any thoughts on cambridge azur cd 540/640?

I agree with Trelja's comments on the D500SE IF he was using the stock power cord with the D500SE. I found a power cord upgrade made all the difference in the world when I demo'd a D500SE. The stock cord they give you is the worst piece of crap I've seen. Does not even fit snug at all into the IEC socket. I got very good results with a Blue Circle BC61 which can be had new for around $80. Everything Tralja mentions poorly was much improved once the cord was replaced.

If they give you the same type cord with the new player, the first thing you do when you open the box is toss it in the trash..

I actually felt the original D500 was better. It had a 20-bit DAC instead of the 24-bit in the SE, but the 20-bit DAC was of higher quality..

Ask the guys at the Spearit Northampton store what they think. They'll give you an honest answer. I've known Richard Moulding the manager for over 25 years. He is a real straight shooter.. (The mystery for Richard is I doubt he knows me by my screen name !!)

Sugarbrie, while I definitely agree with your assessment of the Cambridge D500SE with the stock cord, my statements were of the player with an upgraded cord.

I consider it a mandatory upgrade on any CD player, and tried two very different sounding power cords on the Cambridge. One of them improved things a good bit, but its lack of shielding introduced some big time noise into my system. Careful placement and cable routing helped out, but the player NEVER achieved a level which came close to the Music Hall MMF25. And, as I said, the new Cambridge player is simply head and shoulder better than the old one.

I respect your comments on the D500 sounding better than the D500SE, and would like the opportunity to compare them,
Joe

Joe,
I thought the D500 sounds more natural than the D500SE. I was able to demo both when the SE came out. HiFi Choice had similar comments, when the SE came out...

Since the Music Hall generally sold for 1/3 more, it should (and does) sounds better... They did a nice job with it.

I still use a CD-6 in my work office. It is still my favorite Cambridge, not including the new ones that I have not heard. Pretty nice for an office system, so it is a keeper until it breaks. There are some very inexpensive tweeks that even make the old CD-4 sound really good.

I always like trying budget audiophile gear. It is easy to just spend mega-bucks. It is fun when they get it right on the cheap.

A follow up to my earlier remarks on the Cambridge 640C CD player...

I have now heard this player warmed up, in a warmed up system. My conclusions are more or less what they were in the past, that the new player represents a serious step up in terms of build and sound quality from the D500SE that I once(or thrice?) owned.

However, the player is not in the same ballpark as the Music Hall MMF25 CD player - the player I consider the benchmark for a budget player today, and a fine player in any regard. I would say build quality are not so different, but the Music Hall is just flat out more musical. The Music Hall does a much better job at the flow of the music, the frequency extremes, the midrange, and most of all, refinement.

I can think of no area where the Cambridge competes with the Music Hall sonically.

As the price differential between the two players is $70, the no brainer recommendation is the Music Hall MMF 25. However, I would like to say that I respect the job that Cambridge has accomplised with the 640C, a true improvement over the D500SE - 3 steps up in quality, 2 in sonics, and a recommended player nonetheless.