Barry:
BTW, the 72/hi/250 should be cheaper than the 112/flat/150.
--Eric
I recently bought used 32.5/Hicap/250 for about £1300. Both the 250 and Hi are chrome bumper and recapped. 72/Hi/250 olive green could be had for approx £1600 depending on age and condition.
Yours in Music
Syd
Posted on: 08 February 2003 by David Patterson
Hi,
After years of struggling to get my system to sound the way i wanted, it was always too bright and harsh to my ears , i sold it and bought brand new a 112 Flat2 and 150. Smooth sound yeh but occasionaly boring. Anyway picked up a 32.5 cheap to start a second system and as you do thought what if i try it with 150. Amazing is all i can say, i now blame my problems on the 180 i was using.
On the other hand i do rate the 150 highly after a comparison with a 250 in my system.
Regards
David
After years of struggling to get my system to sound the way i wanted, it was always too bright and harsh to my ears , i sold it and bought brand new a 112 Flat2 and 150. Smooth sound yeh but occasionaly boring. Anyway picked up a 32.5 cheap to start a second system and as you do thought what if i try it with 150. Amazing is all i can say, i now blame my problems on the 180 i was using.
On the other hand i do rate the 150 highly after a comparison with a 250 in my system.
Regards
David
Posted on: 08 February 2003 by Peter C
The 72/hicap/250 is a cracking combination and highly recommended.
The 112/flat 2/150 isn't in the same league
The 112/flat 2/150 isn't in the same league