Cambridge 740c or Rega Apollo with Linn and Sonus

....how quickly time goes by....two weeks? Try 2 days. Bought an 840C from this site and am warming it up as we speak. Sent the Apollo back to have it checked out in anticipation of selling it if I prefer the Cambridge.
The Cambridge was not even out of the box, so it's cold, cold, cold.... For all that, one can still hear the transient response and hard consonants, such as hearing the "k" in "kick" expulsed as "kick-kuh" instead of just "kick" with the last "k" being softened. The brass has an actual leading edge now (and when doing listening using Mercury CDs, which were tipped up in the treble due to the peaky microphones) and wondering it if would sound harsher...so far, the answer is: not. But hey, this is after only 1 hour. It's distinctly more articulate than the Rega, that much is apparent. I'll fill us all in more after 24 hours....

I doubt either player is much of an upgrade over the NAD. A slight difference maybe. I tried all these players, I learnt my lesson the hard way.

Rotarius, you've heard all three players? I've heard the NAD, but not in my own system, and I find it hard to make assessments using unfamiliar systems. One never knows if they have the polarity right, or grounding correct,or the power cords touching the interconnects/speaker cable, all of which can kill one's ability to determine the traits of ANY component. Plus, room acoustics mask detail that would otherwise be apparent.
What was your experience when you heard the Apollo and Cambridge players?

Gbmcleod, yes but not all at once. Apollo was lean sounding to me. Like so many other players at this price point, these are nice players but none really stand out of the bunch. I then settled for a quad cdp-2 which I liked after trying the Marantz 8001. I thought it was the best of the bunch. Recently, I wanted to get a nice dvd/sacd player so I bought the Sony 999es. Much to my dismay, the 999es was more enjoyable than the Quad. The Quad is a bit more open in the midrange and projects vocals nicely. The 999es however is more dynamic, has better bass and is equally smooth. I am now trying some DAC options with the sony. Again, replacing the NAD in this case is a sideways move.

Rotarius, I'd agree with your conclusion about the Apollo, although I'd call it less 3-dimensional rather than lean. In my system, it has other appealing aspects,such as a cleanness and low noise floor. And it does play music, not merely sound.
I'm not at all sure I'm in agreement about the Cambridge player, though. (Incidentally, I see the poster mentioned the 740, and I have the 840C, so...). It differs from the NAD to my ear, in that the NAD has a very immediate presence, but not quite the same degree of inner detail. For example, while it has great microdynamics, it doesn't quite sound as though it's being played by a person. What I mean is, it doesn't reveal the "human" touch in the way that, say, an Arcam FMJ 23, which, whatever its faults, sounded as though instruments were being played by a human being. For me, that is more important than "good bass" (not that you said this), or good highs. I want to hear music made by human beings, and many components give one great sound, but without it sounding as though there's a person attached to the instrument. It is almost as though a spell was cast on the instruments, causing them to simply "play." The Cambridge, which, at 2 days, is slooooooooooooow to unfurl its abilities, sounds as though a person is touching keys, blowing, stroking, striking, and, in general, making music. Hard to quantify, but I heard live music several days a week (piano and flute) for years, and I observe a big difference between "sound-making" and "music-making." Of course, it's too early to tell, but the Cambridge has those aspects, if one listens to live music often. I'll just need to see if it increases in that ability. Time'll tell!!!