I’ve decided to put together my honest initial impressions of the Cambridge Audio CXA60 for posterity. My hope is to help other people decide whether to upgrade from a simple cheap “budget” AV amp to an “audiophile-grade” stereo amp like I did.
First, I don’t consider myself a serious audiophile. I just like to have a good quality experiences. Having little cash to spare, a few years back I set myself a relatively tight budget (audiophile equipment is expensive!) and bought a pair of mahogany Totem Acoustic Mites on sale at Bay Bloor Radio in Toronto. BBR really loves to push the Mites as their top-selling bookshelf speaker. I have personally never heard a better speaker in this size and price range. They are truly amazing, and they never fail to impress my friends. You should get a pair. Anyway, they were demoed for me on a $2k Peachtree amp, but, at the time, I couldn’t afford to buy a newamp, especially not for $2k. I had considered the NAD 315 to replace my $300 5.1 500W Yamaha AV receiver from Best Buy. The salesman told me I wouldn’t notice the difference anyway since I was a n00b (which, to be honest, was great advice), so I stuck with my Yamaha. Given the amp’s 2 optical inputs, my music was fed in via an optical cable from an Apple Airport Express router and my tv’s audio out was fed in via optical cable. This setup cost me $1000 Canadian (pretax, without cables), which was possibly the best sounding digital stereo system out there for the money. For the past year, my source has been music streamed via Spotify at the “Extreme” bitrate or tv via Netflix/Youtube.
This setup was incredible, but, at times, I felt like the sound was a bit garbled. This was especially noticeable when watching movies with loud action-sequence-based rumbling sound effects (eg. Avengers, Xmen, Batman movies…). It’s possible the Yamaha’s distortion was just more apparent at higher volume. I’d always wondered if upgrading my amp would be able to better unleash the supposed underlying high fidelity sound of my Totems. This was the rationale for my recent upgrade to the CXA60.
I initially chose the Cambridge Audio CXA60 for the features at the price range. My only sources are digital, so I needed 2 digital inputs. My speakers are also rated from 20-80W, so I opted for more power. These 2 prerequisites ruled out the 30W NAD D3020. My price point also ruled out the more expensive Arcam A19, which supposedly is of the same caliber as the CX series with less power and no digital inputs (requiring an external DAC, effectively doubling the price of the setup). The A19 product flier literally begins by lambasting other amp manufacturers for integrating DACs. I also preferred a single unit to an equivalently-priced pairing of NAD 316BEE with an external NAD DAC. Note that the CXA60 supports bi-wiring which was absent on these other amps, in case I wanted to go that route one day. In the world of audiophilia, all of these amps, ranging up to $1300 here, are considered “budget amps”. My final decision came down to choosing between the CXA60 or Cambridge Audio’s Topaz SR20. On paper the cheaper SR20 seemed better: it has a radio, a phono stage, a proper digital display, 100W per channel. The SR20, however, reminded me of my existing Yamaha amp: all inputs were pre-labeled (would I want to connect my CD player into the “DVD” input and vice versa?...), it boasted lots of power, and it seemed to be the all-in-one solution amp advertised as offering “incredible performance, connectivity and value for money...”. How, then, could the CXA60 cost more, yet offer no display, only 60W per channel, no phono input, etc.? After reading online a bit, I concluded that the CXA60 must be a more refined integrated amp with a better DAC. After all, they market it by showing you what it looks like inside, which is quite rare. The intention is to show that the engineers cared so much about the design, they’re proud of the hidden bits. That’s a signature marketing technique from Apple. So, I was convinced.
I demoed at The Sound Exchange in NJ on a CXA80 with a high-end Arcam CD unit of some sort. The courteous salesman switched between my AV Yamaha amp and the CXA80 so that I could hear the difference. Few others would audition these amps against one another… (a salesman at another store declined citing that it would be like comparing a BMW 5 series to a Toyota Corolla). Nonetheless, I’ll admit it was actually hard for me to hear the difference. Yet, I could somehow hear that the CXA80 was clearer and more “professional” sounding on my speakers. Of course, this may have been a placebo effect since I wasn’t blind testing. But, ultimately sometimes boys need new toys, so I ordered the cheaper and lower power variant, the CXA60.
I’ve now had the CXA60 for a few days, with the old AV Yamaha amp fresh in my memory, and I can definitely hear an improvement over the Yamaha. Whether the improvement was worth the upgrade cost is debateable. However, the sound is definitely great. With the same optical cable setup I had before, and leaving the amp in “direct” mode, I hear more bass and highs in music. Sometimes the mids seem lower than they used to be, but perhaps it’s just because the extremes have been increased. The increase in bass is welcome on such small speakers, since I want to avoid getting a subwoofer (for now). The most apparent difference is the clarity of the music. I’m not sure if this is due to the higher quality of the amp, or the “audiophile-grade” integrated Wolfson DAC, although it’s possibly a combination of the two. Listening to music on my iPhone through Apple’s Earpods is more clear when the earphones are playing through the amp than the phone. However, this “clarity” improvement is on the order of a few percent. It’s not a night and day difference, at least not with my “extreme” bitrate Spotify source.
