[stvn758]

Hifi Gear ~ ~ Quad 99 CD-P2

CAMBRIDGE AUDIO AZUR-840C-BLK at Richer Sounds - HI-FI Separates, Home Cinema, Speakers, MP3 DVD Portables, Plasma LCD, etc.

Both can be used as DAC's, the Quad actually has six inputs. It costs £999 to the CA's £749. Do we have any comparisons, I could not find many reviews on the Quad.

How do Quad rate, the CD looks a little plasticky and not the sort of thing you'd expect for a grand, although it may be made of metal and weigh a tonne for all I know.

 

[soozieq]

The Cambridge Audio 840c is a monster compared to the silly looking Quad. But I chose the silly looking Quad over the Cambridge simply because I preferred the vocal presentation. From what I remember, the 840c had a wider soundstage, but I couldn't get on with the vocals. The Quad looks like something I picked up from the dollar store in comparison! It doesn't weigh a ton, but it feels very very solid. And it takes up very little space.

If you're in the UK, you can get the Quad for £899 either from Weymouth hifi or superfi. Weymouth hifi list it for £999, but they'll sell it for £899. I really like the Quad a LOT and don't regret spending the extra on it at all. I don't like the fact it's almost completely reliant on the remote. You can't switch inputs from the unit, so if the remote was to break down, you're stuck.

 

[orkney]

I owned a Quad CDP-2 for several years, and then a Saturn and more recently an 840c. I very much enjoyed the Quad for its SQ and form factor but the 840c is a far more detailed player with better presentation of space and great dynamic swing and it really does provide a taste of the high end. I'm not sure I'd pay a premium for the Quad at this point in its lifetime but you ought to be able to find a dealer who stocks both, and compare. Certainly with brighter components I could imagine preferring the smoothness of the Quad and it is as the previous poster has suggested very fine with vocals.

There were some problems with the transports of early-edition CDP-2s, especially those that had been upgraded, but these issues seem to have been fixed and Quad is a terrific company from a CS perspective. The entry-level Naim and Linn players aare also excellent -- the Majik is a killer CDP, I think, though pricier still.

best,

o

 

[soozieq]

Quote:

Originally Posted by orkney /img/forum/go_quote.gif I owned a Quad CDP-2 for several years, and then a Saturn and more recently an 840c. I very much enjoyed the Quad for its SQ and form factor but the 840c is a far more detailed player with better presentation of space and great dynamic swing and it really does provide a taste of the high end. I'm not sure I'd pay a premium for the Quad at this point in its lifetime but you ought to be able to find a dealer who stocks both, and compare. Certainly with brighter components I could imagine preferring the smoothness of the Quad and it is as the previous poster has suggested very fine with vocals. o

When did you get the Quad CDP-2 out of interest? It only seems to have been around since 2005, but the earlier model, the CDP has been around a lot longer. When you said you'd had it for several years, I wasn't sure which model you were referring to.

The only area where I thought the 840c beat the Quad was in soundstage. I think there's more detail with the Quad, although to be fair, I didn't get to test the 840c with my new amp. But even so, I already knew I preferred the Quad midrange with my old amp. They're both great players, no doubt about it, and choosing one or the other really depends on sound preference, and perhaps, available space.

You could hide the Quad inside the 840c

 

[orkney]

Quote:

Originally Posted by soozieq /img/forum/go_quote.gif When did you get the Quad CDP-2 out of interest? It only seems to have been around since 2005, but the earlier model, the CDP has been around a lot longer. When you said you'd had it for several years, I wasn't sure which model you were referring to. The only area where I thought the 840c beat the Quad was in soundstage. I think there's more detail with the Quad, although to be fair, I didn't get to test the 840c with my new amp. But even so, I already knew I preferred the Quad midrange with my old amp. They're both great players, no doubt about it, and choosing one or the other really depends on sound preference, and perhaps, available space. You could hide the Quad inside the 840c

I got the CDP-2 in 2005, initially as an upgrade to my CDP-2 which I bought in the UK in 2003. After a hellish back-and-forth with the "upgraded" CDP-2 which never worked properly, I received a replacement unit, which functioned perfectly and which I only replaced after a move to a tubed system in which the Quad seemed a bit soft. It is a wonderful-sounding player in a sympathetic system, and I quite liked the oddball looks.

I do think that the 840c pulls way more off the disc, though, and in that respect (and a few others) provides a real taste of the high end in an affordable (if brutish and ugly) player. I think they're different enough that a good audition is mandatory if buying new, and I absolutely understand why one might still go for the Quad -- it's very seductive, and makes a whole lot of music for its size and price. Besides which, you can easily hide 2 Quads in the 840c.

Quad gear is very, very good, and if I'd been smart I'd have hung onto my CDP-2/909 setup forever, and not have missed much. My local hifi shop used to carry it, but found they couldn't interest NA customers in such odd small boxes. Now they carry McIntosh.

best,

o