Cambridge Audio Azur 540A VS. NAD C320 BEE

Which one would be your choice and why?
Please advice.
Thanks a lot

My speakers are B&W 603s2.

Cambridge Audio Azur 540A vs. NAD C320 BEE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Walker

Which one would be your choice and why?
Please advice.
Thanks a lot

My speakers are B&W 603s2.

Cambridge Audio Azur 540A vs. NAD C320 BEE

---

I think the Rotel RA-02 is IN the same ballpark for price, and the Azur 640A is not all that much more than the 540A.

witch one would you pick out of the 3 and why?
Thanks for your input.

I choose the CA 540A over the C320bee and RA-02 for three reasons:
1) The Azur was 30% cheaper than the NAD
2) The Azur was almost 50% cheaper than the Rotel (that's a $100 freakin' remote!)
2) The NAD looks like sh!t

Admittedly, number three is purely subjective so feel free to proclaim the little c320bee as fetching as Halle Berry. They make it in silver in other markets, but North American's get their wonderful camo green/grey...isn't that special?

Because of the price of the Rotel, I didn't even bother. As far as sound quality, the C320bee had a slightly better bottom end over the Azur, but you had to really be looking for it to tell the difference. They are both very smooth and don't really exhibit any nastiness which is a nice bonus considering their modest prices. I've got mine powering Mission Argonauts which are 95dB sensitive so needless to say, I don't have to feed them much. There seems to be plenty of headroom when I do let them fly. The remote on the Azur btw is a heavy, solid piece that really imbues the unit with a sense of quality.

I found the sound from both to be far more similar than the serious price differential, hence I bought the CA.

Good luck and buy what moves you.

Hi Topspeed,
Thanks for the info, are you familiar with the cambridge audio A 500 RC or the cambridge audio A 500 (2x 65 watts).
thanks again for all the speaker info.
Walker

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

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 :confused:

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.

Witch CA did they test?
thanks

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

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

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

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.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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

---

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!

Thanks for the tips, I'll let you know how it sounds.
One more question, my cd-player is an NAD C521i, is this a good match for the CA (Ibought it 3 months ago)? It sounds detailed and clean on my HK.
Walker

Sure, why not? It will probably sound even better through the CA (once burned-in).

Hi Guys,

It would be nice if you posted your reviews to the Reviews part of this site. I put mine up for the 540A a while back. Lots of people use this site. I'd rather not be the only opinion out there. Excellent forum though.

Noddi0ff

In 3 1/2 hours I am going to get a hearing test done (my ears keep popping and I got tinnitus) and hopefully it will give me some idea of what I want to do. That is, how much I want to spend on an amp/preamp/ or int...or just keep my old 1988 45w/ch Onkyo receiver.

First I was considering about 100 - 200 w/ch at about $1600 for Parasound Halo Pre/amp combo or Rotel's RC 1070 pre and one of their amps ...Then after my ear problems, I started deciding on Jolida's or Antiqu Sound Lab's tube intergated amps @ about 30-50 w/ch.

Then, I started thinking "If I might loose my hearing, why even spend a grand?" So the Rotel intergated came to mind (RA 1062 @ $700). Then I thought that wasn't much better.

Now I am thinking of the NAD C320BEE ($400). And since reading this thread, the CAs too.

This amp will be for my Martin Logan ReQuests.

Walker,
For you, either one (NAD or CA) will be fine. I've been using small Dali (Dali IV) speakers and larger JBL L7 with the ole Onkyo and it has more than enough power to crank them up! (I never tried to crank it up with the ReQuests - only because I am temporarily living in an apt).

Well...reading a more recent post, I just noticed you made your purchase. Let us know how you like it!

Anyone know how well either of these budget amps do at playing music at low to moderately low volume levels, with medium sensitive spks: 90dB/2.83 volts/meter that are Nominal: 4 Ohms; Minimum: 1.2 Ohms? Do they heat up a lot?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter_Klim

Anyone know how well either of these budget amps do at playing music at low to moderately low volume levels, with medium sensitive spks: 90dB/2.83 volts/meter that are Nominal: 4 Ohms; Minimum: 1.2 Ohms? Do they heat up a lot?

---

Hope everything works out at the Doc, Peter. The only time a loss of hearing is a good thing is when you're married ;)

I've got the Azur 540a running 4ohm Mission Argonauts that are 95dB sensitive. The impedence curve isn't as dramatic as your ML's, but I can say the CA runs very cool and I've got mine on pretty much all day. One of the things that I really appreciate about the CA is it's low level resolution. Whereas some amps need you to turn them up to fully develop, the Azur is balanced regardless of the volume. I use it for my office system so it's rarely cranked to, as Nigel Huffnel would say, "11". It does seem to produce a very real 50 wpc tho and I've never heard it show sign of strain or run out of room on the rare occasions I let it fly. Bare in mind, when you combine my speaker's sensitivity w/ my modest office dimensions (18'x10'), even half volume is REALLY loud.

