Around the beginning of last year, I took the plunge and bought myself my first new hi-fi system in nearly thirty years. I posted on here a few times and received some good advice. Anyway, having lived with my system for over a year, I thought I would come back on here and give you a few overall impressions.
I am conscious that I have done very little A-B testing on my set-up at home, so trying to work out what particular sound characterisitc is attributable to which element of my hi-fi system is far from straightforward. Any conclusions I come to in this respect are therefore informed by personal hunches along with reviews I have come across and comments on forums such as this one.
The system I purchased was:
Amp: Arcam A-18. £299.00. (An end-of-line bargain deal from Richer Sounds)
CD: Cambridge 651 Azur. £279.00. (Pressing flaw in side panel, so another bargain deal from Richer Sounds)
Speakers: Kef Q-300. £360.00. (Haggled with Superfi for a small discount)
Let’s not beat about the bush here – I love this set-up. Although flawed (of which more later), this system has revolutionised my whole appreciation of listening to music. I have re-discovered my music ‘mojo’ and have started enjoying a considerable number of new bands as well as re-evaluating many old favourites. I now realise in retrospect how thoroughly jaded I had become with my old system of 30 years (NAD 3020B, Denon 520 CD, B&W DM110s) due to its pleasant, tonally nice sound, but total lack of engagement. My Arcam / Cambridge / Kef system sounds detailed, incredibly transparent, has great imaging and a soundstage the size of Jupiter. The sheer amount of information that it fires at you draws you into the music and keeps you transfixed…and yet it is strangely non-fatiguing. Compared with my old B&Ws, the Kefs are very ‘precise’ and could possibly be criticised for being slightly ‘clinical’ compared with the big, easy DM110s, but they are so much more interesting and informative musically that I am prepared to forgive. Vocals are eye-poppingly forward, tiny percussion details jump out and slap you round the face, the snare drum snaps, guitars crunch, acoustic guitar notes sing, vocals breathe, revealing in fine detail the acoustics of the room in which they were recorded.
Down-sides: Like I said, the system is flawed and has conspicuous weaknesses. My old ‘NAD 3020’ system played it safe. Pipe and slippers. Everything was mid-rangey and competent. Nothing really stood out either in terms of being really, really good or noticeably poor. The Arcam on the other hand… Let’s start with the bass. Oh dear. The bass. On the plus side, the bass has impressive room-filling scale and plenty of pleasingly deep, sub-wooferish ‘grunt’. However, tonally the bass is very soft, disconcertingly flabby and lacks precision, grip and detail. This is especially noticeable playing old seventies recordings of such bass maestros as Chris Squire (Yes) and Geddy Lee (Rush). Their toppy, throaty, characterful bass sound doesn’t cut through the mix and is reduced to a rather anonymous ball of fluff. Overall, bass notes are curiously ‘un-musical’ and more of a soft, room-filling ‘presence’. I suspect this is mainly down to the Arcam, although I would be interested in reader’s comments. The Kefs generally get good write-ups for their bass sound, yet the shortcomings I can hear on my system, while not disastrous, are fairly pronounced.
Mid-range lacks punch. It sounds a bit open and ‘laid back’. On certain recordings you want to keep cranking the volume up just to extract a bit more energy and get the speakers to cut loose. This is especially noticeable on out-and-out rock tracks. Rush (again), the Rolling Stones, Neil Young. Sometimes you would swap a little transparency and detail for a bit more fizz in the mid-range. It sounds a bit like playing something through a graphic equaliser where the mid-range frequencies have been pulled back and the sound, although less ‘boxy’, lacks punch. Again, this is probably the Arcam.
I’m afraid the upper frequencies don’t escape comment either! This very much depends on the recording in question (modern, digital recordings are far less of a problem than some old anaolgue remasters) but the treble can be a bit harsh and thin. Sibilances are the real problem here -- too pronounced and hard. A softer, sweeter treble would be nice. I suspect this is down to the Kefs. It was picked up in the What Hi-fi review as the only significant flaw in the Q-300s and it is borne out in my listening experience over the last year and a bit…but by no means on all recordings.
D’you know what, though. None of these criticisms matter at the moment. It almost feels like academic nit-picking. I’m hearing it, I can register the issues, but it doesn’t really affect my listening pleasure. One day I may consider my options in terms of upgrade, but the plus-points with the Arcam / Cambridge / Kef combo are so compelling and the system offers up such a great soundstage and level of resolution, and such an impressive platform for the music to shine through that it doesn’t bother me. From Led Zeppelin to Barclay James Harvest, from Richard Thompson to Aimee Mann via Laura Marling, Rush, Prefab sprout, Yes, Fleet Foxes, Elvis Costello and Bombay Bicycle Club, my hi-fi system puts a bloody big smile on my face. …any comments or observations on any of the above would be interesting.