I deliberately tried to challenge the new amp with songs that have a lot of inherent distortion to see how well it can tease apart the music. These songs were usually mildly unpleasant to listen to on my old Yamaha at high volumes. The best example is Coldplay’s Every teardrop is a waterfall. The song features some sort of synthesizer that sounds deliberately distorted, but, on my iPhone or old Yamaha amp, it “bled” into the vocals and other instruments. From what I can perceive, on the new amp, the sound is separated and the vocals shine through. The same appears to be the case for almost any song by the band Alvvays. Every single Alvvays song sounds like it was recorded using a stereo mic pressed up against a ghetto blaster radio. Listening on the CXA60 makes it a little more pleasant, since I really love this band. And when I want to hear detail, I tried a few songs with cool synthesizer effects: deadmau5’s Strobe, The xx’s Chained, M0’s Final song. Jazz sounds good on the amp, but I find Jazz always sounds good on everything. Something about it’s pacing and few instruments make it easier to reproduce.
This is an audio device, so I won’t go on about the looks - it’s decent and shiny - but I’ve got a few gripes about features. First, there’s no digital display, which is included on the cheaper Topaz SR models. I’m not sure why it was omitted. Also, at this price point, I was hoping for more weighty knobs, especially the volume knob. They don’t make heavy metal knobs like those from the amps of yore (70’s). I can still remember spinning that analog tuner dial on my dad’s old Yamaha amp to get a radio station at the opposite side of the spectrum. There’s a motor behind the CXA60’s plasticy knob so that the remote can move it up or down when you press the volume buttons.
To sum, I’m satisfied with the amp, but my perceived improvement over the cheap AV Yamaha is quite small. Perhaps some of my satisfaction is also derived from the fact that I now know my speakers are being driven better and with more power. Everything sounds a bit clearer, which was ultimately what I was aiming for when I opted to upgrade, but I’m not gushing.
So, if you’re a quasi-audiophile like me, and you’re not going to be listening to old vinyl records through a phono hookup, this is probably the highest end amp to opt for. I don’t imagine I can squeeze any more perceivable quality from my speakers, and the 60W leaves me the option to upgrade speakers one day.
However, if you’re a total audio “amateur”, I suggest following my earlier path: devote more of your budget to speakers than an amp. A simple cheap amp with sufficient power to drive the speakers will delight you. I found this to be especially true for medium-sized bookshelf speakers. A dedicated higher end stereo amp like the CXA60 will give the sound a degree of refinement, but it’s easier to improve sound with better speakers than with a better amp.
Verdict: The CXA60 is amazing, and I recommend it. But, if you’re new to hi-fi, be aware that entry-level cheaper AV amps are feature-rich and sound pretty good.
First, I don’t consider myself a serious audiophile. I just like to have a good quality experiences. Having little cash to spare, a few years back I set myself a relatively tight budget (audiophile equipment is expensive!) and bought a pair of mahogany Totem Acoustic Mites on sale at Bay Bloor Radio in Toronto. BBR really loves to push the Mites as their top-selling bookshelf speaker. I have personally never heard a better speaker in this size and price range. They are truly amazing, and they never fail to impress my friends. You should get a pair. Anyway, they were demoed for me on a $2k Peachtree amp, but, at the time, I couldn’t afford to buy a newamp, especially not for $2k. I had considered the NAD 315 to replace my $300 5.1 500W Yamaha AV receiver from Best Buy. The salesman told me I wouldn’t notice the difference anyway since I was a n00b (which, to be honest, was great advice), so I stuck with my Yamaha. Given the amp’s 2 optical inputs, my music was fed in via an optical cable from an Apple Airport Express router and my tv’s audio out was fed in via optical cable. This setup cost me $1000 Canadian (pretax, without cables), which was possibly the best sounding digital stereo system out there for the money. For the past year, my source has been music streamed via Spotify at the “Extreme” bitrate or tv via Netflix/Youtube.
This setup was incredible, but, at times, I felt like the sound was a bit garbled. This was especially noticeable when watching movies with loud action-sequence-based rumbling sound effects (eg. Avengers, Xmen, Batman movies…). It’s possible the Yamaha’s distortion was just more apparent at higher volume. I’d always wondered if upgrading my amp would be able to better unleash the supposed underlying high fidelity sound of my Totems. This was the rationale for my recent upgrade to the CXA60.
I initially chose the Cambridge Audio CXA60 for the features at the price range. My only sources are digital, so I needed 2 digital inputs. My speakers are also rated from 20-80W, so I opted for more power. These 2 prerequisites ruled out the 30W NAD D3020. My price point also ruled out the more expensive Arcam A19, which supposedly is of the same caliber as the CX series with less power and no digital inputs (requiring an external DAC, effectively doubling the price of the setup). The A19 product flier literally begins by lambasting other amp manufacturers for integrating DACs. I also preferred a single unit to an equivalently-priced pairing of NAD 316BEE with an external NAD DAC. Note that the CXA60 supports bi-wiring which was absent on these other amps, in case I wanted to go that route one day. In the world of audiophilia, all of these amps, ranging up to $1300 here, are considered “budget amps”. My final decision came down to choosing between the CXA60 or Cambridge Audio’s Topaz SR20. On paper the cheaper SR20 seemed better: it has a radio, a phono stage, a proper digital display, 100W per channel. The SR20, however, reminded me of my existing Yamaha amp: all inputs were pre-labeled (would I want to connect my CD player into the “DVD” input and vice versa?...), it boasted lots of power, and it seemed to be the all-in-one solution amp advertised as offering “incredible performance, connectivity and value for money...”. How, then, could the CXA60 cost more, yet offer no display, only 60W per channel, no phono input, etc.? After reading online a bit, I concluded that the CXA60 must be a more refined integrated amp with a better DAC. After all, they market it by showing you what it looks like inside, which is quite rare. The intention is to show that the engineers cared so much about the design, they’re proud of the hidden bits. That’s a signature marketing technique from Apple. So, I was convinced.
I demoed at The Sound Exchange in NJ on a CXA80 with a high-end Arcam CD unit of some sort. The courteous salesman switched between my AV Yamaha amp and the CXA80 so that I could hear the difference. Few others would audition these amps against one another… (a salesman at another store declined citing that it would be like comparing a BMW 5 series to a Toyota Corolla). Nonetheless, I’ll admit it was actually hard for me to hear the difference. Yet, I could somehow hear that the CXA80 was clearer and more “professional” sounding on my speakers. Of course, this may have been a placebo effect since I wasn’t blind testing. But, ultimately sometimes boys need new toys, so I ordered the cheaper and lower power variant, the CXA60.
I’ve now had the CXA60 for a few days, with the old AV Yamaha amp fresh in my memory, and I can definitely hear an improvement over the Yamaha. Whether the improvement was worth the upgrade cost is debateable. However, the sound is definitely great. With the same optical cable setup I had before, and leaving the amp in “direct” mode, I hear more bass and highs in music. Sometimes the mids seem lower than they used to be, but perhaps it’s just because the extremes have been increased. The increase in bass is welcome on such small speakers, since I want to avoid getting a subwoofer (for now). The most apparent difference is the clarity of the music. I’m not sure if this is due to the higher quality of the amp, or the “audiophile-grade” integrated Wolfson DAC, although it’s possibly a combination of the two. Listening to music on my iPhone through Apple’s Earpods is more clear when the earphones are playing through the amp than the phone. However, this “clarity” improvement is on the order of a few percent. It’s not a night and day difference, at least not with my “extreme” bitrate Spotify source.
I deliberately tried to challenge the new amp with songs that have a lot of inherent distortion to see how well it can tease apart the music. These songs were usually mildly unpleasant to listen to on my old Yamaha at high volumes. The best example is Coldplay’s Every teardrop is a waterfall. The song features some sort of synthesizer that sounds deliberately distorted, but, on my iPhone or old Yamaha amp, it “bled” into the vocals and other instruments. From what I can perceive, on the new amp, the sound is separated and the vocals shine through. The same appears to be the case for almost any song by the band Alvvays. Every single Alvvays song sounds like it was recorded using a stereo mic pressed up against a ghetto blaster radio. Listening on the CXA60 makes it a little more pleasant, since I really love this band. And when I want to hear detail, I tried a few songs with cool synthesizer effects: deadmau5’s Strobe, The xx’s Chained, M0’s Final song. Jazz sounds good on the amp, but I find Jazz always sounds good on everything. Something about it’s pacing and few instruments make it easier to reproduce.
This is an audio device, so I won’t go on about the looks - it’s decent and shiny - but I’ve got a few gripes about features. First, there’s no digital display, which is included on the cheaper Topaz SR models. I’m not sure why it was omitted. Also, at this price point, I was hoping for more weighty knobs, especially the volume knob. They don’t make heavy metal knobs like those from the amps of yore (70’s). I can still remember spinning that analog tuner dial on my dad’s old Yamaha amp to get a radio station at the opposite side of the spectrum. There’s a motor behind the CXA60’s plasticy knob so that the remote can move it up or down when you press the volume buttons.
To sum, I’m satisfied with the amp, but my perceived improvement over the cheap AV Yamaha is quite small. Perhaps some of my satisfaction is also derived from the fact that I now know my speakers are being driven better and with more power. Everything sounds a bit clearer, which was ultimately what I was aiming for when I opted to upgrade, but I’m not gushing.
So, if you’re a quasi-audiophile like me, and you’re not going to be listening to old vinyl records through a phono hookup, this is probably the highest end amp to opt for. I don’t imagine I can squeeze any more perceivable quality from my speakers, and the 60W leaves me the option to upgrade speakers one day.
However, if you’re a total audio “amateur”, I suggest following my earlier path: devote more of your budget to speakers than an amp. A simple cheap amp with sufficient power to drive the speakers will delight you. I found this to be especially true for medium-sized bookshelf speakers. A dedicated higher end stereo amp like the CXA60 will give the sound a degree of refinement, but it’s easier to improve sound with better speakers than with a better amp.
Verdict: The CXA60 is amazing, and I recommend it. But, if you’re new to hi-fi, be aware that entry-level cheaper AV amps are feature-rich and sound pretty good.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram