advertisement


NAIT v my FlatNAC72/ZAP250

This time last year, I had a Nait 1, a Nait 2, and a Nait 5i. All of them great amps, each with their own character, and each one better than the others in one way or another.
 
Just tried the NAIT in place of the 72 as a headphone 'buffer'. It was damn close. only better (much) vocal resolution, low level detial/ambience and bass definition clinched it for the 72.
If only the NAIT XS had been designed by JV, I could get rid of loads of boxes!!!
 
Mick Parry said:
Chaps

I am inclined to agree with this. I have a 32.5 / Hicap / 250 in the dinning room and it sound excellent and I am unlikely to ever change it. It is just a well put together combination.

Many years ago, I ran the 32.5 and Hicap into a 140 to power some Saras and once again it was an excellent match.

Regards

Mick
Click to expand...

Huge fan of the 32.5/HC/250 myself into Saras back in the eighties. In some ways preferable to my latter 72/HC/250.
 
JTC said:
I once owned a 52/SC/250 at the same time as a Nait 2 (CB). I tried both into Audiophysic Virgo mkIII speakers, which are fairly sensitive.

Upshot was that the Nait 2 ran the 52/SC/250 so close for the fundamentals (i.e. musical enjoyability and fun) that I promptly sold the bigger system. The 52-based amps had more detail and airiness, and a bit better bass grip, but with the speakers I had then that was all they really offered, other than a remote control...

Nait 2 is a great amp when paired with high efficiency speakers IMHO.
Click to expand...
I used to swap between my CB NAIT2 and 52/SC/135s just for fun when I had a full Naim system. There is no doubt the 52/SC/135s is a great amplifier system, but the NAIT2 gets within 95% of what the top-of-the-line system did. Played within its power envelope and into sensible loudspeakers, you'd be hard pressed to find anything better for the money.

Guess which Naim amplifier is still resident chez moi?

2894888-md.jpg


James :)
 
James / flatpopely,

Did the Nait 2 ever come with four line-level inputs?

Joe
 
JTC said:
I once owned a 52/SC/250 at the same time as a Nait 2 (CB). I tried both into Audiophysic Virgo mkIII speakers, which are fairly sensitive.

Upshot was that the Nait 2 ran the 52/SC/250 so close for the fundamentals (i.e. musical enjoyability and fun) that I promptly sold the bigger system. The 52-based amps had more detail and airiness, and a bit better bass grip, but with the speakers I had then that was all they really offered, other than a remote control...

Nait 2 is a great amp when paired with high efficiency speakers IMHO.
Click to expand...

Did the same thing with the same combination but different speakers - same result, so out went the 52/250. The Nait 2 was stupidly close to that combination with full range speakers that are sensitive enough.

Changed my speaker outlook for good. No more insensitive watt suckers - unless they come with their own power.

Steve
 
flatpopely said:
If only the NAIT XS had been designed by JV...
Click to expand...

Interesting...just the other night one of NaimUSA's staff said I should audition the XS against my 102/HC. He said they've made a few advances in the last couple of years;-)
 
JV was alive I think when the 102 came out and it continued the 72's legacy a little way forward I felt. Apologies Dave, but I thought the 82 creamed it in both Naim dealers I worked for in the late nineties (involving different mains quality and dem rooms)....

Regarding Nait 2 line only, I can't remember I'm afraid. I don't think it ever came without the phono stage...
 
DSJR said:
JV was alive I think when the 102 came out and it continued the 72's legacy a little way forward I felt. Apologies Dave, but I thought the 82 creamed it in both Naim dealers I worked for in the late nineties (involving different mains quality and dem rooms)....

Regarding Nait 2 line only, I can't remember I'm afraid. I don't think it ever came without the phono stage...
Click to expand...

Err...the 82 and 52 do cream the 102, they are superior designs. The 102 does the same to the 72.
 
:)
I have both & my impression was, that the 72 tends to give a *rounder* picture if compared to an 82 with only one highcap.

The 82 starts to show its potential with 2 hc at least, in other words a 82 with less than 2 hcs or 1 sc does not make *that* much sense to me.

I you did something inside the 72, that might change the picture... ;)
 
My experience is the better preamp is the better preamp despite power supply or one or two aspects of performance.
 
Sure...Dave I think we're talking about different aspects, but basicly the same thing.
To me the 82 was more about fine details and resolution, but with certain music (driving rock things for example) the 72 sounded more round and convincing in a way compared to my 82 with only 1 hc.
The 82 sounded more detailed still, but also a tad "thin" compared to the 72 then.
I did the direct comparison in my living room with a mate & with the second hc on the 82, the impression of sounding "thinner" was gone & it was sounding more competent in all aspects.

That's just my impression.
That said, the 72 is still a really stunning amp for the money.
 
Agreed, the 72 is a fantastic preamp. Far beyond anything else I'd heard in the price range.
 
Q: 72/140 (no hicap) or a Nait 2 for digital and vinyl playback?

I'm tempted with the 72/140 just because it will leave me a bigger choice of speakers to play with.
 
matt j said:
Q: 72/140 (no hicap) or a Nait 2 for digital and vinyl playback?

I'm tempted with the 72/140 just because it will leave me a bigger choice of speakers to play with.
Click to expand...

72/140. You are correct about the 140 giving you more choice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top