NEWS: ARCAM expands HDA AV lineup with receivers, power amps and processor

I'm happy with my Arcam AVR550, after a year of ownership, although it has been a very frustrating year of tweaks, workarounds and compromises.

A Nad AVR has recently got a rather worryingly bad bench test review.

The only other AVR that I have had that comes close to the power and sound quality of the Arcam was the Cambridge Audio CXR200. But CA seem to have stopped making AVRs, so to be honest, if I needed to replace my 550 I have no clue what I would go for. Thankfully I have 4 years warranty remaining on it so I should be okay for a while yet!
 
Have you got a link to that bench test please? You’ve got me concerned about my plans now...:confused:
 
Have you got a link to that bench test please? You’ve got me concerned about my plans now...:confused:
Here you go Review and Measurements of NAD T758 V3 AVR
I feel it prudent to point out that they have so far tested a small number of AVRs and none of them have measured well in relation to HiFi equipment (although the T758 was particularly bad).
You'll find links to all the other reviews on THIS page.
 
^^Anthem MRX 520, Marantz AV8805, Pioneer LX504 was similar story. So many features these days that there has to be compromises somewhere. Will be intresting to see has Arcam cut any corners, that is if Amir get`s one for test. He will be measuring more receivers in near future.

Arcam AVR550 bench test if someone is intrested (use google translator or Google Chrome translate). In short:


The manufacturer's recommendation, expressed by markings around the speaker terminals, defines the preferred load value as 8 ohm ("8 ohm recommended"), but I have not found a clear ban on using 4-ohm loads in any place, so I made a full set of measurements - also for load 4-ohm.

At 8 ohms, the power is 124 W in one channel, 2 x 122 W and 5 x 97 W; it's practically as much as the manufacturer promises (2 x 125 W at 8 ohms). Tests for 4 ohms ended, however, with quick capitulation of the device, already with one channel and a power of approx. 65 W, the protection circuits disconnected the power supply. It is difficult to determine how the device will behave with "real" impedance characteristics, but it is worth considering the manufacturer's recommendations and looking for 8-ohm loudspeakers for it.

 
^^Anthem MRX 520, Marantz AV8805, Pioneer LX504 was similar story. So many features these days that there has to be compromises somewhere. Will be intresting to see has Arcam cut any corners, that is if Amir get`s one for test. He will be measuring more receivers in near future.

Arcam AVR550 bench test if someone is intrested (use google translator or Google Chrome translate). In short:


The manufacturer's recommendation, expressed by markings around the speaker terminals, defines the preferred load value as 8 ohm ("8 ohm recommended"), but I have not found a clear ban on using 4-ohm loads in any place, so I made a full set of measurements - also for load 4-ohm.

At 8 ohms, the power is 124 W in one channel, 2 x 122 W and 5 x 97 W; it's practically as much as the manufacturer promises (2 x 125 W at 8 ohms). Tests for 4 ohms ended, however, with quick capitulation of the device, already with one channel and a power of approx. 65 W, the protection circuits disconnected the power supply. It is difficult to determine how the device will behave with "real" impedance characteristics, but it is worth considering the manufacturer's recommendations and looking for 8-ohm loudspeakers for it.



Now that Arcam 550 is a hell of a lot worse then the NAD T758 as far as power goes. The NAD has no problem at all delivering power in 4 ohm

It was the DAC in The T758 that measured not too well though
 
Now that Arcam 550 is a hell of a lot worse then the NAD T758 as far as power goes. The NAD has no problem at all delivering power in 4 ohm

It was the DAC in The T758 that measured not too well though
Not sure that you can criticise a product that meets its specs? The 550 was never spec'd for a 4 ohm load.
 
Now that Arcam 550 is a hell of a lot worse then the NAD T758 as far as power goes. The NAD has no problem at all delivering power in 4 ohm

It was the DAC in The T758 that measured not too well though
Just to clarify this. Both the Nad T758v3 and the Arcam AVR550 are on par in terms of power into 8 ohm loads. The Arcam fails to bench test into a dummy 4 ohm load, and goes into protection mode, but we have users reporting (me included) that using them with 4 ohm speakers, or speakers that dip to loads as low as 3.2 ohms have no stability issues in real world use.
 
