Cambridge Audio Azur 540A VS. NAD C320 BEE

[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

[Feanor]

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.

[Walker]

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

[topspeed]

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.

[Walker]

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

[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 :confused:

[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.

[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.

[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!

[Walker]

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

[topspeed]

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

[noddin0ff]

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

[Peter_Klim]

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?

[topspeed]

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.

[Peter_Klim]

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?

[topspeed]

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?


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.

[noddin0ff]

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

[robin_v]

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.

[Peter_Klim]

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).

[Peter_Klim]

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).

[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)

[Peter_Klim]

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 :( )

[Walker]

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

[Peter_Klim]

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.

[topspeed]

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.

[hertz]

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.

[noddin0ff]

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

[Tons of Fun]

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

[Walker]

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

[Walker]

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

[noddin0ff]

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

[topspeed]

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.

[Walker]

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

[hertz]

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.

[Tons of 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.

[hertz]

If "Tons of fun" who knows technical stuff on CA is correct, you will need a more powerfull amp.The power of the amp is not going to improve on break in.I would strongly suggest you try out the NAD 320bee before you spend money on big beefy amps.The power it generates is awesome and it is high current.It clearly beat 100 watt amps from Nakamichi and Yamaha when I last auditioned it.Don't let the size fool you.Make sure you have atleast 16 guage high quality speaker wire though.

[psonic]

"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?"

I don't think it will improve much more, though it could suprise you...I also don't think B&W is very efficient, like say a paradigm or klipsch. FWIW, I have seen the nad 320bee online refurbished for $279, with 1yr warranty. You could always order that and do an in-home comparison, selling the lesser on ebay or audiogon. Just an idea...

[psonic]

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

[Tons of Fun]

If "Tons of fun" who knows technical stuff on CA is correct, you will need a more powerfull amp.

Or with my sales hat on, he needs more sensitive speakers :)

[Walker]

Hi All,
I played many different types of music yesterday and came to the conclusion that it’s a great amp for well recorded music but it shows NO MERCY for a lot of older cd’s. It’s incredible how it went from great to awful. For example “Who’s Next” (The Who): I’ve never heard this cd so poorly (same with Queen, Joe Jackson and a lot of other older cd’s).
I’m used to the (older) HK sound witch puts a good camouflage net over poorly recorded cd’s. On the other end, well recorded cd’s sound excellent. I played some Tosca and Kruder & Dorfmeister and I was very happy.
The volume issue doesn’t bother me, I just turn it up more.
I'm definitely not going to sell my B&W's and I don’t think I will sell the CA anytime soon.
My conclusion so far: Great amp for well recorded music but imo not an all-rounder.
Walker

[noddin0ff]

Walker,

Good news! I sympathize. I'm slowly upgrading with remastered CD's (Look Sharp!, e.g.). Try to remind yourself that its not that poor CD's sound bad, it that good ones are allowed to really shine, something your HK wasn't doing...

Cheers!

noddin0ff

[Walker]

Noddin you're right I will remind myself.
Does the remastered Look Sharp sound a lot better cause my old Look Sharp (and I'm the man) sound horrible.
W.

[Peter_Klim]

Or with my sales hat on, he needs more sensitive speakers :)

I second that!

Unless you loooooooooooooove the way the speakers sound (Q wise, not SPL wise).
But if your lesser-brand-old-amp had the same or less power (can't recall what you wrote) and played louder, that makes NO sense as to what's going on with the CA.

Have you ever told us what happens when you crank it up til it starts to distort - is it to your liking? Is it loud? What position is it at?


Maybe you need, dare I say it...an EQ? ...Wait, on your HK, did you use the tones controls alot? Maybe that's why your not happy w/the CA's lack of UMPH!

Some people, including me, may know what equipment is "good" but that doesn't mean we know what we hear sounds "good" and what doesn't (I haven't auditioned enough to know what is super good. But mostly I have not auditioned live and "unplugged" "musicians" to know what live music sounds like. So I usually listen to vocals to determine what sound like the person is right in fron of me). I mean honestly, if we all truely knew what the "best" sound is, we would less likely, in "many" but not all case, ask someone elses opinion on what to get.

Case in point, my brother still "thinks" Bose 301's (that he returned) sounds better than his Silver series Monitor Audio speakers (that I picked up for him as a replacement). CLEARRRRLY he is wrong! So what I am saying is that maybe you are opinion of the sound the CA delivers is of a lesser quality than your other amps. If you listened to the source of the music (a live performance w/o loud speakers and amplifiers), then you would understand that the CA sounds more like the real thing than the HK?

Please do not be offended. I'm only stating a possibility of what is going on.

How bout trying the amp on a friends sytem?

[Walker]

Hi peter,
The onkyo I used is 2x 100 and the hk is 5x75. I know the ca is better than the other 2 (both receivers), I can hear things I did not hear before. I think I just expected to much of this amp but it's a fine amp and very affordable.
I do believe my B&W speakers are in another league and I will upgrade amps in the future. I bought these speakers recently after a lot of research, forums and try outs and I'm sure they are the right ones for my taste.

I do hear a lot of live music and don't expect to come close to that kind of sound with a budget system.
I guess the quest for better is not over … hooray.
Thanks for your reactions,
W.

[topspeed]

Noddin you're right I will remind myself.
Does the remastered Look Sharp sound a lot better cause my old Look Sharp (and I'm the man) sound horrible.
W.Walker, you've got good taste in music my man. Check out JJ's Jumpin' Jive if you haven't already. Remastered on Amazon for $10.99 and a helluva fun disc.

Enjoy!

[Geoffcin]

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.


Your amp is now giving your speakers what you feed it. The fact that there's less bottom end is not because your amp is not driving your speakers well, in fact it's driving them BETTER. What you used to think was good bass, was actually distortion caused by your old amps inability to control your woofer, allowing it to distort. This is a common problem with amps that have low damping factor. The fact the the drums sound better is a hallmark of a good amp.The sudden attack of a drum strike, and the shimmer of a cymble with mulitple harmonics are very difficult things to reproduce well.

With your speakers the amp is not really working unless your've got it really load. So if your worried about turning your volume up and "blowing" something don't. You want your speakers to rock? Turn up the VOLUME! You'll find that as it get's louder there's more apparent bass, as human hearing is very non-linear in the bass range. My guess, and it's an educated one, as my buddy has the same speakers as you do for surrounds, is that your speakers will ROCK is your just turn it up a bit.

[hertz]

Synergy is a big factor in achieving good audio.B&W 's are not very easy to drive speakers. Although they are specified to be around 90 db I have found them to be very difficult to drive unless you have lots of high current power.The dealer whom I know uses high power Rotel amps with them.They drive them perfectly well. Why don't you do an home demo of any high power amps like the Nad c 372, higher powered CA amps or some Rotel high power amps to drive away all the doubts that you have...

[noddin0ff]

Look Sharp! sounds great. Really, well, for lack of a better word...sharp! The remaster puts back a lot more of the punk punch. I upgraded that one from cassette so no question it was better. Now, thanks to Topspeed, I'm going to have to go and drop some bills on Jumpin' Jive, again, (a desert island top 10 in my opinion). In general, just about every remaster from the 80's sounds better. The first issues were seldom well done. I actually bough two Police Ghost in the Machine CDs several years apart that sounded way worse than cassette. I'm still p*ssed about that. Did it ever get done right?

I don't know how many Jazz fans are reading (but since we're drifting off topic anyway). Some worth while remasters of some must haves include 1) Miles Davis Kind of Blue, 2) Dave Brubeck Take Five, and my personal fave Charles Mingus Mingus Ah Um. All worth the upgrade. The Bonus Tracks on Ah Um are good.

noddin0ff

[Walker]

I used the CA 540a for over a week now and I'm still bouncing between happy and miserable. Sometimes the sound is annoying and I have to play another cd. Tonight I’m going to do a (semi blind ) test with some friend. I’m going to compare the CA to my Onkyo and HK. I now know exactly witch cd’s sound good and bad on this amp so I’m curious to find out if I’m getting crazy or not.
I’ll report on my test tomorrow.
Maybe I’m just not worthy.
Walker

[topspeed]

Good luck and remember what Geoff said: You're hearing the truth.

