matthewpiano said:
That is totally unfair, and inaccurate.
Arcam is now owned by the Canadian company JAM, though (like Cambridge) it is still headquartered in the UK. The fact that some components are made in the UK doesn't automatically make them great. British manufacturing is generally nothing to shout about.
Cambridge have had their occasional reliability issues, but so have Arcam and most other brands. They don't use cheap parts but actually pride themselves on using the best quality parts possible for the price, which is all anyone can do.
Both companies make some very fine equipment and there is no reason why they should not come up against each other in a comparative audition.
Yes, I was expecting such type of disagreements.
I have already owned some Cambridge and Arcam's products and opened all of them to check their built quality.
All Arcam's products that I have opened adopted high quality parts, like Japanese capacitors, including expensive OS CON polymer capacitors in digital circuits (ARCAM CD 73), Japan made Rubycon, Nichicon and Elna electrolitic capacitors on filtering and PSU stages, Japanese Fujitsu Takamisawa relays (A65 and A85), German Wima MKP and MKT capacitors and high quality European made transformes.
How about Cambridge? Well, I used to own Cambridge Magic DAC and the integrated amplifiers A5, 740A and 640A V2. I also removed the cover of a 840A V2 that I tested for a week at home. I have to agree those ampflifiers were bigger and more powerful than similary priced products of other brands, but Cambridge Audio had to made trade offs to price them competitively. All capacitors used in their projects were Chinese made and their brands were not identifiable. High quality custom made parts, like those adopted by Luxman, Esoteric and Accuphase? Certainly not! I do believe they all came underneath Cambridge's cover to hide their low reliability origin. I used to be an electronic technician and, despite not working in this area any longer, I haven't forgot what I learnt. None of Cambridge's product that I analised were reliable due to adoption of low quality parts, most of them from unknown Chinese suppliers, certainly for cost savings matters.
I remember a hot discussion about Cambridge's products reliability about 8 years ago in a Brazilian forum. Myself and some respected electronic technicians pointed the low quality of parts used on Cambridge's Azur. Switch selectors, potentiometer, electrolitic caps and relays were pointed the main concern as regards reliability. Obiviously, most Cambridge's product owners got offended by our observations, but the ages to come showed the truth. I've have seen lots of issues with Cambridge amplifiers since then.
Sonically, some of them, like 640A V2 and 840A V2 integrated amps, do sound fine. Also, I enjoy Cambridge Magic DAC. It does sound great. But frankly speaking, excepting the latter, I wouldn't keep them much longer because of high risk of failure in the long run.
No product is unbreakable and some Cambridge's product may not sound better than ARCAM's, but the risky of break downs of the latter in 10 years time is much lower. The former's products are not made to last longer than 5 years in fact.