Integrated amp recommendations

[topspeed]

I need a cheap ($300ish) integrated that will mate well with Mission 780 Argonauts. They are 4 ohm speaks that dip to <3 ohms so the amp will need to be rated for this. They are rated at 95db's and most listening will be at low-moderate levels as it's for my office. 50 watts (or even less) should be more than enough. I need a warmer sounding ss integrated that's good at low listening levels as the speakers can have an agressive top end if not matched right. New or used, do you have any suggestions? The 4 ohm gig has kind of got me stuck.

Thanks for all your suggestions.

[Geoffcin]

I need a cheap ($300ish) integrated that will mate well with Mission 780 Argonauts. They are 4 ohm speaks that dip to <3 ohms so the amp will need to be rated for this. They are rated at 95db's and most listening will be at low-moderate levels as it's for my office. 50 watts (or even less) should be more than enough. I need a warmer sounding ss integrated that's good at low listening levels as the speakers can have an agressive top end if not matched right. New or used, do you have any suggestions? The 4 ohm gig has kind of got me stuck.

Thanks for all your suggestions.

I don't think your stuck at all. I kinda envy you a bit. with 95db speakers you should be able to use just about any low powered amp you choose.

My advise is to "Go vintage!"

There's my old Pioneer SX-1250 on ebay right now. Price is still good too. I managed to blow one of these up, but that was in my fuse melting days of rock & mayhem.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3089543921&category=50596

Here's a slick looking Sasui intergrated

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3087776862&category=3280

Or you could go the other way with a low powered tube set. Most have 4 ohm taps.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3089832992&category=3280

[manek]

nad 320bee.....
nothing better in your budget.

[bturk667]

I agree with manek. I really like the NAD.

[topspeed]

I've got the NAD at the top of my list right now so thanks for the reinforcement, guys.

Geoff,
That Sansui sold for MORE than its retail in '77! That must have been one helluva integrated! I dunno about the Jolida...I really like the idea of tubes but in my office it's more of a "set it and forget it" scenario and I really don't want to mess with biasing, 4 ohm pots, or anything else for that matter. All it would do is make me play with my stereo instead of earning money to pay for more toys :).

My biggest concern with vintage is how will they hold up to the load. If it's not really going to be a problem (I'm asking you guys), I'll probably just get another vintage Marantz like the one I have because I love their sound.

[gonefishin]

can you solder? How about a kit? or project?


WHat about the Norh se9...the Jolida could be nice too...if it stays within your budget.


have fun!

[topspeed]

can you solder? How about a kit? or project?


WHat about the Norh se9...the Jolida could be nice too...if it stays within your budget.


have fun!

I'm fairly handy but simply don't have the time to invest in a kit. Sorry, no tubes for this application unless they have self biasing, 4 ohm pots, and are pretty much self sufficient. I just think a ss is the better way to go for this app.
Thanks for the suggestions.

[NickWH]

As another suggestion, how about the Cambridge Audio Azur 540A? It runs $349 on Audio Advisor. 50 wpc into 8 ohms, 80 wpc into 4 ohms. Wireless remote, defeatable tone controls, two sets of binding posts, detachable IEC. Sonically, I don't know how it would compare against the NAD. The build quality looks better.

[dean_martin]

I just got a Cambridge Audio A500 integrated. It was replaced by the Azur series. You may be able to find a demo w/full warranty for under $300. Mine is a demo from audioadvisor. So far, it seems like a little power house. 65wpc at 8 ohms, higher for 4 (I don't have the specs in front of me.) I got it for my son who has a pair of Polk RTi25s. The Cambridge does a good job of offsetting the compromises in cheaper bookshelf speakers. It's detailed at low levels and the highs don't run you out of the room at higher levels. I have 2 NAD integrateds - C340 and C350. If I was going to spend a little more I probably would have checked out the C320BEE from NAD. The Cambridge's remote only controls volume. The NAD's controls input selection and volume. I'm not sure if the 320BEE's controls power. I know the NAD integrateds work well with both NHT (power hungry) and Acoustic Energy bookshelf speakers. Neither Cambridge nor NAD comes with a phono section, but Cambridge offers a "phono module" for around $50. The Cambridge A series integrateds do not have headphone jacks (I'm not sure about the Azur series). The NADs do.