I am conscious that I have done very little A-B testing on my set-up at home, so trying to work out what particular sound characterisitc is attributable to which element of my hi-fi system is far from straightforward. Any conclusions I come to in this respect are therefore informed by personal hunches along with reviews I have come across and comments on forums such as this one.
The system I purchased was:
Amp: Arcam A-18. £299.00. (An end-of-line bargain deal from Richer Sounds)
CD: Cambridge 651 Azur. £279.00. (Pressing flaw in side panel, so another bargain deal from Richer Sounds)
Speakers: Kef Q-300. £360.00. (Haggled with Superfi for a small discount)
Let’s not beat about the bush here – I love this set-up. Although flawed (of which more later), this system has revolutionised my whole appreciation of listening to music. I have re-discovered my music ‘mojo’ and have started enjoying a considerable number of new bands as well as re-evaluating many old favourites. I now realise in retrospect how thoroughly jaded I had become with my old system of 30 years (NAD 3020B, Denon 520 CD, B&W DM110s) due to its pleasant, tonally nice sound, but total lack of engagement. My Arcam / Cambridge / Kef system sounds detailed, incredibly transparent, has great imaging and a soundstage the size of Jupiter. The sheer amount of information that it fires at you draws you into the music and keeps you transfixed…and yet it is strangely non-fatiguing. Compared with my old B&Ws, the Kefs are very ‘precise’ and could possibly be criticised for being slightly ‘clinical’ compared with the big, easy DM110s, but they are so much more interesting and informative musically that I am prepared to forgive. Vocals are eye-poppingly forward, tiny percussion details jump out and slap you round the face, the snare drum snaps, guitars crunch, acoustic guitar notes sing, vocals breathe, revealing in fine detail the acoustics of the room in which they were recorded.
Down-sides: Like I said, the system is flawed and has conspicuous weaknesses. My old ‘NAD 3020’ system played it safe. Pipe and slippers. Everything was mid-rangey and competent. Nothing really stood out either in terms of being really, really good or noticeably poor. The Arcam on the other hand… Let’s start with the bass. Oh dear. The bass. On the plus side, the bass has impressive room-filling scale and plenty of pleasingly deep, sub-wooferish ‘grunt’. However, tonally the bass is very soft, disconcertingly flabby and lacks precision, grip and detail. This is especially noticeable playing old seventies recordings of such bass maestros as Chris Squire (Yes) and Geddy Lee (Rush). Their toppy, throaty, characterful bass sound doesn’t cut through the mix and is reduced to a rather anonymous ball of fluff. Overall, bass notes are curiously ‘un-musical’ and more of a soft, room-filling ‘presence’. I suspect this is mainly down to the Arcam, although I would be interested in reader’s comments. The Kefs generally get good write-ups for their bass sound, yet the shortcomings I can hear on my system, while not disastrous, are fairly pronounced.
Mid-range lacks punch. It sounds a bit open and ‘laid back’. On certain recordings you want to keep cranking the volume up just to extract a bit more energy and get the speakers to cut loose. This is especially noticeable on out-and-out rock tracks. Rush (again), the Rolling Stones, Neil Young. Sometimes you would swap a little transparency and detail for a bit more fizz in the mid-range. It sounds a bit like playing something through a graphic equaliser where the mid-range frequencies have been pulled back and the sound, although less ‘boxy’, lacks punch. Again, this is probably the Arcam.
I’m afraid the upper frequencies don’t escape comment either! This very much depends on the recording in question (modern, digital recordings are far less of a problem than some old anaolgue remasters) but the treble can be a bit harsh and thin. Sibilances are the real problem here -- too pronounced and hard. A softer, sweeter treble would be nice. I suspect this is down to the Kefs. It was picked up in the What Hi-fi review as the only significant flaw in the Q-300s and it is borne out in my listening experience over the last year and a bit…but by no means on all recordings.
D’you know what, though. None of these criticisms matter at the moment. It almost feels like academic nit-picking. I’m hearing it, I can register the issues, but it doesn’t really affect my listening pleasure. One day I may consider my options in terms of upgrade, but the plus-points with the Arcam / Cambridge / Kef combo are so compelling and the system offers up such a great soundstage and level of resolution, and such an impressive platform for the music to shine through that it doesn’t bother me. From Led Zeppelin to Barclay James Harvest, from Richard Thompson to Aimee Mann via Laura Marling, Rush, Prefab sprout, Yes, Fleet Foxes, Elvis Costello and Bombay Bicycle Club, my hi-fi system puts a bloody big smile on my face. …any comments or observations on any of the above would be interesting.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram