2. amps-preamps
  3. 1075752517

Cambridge Audio Azure vs. NAD c320bee, c740

I need to replace my 20 year old Rotel receiver, which just stopped working. I have Mordaunt Short Pageant 2 speakers of the same age and a Rotel RCD950 CD player which is more recent. I also have Grado HP1000 headphones. I would like to spend under $400 and will consider pre-owned or refurbished units. I have narrowed down the choices to the NAD c320bee, cambridge audio Azur 640a or 540a integrated amps, or the NAD c740 receiver. Is the nad c320bee significantly better sounding than the c740? (if not, I would get the receiver to have the tuner capability). Are either/both cambridge amps better than the NADs? Finally, are the headphone capabilities significantly different between these models? Thank you in advance for your input.
hopecountryboy
coffeey's avatar
coffeey
363 posts
 
Hey all I can say if your cj stuff is up for sale,you need to check out your other stuff,or stick with the mid fi,its not high end,Al
joemazzaglia
19 posts
 
I do agree: 9 of 10 times, you do get what you pay for...

Not so much is "wrong" with the SA250. (I had a friend do some updates/fixes, and it has improved over the original, too.)

For the price, it just is not on-par with my Monarchy or Plinius equipment.

Also, at $2400 for the setup (Sc-26 and Sa-250), they are not near the value of the Cambridge 640a. We're talking about a $450-ish integrated vs. a $2400 preamp/amp here.

I'm not saying the Cambridge is a reference unit, just that it is VERY VERY good, especially at moderate volumes. It is also 100% devoid of noise, even with the knob at 90% full volume. Try that with the Sc-26 pre and Sa-250 amp (or even my $2000+, modded B&K preamp, unless it's on passive mode).

The CJ Sa250 IS much better than the CJ Sc26 preamp which I bought to accompany it. A simple,$90 Axiom passive preamp kicks the Sc-26 pre down the block. (Sorry CJ.)

The fact that Conrad chose to differentiate the series by calling it "Sonographe by Conrad Johnson" is proof in itself that CJ wished to seperate it from their Hi-Fi lines.

I will also agree that Arcam's Cd players are great! (As are most of Arcam's fine products.)

I'll have to say that the Rotel Cd 980 transport is a bargain "upper mid-fi" unit. It is also just my transport. My DAC was another $2k+ when new. My Rotel transport, though, has been heavily modded, and I will not get rid of it until it begins to smoke! It is almost there, unfortunately.

I'm not a huge fan of Rotel's preamps and amps, just their CD players (Phillips-based, basic, and good 75 ohm digital outputs).

It's funny that this thread is still generating replies! I was quite excited about the value of the 640a Cambridge back when I bought it. At $400-$500, nothing brand-new can best it. I still feel this way, but, as I said, it is not my reference! (We won't even go there...)

Joe Mazzaglia
Auricle Audio Design, NA
joe@auricleaudio.com
xeejeo4712
1 posts
 
well well well well
seen it, read it, bought it
yeah i am talking about the cambridge audio 640a and 640c.
you better give your ears to it, before you try something weird, as in not getting hold of these beauties at such a beautiful price.
i am satisfied, and my ears are good enough to see...ooops to hear the difference.
ojoi
More to discover