From a pure sound quality standpoint, I'd actually give the C320bee a slight edge only because it's bass was a little deeper. The difference is miniscule however, and for me I opted for the far better aesthetics and much lower price of the Azur.

Hope this helps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by topspeed

Hope everything works out at the Doc, Peter. The only time a loss of hearing is a good thing is when you're married ;)

---

LOL!! Some co-workers and I joked the same thing the other day!

My hearing test came out better than expected. Both ears work the same, except a slight relative dip centered at 4Khz (in absolute, it is considered normal). But it is still a 10db difference between the 2 ears. Then at 8K they are the same again. In a couple of days the doc will review the results and we will take it from there. Thanks for your concern.

I wondered why you got the CA over the NAD and then remembered it wasn't for your main system, but for your office. What do you use in your main system again? Do you have it up in the gallery?

What I like about both these amps is that their volume controls are a rotary knob, instead of a digital pushbutton. With the knob, you have infinite volume settings. The Parasound Halo P3 only has only 40 something incremental steps (each step displays the volume by 2, so it displays up to "80", which is still 69 "more louder" than the amp used by Spinal Tap :) ) That, at one time, was my one draw back in deciding on it. My newer Onkyo (TX-DS777 used for HT w/the JBL L-series) has the digital knob that doesn't have an end it it spinning (does that make it even louder than the Halo?!?!)

I also like that the Rotels and the CA have a light in the volume know so I have some idea on what level the volume is set to.

Do you know if the NAD has the light in it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter_Klim

What do you use in your main system again? Do you have it up in the gallery?

---

My HT and 2 channel are forced to coexist so I have a Denon 3803, PS Audio HCA2 for the mains, Sony DVD changer used as transport w/ optical to the Denon's Burr-Browns, Denon tape deck, etc. (for a full list w/ model #'s, check my profile), these are driving a set of B&W CDMNT's: 7NT's for mains, CNT center, and 1NT's for surround. I also have a DefTech PF12TL sub only for HT. I don't have a pic up because, believe it or not, I don't have a digital camera. Any suggestions?

Quote:

---

What I like about both these amps is that their volume controls are a rotary knob, instead of a digital pushbutton. With the knob, you have infinite volume settings. Do you know if the NAD has the light in it?

---

I'm with you, buttons suck. The NAD doesn't have a light on the volume and the CA's isn't lit, although I sure wish it was. BTW, if you like the CA in silver, be aware the white labels are pretty much illegible against the silver faceplate.

I'd have to agree with topspeed on the resolution at low volume with the CA. That's a good observation. I've got mine in an office too, so low to moderate volume listening is it. Speakers are Paradigm Minimons (90dB room/87dB anechoic,which do most manufacturers use?) and 'compatible w/ 8 ohm'.

BTW, a rotary knob doesn't mean 'infinite volume settings'. The knob is just an interface, it can still be adjusting a digital control with big steps. Generally I find steps of 0.5dB invisible to my ear. I don't know but I'm betting the volume control on most modern amps/receivers is operating digitally and not analog.

I've got the 540A in black. Very good looking.

noddin0ff

Good point about the low level response of the CA. I've been using Quad for about 30 years and sort of taken it for granted but it's certainly worth a mention. A lot of pre-amplifiers use logarithmic potentiometers and not linear for volume control.

My CA A500 has a very even response, much like the old Quad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by topspeed

My HT and 2 channel are forced to coexist so I have a Denon 3803, PS Audio HCA2 for the mains, Sony DVD changer used as transport w/ optical to the Denon's Burr-Browns, Denon tape deck, etc. (for a full list w/ model #'s, check my profile), these are driving a set of B&W CDMNT's: 7NT's for mains, CNT center, and 1NT's for surround. I also have a DefTech PF12TL sub only for HT. I don't have a pic up because, believe it or not, I don't have a digital camera. Any suggestions?

I'm with you, buttons suck. The NAD doesn't have a light on the volume and the CA's isn't lit, although I sure wish it was. BTW, if you like the CA in silver, be aware the white labels are pretty much illegible against the silver faceplate.

---

Do you have a regular film camera and access to a scanner (at work, Kinko's, or maybe some places that develop film do?). Some places that devlope film can also develope then film and put the pictures into a CD.

Hmm, I thought the CA had lights on the volume knob (I only saw the unit at the SoundAdvisor website - they have a zoom feature to view it).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by noddin0ff

BTW, a rotary knob doesn't mean 'infinite volume settings'. The knob is just an interface, it can still be adjusting a digital control with big steps.

noddin0ff

---

Yeah, I know:

"My newer Onkyo (TX-DS777 used for HT w/the JBL L-series) has the digital knob" :(

So does the Parasound Halo P3 I wrote about.

Sorry for the confusion.

The Parasound steps are too far apart, especially if using the XLRs. The Onkyo's is much better (it has about double the amount of steps and it may have a different gain).

In a way the digital ones are better, because there is less chance of dust messing up their contact (which can result in a static sound when adjusting the volume).

I received my Cambridge audio azur 540 a yesterday, Topspeed warned me for the first 50 hours so I'm not getting in to the disappointing sound. It needs quite some break in I understand.
Besides this I have some questions for CA azur owners.

1: Is it normal that the Treble and Bass knobs do hardly anything?

2: Te volume, treble and bass knobs have little blue dots on them, I thought that at least the volume knob would have a little light on it, mine does not, is this how it should be?

3: I have to turn the volume up till about 11 'o clock to get a decent volume, is this ok or are my speakers to demanding for this amp (B&W 603 s2)

Thanks for info,
Walker (I'll comment about the sound after 50 hours, cd player has been on repeat since yesterday night)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Walker

I received my Cambridge audio azur 540 a yesterday, Topspeed warned me for the first 50 hours so I'm not getting in to the disappointing sound. It needs quite some break in I understand.
Besides this I have some questions for CA azur owners.

1: Is it normal that the Treble and Bass knobs do hardly anything?

2: Te volume, treble and bass knobs have little blue dots on them, I thought that at least the volume knob would have a little light on it, mine does not, is this how it should be?

3: I have to turn the volume up till about 11 'o clock to get a decent volume, is this ok or are my speakers to demanding for this amp (B&W 603 s2)

Thanks for info,
Walker (I'll comment about the sound after 50 hours, cd player has been on repeat since yesterday night)

---

What does it sound like past 11:00? Is the end result better than you last unit? Like I said in my last post or 2, gains on amps very. My brothers newer Onkyo is the same way (except its a pushbutton volume control, so there is no clock position).

And like topseed replied to one of my comments, the volume knob, unfortunately, does not have a light in it (it sure does look like it form the pictures I've seen :( )

Past 11 it sounds like 9 on my HK avr75, It clearly has to work a lot harder to feed the speakers. I can't really comment on the quality of the sound because of the break in, so far it does not sound rich but rather thin.

Do you know anything about the bas and treble on this amp, is it normal that it's hardly noticable when I turn it all the way

Hardly noticeable when you turn it "ALL" the way up???
You mean all the way up, or just past 11:00 it sound like a 9 on your HK?

I never listened to the amp. But I'll say this based on my old 45w/ch receiver:
9 should be a bit more than moderate level, or at least well enough past background music levels, and enough to be heard by someone in another room.

For a few seconds, have it cranked up till it just barely starts to distort and evaluate.

Any 45 watt amp/receiver should play loud with the speakers you have.

The P3 is a very nice pre-amp, Peter. The pictures of the Azur's volume knob make it look like it's a pin light, much like the power and source lights. Alas, it is but a blue piece of plastic.

Digital potentiometers are great in .5dB increments, which is what the Denon does. However, my old PS Audio 4.6 preamp used an analog Nobel attenuator and worked flawlessly for 15 years. I'm an idiot for selling that thing...

The volume pot on my Marantz 2230 is another story. It had to be rebuilt within an inch of its life when I did a full tune-up about 6 months ago. Of course, the old Marantz's are notorious for this problem.

The treble and bass adjustments won't do much damage to the overall tone because decent amp companies like CA, NAD etc.. design them to work at the frequency extremes.So if the music you are hearing does not have much extreme info, it can't do much.This is a good design principle but poorly understood by people used to tone controls found in Japanese amps.
I think the Nad 320bee would have been a better choice because it has been measured to have almost 80 watts per channel although it is speced to 50 watts.I tested it once with my inneficient speakers and it drove them better than a 100 watt nakamichi amp.

Walker,

at 11:00 on my unit, the volume is moderate to low (moderate in a 10x12ft room w/ bookshelf speakers). 11:00 is about 1/3 of the range of the volume knob. I've never cranked mine, its in a work space. But what you described matches my ears.

The operating instructions (p.11) say the tone controls 'allow subtle adjustments'. I wouldn't expect them allow total defeat of bass or treble. I'd say that compared to receivers I've had that the tone controls on the CA don't do as much.

hope this helps.

noddin0ff

Hello People
Just to let you know that I have newly registered at the behest of my employers (Audio Partnership) to attempt to provide some manufacturer support for Cambridge Audio and Mordaunt Short. I am more easily found at the AVForums run in the UK but I will do my level best to deal with any inquiries you guys have although I suspect that most of my replies will be in the middle of the night.
Cheers
Ed

Hi Tons of fun and others,
I have some questions about my new 540a.
I'm a little concerned about the power of this amp. I have to crank it to 12 o'clock (on some older cd's, Fleetwood Mac Rumors) to get some feel of a powerful sound. It's probably still breaking in (played it for about 30 hours now) but I must say that the lower end is almost completely lacking. The sound is very thin and not at all convincing. The detail is great, much better than my HK and Onkyo, especially in the drums it's incredible what I have been missing.
But again I could not throw a good party with it the way it sounds now, you don't feel it; basically it does not rock (yet). Is this normal for this amp (after only 30 hours on low levels most of the time) or are my speakers a wrong match?
Thanks for advice.

