82 v 282

Question for a freind that is thinking of up grading to 282 from a 82
He’s been told that the 82 with a service would sound better than the 282. The other question is whether his olive compatible 82 compatible with hicap 2’s and again how dose that all compare with a 282 running hicaps none DR be 82 olive hicaps. :thinking: I had an 82 180 olive and I don’t recall the 82 being better than the 282. I question if my freind has been given impartial advice here :thinking:

I have owned a 82 and a 282. I don’t think I would describe one as better than the other but they do have a different presentation. I prefer the 282 others will like the 82.

The Hicap 2 is compatible with the 82 and the 282.


I’ve had two HiCap DR’s (HiCap 3) on my 82 for quite a while - no issues. No idea what a 282 sounds like

1 Like

Very happy with my NAC82, with 2 HiCaps (non-DR).

No interest in a 282 - love my 82, with its built in Phono stage… :smiley:

1 Like

I had an 82 for quite a few years with one olive hicap, then 2 olive hicaps then a Supercap 2. I wouldn’t change it for a 282. It’s a sideways move and I believe it won’t sound better or worse, just alightly different.

He is better off leaving it. Or if he wants a change and upgrade get a 52 or 252 with Supercap olive, Supercap 2 or Supercap DR.

The only reason I would change out the 82 to 282 would be if I wanted to have the look of all Original Classic boxes as opposed to a mixture of boxes.

I have Original Classic, Olive and Chrome Bumper in one system. Purists would say have all of one type. I am not in this category.


I have an 82 with Supercap (olive) - previously 1 x Hi-Cap - then - 2 x Hi-Cap

I find the current iteration very musical and would consider a 282 a sideways move I think.

I have heard 252 and would possibly aim for that with a Supercap DR

Obviously there is then 552 & S1???

1 Like

82 serviced and run from a Supercap DR would be a good move (I have had this, and still have it available).I don’t think the 282 adds anything except the look, which may be important if he is moving towards a classic black system.

I had 82/hicap/250. Switched the hicap to a supercap and there was a modest improvement in SQ.
Changed the 82 for a 52 and that was a huge leap.
Later upgraded the 250 to a pair of 135s - another big improvement.
So suggest one route for upgrade would be a supercap, then a 52. A 282 not really worth it.


I have found Nac 82 to be more musical and engaging than Nac 282.
Go for a Supercap for the Nac 82,it becomes an absolutely fantastic preamp.


So a product that was made up to 2023 is inferior to a product that was last made in the year 2000 .Come on…sorry some of the postings on here are frankly …


It’s just down to the sound of the old olives vs the old classics. They sound different. Some prefer one others the other. Not that weird.


My issue is ,people make these grand statements (of fact )
You cannot fairly compare a 20 year old 282 to a recently serviced 82 .
When long production runs happen ,common sense has to take into account ageing of components and it’s effect .

The problem is no one generally states whether compared components have been serviced or not or even whether they are due. Like everything on forums, just I take everything with a pinch of salt. I get just as annoyed when someone states the fact that gen 1 streamers are obsolete and not to be trusted when in reality they are great vfm, sound great and are very reliable. :blush:

1 Like

I take your point but I wouldn’t get too annoyed!

I doubt burg, himself is getting emotional. Probably got bored after the third response and has gone down the pub instead and who could blame him!


The different power supply options on the 82 (with the exception of powering it from a NAP180) offer only modest improvements, for very high price premiums.
I have tried an 82 with…
a) Powered directly by 82
b) One hicap
c) Two hicaps
d) A supercap with ONLY ONE Snaic connected (an experiment, mimicing a single Hicap)
e) A supercap with BOTH Snaics connected (the recommended way of course)

Option a was by FAR the worse. With a CDX upstream this resulted in an unbearably harsh, brittle sound.

b) Smoothed things out considerably replacing hash for detail. This is the minimum an 82 needs.
c) Relatively small improvement. Not worth the price of the second Hicap.
d) A single Snaic from Supercap was surprisingly (or maybe not) better than two Hicaps. I suppose that 2 quiet rails are better than 4 noisy ones. I guess 10% better than 2 Hicaps
e) Two Snaics to the Supercap was better than the 2 Hicaps by maybe 20%. The biggest improvement was in dynamic contrasts.

But f)…replacing the 82/Supercap with the 52/Supercap was a massive improvement, making even the 82/Supercap sound flat, uninspiring and bordering on unpleasant.

Instead of faffing around squeezing every last bitter drop out of the 82, just get a 52 and be done with any future preamp upgrades.


IMO… it depends how much the 2nd HiCap cost you. My #2 HiCap (Olive) was bought pre-loved (from TomTom), for £375, back in 2012. A service at Class A cost me £199. So £574 all in.

One day, maybe a Supercap might come my way…

YMMV, as always… :sunglasses:

1 Like

Since none of these things can be bought new nowadays it’s very difficult to put a value for money stamp on the different upgrades. I paid 756£ for a Supercap making it very good value since the uptick in sq was very much to my liking. Also getting an 82 here (if you find one) is usually at least half to one third of the price of a 52 (if you find one). Leaving me thinking that an 82 is very good value for money. I haven’t heard a 52 but can only say that my 82 is a very good pre either with a hicap or a Supercap, by any standards.

Oh and I prefer the 82 over the 282. Had them both in my system at the same time.


Sorry. Some of us still feel forced to judge hifi by how it sounds, but others have more modern techniques - see ASR.

I have heard the various options but judged them using ears. On occasion, various options have also been played to disbelieving non-Naimites without their knowing what they were hearing.

There is no doubt that some bits need periodic replacement, hence service intervals. However, those of us who can ‘hear a difference’ between a serviced 82 and a serviced/ recent 282 include quite a few who prefer the 82 (other things being equal).

The same goes for preferring 52 to 252, though imho that is even more clearly a case of neither being better and the modest differences making the best choice a matter of system and personal taste.

There are even some who rate the old 250 and 135s ahead of the first OC 250 and 300 replacements, even if some of them (not all) think that the DR versions of the latter eventually addressed the audible differences well.

This does not prove that we are deaf, daft or delusional. If you have tried extensive auditions of old and newer designs and prefer the newer ones, I am glad that you have found that out.



1 Like

Presumably you mean powered by 180?