The A500 was delivered today. If you come across one and are interested in getting it, I could add a little more info on reliability and performance as we use it.

[topspeed]

This is perfect because both the NAD and CA were considerations for me. If you could get into a more detailed description as to the voicing of each amp I'd be very appreciative. If either are clinical and cool sounding, I'm SOL because that combo will drive me crazy with the Missions. I'll have to buy Tylenol in bulk! Unfortunately, the nearest NAD dealer is 3 hours away so I'm going to have to listen vicariously thru you.

Thanks.

ts

[dean_martin]

I'll take one...uhmm several of those martinis before I get started...

First, each amp is in a different system. The NAD C340 is in my bedroom w/ a panasonic dvd player, Cambridge Audio D300 cd player and NHT SuperOneXU speakers. (The XU is designed for wall-mounting. My wife insisted on white, wall-mounted speakers for the bedroom. Since it's her bedroom too - at least until that addition is built - I agreed.)

The NAD C350 is in our family room and is used for watching dvds mostly. It's partnered w/ a Pioneer Elite 5 disc dvd changer, NHT SuperOnes (high-gloss black instead of that sissy white) and a big Velodyne sub. The only time I noticed any shortcoming w/ the 350 is when we were watching one of the Lord of the Rings movies. My nephew who has a hearing deficit came over so we had to crank the amp pretty loud. During one of the loudest passages of the movie, I heard some swishing noises. This was a one-time occurrence and since then I've used NAD's soft-clipping feature. Some say that this feature degrades the sound, but I can't tell the difference when watching movies.

Again, the CA amp is the A500 that was recently replaced by the Azur series. We just got it in the house yesterday. It's in my son's room who has a Pioneer dv354 dvd player pulling double duty and Polk RTi25 speakers. I read several on-line reviews of this amp which were mixed. One website said that it was "slow." So I tried it out with some big classical pieces - Mars, The Bringer of War and Night on Bald Mountain. I was impressed. It kept up with all the string and brass runs and handled the crescendoes without a problem. The tympanies, low brass and low strings were solid with decent punch. It didn't get congested or bogged down in loud passages. I then listened to these same tracks in my bedroom system. I don't know if it was a function of the CA D300 cd player, the NHTs, or the NAD amp but my conlusion was that this combination kind of blurred the section runs. In other words, with the CA system I could more easily identify each string or woodwind instrument in the section eventhough the whole section was playing the same thing. But, and this may seem contradictory, on the NAD system the cymbal crashes and notes at the end of passages seemed to linger or fade more naturally rather than stop abruptly. This may be better hall ambience or decay or both. Overall though, I thought the CA system was more exciting on these pieces.

Next, I'm going to try some jazz. I've always liked my NAD bedroom system with jazz. It seems to do well with small acoustic instrument ensembles.

A couple of more points on features - The CA does have a removable power cord, but the 340 and 350 don't. In my previous post I mentioned that if we had more money to spend I would have looked at the 320BEE, but as it is I don't know much about it. My son had saved up $300. The old NAD receiver I passed down to him finally gave up the ghost. The A500 came in just under his budget.

The only thing that concerns me about the CA's reliability so far is that it makes a "pop" sound (not quite as deep as a "thump," but not high enough to hurt a tweeter) in the left channel at power on and in the right channel at power off. We have 30 days to evaluate so we will watch this closely. I read a review that mentioned this, but the reviewer said it wasn't a problem. It's perfectly quiet when nothing's playing - not even a hiss with the volume turned up.

Topspeed - What is your source and what kind of music do you listen to? I MIGHT be able to listen to the NAD C340 and the CA in the same system this weekend. If not, I'll still post some comparisons with jazz, rock, alt. rock and maybe some softer classical (and maybe even some electronica, bluegrass and country). I think a comparison in the same system would better answer your questions on voice, e.g., warm, cold, sterile, analitycal, bright, etc. I can say that so far the CA seems very detailed without hurting my ears. My son listens to a lot of live performances by drum and bugle corps (he's a snare drummer) and mentioned that he can hear some softer passages now that he couldn't hear with his old 25wpc NAD receiver. So far he's running it in direct mode and not with the bass cranked up like teenagers tend to do. More to come as time allows.

[kexodusc]

Hmmm...Topspeed, I'm a big fan of NAD (having owned a few) but I went through this same dilemna about a year ago. I ended up increasing my budget for Rotel separates, but I did have the pleasure of borrowing a few ARCAM models that were discounted quite nicely, and very well within your price range. I don't know if my NAD was on its last legs or what, but for just about any music that wasn't a variation of rock, the Arcams had a warmer, more natural sound with far more detail. The Nad seem to go louder, but that point was moot. For hard rock/heavy metal etc, I couldn't really tell much difference at all between my Nad and the Arcams.
I never did buy Arcam, and went separates instead on some advice from my Rotel fanatic brother, but those 2 weekends made a believer out of me. The models escape me, an Alpha and DIVA something or other...but I'm pretty sure those were the two Arcam lines I demoed.

I don't think you can go wrong with NAD though, just thought I'd share..

[RGA]

You know the usual suspects: Rotel, NAD, Arcam, Cambridge Audio. The 320Bee is one of the better low priced ones out as are the Cambridge units. All males are solid.

[nusiclover]

hey dean,
i read about your "popping" problems on power on and power off. have you considered leaving it on permanently (of course having it pluged into some kind of surge protector).

[nusiclover]

oh, and tops, i could add a few different int amps, (like this onix http://www.av123.com/products_product.php?section=stock&product=4.1) but why more confusion. i think that the nad would be equally as cool as the ca.

[Mr Peabody]

Hi Topper;

Onkyo did have a 2 channel new for around your price. On the used market Arcam made an Alpha One integrated that was only about 30 wpc that had amazing drive. It sold new for around $499. Creek also had an integrated that sold new for around $499. but I can't remember the model#. Check out www.spearitsound.com and see what they have available under the "used/demos/close out" link. I think you would be pleased with the sound of one of the little Brits if you could find one.

Regards

[topspeed]

Dean:
Thanks for the insight as it's very helpful. The speaks are floorstanding 2 ways w/ two 8" drivers and an elipse quasi horn loaded soft dome tweet. The source will be just a plain 'ol cd player (probably Denon) that I haven't bought yet. I'll be playing mainly rock, jazz, and new wave (i.e. New Order, Depeche Mode, Yaz, etc.). You know, high tempo stuff to keep me groovin' during the working day.

Kex:
Thanks for the tip on Arcam. I honestly never even thought their stuff would be in this price range so I'll definitely try to find them. How did they sound next to the Rotel? I like Rotels warmer sound so if they are along the same lines they could be a good match.

RGA:
"All males are solid?" Ummm...OK. I'll just take the zero on that one ;). j/k

Nusic:
That's a sweet looking unit, but how does it sound? I'm not really into mail-order stuff with the exception of CSW and that was because of Kloss, however I'm not totally against it either. Have you heard it? What's your impressions?

Mr. P:
What's up brother? Good to see you active on the board these past few months. Thanks for the link. Have you ever dealt with SpiritSound before and are they stand up guys? I'd heard some Creek products and thought they were a little on the hard side. Did I hear an aberration? What's your impression?

Many thanks for all the input guys.

