Just picked up a Cambridge Audio 540R for 30% off list.
This is rumored to to have excelllent sound quality
will let u know
This is rumored to to have excelllent sound quality
will let u know
Excelsior, This is actually a good time to buy. They have started shipping there 2006 v2 models to most of the their dealers. So call around and get some price quotes. if u wait long enough u could get up to 50% off but you would have to catch the last of their stock at just the right time.
the amp will be here by thursday so ill spend the weekend breaking it in and giving my thoughts.
Also, just ordered an AVR line conditioner, sanus speakers stands, and a pair of Ascend CBM 170SEs busy day... now i just need some good wall mounts.
Some updated thoughts on the Cambrdige Audio Azur 540R receiver:
Packaging is minimal but adequate. Thick styrofoam on both sides protects it from shipping damage.
I've read several reviews saying how bad the manual was but I found it answered any questions I had settings it up. The manual explains how to set all the features but offers very little information as to why or when you would want to use any of these settings. I would say some basic home theatre knowledge would help you get teh most out of the 540R.
For example I wanted to setup a 4.1 with no center channel since my center was not connected yet. On the Marantz I used 4.1 was call using a "phantom" center channel. For the 540R your options are to set any of the speakers to Large/Small/Off. Turning off the center channel entirely automatically sets the DSP to the "phantom" centerchannel. So after watching a movie where people's lips were moving but there was no dialog I was able to discover this setting and it does a very good of recreating that "phantom" center.
Ok so lets start with the bad. I called multiple dealers across the country to confirm these details.
BAD:
- No 5 way binding posts on back as seen in pictures. Some annoying plastic screw down caps. also all teh speakers outputs are so close together and can only be inserted at a 60 or 150 degree angle. Dont plan on changing the speak wire often, it will not support banana plugs.
- Manual states power consumption is a max of 850 watts, back of unit is rated at 615w max. 7A max verus 5A max which is close to a 30% difference (double checked with multiple dealers all Model # 540R CU version). [Note 615w / 6 ch = 102wpc. * PSU @ 80% efficiency still gives your the rated 80wpc all channels driven. Not sure what the DSP overhead is. I confirmed it states 615W on teh back of the version 2 models as well.]
NEUTRAL
: Made in China (really what isnt these days)
: torridal power. I'm pretty certain this is marketing BS.
: I was disappointed at the lack of passive heatsinks since there was a big HOT warning on the unit but heat off the top of the of the receiver near the power supply never was more than warm to the touch even after extended use.
: Large rooms with large, hard to drive speakers may need more juice
: no hdmi or dvi (this really isnt an all purpose AVR its more just a good AR. Good TVs have more than enough video inputs)
GOOD
+ Lightweight 20lbs. Most people hate light weight receivers as they feel cheap parts were used. News flash folks, modern electronics can produce higher quality lighter weight units. Which isnt to say the weight rule is bad, It just means the 540R is an exception.
+ no hiss, hum, buzz, or noise of any sort.
+music from 60dB to 80dB is all very detailed. Plays well at low volumes. Music instruments dont get their full weight until the 80dB range at which point its a live show.
+ music overall has great sound stage, very detailed, and enough power to be very convincing.
+good match for medium sized rooms with medium sized speakers.
+works well for small rooms and small speakers. may be overkill.
+full 6.1 preamp out worked great to add a velodyne sub to the system and kept the volumes balanced. offers the option of having an additional set of powered nearfield monitors connected to receiver along with your usually speakers.
+ handles all types of music rock/rap/classical/techno well(all tested).
Playing BF2 and actually feeling a tank driving near as opposed to just hearing it. Movies are what I would expect them to be, very convincing. Musically I am quite happy with it. It did even out the frequency response over my old NAD 7220PE but the NAD was quite old. I havent been able to compare this side by side with current competition. The NAD T743 was my other candidate for the same price range of $800 or less. I got this unit on closeout sale for $500.
So if I paid the full $800 I might be more curious of other receivers for comparison.
@ $500 I am very happy with my purchase and have decided not to exchange it for the NADT43.
**Update**
After a couple weeks use I have become more satisfied with my purchase. In spite my initial caveats it just sounds good. Hard to say where it lies in the spectrum.
Packaging is minimal but adequate. Thick styrofoam on both sides protects it from shipping damage.
I've read several reviews saying how bad the manual was but I found it answered any questions I had settings it up. The manual explains how to set all the features but offers very little information as to why or when you would want to use any of these settings. I would say some basic home theatre knowledge would help you get teh most out of the 540R.
For example I wanted to setup a 4.1 with no center channel since my center was not connected yet. On the Marantz I used 4.1 was call using a "phantom" center channel. For the 540R your options are to set any of the speakers to Large/Small/Off. Turning off the center channel entirely automatically sets the DSP to the "phantom" centerchannel. So after watching a movie where people's lips were moving but there was no dialog I was able to discover this setting and it does a very good of recreating that "phantom" center.
Ok so lets start with the bad. I called multiple dealers across the country to confirm these details.
BAD:
- No 5 way binding posts on back as seen in pictures. Some annoying plastic screw down caps. also all teh speakers outputs are so close together and can only be inserted at a 60 or 150 degree angle. Dont plan on changing the speak wire often, it will not support banana plugs.
- Manual states power consumption is a max of 850 watts, back of unit is rated at 615w max. 7A max verus 5A max which is close to a 30% difference (double checked with multiple dealers all Model # 540R CU version). [Note 615w / 6 ch = 102wpc. * PSU @ 80% efficiency still gives your the rated 80wpc all channels driven. Not sure what the DSP overhead is. I confirmed it states 615W on teh back of the version 2 models as well.]
NEUTRAL
: Made in China (really what isnt these days)
: torridal power. I'm pretty certain this is marketing BS.
: I was disappointed at the lack of passive heatsinks since there was a big HOT warning on the unit but heat off the top of the of the receiver near the power supply never was more than warm to the touch even after extended use.
: Large rooms with large, hard to drive speakers may need more juice
: no hdmi or dvi (this really isnt an all purpose AVR its more just a good AR. Good TVs have more than enough video inputs)
GOOD
+ Lightweight 20lbs. Most people hate light weight receivers as they feel cheap parts were used. News flash folks, modern electronics can produce higher quality lighter weight units. Which isnt to say the weight rule is bad, It just means the 540R is an exception.
+ no hiss, hum, buzz, or noise of any sort.
+music from 60dB to 80dB is all very detailed. Plays well at low volumes. Music instruments dont get their full weight until the 80dB range at which point its a live show.
+ music overall has great sound stage, very detailed, and enough power to be very convincing.
+good match for medium sized rooms with medium sized speakers.
+works well for small rooms and small speakers. may be overkill.
+full 6.1 preamp out worked great to add a velodyne sub to the system and kept the volumes balanced. offers the option of having an additional set of powered nearfield monitors connected to receiver along with your usually speakers.
+ handles all types of music rock/rap/classical/techno well(all tested).
Playing BF2 and actually feeling a tank driving near as opposed to just hearing it. Movies are what I would expect them to be, very convincing. Musically I am quite happy with it. It did even out the frequency response over my old NAD 7220PE but the NAD was quite old. I havent been able to compare this side by side with current competition. The NAD T743 was my other candidate for the same price range of $800 or less. I got this unit on closeout sale for $500.
So if I paid the full $800 I might be more curious of other receivers for comparison.
@ $500 I am very happy with my purchase and have decided not to exchange it for the NADT43.
**Update**
After a couple weeks use I have become more satisfied with my purchase. In spite my initial caveats it just sounds good. Hard to say where it lies in the spectrum.
CBM-170SE pair has arrived.
They havent had enough time to break in but already they sound great.
Claims of neutral tone and very flat response curve is tangible in a variety of music material.
Looks wise they not sexy at all but easily forgiven.
Compared to the B&WDM600 S3 they are a larger speakers(50%-70% larger). Stout would be the way to describe them. They actually sound larger as well. More "weight" to the instruments without blasting the SPL. With the DM600 I was required to use the equalizer to enjoy them. That is now turned off with the CBM-170SE. I will be pushing them through the gaming gamut later but musicially i am very impressed already.
The sound stage is wider and more transparent than the DM600s. The DM600s there was a center point on the stage and then there was the actual speaker positions. Sound seemed to come from 3 distinct points in space. The CBM-170SE has at least 7 points of separation, possibly more but what was all that was identifiable with with Styx song I was listening to.
Another plus for the CBM-170 is the sound doesnt change much at different angles. You dont haev to stand exactly in the sweet spot to get good sound.
As far as resolution of detail I would say that they are both about on par with eachother.
While they are magnetically shielded they are soo fat its hard to recommend them as a computer speaker. I have some Sanus stands on each side of my computer desk so manager to fit perfectly.
I have moved the B&W DM600s to the rear surround channels with no plans currently to replace them with more CBM-170s. Considering they cost the same amount the cbm-170SE is a clear winner sound wise. Mostly sutble differences but enough of them to give the CBM-170SE a total victory.
They havent had enough time to break in but already they sound great.
Claims of neutral tone and very flat response curve is tangible in a variety of music material.
Looks wise they not sexy at all but easily forgiven.
Compared to the B&WDM600 S3 they are a larger speakers(50%-70% larger). Stout would be the way to describe them. They actually sound larger as well. More "weight" to the instruments without blasting the SPL. With the DM600 I was required to use the equalizer to enjoy them. That is now turned off with the CBM-170SE. I will be pushing them through the gaming gamut later but musicially i am very impressed already.
The sound stage is wider and more transparent than the DM600s. The DM600s there was a center point on the stage and then there was the actual speaker positions. Sound seemed to come from 3 distinct points in space. The CBM-170SE has at least 7 points of separation, possibly more but what was all that was identifiable with with Styx song I was listening to.
Another plus for the CBM-170 is the sound doesnt change much at different angles. You dont haev to stand exactly in the sweet spot to get good sound.
As far as resolution of detail I would say that they are both about on par with eachother.
While they are magnetically shielded they are soo fat its hard to recommend them as a computer speaker. I have some Sanus stands on each side of my computer desk so manager to fit perfectly.
I have moved the B&W DM600s to the rear surround channels with no plans currently to replace them with more CBM-170s. Considering they cost the same amount the cbm-170SE is a clear winner sound wise. Mostly sutble differences but enough of them to give the CBM-170SE a total victory.
Hey.. i just read your thread on the PC Speaker setup. I am also planning on getting the Ascend 170 SEs but am wondering how far apart would i have to get them to have good sq? As of right now i am planning on placing them 3ft across from each other and about a foot behind my lcd. Would that be a bad setup for these speakers?
I think they will work equally well near-field as well as further apart. I usually hear suggested that you keep speakers twice as far apart as you have them away from you for optimal soundstaging, but this is almost never practical unless you have a horizontally wide room.
It's not a bad setup for nearfield. Hell, your power bill will be alot less
Even though I use mine for PC music listening, I have them about 6 feet away and about 8 feet apart, but this setup takes about 70% of my bedroom space. Still, sometimes I find myself moving my chair back a few feet for better soundstage convergence. However, this is a very subjective experience, you don't give up any accuracy sittting closer, and probably have less of a chance to annoy the neighbors this way : P
It's not a bad setup for nearfield. Hell, your power bill will be alot less
Even though I use mine for PC music listening, I have them about 6 feet away and about 8 feet apart, but this setup takes about 70% of my bedroom space. Still, sometimes I find myself moving my chair back a few feet for better soundstage convergence. However, this is a very subjective experience, you don't give up any accuracy sittting closer, and probably have less of a chance to annoy the neighbors this way : P
Those B&W multimedia sets are damn expensive! $200 for those M1 sats and almost $500 for the A2 sub, which is...not really a $500 performance sub.
Like Astralilite said, you will want them at least double the width apart as they are from the length of you. I would recommend at least 5-6 feet apart Left to Right.
Sanus has some stands for about $30 if your desk wont fit them. Personally, I think its worth buying stands for the extra separation but you may want to just try them out with your current setup before you run out and buy stands.
So for example, think of it as a "T" if you are a foot away from top of the "T" then you would need at least 2 feet between the left and right speaker. ratio is 2:1
I've found they work best at least 3 feet from the top of the T. You can do less and the sound is still pretty good. You will lose some of the sound stage separation though. Tilt the speakers toward you so you get the full high frequency response.
I have to agree that the B&W subs are over priced. I have had good results with my Velodyne DLS3500-R so far.
I listened to the LM1 and M1 at the store. I wouldn't rate them as high as the CBM-170s but if space is a premium they are still way above any of the traditional PC speakers like logitech or creative. Hard to say where they compare to other high end satellites
Good sats are expensive. I guess the iFi sort of stands out as a special deal in the MM/HTPC market (if you can get it at $200).
Sean, are you keeping the Ascends or sending them back? They certainly do look like little black cubes and are about as sexy as OEM Dell speakers.
Sean, are you keeping the Ascends or sending them back? They certainly do look like little black cubes and are about as sexy as OEM Dell speakers.
Astrallite:
I'm going to keep them. The tweeter is very smooth, wide dispersion, and detailed sound. I wouldnt call the sound emotionally involving, but its hard to say if its the tweeter lacking a bit of high extension, the recordings I'm using, or perhaps I need more power. You know how that goes...
They fit the price point I was looking for and as of right now I do not have a better alternative worth sending them back for under $400.
I wish had known about the custom finishes for the CBM-170SE sooner, since my biggest beef with the speakers are their looks.
I'm going to keep them. The tweeter is very smooth, wide dispersion, and detailed sound. I wouldnt call the sound emotionally involving, but its hard to say if its the tweeter lacking a bit of high extension, the recordings I'm using, or perhaps I need more power. You know how that goes...
They fit the price point I was looking for and as of right now I do not have a better alternative worth sending them back for under $400.
I wish had known about the custom finishes for the CBM-170SE sooner, since my biggest beef with the speakers are their looks.
Or it could be the room.
Sometimes for a bedroom system, the best you can do is nearfield, or a live with the flaws of a farfield setup--room resonant modes due to the shape of the room, peaks and dips in the rooms response based on the wall material or windows, furniture, etc, etc.
Sometimes for a bedroom system, the best you can do is nearfield, or a live with the flaws of a farfield setup--room resonant modes due to the shape of the room, peaks and dips in the rooms response based on the wall material or windows, furniture, etc, etc.
yeah lordy, I've had a hell of a time optimizing the dual subwoofers. They sould different in every config ive put them in. Right now the subs are firing directly into opposite walls which gives the earth shaking effect I was looking for in games and movies without having to artifically make the subs higher volume than the other speakers. For music I prefer one facing me and one facing the wall. The one facing me gives more detail to the upper bass and the one facing the wall fills in the very bottom.
Are you keeping yours as well astralite, or do you have other plans?
I more recently noticed at really high dB levels some of the detail is actually lost. I'm thinking that perhaps some resonance or standing waves are affecting that. The other remote possibility is since the speakers are toed in that waves are cancelling out or just getting muddied when they crossover or reflect.
I have no way to really test my guesses.
Are you keeping yours as well astralite, or do you have other plans?
I more recently noticed at really high dB levels some of the detail is actually lost. I'm thinking that perhaps some resonance or standing waves are affecting that. The other remote possibility is since the speakers are toed in that waves are cancelling out or just getting muddied when they crossover or reflect.
I have no way to really test my guesses.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter