Good option, i could reverse my spare CBs on the IBL, plus i’ ve been offered what i payed for the 200
1 Like
Proper little system that. A personal favourite of mine 40 years ago when i ran it, and near unbeatable now in some ways assuming in good order.
Keep the IBL’s active
1 Like
At the end i’ll return the 62/90 since i have another identical 62 with Snaps a 32.5, 42.5 and 2x250. Next week i’m getting 72/HC/140. I’ ve also bene offered an ATC SCM11 home demo, however i have not suitable speakers support.
Good choice to skip the 62/90.
Nap 90 was a known as the amp Naim didn’t want to manufacture…the dealers wanted a cheap amp,I’ve heard.
Probably, but It would be a mistake do dismiss the 90 like the ugly ducking of the family, in fact It’ s got many similarities with the well regarded Nait 1 but with more flexibility.
3 Likes
The 90 is a lovely amp,very sweet sounding and like a grown up Nait 1.
62/90 any day over a Nait1 or 2, Ive got them both.
1 Like
I thought that was the Classic cased NAP100, introduced partially to partner the DAC V1? There are two NAP90s, the original CB (and possibly olive) half width one, and the latter full width NAP90/3 which was the partner to the NAC92, and which when packaged together pretty much made a NAIT 3?
The story I was told was that with the introduction of the NAP140, which replaced both the NAP160 and the NAP110, certain distributors felt that they needed a lower priced power amp to pair with the NAC42.5/62. So Naim developed the NAP90 based on the power amp section of the upcoming NAIT2, but with almost twice the power output. It was one of the first instances where the main driver for the development of a new product had been from the distribution network rather than from within Naim itself.
7 Likes
Thanks for that, happy to be corrected 
Sorry @Igel !!
1 Like
Just out of interest Which CB Pre amp do you reckon is best?
I think Nac 32.5 is the best of the CB’s.
5 Likes
I have 32.5 and 62, not sure which one is better. The 32.5 a little more refined and 62 more engaging perhaps. Both are 87/88 vintage. Better asking Mr. Max B. who listened them with nSat
You could just ask JV.
“Because of system hierarchy we decided that there was no point in economising with the preamp – that it’s best to make it the best one can, and just alter the facilities. Essentially the performance of the current preamplifiers is the same. They do not sound the same, and no two will sound exactly the same, but in terms of absolute performance they’re pretty much on a par. You may prefer one in one situation yet prefer the other in another situation but to isolate which one is better is pretty difficult. lf you are listening to fifty preamps in our dem room and there’s a mix of 62s and 32s you may well find that there are some 62s that work better than 32s and vice versa. You might prefer a whole batch of 62s to another of 32s. Next week it may well be the other way round. The differences between the two preamps are not that large: there are probably bigger variations between a current 62 and one from three months ago. There has to be: we use, for example, three different suppliers for our printed circuit boards. We have to because we use over 80,000 PCBs each year. They do sound slightly different but that’s not to say better or worse.”
5 Likes
If all preamps are in top and completed condition I think it’s 32.5. People said 42.5, 62 are better, I think mainly because they got the least daughter boards one could mess with (the original sound is mostly retained)
1 Like
Cat, Hat or your feather boa?
1 Like
How can you recognize this?
@rsch If you search about 32.5 on Internet there are ton of opinions about it, and the opinions always contradict to each other. Such confusion never happens to 42.5 and 62.
For instance, many people will say 32.5 board-pulling will improve the performance – yes undoubtedly. However if going with early Kan, IME you need put back all the boards, otherwise it’s hopelessly bright and thin, bad enough to turn one into Linn or Naim basher. With 42.5 no board-pulling, and it sounds about right from start.
Early boards sounds sweeter while later boards are punchier if not dryer sounding. A mix of early ‘artboards’ and later boards will slightly break the sound coherence. I’m sure 42/62 will sound better.