Cambridge Audio Azur 540A VS. NAD C320 BEE

[topspeed]

Sorry, no. Dean Martin (the poster, not the singer) might be though. You might PM him.

[Walker]

Is the rotel ra 02 worht the extra money compared to the others (NAD& CA). I read good things about all of them.
And is 40 watts enough for B&W 603 s2 speakers.
The more I read, the harder it gets.
Thanks,
Walker

[RGA]

Walker

You may want to check out the latest What-Hi-fi they found a cheaper Cambridge Audio to perform better than soem of the costlier units like the Rotel. Also NAD's new C352 won their super-test. It should be noted that all the units they tested did well - and I'm sure any of the ones would do well for you - but wirth a read anyway.

[Walker]

Witch CA did they test?
thanks

[RGA]

I can't remember the name but it was $250 Pounds(I believe the 640A) - the cheapest in the test and scored second best right behind the NAD. But they said it was close - considering the NAD is 50% more money it would be worth checking out the CA.

This is a subjective magazine however - so you may want to get a hold of the reviews by Hi-Fi Choice - their magazine is not sold inmy area and the web-site only has older models - though the NAD BEE is there so who knows. Hi-fi Choice liked it though I believe - well CA's site says they did. I know the matching CD player got a best buy award in Hi-fi Choice --- these guys listen in blind panels level matched. http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/reviews.html

[Walker]

Thanks for the advice, I bought the CA and will receive it soon.
I very curious how it will sound with my B&W 602 s2's.
Thanks again,
Walker

[Walker]

I mean my B&W 603 s2's, not the 602's.

[topspeed]

Thanks for the advice, I bought the CA and will receive it soon.
I very curious how it will sound with my B&W 602 s2's.
Thanks again,
Walker

Congrats Walker,

I'm sure you'll enjoy your new CA. I'd like to recommend a few things:
1) Burn, baby burn! This thing really benefits from a solid burn-in period (50+hrs) before it starts to sing. It sounds pretty thin straight out of the box so don't judge it right away, give it time to open up. The difference is considerable.

2) The sticker on the top is a can either be very easy to take off or a bloody nightmare. Another member that has the 640 had the same situation. "Goo Gone" works like a charm. Home Depot should have it.

3) The binding posts are disappointing in quality and don't accept banana! WTH??? Get some spades or pins while you're waiting for the unit to come in, you're going to need 'em.

Have fun!

[dean_martin]

chiming in a little late on the 540A and older A500. My son's A500 had to be returned because it was making a humming/buzzing sound in one channel. The A500 was rated 65wpc, the new 540A is rated 50wpc. I think the new 640A is 65wpc. We opted to replace the A500 with the 540A. It's build quality is better. Unfortunately, the A500 didn't run as it should long enough to really compare sound quality although it seemed very capable and controlled especially in the bass region until it started acting up. We've been very pleased with the 540A. It's build quality, including the cool remote, surpasses the old A500. The Azur series also includes a headphone jack. I would describe the sound as full-bodied. Not sluggish or bloated in the bass region but it's definitely not missing. We were replacing an old 25wpc NAD receiver that sounded thin at lower volumes (my son always used the bass boost and bass control at low volumes) and just wouldn't rock at the levels my son likes to listen. In his bedroom, the 540A does just fine in tone defeat mode.

I have 2 NAD integrateds - C340 and C350, I prefer the C340, but they're both rather bland in appearance compared to the Azur. I haven't really done a head-to-head between the Cambridge and the NADs for 2 reasons - too lazy to disconnect/connect all that wiring and never noticed a difference going from room to room that would indicate some sonic fault or benefit worth investigating.

Ours is driving a pair of Polk RTi25 stand mounts, but I've heard the 603s with an entry level Marantz A/V receiver and they sounded fine. I would think the 540A would be an improvement - probably a little smoother in the treble and tighter bass.