NAD 320BEE/Cambridge Azur 540A/Rotel RA01 with Mission M31i's??

 

New member
Username: Bjw_uk

United Kingdom

Post Number: 1
Registered: Apr-06
1st foray into HIFI:

I have bought a pair of Mission M31i bookshelves and am looking to team with an amp.

Bearing in mind budget and reseraching a little of reputation, I have selected the above 3 options as a partner for the missions (can get them all at a comparable price- the Rotel is ex-demo).

Given that I will be playing mp3's from my powerbook (presumably using my qunex j2p interconnect is the best way to do this???) with a view to purchasing a cd player when finances allow what would be the best option.

Any thoughts or opinions much appreciated!
 

Silver Member
Username: Dakulis

Spokane, Washington United States

Post Number: 888
Registered: May-05
All good options. I'd probably opt for the NAD, a little warmer sound but you should go listen for yourself if possible. Is the Azur 540 a v.2 or original, it does matter a bit.
 

New member
Username: Bjw_uk

United Kingdom

Post Number: 2
Registered: Apr-06
Its not marked as a V2 so am assuming its the original. What are the differences???

Many thanks for advice.
 

Silver Member
Username: Hawk

Highlands Ranch, CO USA

Post Number: 764
Registered: Dec-03
Ben:

v.2 of the Cambridge amp was recently released. I have not heard v.2, but I would not include the original Cambridge as a worthy contender for your system. I have yet to see anyone enthusiastic about it (other than one rather dense saleman who demo'ed it for me). I read one review where the reviewer said he found himself uncounsciously getting up and wandering off to do something else rather than listening to the music. I would use the word "uninvolving" to describe what I heard. If I read anything that says the v.2 has an improved sound, I will go back for another audition, but not until then.

I do think both the NAD and the Rotel are excellent amps and I don't think either would represent a bad choice, but you should check out the reviews done by Stereophile of both the NAD C320bee and the Rotel RA-02 (an -01 with a remote control). They liked the Rotel quite a bit, but it pales in comparison to the NAD which they felt was worthy of high dollar speakers. Here are the link to the two reviews both contained in this article by Art Dudley:
http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/885/index.html

I don't think you can go wrong with either amp, but the NAD seems to be the better unit (smoother sound and more power) and it does have a remote included (unlike the Rotel). Good luck.
 

New member
Username: Bjw_uk

United Kingdom

Post Number: 3
Registered: Apr-06
Many thanks for all the advice Hawk. I am hoping to spend next weekend listening to the options with my speakers and making a decision then.

Just as a little update, I have managed to find a Marantz PM7200 (used) in my price range. Am hoping to spend next weekend listening to the options but in the meantime has anyone got opinions of this amp give the missions i will be pairing it with???
 

Bronze Member
Username: Mrspeeed

Parts Unknown

Post Number: 37
Registered: Jun-04
Ben,

I have only heard Missions with Denon, Yamaha and Pioneer/Elite. I preferred the pioneer which IMHO has some same "warm" sound characteristics wise to NAD and Marantz. I think either of the NAD and Marantz will work out just fine. You should not have buyers remorse with either purchase.

 

Silver Member
Username: Dakulis

Spokane, Washington United States

Post Number: 898
Registered: May-05
I just purchased the CA 540C for a friend and before doing so, I reviewed the following reviews, which are no where as critical as Hawk's reviewer or his comments.

I'll report further after I listen to it with the NAD C320BEE and Alegria Audio Emma speakers. Dave.

http://202.186.86.35/audio/story.asp?file=/2005/5/5/audiofile/05azur


 

Bronze Member
Username: Ellison

Post Number: 49
Registered: Mar-05
Go for the Nad 320. Its more sound friendly and sweeter compared to Rotel. Rotel sounds forward. If dont have sensitive speaker, go for the 352.
 

Silver Member
Username: Hawk

Highlands Ranch, CO USA

Post Number: 775
Registered: Dec-03
Dakulis:

My original post was in response to the query about integrated amps, and my response was concerning the 540A, an integrated amplifier, and not about the 540C, which is a CD player. Your reviews concern the CD player, which I was not critical of.

This confusion is unquestionably understandable as it is Cambridge which has this incredibly stupid fixation on the number 540 (e.g., 540A, the 540C, the 540D, and the 540R, an integrated amp, a cd player, a dvd player and a receiver, respectively).
 

Silver Member
Username: Dakulis

Spokane, Washington United States

Post Number: 902
Registered: May-05
Hawk,

You are absolutely correctamundo and I apologize profusely for further mucking up Cambridge Audio'ss already mucked up model numbering conundrum. In any event, my friend is so far quite happy with the 540C, which is not the 540A, 540D or 540R. LOL

I will go and sin no more. And, if you believe that, I've got this here bridge I'd like to sell ya. Dave.
 

Silver Member
Username: Dakulis

Spokane, Washington United States

Post Number: 903
Registered: May-05
Shoot, I went over 900 posts, didn't realize it and missed the opportunity to celebrate. YAHOO!! OK, I'm done now.
 

Silver Member
Username: Hawk

Highlands Ranch, CO USA

Post Number: 785
Registered: Dec-03
Dakulis:

LOL!!!!
« Previous Thread Next Thread »



Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us