NAC 72 vs 102 The Final Verdict

Apparently the design of the 102 is basically to use an expanded version of the 72 motherboard made to fit inside a full width box, If this is true (?)  ...then it's very odd how these two pre-amps differ so much in voicing character.

Having owned both, i can appreciate the pros and cons of each, and can only surmise that if one took the good points of the 102; it's clarity and wide bandwidth of frequency, and the good points of the 72; it's warmth and analogous musicality, and then put the best of both together, the performing result would sound something like a well tempered NAC 52 : )

Debs

I know this debate has gone on for some time time but I hope this post will put it to rest once and for all.

Both are excellent preamps and will outperform much of the competition for a fraction of the cost, but when deciding between the two here is what I found. System for both was identical. CBNap250/CBHC/CDS/SBL/NACA5. The 72 is better IMO because it has more clarity, a warmer presentation , more of a live sound.,tighter bass and sounds like you are in the front row. The 102 sounds a slight bit more open and airey but at the cost of all these other critical factors. As I said both are very good but the 72 is truly a special preamp that will continue to be praised by audiophiles around the world.

 

 

You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, and I will defend your right to give it.........even if it's wrong.

naim_nymph posted:

Apparently the design of the 102 is basically to use an expanded version of the 72 motherboard made to fit inside a full width box, If this is true (?)  ...then it's very odd how these two pre-amps differ so much in voicing character.

Having owned both, i can appreciate the pros and cons of each, and can only surmise that if one took the good points of the 102; it's clarity and wide bandwidth of frequency, and the good points of the 72; it's warmth and analogous musicality, and then put the best of both together, the performing result would sound something like a well tempered NAC 52 : )

Debs

or an 82?

Too dry.

Perhaps there is a high chance that sample variation will affect your findings, especially given the age of these preamps. 

mikeybaby posted:

I know this debate has gone on for some time time but I hope this post will put it to rest once and for all

 

 

Well thats that then glad you put us all straight on that one. What's your thought on the chicken and the egg?

I went 32.5, 72, 102, 82, 52, my favourites where the 72/52, the 102 I thought was a downgrade rather than upgrade.