2. amps-preamps
  3. 1307321745

Anyone compared NAD and Cambridge Intergrateds?

My Dad's 18-year-old NAD integrated stereo amp just shot craps. He's looking for a sub $800 replacement. He uses it primarily for jazz and classical music and the occasional stereo fed of his DVD when he watches movies. His speakers are Meadowlark Kestrels, which are rated 89db but they're easily driven in his small-to-moderate sized room.
I'm considering the NAD 326BEE or one of the Cambridge Azurs.

Thoughts? Recommendations? My Dad has no patience or space for separates or tubes (sadly).
vhiner
vhiner OP
544 posts
 
Thanks Phil. I keep hearing good things about the" bang for buck" factor of the 326.
tobias
1,534 posts
 
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.
singleendedsingle
664 posts
 
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.
timrhu
2,779 posts
 
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.
vhiner OP
544 posts
 
Thanks to everyone! This is what makes audiogon great! I've had a number pm's and also read the TAS and What HiFi reviews. Opinions are pretty uniform so I think I can now make a good bet. We're going with the 326BEE. I know Cambridge makes good digital gear but, at my Dad's price range and knowing his taste, the NAD appears to have the edge when it comes to amps.
More to discover