Just to clarify this. Both the Nad T758v3 and the Arcam AVR550 are on par in terms of power into 8 ohm loads. The Arcam fails to bench test into a dummy 4 ohm load, and goes into protection mode, but we have users reporting (me included) that using them with 4 ohm speakers, or speakers that dip to loads as low as 3.2 ohms have no stability issues in real world use.

yes, you are right. its the real world use that counts of course :)
 
Not sure that you can criticise a product that meets its specs? The 550 was never spec'd for a 4 ohm load.

yes your obviously right
 
Given the release of these new units, is there any chance that some of the outgoing units will receive a price discount?

I'm in the market for a P429 to go with my AVR550, as I still have Alpha 10 Power amps for the additional channels.
 
Actually that report also shows that they are officially rating even the lower models at 4ohms.

I think I may be buying one... price dependent obviously!!!
 
Apologies, hadn't seen it from the original article!

Prices appearing also:

AVR10 - £2299
AVR20 - £2999
AVR30 - £4999
AV40 - £3749

 
That video does give something that's rather concerning for me: there's no re-allocation of the power amps at all, and they can only be used for the lower level of speakers, so anyone who's using a current Arcam for 5.1.2 (like me) can no longer do that.
 
Having said that, the picture on the spec sheet does seem indicate that channels 6 & 7 can be Zone 2, Height 1, or Surround Backs, so maybe the guy in the video was giving out duff data.
 
8:40 "I now have voices coming out of the rear, what have I done wrong?"

Installed Arcam firmware? :D
 
I wonder if Arcam will have moved into the 21st century & now will allow firmware updates via WiFi or Ethernet instead of the USB port at the back of the unit you can never find & you need a 8 year old 2gb flashed formatted in FAT32 for it to work. :facepalm:
 
That video does give something that's rather concerning for me: there's no re-allocation of the power amps at all, and they can only be used for the lower level of speakers, so anyone who's using a current Arcam for 5.1.2 (like me) can no longer do that.
I think that the all but identical Audio Control receivers do have the option of reallocating the internal amps. Maybe to differentiate the two lines. I also think that the bass management is part of the Audio Control offer but is extra for the Arcam?
I'm awaiting reviews and a home dem. For me the current Arcam line is still a beta product (also based in Audio Control Platform) with bugs aplenty. I also had three NAD t785 units and all of them had quite pronounced distortion at about 1khz. To be honest the only receiver I'd consider over my Denon 6400 would be an Anthem.
At least until I've had a hands on look at the Arcam.
 
I think that the all but identical Audio Control receivers do have the option of reallocating the internal amps. Maybe to differentiate the two lines. I also think that the bass management is part of the Audio Control offer but is extra for the Arcam?
I'm awaiting reviews and a home dem. For me the current Arcam line is still a beta product (also based in Audio Control Platform) with bugs aplenty. I also had three NAD t785 units and all of them had quite pronounced distortion at about 1khz. To be honest the only receiver I'd consider over my Denon 6400 would be an Anthem.
At least until I've had a hands on look at the Arcam.

The official spec sheet does show that the surround back and height 1 speaker outputs can be swapped round, so I think the guy in the video was giving out incorrect info. I’ve really liked my 850, but I will wait to see the verdict on the new ones.
 
I have an 850 and am generally very pleased with it especially after the Dirac was set up professionally, it sounds fantastic. With this announcement does it mean that the 850 is no longer being made or superceded ?
The AVR 30 seems to be very similar in specification to the 850 so why bother making it unless it is better in some way? The price seems to be similar to what the 850 cost new. Is it just a marketing exercise to get owners like myself to upgrade? I would like to read an A/B comparison between the 850 and AVR 30.
Improvements to the 850 could be downloading firmware updates via wifi rather than with a memory stick and having a way that the amp remembers the settings for Dirac and so on after an update ,I use the ethernet input fed from a Sky Q WIFI booster. At the moment doing a firmware update erases all the settings. You then have to re load the saved Dirac settings from a laptop or similar, very annoying. My 850 has just been back to Arcam after a freak lightning pulse through the telephone line zapped all my Sky Q gear and damaged the HDMI SAT input requiring a new HDMI board. I have a mains surge protector feeding it but that did not trip so the surge must have come down the phone line, very weird. I am waiting for the Dirac man to come and do another setup as he used his own laptop to do it last time. I will get him to use my laptop this time so that the Dirac settings are saved and I can re install next time.
 

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom