Johnny Blue, my resident audio guru, has now probably had enough of me, so I'm being brave and posting on my own.
I'm hoping that someone out there has owned these two amps before and can help me with a comparison. NAP 90 v NAP 160.
I've had the 90 from new and have just bought the 160. After listening to both, I've come to this conclusion:
1. The 160 has less bass than the 90.
2. The 160 has slightly more treble than the 90.
3.The 160 has slightly less volume than the 90.
4.The 160 has slightly more detail/separation than the 90.
Sound about right or wrong?
To be honest, I was hoping for quite a big improvement on the 90, not a marginal difference.
Neither amps have been serviced, and I don't want to spend money servicing the 160 if, in the end, there's still not going to be much difference between the two.
Many thanks for any replies, Kim
I'm hoping that someone out there has owned these two amps before and can help me with a comparison. NAP 90 v NAP 160.
I've had the 90 from new and have just bought the 160. After listening to both, I've come to this conclusion:
1. The 160 has less bass than the 90.
2. The 160 has slightly more treble than the 90.
3.The 160 has slightly less volume than the 90.
4.The 160 has slightly more detail/separation than the 90.
Sound about right or wrong?
To be honest, I was hoping for quite a big improvement on the 90, not a marginal difference.
Neither amps have been serviced, and I don't want to spend money servicing the 160 if, in the end, there's still not going to be much difference between the two.
Many thanks for any replies, Kim