Cambridge 650A / NAD C326 System Matching.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.
A

Anonymous

Guest
Well, I've finally bought a 740A. I connected it up last night and I'm delighted to report that it has the dynamic punch I most wanted, very different to the Rotel.

My first impression wasn't great though but this doesn't seem to be a fault of the amp. I played a couple of CDs to start with and got a fairly dry treble and laid-back performance (like a record rotating slightly below the correct speed). I remember thinking "Oh no, not again". I then played my cassette copy of Magical Mystery Tour on the Yamaha deck just to make sure the connections in the back were OK, and this time the sound was noticeably different. The drums of the title track had the required leading edge and there was no particular dryness in the top end. I powered up the tuner and the song being broadcast was again dynamic and toe-tapping.

Lastly I spun some LPs on the RPM4 (the one unit that had sounded the least exciting in the old setup) and the results were fantastic. On Rubber Soul the voices had an "in the room" presence and even with a basically constructed track like Kraftwerk's Computer World I was hearing detail I hadn't noticed before, there was plenty of kick and the treble was fine.

I don't know why the Arcam sounds so different from the rest. I'll try swapping the interconnect to see if that makes a difference. It's the only peripheral not to have a Qunex cable (it has an XLO/Pro type 125 which came free when I bought it). I'd be surprised if an interconnect could affect punch and treble response that much though. Still, no harm in giving it a try.

The 740A manual states that it needs a week's run in period (if used for several hours a day).Can this be achieved in mute mode or does it have to be driving the speakers at volume for the electronics to bed in? It also says that the sonic properties will improve over this time. I'm curious to know what differences I'm likely to perceive compared to what I'm hearing now?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Not much into running-in solid state gear imho, but I did it anyway.

I suppose it's best to have it playing material and driving something (or use a test tone). If you're doing something like this, you might as well go full-stop and eliminate the what ifs.

Good luck. :)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Well, it looks as if I'll be returning the 740A after all (within the 7 working days required by Richer Sounds) which is surprising considering my last post.

I'm sorry to say that on closer listening, and giving it more critical attention, it seems that the CD player was fine all along and now the other hardware is falling into place with it. The treble is definitely too dry and thin coming through the Focals, which is a shame because the punch I needed is certainly there. My local Richer Sounds hasn't got a listening room so I had to go by the reviews I found trawling the web, but these are obviously no substitute for auditioning (which I now appreciate much better).

I recall reading a comment somewhere on the forum about how some Cambridge amps can sound thin in the upper strings and when playing jazz or classical music I can certainly hear it. My idea of the term 'brightness' was of a kind of sparkly richness in the treble but that's definitely not the case here and after several day's running-in it doesn't seem to be changing. I also thought it's clinical approach would suit my musical tastes but instead I find that I'm missing the colour and character my old amps provided. Having heard this contrast I can understand now the difference in richness and realism that character can engender.

I'm sure that with different speakers the 740A would be absolutely fine but with the 714Vs it's just not working. I think I'll have to go back to the drawing board and commit myself to forking out a couple of hundred quid extra for an amp with a fuller and maybe even a warmer sound, like the 840A or something from another company. The Rotel that I have has a sweet treble and a rich 'fat' sound but there's just no guts there so it still has to go.

Six years after getting into hi-fi separates I'm still struggling to get it right!
 
T

the record spot

Guest
Join the club; it took me about a year and a half of trying various amps before I went back to a late 1970s Sansui. This has clout, power, tonal quality and makes music sound like music. Have you considered a NAD 370? Or an Arcam Alpha 10? Both about a decade old, but you should be able to get both for around £250 each (try a Buy It Now on Ebay for instance). Stereophile did good reviews on them a while back. Terrific amps for the money at full price and no slouch even given their age now.
 

matthewpiano

Well-known member
Your description of the 740A is spot on in terms of what I found on two seperate occasions of owning one. It is a very fine piece of kit but tonally it can be on the 'white' side.

I still think you should look at NAD again. See if you can hear a C355BEE. What I love about my NAD is that all the instrumental colour comes through without it ever sounding muddled or lacking in attack/excitement. NAD really know how to make a great amplifier.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Yes I'll certainly have to start looking at alternatives but I'm willing to fork out for something in the mid-range price band. Having looked at the reviews of the 840A though I don't think that's going to suit me either. I guess what I'd be looking for now is something with the richness of the Rotel sound but the punch of the 740A. I might take a second look at the Rotel RA-1520.

Since Cambridge amps are off the radar at least I can use my local Audio Excellence to audition the next one before I part with any cash. I'll have to draw up a list of 'possibles' but I must be honest I usually find that kit sounds great in a dedicated listening room yet completely different when I get it home. The Rotel actually sounded quite toe-tapping during that audition, but perhaps the high volume acted as a mask and gave me a false impression.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Hi Matthew.

The term 'white' sums it up well. In my second review I was going to use the word 'bland' but I thought that might be a bit harsh, but as you say it does indeed have that colourless characteristic. It's a good idea for an amp to allow a piece of music to play true to the original recording but I found that in practice this neutrality was making everything sound a bit samey rather than permitting each composition to have its own feel and identity.

There were plenty of postings on the forum about such things but I suppose I'm guilty of only regarding the parts I wanted to hear because I'd already made my mind up. Not the first time I've done that I'm afraid!
 

izpuuteejs

Well-known member
Jun 15, 2009
13
0
18,520
Visit site
I am using C355BEE with Focals 816V. Sounds good,very realistic midrange,and plenty of bottom end as said in NAD355 WHF team review.

I've also heard the 714's with the same amp,in general sound was the same,most noticeable difference was in bass production.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
izpuuteejs:

I am using C355BEE with Focals 816V. Sounds good,very realistic midrange,and plenty of bottom end as said in NAD355 WHF team review.

I've also heard the 714's with the same amp,in general sound was the same,most noticeable difference was in bass production.

Thanks! I've heard a lot of good things about the NAD sound and their amps will definitely be on my audition list when the time comes.
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts