Advice on Arcam

Thanks TIC, Your advice and info are appreciated. Both the Nad and Alpha are dated pieces I know but the Nad sounds very good thus far. The quest continues---

My memory of the NAD 304 is that it was a lean sounding amp. An enjoyable amp, but so much better can bought used for just a few hundred dollars more. Not familiar w/the older Arcam Alpha int. amp but I've owned the the Arcam Alpha 10 and Alpha 5. The Alpha 10 is a better sounding amp. Much more refined. Also, it has a remote. I'd take the Arcam anyday over the NAD. Also to consider is the Creek 4330R/SE as well as the Jolida 1701 too name just a few.

I'm leaning towards the older Arcam because it's pretty affordable but not knowing the outcome makes me a little worried. What the heck I brought the 304 without hearing it. Stay tuned

You've got pretty good responses and I'll add a little of my own here. The ARcam ALpha 10 was my first integrated amp and having listened to the Alphas 8 & 9, the former is a better amp with greater dollops of power and refinement. However, I realized it was a bit of a cold fish after a while when I moved up the upgrade path. The Arcam was clearly lacking in dynamic swings when you needed it the most. Having said that, the ALpha 10 was still an excellent unit in some systems, and I believe it will be an improvement over your NAD.

Although I haven't listened to the Roksan Caspian, you might give it a consideration too as I've read it's a better-sounding amp than the Arcam.

Thanks Ryder, You know I have been giving thought to tubes again. I have had pre and amps that sported the glass bottles so I know what they are capable of. I however have to consider the tweak factor when it comes to the different sonic variations---it can get crazy.