Cambridge Audio Azur 540A
Speakers B&W 603s2
CD-player NAD C521i
Good cables

Thanks Noddin,
It's good to know that it's normal for this amp, I'm just not used to ever have the volume over 12 o clock but I'll get used to it. How long did it take you to break it in and did it make a big difference?
Thanks,
Walker

Hi Walker,

I can't comment on the break-in period of the amp because I was simultaneously breaking in new speakers. I'm sure there are many opposing opinions but, in MY opinion, there is very little 'break-in' for an amp. My bet is that the the majority of the 'burn-in' occurs between the listeners ears. Speakers being mechanical, definately need to loosen up. I'd say all-in-all, three days of use and any further change will require golden ears in ideal listening environs to hear... assuming that the change is not in one's head...

Regarding your power crisis...have you turned it up past 12? (Well,it's one louder isn't it?) Does the amp get loud enough when you keep going? I wouldn't put to much emphasis on dial position vs loudness. For example my Yamaha at home gives the volume in -dB. The numerical given changes linearly with the know rotation (for the most part, it actually depends on how fast you turn too). But, perceived loudness from the speaker does not have a linear correlation with the number. So, for most of the range say -80 to -40 (-0 being max loudest) there's not much difference. But in contrast, between -30 and -25 there's significant difference. As I mentioned I can't crank my CA540, but I'm guessing that the volume increases more noticably per o'clock the farther you go.

Find out.

If there's still a volume deficit, maybe you should compare to other 50wpc amps. Maybe you just want more?

noddin0ff

Hey Walker,

Sorry to hear the Azur isn't meeting your expectations. My experience was that the bottom end filled in considerably during burn-in, still it probably won't be to the extent that you were either expecting or are accustomed to. There's a good chance that your previous Onkyo presented a very different sound, possibly with an exaggerated bid-bass hump or something. I don't think it's so much a problem of the CA not mixing with the B&W's as it is your personal preferences.

As for the volume position, you're putting way too much thought into this. The volume is what it is. Seriously, on mine I've barely got the knob past it's base line around 7 o'clock and the slightest change merits huge differences in sound levels. Ah yes, the joy of 95dB speaks :).

At this point, you need to seriously consider either:
1) The CA is defective
2) The return policy of your dealer

See if you can borrow a demo to verify #1 otherwise look into the NAD. As I mentioned before, it did have a better bottom end to my ears.

Good luck.

Hi Topspeed,
I'm still hoping for a good change after burn-in. Except for the low end it sounds wonderful, detail is so much better than the hk and the onkyo.
I used bookshelves (B&W 601i) for many years and was now hoping (with my floor standing speakers and new amp) for a bigger and richer sound. I'm not there yet, maybe tomorrow.
If not, I guess its part of an ongoing hobby.
Thanks for your help and I’ll keep you posted (did not dare to try Level 42 yet)
Walker

One point.The position of the volume control does not mean anything.It depends on the design.I once tried out the NAD c 350, c 320bee and c 370 at home. The volume control of the c 370 goes all the way to max without distorting the sound but the max undistorted sound in the c 350 and c320 bee is the 1' o clock position.But overall the 370 is a more powerfull amp but to get more power out of it, I had to go past 2 o' clock position.It all depends on the design.I bought the c 350 due to budget constraints and I rarely go past 11' o clock position and I am very happy.

You could check if your vol control is designed like the c 370 by cranking it all the way up.Be carefull when you do this though.If you are distorting the sound as you go up, you need a new amp.If the sound stays clean and undistorted and the amp is not getting heated up, you are ok with what you have.

Clean,defined bass and thumpy, bloated bass are different things. Most amps like the Nad and CA will give you undistorted, clean, fast bass.It is very well extended also. Except for badly recorded stuff, you shouldn't have a problem in this department keeping the tone controls at the off(flat) position. You need to check out the speaker placement, interconnects and speaker cables also..
Have fun.

The B&W's you're using aren't the most sensitive speakers out there (I would describe B&W as "creative" when it comes to giving sensitivity measurements) and what you are describing sounds a normal enough for the 540A on speaker of that type. Do remember;
1) The 540A is happy to about 12 ish on the dial
2) If it does get flustered, it will simply turn itself down.