NAC72 vs 112 (it's not for me...)

Posted by: Alco on 11 August 2003

Hi Y'all,

Now, don't get me wrong here!! Don't think I'm about to swap my 102 or 72 for a 112, but I just placed a 'for-sale' ad on a Dutch HiFi site for my NAC72, and already got a reply.

The person who might be interested would like to know how the 72 compares to the recent NAC112.

Any thoughts...? Roll Eyes

regards,
Alco

[This message was edited by Alco on MONDAY 11 August 2003 at 15:05.]
Posted on: 11 August 2003 by Mike Sae
I don't know myself, but I've corresponded with people who think the 72 is better than the 112.


Maybe they'll add their comments here.
Posted on: 11 August 2003 by Mike Sae
Nah, 52 replaced the 72, surely.

102 was a johnny come lately.

My guess: you prefer the 72.
Posted on: 11 August 2003 by Alco
aaargh...how stupid can a man get... I just found out I accidently deleted the message from the guy who was interested in the NAC72.(together with another shipload of spam)
(yes, withou replying first Roll Eyes)
Posted on: 11 August 2003 by Mat Bon 0013
I never thought the 72 was ever replaced then that is just me Wink
I would rate it just below the 52 and 82 respectively IMHO

Mat
Posted on: 11 August 2003 by Phil Barry
Yeah, the 72 and the 102 were in the lineup for at least a couple of years, so the 102 did not replace the 72.

The 72 was top of line until the 52, which started development earlier than the 72, went into general sale, so it could be said that the 52 replaced it - except the 2 preamps remained in the lineup together for close to 10 years.

The 72 obviously was as far as the shoebox could go. It's impossible to take it farther. Richard, Paul, etc., I will neither confirm nor deny that stmt is a challenge.

Regards.

Phil
Posted on: 12 August 2003 by novelty
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Sae:
Nah, 52 replaced the 72, surely.

102 was a johnny come lately.



ditto

"So what ya gonna do when the novelty has gone.."--Ian Curtis
Posted on: 12 August 2003 by Arye_Gur
I can't see how someone can't hear that the 102 is much better than the 72.

Arye
Posted on: 12 August 2003 by Tuan
quote:
Originally posted by Arye_Gur:
I can't see how someone can't hear that the 102 is much better than the 72.

Arye


Naim sheeps can't hear they only bahhh....
Posted on: 13 August 2003 by Brucie
Just off at a tangent a little.

Would people say the 52 is further away from the 82 than the 72 is from the 82? I've heard it said that whilst the 72 to 82 is an upgrade certainly, the 82 to 52 is a much greater upgrade.

I currently own a 72/hi and was thinking of going to 52/super rather than my initial plan of an 82/hi. In other words, if one is going to commit to a supercap, one must really aim for the 52 or the supercap is under utilised.

I feel that these *caps (XPS*, CDPS) are Naim's real strength and make a world of difference.

b
Posted on: 13 August 2003 by Bob Edwards
Bruce--

I'd agree with that, having owned all three preamps. There is a MUCH bigger difference from 82 to 52 than there is from 72 to 82.

I had the opportunity to move from 72/Hicap to 72/Super and then to 52. As large an upgrade as the Supercap was on the 72, replacing the 72 with the 52 was substantially larger.

Best,

Bob
Posted on: 13 August 2003 by novelty
quote:
Originally posted by Tom Alves:
I had a 72 for a few years, added a supercap to it which was very worthwhile and then swapped the 72 for a 52. Easy steps and missed out the 82 altogether. Well worth it.

Tom

Actively enjoying it all


this is my current planned path..Smile i'm in no hurry to get there..though the recent fall in prices for s/h green boxes has gotten my attention..

"So what ya gonna do when the novelty has gone.."--Ian Curtis