Superb sound Superb Value

Remote only controls volume

Having tried a pioneer av amp on my MS902 speakers and being very disappointed , I decided a true 2 channel amp would hopefully give me the sound i was looking for. I purchased the a500 from Richersounds for £200 ,I was impresses with the spec and build quality for the price. The sound quality is superb , the music sounds alive treble and bass are spot on but can be adjusted to suit. With this being my first separate amp I had nothing to really compare to , so I bought a Cyrus III amp which is twice the cost and has good audiophile reviews .I was very disappointed, the Cambridge audio A500 in my view gives far superior sound quality over the Cyrus III , it is as clear as the Cyrus but has more bass if needed and also sounds more alive if you know what I mean!!.

Similar Products Used:

Cyrus III

Excellent sound reproduction and power. Aesthetically attractive.

Remote has limited functionality - being able to switch between the inputs: Aux, CD, DVD, Tuner etc would be very useful. Even with the speakers unattached you can notice, at the dead of night, some humm in the transformer. This may be dirty mains however I thought dirty mains would only affect output to the speakers?

I was very impressed with this amp for the price. It retains very good sound reproduction at high output levels with little distortion recognised. I am only using this with some Eltax Monitor3 Speakers as I cant fit floor standers in this room. I would certainly reccomend this amp to anyone looking to buy a first system without spending too much.

Similar Products Used:

Used with: Marantz CD4000 and Eltax Monitor 3 Speakers

Sleek silver face, simple and classy. Soundstage, ability to bring life to music

Binding posts. Lack of headphone jack.

Bought this reciever in the late fall of 02 as the sale was just too good to pass on. In my search I did find the Rotel to ba richer with better extras, but was twice what I paid. With it home, I have fallen in love with it. The openess and space that it adds to music is wonderful. I am using the amp in a small room (10'x12')and do find that it does lack impact, but this is more than compensated for by its atmosphere. The only problem I have, in part due to the room size and the fact that my speakers have a sensitivity 93db, is that the volume gets very loud very quick. I don't think that I have ever been able to turn the volume past 9:30 10 o'clock on the volume pot. The remote adjusts the volume in such large increments, that I find I don't use it.

Similar Products Used:

Used with: Yamaha CDC-575 Energy e:XL16s

Smooth character

Everything else. Slow, bloated bass, about as transparent as a lump of cement, no soundstage, severely withdrawn treble and midrange, too smooth on hard hitting genres, extremely fussy about components its used with, ugly, poor build quality, does not seem capable of its claimed power output, lacks excitement.

I first got this amplifier last year. I needed a cheap amplifier to start me off, and I had the choice between this and the Kenwood KAF-3030R. I based my decision on good reviews, and regretfully never listened to it before I had bought it. The first thing was this is one ugly amplifier. You dont buy this if you want something pretty. I wouldnt have minded if the sound quality had been up to it... The Cambridge A500's major failing was excitement, or lack of it. Dont buy this amp if you like dance, rock or any other hard hitting genre. It smooths everything off to the point of being a cure for insomnia. Its not so much warm as muffled. The bass is slow, bloated and mushy, there is severe roll off in the upper frequencies, and the mid range is very recessed, there almost seems to be no music coming out of this amp. There is no soundstage either, its just muddled and confused. Theres a certain lack of bite too. Its probably at its strongest playing mellow, simple music, where it makes a reasonable impression of itself. Whether you buy this should depend on your music tastes and the other components around it. I'd recommend a source and speakers with brightness, and dry and tight in the bass region. Something like small Mission bookshelfs will be best with this, and a CD player like a Marantz or Rotel. Build quality is poor, and does not seem capable of its claimed power output. Even so, this is a poor quality amp, even at its low price. Richer Sounds are selling these for £200. Do yourself a favour and check out the NAD and Rotel amps for just slightly more , as they are much, much better than this pile of crap, well worth paying the extra...

Similar Products Used:

Rotel, Kenwood, Trio, Sony, all of which are better, esp Rotel...

Attractive, Great performance value ratio, Power, Back panel flexibility

Binding posts are chinced Remote has limited functionality

Whoever has used this Integrated amp and found it lacks bass..look to other weaknesses in your system. This unit provides ample bass at worst, gobs of bass at best. It also gives nice mids and quite decent clarity and detail as well. Given the price this amplifier is a knockout.

Similar Products Used:

Rotel RA-02 Rega Elex

Bass. Midrange. Treble. EVERYTHING!

Them speaker terminals.

I got this amp as part of a bundle from Richer about 3 years ago as my first seperates system, and it was DAMN cheap. Got this amp, a Marantz CD 48 and Eltax Symphony 6 Floorstanders for £235. As my first system I was obviously impressed, but, having heard systems costing over twice as much, I'm even more impressed. Even my audiophile mates comment on how good this "cheap" system sounds.

Excellent detail and refinement, with revealing sound. Bass has great depth, it is very deep and smooth rather than punchy. For £200 it's an absolute bargain.

Two versions of this Amp. 50W version is very good but 65W is far superior. More suited for use with floorstanders to appreciate the depth of Bass.

I can Confirm that there are definitely two versions of this Amp. I purchased the A500 nearly three years ago and it came with the specification card 50W 8Ohms/ 65W 6Ohms. I bought it as part of a Richer sounds package along with Eltax Symphony 6.2 + Technics SLPG590 CD and was very pleased with my Hi-Fi. Unfortunately my house was burgled and they took the lot! I have now just got an exact replacement of all the kit via my insurance and my new Cambridge Amp spec now states 65W @ 8Ohms/ 80W @ 6Ohms. It sounds totally different, much improved. It has a more clean and detailed sound with more control and better separation. When cranked up it doesn't sound muddled, it remains composed although I would say that the earlier model had a bit more volume(more watts doesn't always mean more volume). The new model of the A500 is in a different League to the old and has the same kind of refinement of an amp twice its price. I have been to a lot of demos recently in case I had to get an alternative and was surprised how good it sounded compared to some other big name amps. CD's used for demo include: Depeche Mode- Exciter, Doves- Last Broadcast, Air- Moon Safari, Bjork- Vespertine. All sound fantastic on this amp.

Similar Products Used:

Denon PMA-355 NAD C350 Cambridge Audio A500 50W version

Solidly built. Sleek finish (in silver). Biwire capability. Upgradable AC power cord. Way cool blue LED.

Hardly. But what's up with those pesky blocked binding posts that won't accept banana plugs? Sort of like an audio chastity belt, I guess.

First off, I need some clarification as to the official word on the ongoing controvery surrounding the so-called dual models of the A500RC, as well as the debate over the power rating between the two models (or is there more?). With all due respect to the U.K. and other countries outside of the U.S. that have this amp in their markets, I really don't care. If you're one of the many who have purchased the A500RC through Audio Advisor within the last year, please email me with your concerns, tips and viewpoints. I would appreciate it greatly. Now for my story: First, I'm a "tightly-budgeted-audio-enthusiast," a somewhat rare breed in today's world of high-end esoteric audio equipment. I've recently entered the 21st century and have upgraded from my trusty old NAD 3225PE from 1989 into this Cambridge model, and I must say, I think I've made a wise choice. Essentially, both my consciousness, bank account and credit limit has mandated the purchase. The A500RC has provided me with more power(?), more inputs and better aesthetics thanks to a sleek silver finish and that nifty blue LED! For now, I can only marvel at how yummy it all looks on top of some silver Michell Tenderfeet Cones and sitting in a cool-looking Sound Organisation Z545 rack (see review). Additonally, it looks even more cool with the Cambridge DVD300 (silver, of course) as its downstairs neighbor! Finally, my consciousness said, "Right on, brother!" I won't even go into a review of the sonics because Sam Tellig has already spoken on my behalf. Besides, I need the break-in period to justify writing a review. Coming soon: "Cambridge A500RC: Part Deux"

Similar Products Used:

Trusty NAD 3225PE (sob!).

For under $400 bucks, one can't go wrong on the looks alone. By all means, get the silver finish. Unless you're stuck in gothic mode, go for black. Bi wiring capablity. Upgradable AC power cord. And again, that cool blue LED!

Perhaps the heavily discounted price from dealers leaves one to speculate on the quality. And what about those peculiar binding posts that doesn't allow banana plugs to be used? Is this some sort of audio chastity belt?

First off, I would gladly appreciate some clarification on the controversy regarding the Cambridge Audio (not Cambridge SoundWorks, mind you) A500RC Integrated Amp. To this day, I have been re-confused even further in regards to the official power rating that the U.S. model is supposed to have. With all due respect to the U.K. and any other countries outside of the U.S., I don't really care since I don't live in your country and I'm working off of a 110/120 voltage system. Any persons who has purchased this "budget" amp from Audio Advisor, would you please email me and give me your thoughts on this otherwise "well-reviewed" piece of equipment. Now, my story: For starters, I am a budget audio enthusiast who's just gone through a technological revelation recently. I have finally say goodbye to my trusty Magnavox CDB650 CD player, my dependable NAD 3225PE Integrated Amp and 4225 Tuner combo and have decided (after months of negotiations with both my conscience, bank account and credit limit), to upgrade to the Cambridge A500 amp and DVD300 DVD/CD player (both in the silver finish---simply gorgeous to look at versus the black!). Again, with the budget in mind, I've pondered over the Arcam A75, Rega Mira, the Audio Analogue Puccini, Roxsan Kandy, NAD C370, and various Rotel model amps and all of them are just plain beyond my means. I realized that the Cambridge's 50 watt (or is it 65--who know!) is enough of a justification to double up power over my NAD. I'm also a great follower of Sam Tellig's review some time ago, and I felt that was reason enough for me to settle on the A500. Ditto for the DVD300. Most will agree that there is a lot of DVD machines out there that are just garbage! Save for several models in the 400-3000 range (again, the Arcam comes to mind, as well as perhaps, any of the Pioneer Elite series). Then pow!--the 300 came in silver too. How way cool! Now both the amp and DVD unit look just absolutely delicious sitting on top of some silver MIchell Tenderfeet Cones within a Sound Organisation Z45 audio rack. My consciousness gave me a reasurring "Right on!" And did I mentioned the cool blue display and LEDs!! Now, to make a long story even longer, I'm ending this review at this point by just covering the aesthetics of these two fine machines. In the next installment, look for the sequel: "Cambridge Audio: Part Deux."

Similar Products Used:

NAD 3225PE (sob!)

great bargain...

Male vocals and piano sound hollow enough to notice at times...

This unit is a bargain. I received this unit about two months ago and hooked it up using Energy C-2's...During the first day or so, I was really unimpressed with the A500...almost to the point of returning it...but I decided to wait through the break-in period to at least give it a fighting chance...after two months, I can say that i'm glad i decided to keep this unit...it really is an unbeatable bargain...crisp and clear sound, ample power, good price...there's no question, 5-stars for value all the way. there are a few weaknesses as listed below...

Similar Products Used:

Creek, NAD, Sherwood