Anyone compared NAD and Cambridge Intergrateds?

I have an NAD C326BEE (in a second system) driving Sound Dynamics 300ti speakers and it sounds big and intimate with terrific soundstage width and depth. Tone and dynamics are very good. In short it reminds me of their 3020 but better in all areas.

It's shortcomings are also similar to the 3020, it can be a bit 'opaque' in the upper bass region and is not the last word in detail.

Overall I think it is very musical for the money. I get way more enjoyment than I should out of this system for the money.

Thanks Phil. I keep hearing good things about the" bang for buck" factor of the 326.

When I compared NADs and Cambridges several years ago, it was the C320BEE vs. the 540/640 series. Well Cambridge may have had better digital sources at the time but NAD had the better-sounding amp to me. The Cambridge amps' highs sounded harsh in comparison.

Nad lower end models are known for having nice SQ for the price, while cambridge gets better once you go up on their product line...they are ok, but more expensive.

As a Meadowlark Kestrel owner for years I say go NAD. a few years ago I replaced a Classe CAP-151 with a NAD C352. The Nad was only temporary as it should have been a step down, but I preferred the Nad. About a year later I found a good deal on a Cambridge 840A int amp. That amp stayed with me less than a month.