Nac92R - How does it fit into the heirarchy

Mike

I have the NAC92, and I like it very much. But most forum members dont rate too high, but each to their own I guess.

However the 92 is no match for the likes of the 72 and 102 from what I know anyway. The 62 is more or less the same as the 92 so the performance between the two is pretty much the same. The 32-5 was I think replaced by the 72, so the 32-5 is also maybe a bit better than the 92. The 112 is the new Naim range, and again from what I know the 112 should out perform the 92.

If you do end up buying a 92, then the most popular power amp would be the NAP90.3 but I know some people who are using the 92 with a 140 with good results.

so the best in terms of order would look something like this.

102
72
32-5
112
92 and 62 (same)

But of course not everyone will see it this way, as there are some in favour of the 72 over the 102. But like I said, I have a 92 and I have been happy with mine for 9 years, but for not much more money, it would be better to look for a 72 and then maybe a 140.

Hope this helps.

Ian Marsh

Mike,

I run a 92R with a 180 and it sounds pretty good. I have listened to a 92R paired with 135s and that is even nicer.

Unfortunately, I have not compared a 92R head to head with other preamps. At some time in the future I will probably upgrade to an 82 pre.

Jim B.

Once again, since the 32, there were several lines of descent:

1) 42, 42.5, 62, 92, 92R. These Naim 'low end' preamps rate only a 'Holy cow! This is great!' response from the listener. I've done a lot of show room listening between 62 and 92 and 92R and heard no significant differences. My dealers say the 42.5 are the same. In fact, my '62' was a 62 board in a 42.5 case.

2) 32.5, 72 - these evoke the response, 'Gee, I couldn't imagine anything better than the 42/62/92, but this IS better', if a hicap is atteched.

3) 52, 82, 102. The 52 evokes wonder and the silence of holiness. The 82 and 102 use cheapened versions of some 52 technology but do not come close to the 52 in response.

4) 112 - I don't really understand the 112's place.

5) 552, 252, 282, 202. The 552 is something new and sui generis. The 252, 282, and 202 are improved 52, 82, and 102 respectively, with the improvements being derived from lessons learned from the 552.

Overall, the rank appears to be (that is, reports indicate most people will prefer):

42.5=62=92=92R <
(112 < 72) or (112 > 72) <
102 <
202 <
82 <
282 <
52 <
252 <
552

There is some controversy over the rankings above. For example, I listen to a lot of vinyl, and I prefer a 72 to a 102. Others don't see a particluar preamp as good VFM. But overall, I think most listeners would agree with this ranking.

If all you want is musical enjoyment, any of the above will do. If you have even a touch of audiophilia nervosa, though, you have to listen for yourself.

Regards.

Phil

The 92R I had was similar in performance to my 32.5 (both being pretty damn good).

Regards
Steve

Hi guys, and sorry about the no response, I've not been watching the forum for a couple of days.

I have a 72 and a 62 (replaced by the 72, don't know what to do with the 62 now), and Snaps (upgraded with Andy Weekes superregs) and a NAP250 which I have had recently serviced at Salisbury.

I have been offered a S/H 92R (remote version) recently for very a good price (I think), and wanted some idea on the performance to work out if I wanted it or not as I like the idea of the remote.

From what your good selves are telling me here, although a good enough performer, I doubt it would be on the same level as the 72, and definitely not worthy of the 250 now it has been re-furbed. I guess I'll just have to hold out for a 102 or 82 to get to the remote without compromising my existing sound.

Incidentally, what would be a good price for the 92R ??, and what sort of price can one find a 90.3 for (by the way, is this full size or half-size ??)

Thanks again for the help folks.

Mike

Hello Mike,

quote:

---

Incidentally, what would be a good price for the 92R ??, and what sort of price can one find a 90.3 for (by the way, is this full size or half-size ??)

---

The 92R/90.3 seem to sell most often as a pair, recently they seem to be going for anything between £350 and £500 depending on age and condition and who's selling (dealer or private etc.) Individually, they go for about £200 to £250 each.

The 90.3 is a full width slimline case which matches the 92R. I can confirm that Steve's 92R/90.3 combination sounded excellent since I bought it off him! I've now replaced the 90.3 with a 140 and added a psu to the 92R. I still have the 90.3 in a box, so if you would like to make an offer feel free to email me offline (since selling is not allowed here.)

Cheers,
Simon

scrosland at yahoo dot com

Not meaning to hijack this thread, but I have a 42.5, a 32.5 and a 102 currently in my listening room. My 42.5 I won't part with because I use it for other things... and the 32.5 is awaiting the completion of a transaction and will be off by UPS right after Christmas.
Anyway, I slapped on a CD (won't mention the CDP brand -- need to replace that POS with a Naim CDP as soon as funds allow) and tried each pre with only the 110 internal PS while driving my Briks.
I tried to "forget" what my 102/Hi/NAPSC/250 "sounded like" so I could compare. Hardly scientific, but here goes.
The 42.5 was perfectly listenable even with the 110's internal PS. Lots of Naim amp sound, gripping the Briks and driving the lows hard. As I said, perfectly listenable though a bit harsh in the highs (neither have ever seen NANA for a recap).
Then I switched to the 32.5 and the 42.5 suddenly seemed "veiled" -- my wife said it sounded more like a smoky club sound rather than a concert. OK, I'll take that.
So, next was the 102. No NAPSC, just the 110 driving everything. Again, the 32.5 then seemed dull in comparison. Not that there was anything wrong with it, just not as clear and detailed.
Then I switched back to the 42.5 and used the HiCap. The 102 was better "bare" but the Hi gave the 42.5 some life. Same with the 32.5. And the 102 fully loaded was really pretty good with the 110.
Then out came the 250 and I did the same thing. No need to tell you that the 250 was in far greater control of those Briks and let the difference between the preamps sound out even more.
Moral to the story: What Ian and Phil said in spades for my limited and unscientific testing. You can be very happy with the 42.5 and 110 (or, I'll infer other entries in Naim's low end) but if you've got Audiophile Nervosa and start comparing equipment, expect to want more!
David