NAC 32.5 vs NAC 42.5

32.5 - we couldn't tell the difference between that and my 72 when a mate of mine and myself compared them (a very long time ago !)

The 72 replaced my first Naim pre - a 42.5 which sounded rather opaque in comparison.

Hi David

In theory, if everything else is equal, then the 32.5 was originally supposed to sound a little better than the 42.5.

However, everything is not equal.  There was variation from sample to sample of the same design, so a good 42.5 would outperform a not so good 32.5.

With the passing of time, the components age, so the one that was serviced most recently will probably sound better.

There are a number of threads on this and similar topics comparing the 72, 62, 32.5, 42.5 and the 12, so it might be worth doing a search.

In summary, unless you need the extra inputs of the 32.5, go for the one that has had a factory service most recently.

Hope this helps, FT

Agree the 32.5 is the better amp, much more detail than the 42.5 although it does have its charms.

Don't forget the 32.5 was top of the range at the time and was replaced by the 72.

The 32.5 and 72 are essentially the same amp, the main difference being the  32,5 uses the 324 time aligned buffer boards where as the 72 uses the 729 boards.

David, the 32.5 is a superb preamp, you won't go wrong with it.

Regards

Mark

I had the 42.5 for years

I loved it

juste replace it by a 32.5

more details, more life

32.5 is a little 52

Yes indeed.

I've always felt the 72, which as mentioned has many similarities with the 32.5, has some of the signature of the 52.  The 32.5 is a touch warmer and smoother.

The 72 and 52 have such presence, the 52 in spades.

Regards,

Mark

The32.5 was the top of the range amp for a few years. The 42.5 was second in line.

I moved on from a 42.5 to a later 72 - wow, the difference was shocking . In a different league. Oh, how I love my little 72 .

I traded up from a 42 to a 32.5. The difference was nothing short of miraculous. The 32.5 has the classic PRAT and an openess, and 3 dimensionality which its forbears lacked. The 72 and 52 are from the same stable, so, sonically on  a continuum. Although I am interested in 52 or 82 as upgrades at some stage, the 32.5 still does it for me: and an absolute steal at the usual price of £350.

You are so right .  I wonder what went wrong afterwards ?

(Flame-suit 'ON'  ).

I thought that you already used a 72.

Personally I always felt that adding a Hicap was more fundemental then the relative diffences between the two preamps.

I still have my NAC 42.5 - which started life as a 42 - recently serviced and sounding very nice indeed thank you 

HICap: seconded! Likewise servicing.

I once changed from a 42.5 to a 32.5, both with a Hicap, and heard virtually no difference. I then changed the 32.5 to a 72 and heard virtually no difference. The Hicap makes a huge difference to all of them though.

Nice one Adam! My old 42 must have been a dud then! In fact it was older than the 32.5 and unserviced. It was also not a .5.  Presumably the .5  upgrade rolled out with later 42s and 32s was a sonic upgrade? The key point of the article is the suggestion that batches change according to parts, so if we were really nailing a comparison we'd have to look at preamps made on/in the same day/week?! Serial numbers anyone?!!

What's the source (excuse the pun) of the article?

But the 52 broke that mould really!

I don't think any of the Olive pre-amps apart from the 52 really came close to eclipsing the shoe-box pre-amps - 32.5 42, 62 and 72. Though they were different, and some did prefer the 102 and 82.

The 92 was an odd-ball, designed as an entry level pre that perhaps did not aspire to improve on the old shoe-boxes, but only be less expensive ...

Amazingly, I have never heard what a 42 or 62 can do!

ATB from George

My 62 sounds great to this day. I've had the Olive 82 and 52 which were far superior to the 62, and now the 552 which is better again. I guess it's the natural evolution of Naim pre-amps.

I was told - and I assumed that it was true as I had no reason to disbelieve - that the numbering of the 52 was due to when the design project started - the mission to build the best pre-amp then possible.

The 62 and 72 started later but were finished and released earlier. After the 52 was released the advances and lessons learned were then used to produce the 82 with its various power supply configurations.

Was this true or BS?

I've heard that too Chris, but my BS detectors were down at the time.

https://forums.naimaudio.com/to...240#1566878604393240