… and retailed for double … but yes.
Defo not the other way around.
They released Nac 102 as market demand was remote and probably full width, maybe to create a cheaper alternative to 82 with Nap 180 use.
Must be thirty years back.
Its strange those two preamps (102 & 72) contain same basic circuit but sound rather different.
Now s/h prices is going up for 72, down for 102.
Can’t remember the RRP new but sure a 102 was more expensive.
1 Like
Really enjoyed this series of points put forward regarding the 102 very decisive in opinions a little like the CDX once described as able to strip wall paper!
I have both and the 102 is fully serviced linked with HIcap/NAPSC to NAP 200 driving Q Acoustics Concept 20 all linked with Witchhat speaker and interconnect cabling. Bought it originally because it seemed to be good value moving on from a 62. Never used the remote since installing I am of the original 42/110 era and don’t really equate remote op with Naim, don’t use CDX remote either display turned off. My old LP12 never told me what track was playing!!! More relaxing in the dark!
But I appreciate it’s not to everyone’s taste, but I took delivery of the new Mary Chapin Carpenter album last week… It made me very emotional so for me it works
3 Likes
I don’t know if anyone here remembers the old old forum (the multi-layered threads). When that was replaced by the predecessor to the current one, resident Trekkie Joe Petrik posted the first thread - ‘72 better than 102’ to much hilarity. I think those days of nuanced humour are sadly long gone.
Incidentally the 102 is in fact better when accompanied by the NAPSC as previously noted. I’ve had them all. And now not.
3 Likes
That brings back memories 
Dave Simpson (remember him ? ) and myself would usually wade in as staunch defenders of the one oh two - much to the annoyance of the 72 loyalists. Joe moved on to valves IIRC 
Funny thing is the 72 / 102 / 82 / 52 all contain pretty much identical audio circuits! All that differs is layout, switching and some nicer power line filtering cap’s as you go up the range. Doesn’t mean they all sound the same (and yes, the 52 obviously has a more substantial PS), but they definitely all share a more common ‘house sound’ than some commentators would admit.
4 Likes
I have a 72/180/Hicap which I use with an arcam dv88 (my cd3.5 went to cd heaven) and use a wiim mini. I use my phone as a remote for streaming and don’t really have the need to get an 102 or 82 for a remote.
Had a Nait Xs2 Hicap, great but the Olive just does it for me. Absolute joy of a system.
Turntable and vinyl all now sold.
Looking at the NDX2… 
1 Like
I love convenience but I completely agree with your take. My tube pre doesn’t have a remote control but I can’t seem to remove it from my system. 72 is considered to be a classic in the Naim line. I think it may have had a brief moment as the flagship pre. Am I right?
3 Likes
Yes you are right, the 72 was naims top pre for a while. It was the pinnacle of what they could do at the time. Maybe thats why it sounds so special and is still sought after today.
5 Likes
It is the pinnacle of what they have ever done… 
4 Likes
Fairly certain the 72 was their top pre amp in about 1989. Just before the 52 was released.
I have 3 of these at " home". One in my second system, my son uses one with a hc/140 and my daughter uses the other in Salford with a 140.
6 Likes
Yes, but only because it took them so long to get the design the 52 right that the 62 and 72 hit the market first.
2 Likes
Years ago I went with a friend to audition 72 v 102 for him and we both felt the 102 was clearer and more detailed, just more revealing. I know that contradicts the prevailing orthodoxy on here but I think the 102 (especially with a HiCap) is a much maligned pre-amplifier. It’s so good I haven’t been able to bring myself to part with mine which I had serviced at Naim about 4 years ago and then bought an 82 which came up as a bargain buy. It’s been in the loft since which is madness really because I just don’t need it unless the 82 goes down…
JonathanG
5 Likes
Bravo sir. 
I can’t even get my niece and nephew to watch football. You’ve given them the hifi bug. 
2 Likes
They enjoy the quality of sound, but doubt they’d ever buy their own. But who knows? I’d like to think they have had a taste of decent kit and the sound it can bring.
1 Like
True.
They did in fact convert 42.5 to 62, 32.5 to 72 - both were a much simpler convert.
With 52 JV was on new territory, time consuming.
1 Like
I think I agree with that completely. My 102 is also in the loft, probably waiting for a 180 for my wife’s system. The 82 is in my system.
1 Like
Daughter #2: Dad the sound on our shiny 55” TV is pretty meh, and you and mum have all this Meridian hifi just lying around. Don’t you think it should be put to good use at your darling daughter’s?
4 Likes
I love what I have now. I have had later, newer classic Nait XS2 which was fantastic don’t get me wrong. But for me the 72/180/Hicap I have at the moment is a place of solace and great joy, especially after a long shift on chefy service. I get home, sort a rum out and chill with tunes.
I know there are newer and perceived better pieces, as time has moved on and technology also, but it gives me so much joy.
The bang for buck is unquantifiable.
If I was to upgrade, maybe try 82/2x135/Supercap…but that is for the future. But my combo has a place in my household till I rock out in the wooden box
1 Like
How much difference is there between the 82 and 52??
How good is this fabled 52?? 
Never heard either, but really want to…
I went from 82/Supercap to 52/Supercap and thought the difference was night and day. The 52/Supercap was so much more engaging. It filled the listening room with music.
2 Likes