As your rig becomes more and more revealing and transparent, it becomes less forgiving, especially of sh!tty recordings. It's a double edged sword my friend. The payoff is when you hear great recordings where you not only hear the music but are emotionally involved with it. Overly romanticized? Not at all, I'm dead serious. You'll know it when you hear it.

BTW, you're not going crazy. If anything, the wool has finally been removed from your eyes (ok, ears).

[Walker]

You're right Topspeed it's a double edged sword.
Overall the CA beat the other two by far, now there is no way back. I can't believe I enjoyed the sound of HK for so long. The clarity and detail of the CA is incomparable to the other two amps (HK 75w & Onkyo 100w).
Though the Onkyo sounded rather stiff compared to the CA (at higher volume) the sound of the Onkyo was more pleasing and embracing at low volumes. The CA sounds very petite at low volumes. My conclusion: I like the CA but I don’t love it, my goal for the future is to find an amp that has the clarity, air and detail of the CA but also has the ability to sound convincing at low volume levels (more body).
Any suggestions?
Walker

[topspeed]

You're right Topspeed it's a double edged sword.
Overall the CA beat the other two by far, now there is no way back. I can't believe I enjoyed the sound of HK for so long. The clarity and detail of the CA is incomparable to the other two amps (HK 75w & Onkyo 100w).
Though the Onkyo sounded rather stiff compared to the CA (at higher volume) the sound of the Onkyo was more pleasing and embracing at low volumes. The CA sounds very petite at low volumes. My conclusion: I like the CA but I don’t love it, my goal for the future is to find an amp that has the clarity, air and detail of the CA but also has the ability to sound convincing at low volume levels (more body).
Any suggestions?
Walker
nt....

[Walker]

$1000 max.

[Geoffcin]

You've got to consider your budget first. With amps, you hit the point of diminishing returns pretty quick. I would happily trade in my Musical Fidelity A3cr amp for the TriVista line, but it's more than 3x the price! Even then it wouldn't be the big difference you get jumping from a receiver to a decent amp.

I've also got the same problem with my setup at low listening levels. The real problem comes from your HEARING responce, not your amp. At low levels your hearing is markedly non-linear. Low frequancy hearing responce especially suffers at low volume. Loudness controls offered on recievers are designed to compensate for this, although the "Midnight" setting on my Pioneer receiver seems to do even a better job, as it includes compression in addition to bass & treble boost.

I've got a novel approch that I've recently done on my system that you might consider;

I'm sending the preamp out on my reciever to my seperate audio preamp. A simple switch to VIDEO on my audio preamp and I'm using the input from my reciever, instead of the direct input from the CD player. It's not nearly as "audio pure" as the CD direct into the preamp, but it gives me a chance to process the signal. I've used it to good effect, and it also allows me to use ALL my speakers when I'm playing DVD's.

[topspeed]

Well obviously, this would be my first choice:
http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?ampstran&1093932250

If you browse a'gon, you'll find a veritable cornucopia of options although the ones that caught my eye were Threshold (bias alert: I like Nelson Pass designs), Plinius, Bryston, Krell, Proceed (aka Mark Levinson), and Parasound Halo (not HCA). Amps are usually pretty safe buys when purchased used because there are no moving parts and audiophiles usually take better care of their equipment than they do their spouse.

If you want to buy used, it's very tough to beat Rotel under $1K imo. B&K, Adcom, and Parasound are also right there so it may come down to system synergy. Rotel and B&W play very well together.

Enjoy what you've got for now. Ms. Upgrade is a seductive little minx...

she's also a b!tch :cool:

[hertz]

For the price this is one amp that is hard to beat. awesome power, amazing clarity, capable of instantaneous high current burst of 1000w at 1 ohm....Play some Jazz with lots dynamic swings at high vol levels and you will see why this is important.This amp has a class A preamp too.It has a second pre out which can be used to add another power amp if you want to biamp.

[Walker]

I must say that the CA is growing on me. I used the biwire cables that came with the speakers and it seems that the low end is quite a bit bigger . Especially at low levels it sounds better. I don't know if it's my imagination or not but who cares (it's a little scary to talk about cables on this forum).
I do wonder about my biwire cables, I have 4 rca’s per speaker (low and high) but they come together to just 2 rca’s, so what is the difference?????
Thanks for the advice on future upgrades.
Walker

[matt39]

Your cables are set up in standard biwiring mode. You have one connection at each amp terminal which splits into two connections at the speaker terminals. I also agree with hertz about upgrading to the NAD C370 (or C372 by the time you're ready). It's a good match with your speakers. I'd stick with the Cambridge for a while though. You seem to be enjoying it more as time passes and it is a very good integrated.

[slate1]

Congrats Walker,

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!

You can use banana's on the Cambridge Amps (although I still agree that the binding posts area crap....). The small circular "plug" in the end of the post will come out but you'll have to get something like a thin knife blade to pry them loose. Once the end-cap has been removed, they will accept banana plugs - I've got mine hooked up this way but had to call the vendor I purchased the amp from in order to learn how to do it and the manual speaks nothing of it.

I've had the 640A for a few months now and am really enjoying it - just hope it lasts for a while. I've been reading about some reliability issues.

[topspeed]

You can use banana's on the Cambridge Amps (although I still agree that the binding posts area crap....). The small circular "plug" in the end of the post will come out but you'll have to get something like a thin knife blade to pry them loose. Once the end-cap has been removed, they will accept banana plugs - I've got mine hooked up this way but had to call the vendor I purchased the amp from in order to learn how to do it and the manual speaks nothing of it.

I've had the 640A for a few months now and am really enjoying it - just hope it lasts for a while. I've been reading about some reliability issues.
Hey Slate,

Thanks for the input. After posting, I later found that the Azur could indeed accept banana's from AudioPlus, the distributor. Unfortunately, the reason I was talking to the distributor was to check on the repair status of my 3 month old 540a (2+ weeks and counting). Hopefully my trials and tribulations are an aberration and you folks will have better luck. I still think the binding posts suck tho :D!

[slate1]

Man - I hate to hear you're having trouble with yours.... I'm hoping that I won't have any issues with my 640a. I love the amp - it sounds better than many other integrateds I've had including those from NAD, Creek, H/K, etc. I honestly couldn't be happier and my only complaints are the cheap volume knob and those damned binding posts. I can't imagine why they skimped on both of those after building such a nice piece of equipment.

[Geoffcin]

Hey Slate,

Thanks for the input. After posting, I later found that the Azur could indeed accept banana's from AudioPlus, the distributor. Unfortunately, the reason I was talking to the distributor was to check on the repair status of my 3 month old 540a (2+ weeks and counting). Hopefully my trials and tribulations are an aberration and you folks will have better luck. I still think the binding posts suck tho :D!

Enquiring minds wanna know.

I wonder if they know that hundreds of people are reading your posts about thier service?

[topspeed]

Enquiring minds wanna know.

I wonder if they know that hundreds of people are reading your posts about thier service?
Hey Geoff,

You know, I'm actually not slamming them. I shipped it UPS ground and it had to go all the way from Cali to NY so that alone probably chewed up 5 days or so. Mike at AudioPlus warned me before I shipped it that it was vacation time so it would take a bit longer. Well, the boy wasn't lyin'. As of yesterday, they said they were scheduled to look at it in the next few days. Hopefully, I'll have it up and running in another week or so. I'll let you guys know.

Man, I never realized how horrible my computer speakers were until this happened :p

[Geoffcin]

Hey Geoff,

You know, I'm actually not slamming them. I shipped it UPS ground and it had to go all the way from Cali to NY so that alone probably chewed up 5 days or so. Mike at AudioPlus warned me before I shipped it that it was vacation time so it would take a bit longer. Well, the boy wasn't lyin'. As of yesterday, they said they were scheduled to look at it in the next few days. Hopefully, I'll have it up and running in another week or so. I'll let you guys know.

Man, I never realized how horrible my computer speakers were until this happened :p

I think they are screwing you around already. If your dealer confermed that the unit was faultly, then the manufacturer should have authorized an immidiate replacment. If it's going to take another few weeks to get this sorted then they've really dropped the ball IMHO.

