best budget integrated amp?

[Jamie]

For what it's worth, I have seen a lot of Jolida owners sit in silence when their units go down, and a lot of them have.
Now understand, I have NOT owned a Jolida myself, but know a lot of folks, and a lot more online, that have had dependability issues with Jolida.
But they DO sound really good, the cdp especially, with the tubes and all.

[funnyhat]

Thanks for the info so far. I have been considering the Cambridge and the NAD 320 BEE, but am confused as reading other forums, people mention the Cambridge as being less than the NAD, but I usually see the NAD for 400, and the Cambridge for around 6. Am I misreading or maybe thinking of other models? Also, preferences between the Cambridge and NAD, I have Paradigm studio 20s. Thanks.

[funnyhat]

More specifically, Cambridge 340 or 540 versus NAD 320 BEE? Thanks

[JohnMichael]

More specifically, Cambridge 340 or 540 versus NAD 320 BEE? Thanks

As far as my 640A I purchased it from www.audioadvisor.com for $499. I do not know the prices of the 340 or 540 but they do sell for less than the price of the 640A.

[topspeed]

I compared the c320bee vs. the RA01 vs. the 540a and picked the 540a. It really came down to the NAD and Cambridge units as Rotel charges $100(!) for their remote and for my office app., a remote is a neccessity. The speakers are Mission Argonauts (4ohm nom., 95dB/w/m). Here's a summary as to how they compare to each other:

NAD C320bee:
Superior bass response, very musical, neutral tone, looks only a mother could love.

CA Azur 540a:
Better low level response (i.e. more balanced at all volume levels), slightly warmer tone, very musical, far better aesthetics.

If you want more bass, the NAD is the way to go. Given enough juice, C320bee plays deeper and with more authority. I use mine in the office so low level ability took precedence and because they are out in the open for my clients to see, aesthetics played a role as well. The Azur runs cool and hasn't had any problems whatsoever driving a 4 ohm load 10 hours a day for the last 2 years, although I doubt the NAD would have encountered any difficulties either. With the Mission's sensitivity, it isn't like I'm pouring power at 'em. NAD has had some previous QC probs, as has CA. In fact, I had to send mine back to replace the volume pot barely 3 months into ownership. Since then however, it has been bulletproof. BTW, I got mine from a dealer for $250, so realize there is room to negotiate.

Both are very good units. You can't really go wrong with either.

Hope this helps.

[RGA]

Yes I have experienced reliability issues with Jolida - my choice would be ASL but it costs more. My dealer recently dropped the Jolida line in favour of the ASL -- they carried both for 2 years as a trial run and ASL has less problems is built better and sounds better -- but Jolida has more options such as hybrids and they look better.

There other tube amp makers callled Almarro and Cayin that may be worth checking into which may be better. There is a Canadian Tube maker which si supposed to be very good and VERY inexpensive -- easily under $500.00(if you build it yourself) called Mapletree Audio. Their main thing is preamps and headphone amps but one could buy a preamp and power amp combination that would be around the $500.00 range (this would be a separates set-up with monoblock amps.

The NAD 320 is the worst budget integrated amplifier I have ever heard in this hobby in my entire life. My dealer sells it and was on the phone for hours trying to get NAD to put the designer on the phone to explain the issues all of his 320Bee amps were having. The amplifier does not create a proper soundfield or realistic stereo image when it should, has a dead sounding bottom end. Directly A/B'd to the Rotel RA-02 it was shocking that two budget SS amps could be so polarizing to listen to -- equally shiocking that both get great reviews.

The Other NAD integrated such as the 370 sounded much better (though the 370 does have a constant transistory sounding etch to the thing -- but it has a ballsy brute force Bryston like presentation for much less coin than a Bryston so there is appeal there.

[topspeed]

To be fair Rich, you should note that you've heard various 320bee's that have sounded different from one another, so it' entirely possible this one example had something seriously wrong with it. Of course, the fact that there's such variability between samples poses a whole 'nother set of questions .

[ECMJazz]

Yes I have experienced reliability issues with Jolida - .

I'm curious! What model Jolida and what kinds of issues? Thanks!

[bacchanal]

The studio 20's are quite efficient. You won't have a problem driving them with any of the amps you're looking at.

[RGA]

I'm curious! What model Jolida and what kinds of issues? Thanks!

the 202a -- this was a second hand unit that I wanted to audition and then buy. This was a B&W Reps unit and I booked time to audition it. It didn;t work and all that came out was static. I booked a second audition but got a phone call saying it failed and had to be repaired. Then 3 weeks later I went down to audition it and it didn't even turn on. The dealer was so mad at it that he refuesed to sell it.

You ask why I was willing to give ti so many chances? The price - they were asking $300.00Cad for it. The reason they had it that cheap to start with was because it had physically caught on fire.

Now this may just be a lemon but Jolida has had some issues mentioned on a lot of forums and that is why I lean a little stronger to Antique Sound Labs which has not been free of problems either. Generally though ASL has been sightedmore for fit and finish issues which are less important. My headphone amp has been perfect for 6 years (still on the stock tubes).

One big reason I prefer AN or SET amps is that you never have to bias the tubes -- incorrect biasing can lead the inexperienced user into some problems. But Audio Note's entry level integrated is the OTO SE at $2,600.00 with phono another $500.00.

The ASL AQ 1003DT would be my first choice in the $1k US range -- the SS Audio Refinement Complete is also quite excellent for the money as is the Jolida 302B which has a more classic valvey sound than the ASL.

[Kaboom]

i certainly agree with all of Topspeed's points, owning the 540a and having auditioned the NAD 320BEE. I chose the Cambridge because it sounded way more accurate to me, and because at the price, it was a downright steal (199€, or slightly less of what Topspeed got it for).
However do realize that if you intend to have room-shaking bass, or if you have speakers with less than 89Dbs of sensitivity, the cambridge (nor the nad, nor any sub-100 watt amp) won't cut it. It struggles BADLY to drive my 84 Db 6-ohm speakers (this was fixed with a fine Adcom power amp).
So yeah, it is indeed an awesome amp, specially for the money. Rotel might be more detailed, but i didnt find it quite as involving (auditioned this one, too) and its definately overpriced for what you get.
Cheers!

[funnyhat]

Does the fact that I have paradigm studio 20's make a difference? One comment about the Cambridge needing a pretty effecient speaker makes me wonder as I don't think the paradigms are that effecient, but I could be wrong. Thanks again!