[kexodusc]

Topspeed..I'm on the road in Canada right now,and the local dealer here in Montreal has a few new Arcam's discounted 50%...One was $450 CDN (an A-65 integrated), the other was $700 CDN. There were several boxes of both models so i don't think they were floor demos or anything. I think with the currency, the cheap one is pretty close to $320 USD or so...they seem to be cheaper this side of the border after you do the dollar conversion...Looking on audiogon and ebay though, it's not looking to great to get within your price range. But if this guy can dump 50% maybe the dealers back home in the USA can too??
I should warn you, the Arcam integrateds start at lower power ratings than many others...40watts for the A-65, but they'll go plenty loud.
To be honest I bought my Rotel separates on advice from my brother and friend when I built my house, not really knowing why Rotel sounded better than my older Marantz or NAD integrateds...I liked the Rotel better, and wanted my brother to ooh and ahh when he came over, but I was leaning towards Arcam for awhile...ended up buying used Rotel gear instead. If memory serves though, they were a bit similar in terms of warmth.
You might consider buying used gear, I think a lot of brands even allow for transferring warranty.
Good luck.

[Geoffcin]

I've got the NAD at the top of my list right now so thanks for the reinforcement, guys.

Geoff,
That Sansui sold for MORE than its retail in '77! That must have been one helluva integrated! I dunno about the Jolida...I really like the idea of tubes but in my office it's more of a "set it and forget it" scenario and I really don't want to mess with biasing, 4 ohm pots, or anything else for that matter. All it would do is make me play with my stereo instead of earning money to pay for more toys :).

My biggest concern with vintage is how will they hold up to the load. If it's not really going to be a problem (I'm asking you guys), I'll probably just get another vintage Marantz like the one I have because I love their sound.


I still say; VINTAGE! See if this floats your boat;

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=50596&item=3090697554&rd=1

This ones built like a brick ****house. No problem with driving any load in my view.

[topspeed]

I still say; VINTAGE! See if this floats your boat;

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=50596&item=3090697554&rd=1

This ones built like a brick ****house. No problem with driving any load in my view.

...it just doesn't have enought buttons on the front plate for me! LOL! That baby makes my 2230 look plain for Pete's sake. You know I love Marantz but I have to admit I'm wary of their notorious problems with the pots. I just spent $120 on the 2230 and don't really want to do it again. As much as I enjoy their sound, I'm going to take a pass unless it's already been reconditioned (and I've been watching ebay for exactly that).

Thanks for the link.
ts

[Geoffcin]

...it just doesn't have enought buttons on the front plate for me! LOL! That baby makes my 2230 look plain for Pete's sake. You know I love Marantz but I have to admit I'm wary of their notorious problems with the pots. I just spent $120 on the 2230 and don't really want to do it again. As much as I enjoy their sound, I'm going to take a pass unless it's already been reconditioned (and I've been watching ebay for exactly that).

Thanks for the link.
ts

That's just great, now I have to buy it!

[nusiclover]

Nusic:
That's a sweet looking unit, but how does it sound? I'm not really into mail-order stuff with the exception of CSW and that was because of Kloss, however I'm not totally against it either. Have you heard it? What's your impressions?


i havent heard it either, so i cant comment. i did see it and figured to at least add it to your list. the more options the more fun, right? i do think that the arcam in canada would be pretty sweet though.have you thought about rotel used? you seem to like their sound.
btw,that vintage marantz looks like it has enough buttons to fly if you put wings on it.

[Mr Peabody]

Rotel and Arcam do NOT sound the same. Arcam and Creek are similar in that they are both very fast and detailed. I would not say they were warm but to me warm is almost a negative, I think of rolled off highs and fat bass. Rotel makes the music sound like the band is on Valuim or playing with a bad hang over in comparison. Honestly if you like Rotel then I would not recommend the Arcam or Creek however the few Creek's I've heard did give an empression they are slightly warmer.. Rotel had a pleasant delivery but made my cd's sound sluggish and lacked dynamics. I'm used to the slam of Krell and Arcam, some people aren't into that and that's fine, I just didn't want you to go on my recommendation and not be happy. NAD has gone through many phases over the years so you really have to know their product, one year may be a good run where the next they are under different management or ownership and the gear will be different. I always thought NAD presented a very thin sound. I really don't know of anything to recommend that would be a cheaper alternative to Rotel since I really don't gravitate in that direction. Maybe the Marantz you mentioned or a Yamaha. Adcom may work but I think would be out of your price range. Adcom would be somewhere between Rotel and Arcam, they are still fast but give a big bass sound.