[topspeed]

Yeah, you're probably right. I guess because it's only used for my office rig, I just don't care that much. Most of the time I'm not even paying attention to the music anyway. Besides, Lord knows I've got bigger issues to deal with than a faulty amp.

[Uptown Audio]

We sell both Cambridge Audio and NAD products here. In response to the original poster's question, I find that his choice of amplifier was on the weak side. The Cambridge amps are fine, but they are not the last word in brute power, especially the smaller of the two. The small NAD amp, the C320BEE, has a nice, warm sound while still resolving details so it would have been a better choice at that level. For your particular speakers (another sore point IMO) I find that the NAD C352 would be the best choice. It is reasonably priced and is the best sounding of their integrated amplifiers, even the larger C372, IMO. It sounds like some of you have not had satisfactory experiences by choosing to buy products via mail, based upon review rather than to buy them locally after actually hearing them. The personal service and experience of buying from a competent local dealer would be well worth the "trouble" or "cost" considering what many of you have been through by avoiding it or simply "missing" it.

[noddin0ff]

Bill-

It would be a wonderful thing if everyone had access to a 'local' dealer that carried all makes and models. Mail order, however, is what many need to rely on to purchase components they desire, which is why forums and reviews are so important. I'm curious to know how you found the 320BEE and the 540A to compare. Frankly, I'm not interested in brute power. I'm more concerned with how the amps compare at low volumes. This seems to me to be a more demanding criteria. You say the BEE has a 'nice warm sound while still resolving details." That is pretty much exactly how I'd describe the 540A. You can read my review here at
http://www.audioreview.com/Integrated%20Amplifiers/Cambridge%20Audio/PRD_299477_2717crx.aspx

A lot of posters in this thread (and other threads) have described the sound of each component but few have been able to set up a blind A/B comparison with similar sources and speakers. It would be good to hear a complete informed review of how they compare. If you do post one, I would think it deserved a new thread since many have asked for this comparison.

noddin0ff

[kimchee411]

For the price (< $1k) this is one amp that is hard to beat. awesome power, amazing clarity, capable of instantaneous high current burst of 1000w at 1 ohm....Play some Jazz with lots dynamic swings at high vol levels and you will see why this is important.This amp has a class A preamp too.It has a second pre out which can be used to add another power amp if you want to biamp.

My vote in the sub-$1k (used) category would go to the Classe CAP-80/100. Of course, I've been a sucker for Classe's lush, silky smooth sound ever since I heard a pair of CAM-200s on Sonus Faber Signums (*drool*)... absolutely gorgeous with Jazz/Classical/instrumentals.

I used to have an NAD C350 and it was a very good amp for rock - clean and lean with great, tight bass, but a little too grainy and bright for the more refined stuff (the brightness factor really came into play with SACD, especially w/the Axiom M3Tis I used with it).

The Arcam Delta 290/Alpha 10 is a very well-balanced integrated (a smidgen toward the warmer side) for various types of music and a superb bargain, ~$350-400 for the D290, but they are hard to find these days and the build quality is a bit questionable.

Having been caught up in this audio obsession for a few years now and going through a number of amps/loudspeakers/subwoofers/cables/headphones/sources there are a couple of things I've realized. Among them are: 1) You'll never be completely satisfied, and 2) different gear produces different TYPES of sound (one not necessarily "better" than another), which are in turn better suited for different types of music, so select according to what areas you really want to shine or where you're willing to make sacrifices (at least in the "budget" realm).

[anamorphic96]

Does the 540a offer pre-amp outputs to upgrade later. The CA site makes no mention of this but looking on the back of the unit it looks like it has jacks for this.

I have been unhappy with the way my new Marantz receiver does music so im looking back into getting an integrated. How do you think the CA 540a will match with Paradigm Studio 40's. I have heard a few mention the CA integrated amps have some glare in the top end.

Any input would be great.

Cheers,
Glenn

[topspeed]

Does the 540a offer pre-amp outputs to upgrade later. The CA site makes no mention of this but looking on the back of the unit it looks like it has jacks for this. Yes, the 540a has pre-outs.


