NAC 62/Hicap chrome bumper

So I’ve just had to sell my beloved NAC 552DR to free up some urgent capital. I plan to purchase it again in the future, however I was wondering if in the mean time I can get by with a classic pre amplifier in the chrome bumper NAC 62/Hicap. I just love the look of this generation half size boxes. I understand the NAC62/Hicap will not match the 552DR, however can it provide enough entertainment to get me by for a few years?

my setup, Audio Note DAC, NAP 135s and Harbeth M30.2s.

I’ve previously owned the NAC82/SUPERCAP and the 252/ SUPERCAP so I’m not interested in these suggestions please.

I ran olive 72/Hicap into135s back in the late ‘80s and early ‘90s, I thought it was great, it really boogied. I’d suspect 62 would have a similar style.

Is there a big difference between the 62 and 72?
Was the 62 flagship pre amp of it’s time?

These days, which sounds best will mostly be down to sample variation, servicing, age factors etc. If you have a great sounding NAC62 and don’t need the extra inputs of the NAC72 then stick with what you have.

FWIW, one of my favourite shoe-box pre-amps in my own collection is a chrome bumper NAC62 - it definitely has that “special something” to its sound.


The 62 was never the flagship - it replaced the 42.5. If you want chrome bumper, the 32.5 is really cool looking with its shiny mute switch, and sounds great.

I’ve owned both in the past, and still own a couple of 72s : )
The 62 is quite open and airy (…or perhaps hairy)
The 72 has an exquisite warmth and beguiling earthy charm.

At first hearing the 62 may excite more, but the tone and voice of a well tempered 72 can be more forgiving and less fatiguing on extended plays, and engages one directly with the music.

Whichever you decide, make sure the unit you buy has the original naim intended internals and is unmolested by alternative engineers.


Which presumably means non techie people are best advised to buy from a dealer.

I did buy an old NAC32.5 once that was extremely hairy. But it was cheap and a good hour cleaning off all the crud and removing all the hair and fluff from the inside was very worthwhile - it looked good as new!

Lol. I actually thought ‘hairy’ was an adjective describing the sound of the amp.

I will of course have any units I purchase serviced/recapped.

If NAC 62 wasn’t the flagship pre. What was please?

32-5 for CB and 72 for Olive.

1 Like

You thought correctly, the 62 is sonically mordant compared to the smooth refinement of a 72 which can only be described as a considerable upgrade.


I also had 72 boards in the 32-5…looks and SQ :slight_smile:

Ok having read several posts, I think a 72 might be a better fit for me for now. How would you describe the sound of the 72/Hicap compared to say 82/supercap. As ive owned the latter.

1 Like

The 72 and 32.5 are easily better than the 62, assuming equal service condition.

A couple years ago I had a fully restored 72 and 82 at the same time, into a fully restored olive hicap, an olive 250 that had been recapped. Sources were Rega Apollo-R/ndac and Rega P3. Speakers were ATC 7. I ditched the 82 in favor of the 72. The 82 was smoother and more refined. It’s a great preamp, but I preferred the prat and musicality of the 72. It probably comes down to personal preference.


But I did not run an 82 Supercap.

I ran a 32-5 with 72 boards changing to a 102 mainly because I have to have a remote volume. The 102 had more clarity and detail but did miss some of the warmth of the 32-5, not for long though :slight_smile:

The 82 is streets ahead of the 102 and shoebox pre-amps. Especially with a Hicap or Supercap :heart_eyes:

All the CB and olive pre-amps have they own unique voicing signatures, and are engineered with different levels of technology improvements albeit at a higher purchase price levels. There is a tendency to own and enjoy most of these pre-amps but which become a stepping stone [when funds allow] to upgrade to a more expensive and better pre-amp, however there exists the uncanny ability of the 72 to perform years of musical satisfaction with far lower ungracious itching to effect the happy listener.

Most would probably prefer the ‘audio sound’ ability of an 82/SC over a 72/hicap, the 82 has a larger open window for frequency and greater finer detail, however this can expose any weakness upstream on the front-end, and will probably in time beg the question for upgrading to a 52… which is not a bad idea actually : )

The minimalist and earthy 72 simply gets on with presenting music in the relaxed and satisfying manner without the question of audio getting in the way, it also costs considerably less than a pre-owned 82/SC.
The 72 is a fabulous bang for buck music making machine whereas the 82/SC is merely superior audio kit.

It really depends upon your budget, but considering you are selling up the 552, a more gentle landing would be a 52/SC, especially if you still have the 135s.
It may take time to find a good pre-owned 52 tho’.
Alternatively a 72/hicap work a treat with 135s, i enjoyed this combination for years and refuse to part with them : )


Debs and Snarfy,

very interesting points. I should mention that I now understand what is meant by PRAT more than ever before. For example the NAP 300 and 250DR clearly cover more of the audio frequency and detail etc but I did not enjoy them anywhere near as much as I do the NAP 135s.

The 552DR will surely be missed because I think that it does both things very well. The PRAT and the finer details of the music. But if I could only have one, I pick what this brand does better than any other imo.

As this may be a lengthy wait for my next 552DR.
I think I’ll kerb my desire to spend on 52/supercap. Besides I’ve had the 252 Supercap Classic so I guess it’s better to try another flavour for now, right?

1 Like

So after much thinking I think I’ll settle on a NAC 52/ SUPERCAP to match my NAP 135s; so 2002 model.

I just had a question. What are the forum rules regarding trading?

No trading I’m afraid.