So having received my newly serviced and recapped 62/90/FC, I’m now waiting for my Naim dealer to send the ‘new to me’ 202/200 in for service. I’ll be picking it up in January/February.
I’ve decided not to get a hicap or napsc quite yet, but wondered if even the freshly serviced Flatcap will make an appreciable difference?
I think the napsc makes a worthwhile difference on the 202, even if “just” powered by a 200.
If you search here, there are mixed opinions regarding 202/200 versus 202/fc/200. But mostly thinking it’s better without the flatcap. I guess you need to try.
You might just start slowly looking for a NAPSC and a HiCap. They can often be found pre-loved, at various Naim dealers.
See what turns up… 
I remember when I bought my 102/180 in 1999. I told the dealer I couldn’t stretch to the napsc and he said nothing but played a couple of tricky tracks with and without the napsc and I decided I couldn’t do without one. I don’t think I have ever seen anyone be negative about it and it seems to be widely regarded as the best value upgrade offered by Naim
Adding a NAPSC to my otherwise bare 202/200 made a nice and noticeable difference for the better.
If you’re within range, TomTom Audio currently has more than one s/h NAPSC available for tempting money.
Mark
For the relatively modest cost of a s/h NAPSC the benefit is well worth having…
I prefer the Nac 62 over the Nac 202,so my advice is to try them side by side before investing in a Napsc for the Nac 202.
The Nap 200 will be a good upgrade over the Nap 90.
I’m in Canada, not sure if Tom Tom has any North American compatibke units. A great suggestion for UK based people.
Any NAPSC is better than none, between a flatcap and the 200’s internal it’s closer but the Flatcap is dual rail so might win that one even though the tranny is on the small side.
How much of a significant upgrade in SQ is a Supercap from a single Hicap with a 282?
An extremely big upgrade, takes the Nac 282 up to a very high level.
I’ll let @Igel paint-in a bit more, but when I upgraded my old Olive 82 with an Olive S/Cap, there was more detail, more but far better controlled bass. It removed some edginess – But, it appears on here, some people don’t like that, as they prefer the livelier nature of the bare-ish 82/282. When the time came, the move to an Olive 52 was a step-up, but not in any way a leap.
A FlatCap in good condition, with its dual voltage rails, will be a worthy improvement in SQ over the 200 PSU, even if DR.
This doesn’t directly answer your question but I have always thought that it’s not which power supplies you have got that count, more what you might be putting them on.
Put another way, I’d prefer a NAC282 with NAP200 rather than a NAC202, HC, NAP200.
Just an opinion.
I’d much rather have a 202/200DR than a 202/FC/200…
I’ve had both, my opinion doesn’t come from what I think but from what I’ve heard.
Agree
Different ears…
To me and the usual listening crew, even with olive 250, the 52/SC had no more PRaT than 82/SC, but was better in every other way in my house and system.
With the 82 briefly back in, I tried 300DR instead of that 250, and thought the 300DR a bit different but no more enjoyable.
With the 52/SC, by contrast, the 300DR was not only better but was so good it stopped me getting the 135s I spent a decade wanting - and messed up my olive-wall aesthetic.
On the other hand, I agree that going from 1HC on 82 (or 282) to 2 HCs is a non-zero upgrade and that going from 2 HCs to 1 SC is another step.
For me, the latter was a smaller step, and only good value because it was the gateway to the 52. However, other sensible people rate the 2HC to 1SC step as being bigger than we thought it.
YMMV as they say.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.