I have been unhappy with the way my new Marantz receiver does music so im looking back into getting an integrated. How do you think the CA 540a will match with Paradigm Studio 40's. I have heard a few mention the CA integrated amps have some glare in the top end. I haven't noticed any glare or hardness, and my speakers have an aggressive top end. In fact, when demo'ing amps I specifically searched for amps that had a neutral, if not warm sound that wouldn't exagerrate the semi-horn loaded tweeters, a problem I've had with other amps. Don't get me wrong, it's not warm or tube-like in the least. I'd just say it's neutral in color and does a great job, especially for the price. If your speakers are v2's, I think it'd be a good match as I found the v2 tweeter could get a little ragged at the extremes. Borrow one from your dealer and see how they play together. That's really the only way to really tell. BTW, make sure the unit is well broken in because the CA sounds horrible straight out of the box.

[anamorphic96]

Well I brought both amps home and spent two days comparing. Both units had been extensively broken in. The Cambridge 540a did sound very good and was a very smooth performer. The bass did not have the weight and authority that the NAD C320BEE has. The NAD had more body and was on the warmer side of neutral. With my speakers being a tad on the bright side, I found the NAD complimented my speakers better. I do like a good bit of electronic music and the extra bass weight works quite well.

Cheers,
Glenn

[Geoffcin]

Well I brought both amps home and spent two days comparing. Both units had been extensively broken in. The Cambridge 540a did sound very good and was a very smooth performer. The bass did not have the weight and authority that the NAD C320BEE has. The NAD had more body and was on the warmer side of neutral. With my speakers being a tad on the bright side, I found the NAD complimented my speakers better. I do like a good bit of electronic music and the extra bass weight works quite well.

Cheers,
Glenn

I'm actually in the market (again) for an amp, and from your review it looks like I'm going to have to check out the Cambridge 540a. My second HT system speakers can be a little too warm and bass heavy sometimes, and although my receiver powers them well, I'm a firm beliver in discreet amplification.

[anamorphic96]

They ditched the classic green button. What the hell. :p The volume knob is now gray. Hmm. I have actually always liked the understated look of NAD products. Its the whole wolf in sheeps clothing thing I appreciate. But the green button would have been nice. But im just being ridiculous though.

The capacitors are also black instead of the white I saw in some reviews. :confused: Im not to worried it still sounds fantastic. :D

Cheers,
Glenn

[texlle]

I have both the Cambridge A500 integrated but has been replaced by a Jolida tube amp because I found the cambridge to be a little too bright and over the top with the highs for my taste. I have heard nothing but good remarks about NAD stuff, so if you believe it sounds warmer, and you like the warm, full sound, go with the NAD.

[anamorphic96]

Well folks I returned the C320BEE and stepped up to the C352. I loved the 320 so much I had to listen to the others and 352 is a major upgrade. Not a big power jump but a substantial increase in control and focus. :) Includes and all metal chassis and ditches the plastic faceplate which is nice. Volume control seems a little cheap but other than that its great improvement in build quality. :D Oh and you get and extra set of pre outs as well. :p

Cheers.
Glenn

[Kaboom]

my vote in the sub1k category would be...
(drumroll)
A second hand adcom 5500 power amp. That will run you at least 600-700 hundreds, plus an extra hundred bucks for the interconnects.
i bought it yesterday because my 540a was struggling to drive my 84db Platinum Audio solos, specially at higher levels when the music was dynamically demanding (its amazing how the sound would collapse when Wagner had the whole orchestra going at once).
it gives you 200 watts of PURE class A power to drive almost ANYTHING in this planet, and i'm AMAZED by how much more open the sound is compared to the 540 alone. It resolves trebble wonderfully and the attack and decay of drums is even more wonerful now than when i went from my crappy reciever to the 540.
All in all, its a hefty pricetag, but in my opinion its well worth it. the soundstage is vastly improved too.
Keep in mind this is with what are considered to be reference bookshelf speakers (another wonderful second-hand buy), and that the B&Ws u have might behave slightly differently, but i'm REALLY pleased with the results.
Plus this allows me to save up for a nice tube preamp, and then sell the 540.
cheers!
(oh btw, it gets hotter than my radiator... i have one of those little paper spirals balanced on top of a pencil spiraling away atop one of the massive heatsinks... Ah, the joys and the worries of class A...)