Nac 72, 52 or 82?

Hi, I hope there is someone who can help me. I own a Nac 72 and a Nap 250. I don’t know the Nac 52 and the Nac 82, is there anyone who can explain the real differences between these three preamplifiers? I thank you now.

The 52 was the forunner to the 252 and then the top of the range Pre Amp that Naim produced. It comes in 2 variants, 1 with the 52PS (earlier) and the other with the original SuperCap. The 82 sat below the 52 and was replaced by the 282. The 52 is a higher level pre amp but the 82 is still very well respected. The price difference is likely to be a few thousand pounds anyway so you have most likely worked out this is quite a step up from the 82.

The 82 vs 72 splits some users so if you need the extra functionality of the 82 I don’t think you would be disappointed by the sonics. If you don’t need the extra functionality then the difference to my ears was more of a preference thing in terms of presentation. I could not say one was distinctly better. Its some time back but I really liked both.

If you can afford the 52 and have the space for 2 full size boxes then go for it! You won’t be disappointed!


Thank you Steve

1 Like

The 82 can be powered by a hicap, 2 hicaps, or a supercap.
The 52 requires a 52ps or a supercap.



I am currently running a Nac 52 and a Nap 250, I have also owned a Nac 62 and 82.
I originally had the 62 through a hi cap and Nap 140, Which I upgraded to a 250
when I got the 82, I ran it with 1 hi cap then 2 hi caps.
The second hi cap made quite a difference.
When I got the 52 the difference was very noticeable, More depth sharper definition.
The 82 is no slouch though, incidentally my 52 is a late one with the pots 8.

1 Like

A 72 is such tremendous value. I went from a 282 to one and felt I was giving up almost nothing.

That said, when a serviced POTS 8 52 became available, I went with it and the difference is very large.

Based on the above, I’d only move from a 72 if I was going all the way to the 52.


But do you think there is a big difference between Nac 72 and Nac 82?

Ok Thank you

I used a 72 from launch, and replaced it with an 82 in 1993. I felt there was a big step up, As I recall my impressions from 26 years ago, the bass tightened up and was even faster, and the midrange improved. I replaced the 82 with a 52 2 years ago, that was a very major improvement, everything just seems clearer. They’re all great amps, for me each step up the range gives you more of the stuff I like in the one below.


Well, for me the 82 is a huge step up from 72, with 1 HC on both.

Later went 82/2HC to 52. This step, for me, wasn’t nearly as big an upgrade.

YMMV, of course.


This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.