I have emailed spearitsound on some things and they seem very knowledgeable. They have almost every high end line you can imagine. They do a lot of Ebay sales and have good standing. Although I haven't bought from them yet, I wouldn't be afraid to deal with them.

Even though your speakers are 4 ohm, I'd think they would still be easy to drive with such a high efficiency rating.

[RGA]

Mr. Peabody hears it the EXACT same way I do. Rotel is laid back even bland. Arcam Is fast and tight and Creek is a bit warm. It's the Rotel Preamp section I'm not a fan of - though I have not heard the new RA-2.

The 320Bee has a huge following from NAD and may be one of the class leaders.

Thi might help you find some demo models... http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_list.asp?category=AMP&subcategory=INTGR

[topspeed]

Thanks for the heads up guys! I wouldn't necessarily characterize "warm" as rolled off highs and flabby bass; that sounds more like how people generalize tubes. "Warm" to me is detailed but not at the expense of musicality. It's hard to explain. Some systems have so much detail that they aren't particularily enjoyable to listen to anymore. I'm not talking about bright, etched, or overly aggressive highs, simply a loss of the cohesiveness of music. Like I said, it's hard to explain.

Thanks for the link RGA. Interestingly enough, it does seem that they like Rotel more often than not.

The search goes on!

[RGA]

To be fair though that is a UK site. So you should factor in that it costs more in North America. They gave the Bryston B60 a 3 star rating but that has more to do with the fact that the price doubled in the UK market and was twice as much as the Sugden A21a...no contest. Yet over here the A21a and the Bryston are about the same price...which helps the Bryston a great deal.

I have not heard the small Arcam's.

Why not buy a used rotel power amp and a good inexpensive preamp?

[noddin0ff]

As another suggestion, how about the Cambridge Audio Azur 540A? It runs $349 on Audio Advisor. 50 wpc into 8 ohms, 80 wpc into 4 ohms. Wireless remote, defeatable tone controls, two sets of binding posts, detachable IEC. Sonically, I don't know how it would compare against the NAD. The build quality looks better.

I've had the Azur 540A in my office for two weeks now driving a pair of Paradigm MiniMonitors v.3. The source is my humble Apple PowerBook G3 (Pismo) outputing via USB to a Griffin iMic. It's near impossible to find specks on the DAC in the iMic, It's obviously not the best but probably on par with most brand name consumer players. It took about a week to break in all components. I can't really do A/B comparisons, I have the Paradigm Reference line at home and some Titans so I'm fairly familiar with the limitations of these speakers. I'll give you my impressions on the Azur.

First, it looks great and is nice and solid. I have the black version. Its layout is simple, intuitive, and has the great big volume control, Everything feels good to the touch and visually the little pinpoint 'azur' indicator lights are totally cool and tasteful. The binding posts were probably the least satisfying part. They are not super solid; realistically though, you attach your wires and leave them alone so how solid do they need to be? The remote is very stylish and will switch inputs. It'll run other Cambridge components. The 540A has bass and treble defeat, balance, a/b speaker, and direct bypass. Again all the controls look and feel good. Oh, and a headphone jack I haven't tried yet.

A lot of people complain that Paradigms are bright. I actually prefer that sound, to me it adds detail to strings. Probably, I, like most men, don't hear high frequencies as well... With the Azur they don't seem as bright. The sound is a little less pushed, and more comfortable...like a good pair of shoes. This could be the amp, OR maybe the white noise from the air in the office could be hiding the bright edge a bit. I listen to jazz, classical, and alternative. Everything comes through just fine. The Azur seems confident without being pushy, perfect for the office. I couldn't justify a more expensive component, I really love my music, but how critical can your listening get in an office? There's more noise there than you think!

The price was right for me. The Azur provides more quality than a similar priced receiver. I looks real nice in the office. The power range is perfect. I think it was a good buy. I would characterize it as warm and confident, but I'm comparing it to my bias for a Yamaha/Paradigm combo.

2 cents

Noddin0ff

[Mike That Likes Music]

Topspeed,
I'm not nearly up to the level of product comparison that most of these guys are, but I'll throw my encouragement behind those in the Cambridge camp. I have an A500, bought from Audio Advisor for $295 (same deal as the erstwhile dean martin, I'm sure). I'm using it to drive a pair of JMLabs Chorus 710s. The Chorus' are 8 ohm speakers, rated to recieve 60W RMS and 80W peak, so I have no need to turn up the volume much. Even for my loud nasty rock 'n roll moments, it has oodles of power to spare.
Prior to my getting the Chorus' though, I was using the A500 to drive a pair of Mission bookshelf speakers. There was no model #, but they were the speakers that came with the old Denon/Mission systems. They were 6 ohm speakers rated at 75W RMS, 100W peak, and again I never had to turn the volume up above the 9 o'clock position to get anything I wanted from it.
As for characterising sound, my keyword is "smooth". Everything on the recording is evident, but even so-so recordings (of which I own many) sound pretty decent. So maybe slightly "forgiving" too.
One thing I do love about this amp is that it sounds wonderful at low levels. My old amp had to be going above conversation level before it would really start to sing. This one is great at every level and with every bit of music or film audio that has passed through it. Happy hunting. :)

Mike

[topspeed]

Thanks for the replies Noddin and Mike. How long have you guys had your units running now and have you had any problems? Because of Dean's experiences, I had pretty much written off CA and it has become a two horse battle between the NAD and Rotel RA02. As shallow as this sounds, I'm having a bit of trouble coming to grips with NAD aesthetics, or rather the lack thereof. Geez, do they make ANYTHING that looks good?? OTOH, I love the style of the CA and Rotel. Still, sound and especially quality overcome looks in my book any day of the week. This unit is going to be on for pretty much 12 hrs a day, 5 days a week and it has to up to snuff.

Thanks for the input.

[dean_martin]

I didn't give up on CA. I've found that putting together a good system often comes with some inconvenience. As long as you get good service, it's often worth the minor disappointments. Here are some of my experiences. I have an AMC cd8b cd player. The first unit I received from audio advisor had problems reading discs. It would come up "no disc" on the first try just about every time I loaded a disc. I sent it back at their expense, received a new unit, no problems since. I've already described my prior experience with a CA cd player - the D300. I got this fixed under warranty through audiolab and wouldn't trade it for anything in it's price range. It's the perfect complement to my NAD integrated and NHT SuperOnes in my bedroom system. In my main system, I blew an Acurus A100 power amp the first time I tried it. I got it repaired through Mondial/Klipsch with no problems since. When it blew, it took out the midrange driver in my left Acoustic Energy speaker. I had had the AEs for almost 2 yrs. I called audiolab (where I bought them) and they got it fixed under warranty. I added a Pro-ject turntable for my main system after my old Dual died. It immediately produced a hum in one channel. After trouble-shooting according to Sumiko's recommendations, I sent it back. They attempted a repair and sent it back, but they didn't fix it. It had the same problem. Then, they sent me a new one.

After these experiences, the CA A500 with the hum problem was only a minor inconvenience ("patience, grasshoppa"). Audio Advisor gave me a good deal on the Azur 540A as a replacement. Newer model, but less power for $4 more. We received it yesterday. It looks so much better than the old A series. It has a headphone jack and its remote is probably the coolest of all budget component remotes. My son and I stayed up later than usual last night listening to Grant Green's "Idle Moments." When I turned it off to tell him good night he said, "Hey! What are you doing? Can I borrow that cd?" All is well.

[noddin0ff]

Personally, I give the good looks award to the Azur. It also has the lower list price. I was also considering Parasounds Zpre and Zamp separates for the small footprint... to add another option to the mix. I didn't audition any of the above. Just went with reviews and ordered the Azur online. I like it, had it almost a month. On some of my better recordings the sound is really really nice. My impressions haven't changed much, warm. comfortable, confident. I did see this comparative review between the NAD and the Rotel if you like (links below). Also a link to a What Hi Fi Azur review and finally, I have a pdf of a Hi-Fi Choice Feb 04 review of the Azur that I can't find the link for.If you send me an email at *my username below* @yahoo.com and I will forward it back to you. It makes a brief statement of preference for the Azur..."The Cambridge has a more weighty sound than much of the similarly-priced competition from brands like NAD and Rotel, which don’t have quite the same finesse in terms of building tension." For whatever that means...Nothing like completely subjective and vague opinions to clarify an issue. :-)

http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/885/index1.html
http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/885/index2.html
http://www.everestaudio.com/reviews-cambridge-audio.htm

Have fun!

Noddin0ff

[topspeed]

Thanks for your impressions and links. I take a look.

[psonic]

greetings,

here's a good site for refurb NAD amps with 1yr warr, like c320bee for $279.... the c370 may be good for your 2 8" drivers also...

http://www.yawaonline.com/amplifiers.html

[noddin0ff]

a thread from another forum where NAD and Cambridge are discussed

http://forum.ecoustics.com/bbs/messages/1/10807.html

noddin0ff

[topspeed]

Well, I just ordered the Azure 540a & 540c cd player from my dealer that sold me the VSA's. I'm taking a leap of faith here as even AudioAdvisor admitted there were quality problems with the previous gen 300 & 500a(?) Cambridge integrateds. They told me that the new Azure line has completely different transformers which is where the qc problems manifested. I'm also intrigued by the Wolfson dac's (as oppossed to the Crystal dac's in the 300) in the new 540c. While I originally thought all dac's should sound the same, I've found thru experience that this is indeed untrue.

Thanks to everyone for your advice and opinions as once again, this place proved an invaluable resource. I can't believe how hard it was to pick an integrated for a simple office system but I guess that shows how fanatical (or is it deranged?) we call all be when it comes to this crazy hobby. Bottom line, I simply couldn't pass up the deal my guy gave me: $530 for both. It would have been $700 thru AudioAdvisor. Tough to pass up, no?

If anyone's interested, I'll post impressions after break-in, which in my office will take about 3 days after everything comes in.

Thanks again and have a great weekend.

[Geoffcin]

Well, I just ordered the Azure 540a & 540c cd player from my dealer that sold me the VSA's. I'm taking a leap of faith here as even AudioAdvisor admitted there were quality problems with the previous gen 300 & 500a(?) Cambridge integrateds. They told me that the new Azure line has completely different transformers which is where the qc problems manifested. I'm also intrigued by the Wolfson dac's (as oppossed to the Crystal dac's in the 300) in the new 540c. While I originally thought all dac's should sound the same, I've found thru experience that this is indeed untrue.

Thanks to everyone for your advice and opinions as once again, this place proved an invaluable resource. I can't believe how hard it was to pick an integrated for a simple office system but I guess that shows how fanatical (or is it deranged?) we call all be when it comes to this crazy hobby. Bottom line, I simply couldn't pass up the deal my guy gave me: $530 for both. It would have been $700 thru AudioAdvisor. Tough to pass up, no?

If anyone's interested, I'll post impressions after break-in, which in my office will take about 3 days after everything comes in.


Thanks again and have a great weekend.

Congrats dude!

I'm sure your going to love the new equipment. Keep us up to date on how it sounds. and also how it changes as it breaks in.