Cambridge 740c or Rega Apollo with Linn and Sonus

I don't know if this is instructive because there are probably few parts in common, but my Cambridge Azur 640C v2 was still presenting new musical perspectives after many months of playing. Sometimes I would put in a disk and go "Wow! It didn't sound like that before". More detail, smoother leading edges and more nuanced decay. Your mileage may vary... Curious that some components seem to take longer to "bloom" than others.

Knownothing...you know plenty!

It's approaching the end of the first week, around hour 150...this player is astounding!

The player's ability to breathe music makes you laugh...just for fun, I played with the spikes on the stand under the (Usher) speakers. Of course, this says something for the whole system, Arcam FMJ A-22, Transparent MM cables, Nordost Valkryja, Shunyata Phython Helix VX and King Cobra V2 power cords, Usher 718s on 24-inch stands (very solid, but forget the manufacturer), a Finite Elemente Spider rack, Shunyata Dark Field Elevators (too new to analyze) and a highly acoustically tweaked room (ASC Walldamp, tube traps (16", 16" quarter rounds, 11 inch and 9 inch as well as sound panels,with a half round on the ceiling), the flutes would bloom into space with as little as 1/4 turn of the spikes, and lower instruments (contrabassons, bass clarinets, etc.) display a halo of air around them. And musically...just mesmerizing. One HEARS the composer's vision, not the imaging, the bass, the soundstaging, the "highs. You forget about those, although you can hear that if you choose to. I wonder what they'll sound like with the Hurricanes and ASL preamp or Modulus.

I hear what Mr. Harley means when he calls it "organic." If I read him correctly, it is less nubby cotton fibers: more a tapestry of finely-woven threads. Just beautiful.

And the Apollo? A terrific player, but not truly in the same category, nor is the NAD. The NAD sounds like very good digital, the Rega is more oganic, but the Cambridge makes your head swivel, even while reading a book ( a conscious way of "hearing" without listening, the same as closing your eyes in a concert hall. One still hears everything, but, generally, amazement is not a trait when hearing live music, unless the musicians are having a fantastic night. One does not expect "better" than live, although a great hall, like Carnegie, while sitting in the balcony, CAN bring tears to your eyes).

The Cambridge 840C, even at this stage of break-in, is a rare component that beathes the (genuine) sound of music. Listening for other than that misses the point. For all that, the bass is great, dynamics very good (as Harley said, not astounding, but, as somewhat who loves microdyanmics AND fortissimo passages, I'm still in love). Imaging is good, not yet killer, although on Dionne Warwick's cut of "The Windows of The World," when she sings "when men cannot be friends/their trouble often ends/but some have to die..." the word "cannot" comes out with a full aspiration as "CAN-notttt" instead of 'cahnnot," the hard "c" of "cannot sounding like a K as in "KICKKKKK." The consonants do not get lost or softened as they do with so many sound-reproducing devices. With many players it almost sounds as though they (the singers) are "swallowing" the hard consonant down in the throats the way it would sound if one was trying to talk with one's mouth full.

At this price, it's the same as being the millionth customer walking thru the doors of an establishment and finding out you're the winner of the grand prize...

Where the Cambridge clearly betters the Apollo is in the areas of resolution and neutrality. As noted above the 840C takes that up a further notch still. HiFi News recently commented that the Analog Devices high end AD 1955 DAC's employed in the 840C are also used in the frighteningly expensive Esoteric X-01D2 product. Blimey, little wonder then that both technically and audibly the Apollo doesn't stand a chance.

I thought it was interesting that Hi Fi Choice, in its original review, talked about how fantastic the unit was, but in its "Ultimate Group" survery, the bass was picked out as 'lacking speed and control.' The reviewer, in the original review, said the bass was 'truly excellent, deep, powerful, tuneful, rhythmic and controlled." Huh? Talk about an about-face. Oh well, I haven't found that to be the case. Must be me...

Yes at least Hi Fi News is consistant. It just gave the 840C the gong for trumping products from Cairn, Roksan, Naim and Creek.