Arcam amp - what is it?
Wally
I've got an Arcam integrated amp that I bought used a few years ago. I have
no idea what its specs are, or how it rates, quality-wise. For some reason,
I think it's 40wpc. It has "A&R Cambridge" on the left, and "Arcam Alpha @"
on the right (that's a Greek alpha symbol). The case is black metal and the
front panel and knobs are grey plastic. It has a 5-way selector, volume,
bass, treble and balance. Headphone output, and two sets of speaker outs
which allow muting or not when headphones are plugged in.
Sound-wise, it reminds me of a NAD 3020 - a bit soft, bass a tad indistinct.
Modern Arcam kit seems to be well spoken of, but I can't see anything in
this unit to make me feel that it's in the same league.
What is it? Is it any good? When was it made? Were contemporary reviews
favourable? Where can I find specs?
Wally
John Dawson
1984 and probably made sometime in 1985.
The idea was to make something that could sell at about
60 - 65 % of the price of our best selling A60 - i.e. £120 rather than
£180 - £200 (it is too long ago for me to remeber the details
exactly).
It was our first heavy use of industrial design - the work was done by
Peter Harries of Cambridge Industrial Design. The case was all
aluminium apart from the moulded front panel.
The power IIRC was 30 WPC into 8 ohms with a complementary bipolar
power amp. To save cost it had a frame transformer, which did colour
the sound slightly for the worse. People either loved or hated the
grey front panel.
It sold OK but did not really hit the spot. In 1986 we launched the
Alpha Plus, with a toroidal transformer and a black painted front
(using the same moulding - the tooling had been very expensive). It
was £10 more and sold at a 50% higher rate.
A couple of years later we retooled it to 430 mm wide (the earlier
models were 400mm - don't ask why!), called it the Alpha 2 and put the
price up £20. It sold 50% more again.
There is a lesson in there somewhere!
You can maybe get a spec from our support staff at sup...@arcam.co.uk
Probably easiest to give them a mail address, though they may have a
PDF.
HTH.
John Dawson (Arcam)
"Wally" <m...@here.com> wrote in message
news:aoZ58.5856$UV7.43...@news-text.cableinet.net...
Wally
<snip>
> ... People either loved or hated the
> grey front panel.
I can't say I'm a major fan of it. Worst bit is that the knobs slide off the
pots very easily.
> It sold OK but did not really hit the spot. In 1986 we launched the
> Alpha Plus, with a toroidal transformer and a black painted front
> (using the same moulding - the tooling had been very expensive). It
> was £10 more and sold at a 50% higher rate.
I've noticed that mine induces hum into the tape deck (ANOther Sony jobbie)
unless the deck is a few inches away - stacking the two is a bad idea.
> A couple of years later we retooled it to 430 mm wide (the earlier
> models were 400mm - don't ask why!), called it the Alpha 2 and put the
> price up £20. It sold 50% more again.
>
> There is a lesson in there somewhere!
Trying to do hifi in round numbers doesn't work? :-)
> You can maybe get a spec from our support staff at sup...@arcam.co.uk
> Probably easiest to give them a mail address, though they may have a
> PDF.
I'll pop them a mail, though the need has reduced thanks to your response.
Cheers...
Angry Bob
talking about. How does the Alpha 3 amp compare to those you mentioned in
your post? (You stopped at the Alpha 2...... and, course, I've got an Alpha
3!) I've found that mine struggles a bit sometimes, particularly with the
feed from my Alpha Plus CD - it loses some detail compared with my old
Marantz amp (>20 years old, I think, and some hiss, but lovely crisp sound
during quiet passages....)
Cheers
Rob.
"John Dawson" <xw...@dial.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:3c587214$0$8508$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com...
Tony Sayer
edisli...@notmail.com> stuck his oar in and spake thus
>Sorry to be a pain, John, but you sound like someone who knows what he's
>talking about.
He should do, he run's the company that made them!...
--
Tony Sayer
Jim Lesurf
<xw...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
> The power IIRC was 30 WPC into 8 ohms with a complementary bipolar power
> amp. To save cost it had a frame transformer, which did colour the sound
> slightly for the worse.
Interesting. Can you explain how the transformer 'coloured' the sound due
to being a frame construction? Are you meaning an electronic alteration of
the signals of some kind (e.g. worse hum spectrum) or do you mean something
like audible mechanical 'buzz'? Or... I am wondering what the root of the
problem was, and how it manifested. I have only used toroids in the past as
mains transformers in amplifiers, so am curious about what you wrote.
Slainte,
Jim
--
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/intro/electron.htm
MMWaves http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/MMWave/Index.html
Armstrong Audio http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/Audio/armstrong.html
Barbirolli Soc. http://www.st-and.demon.co.uk/JBSoc/JBSoc.html
John Dawson
"Angry Bob" <Ireallydoquit...@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:a3gmsj$e9q$1...@paris.btinternet.com...
> Sorry to be a pain, John, but you sound like someone who knows what
he's
> talking about. How does the Alpha 3 amp compare to those you
mentioned in
> your post? (You stopped at the Alpha 2...... and, course, I've got
an Alpha
> 3!) I've found that mine struggles a bit sometimes, particularly
with the
> feed from my Alpha Plus CD - it loses some detail compared with my
old
> Marantz amp (>20 years old, I think, and some hiss, but lovely crisp
sound
> during quiet passages....)
>
> Cheers
>
> Rob.
>
somewhat restyled. Still 30 - 35 Watt type of rating I think. The
balance would be a bit smoother than some other amplifiers which may
account for your findings in your system.
John Dawson
John Dawson (Arcam)
John Dawson
"Jim Lesurf" <jc...@st-and.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4b02868...@st-and.demon.co.uk...
> In article <3c587214$0$8508$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com>, John
Dawson
> <xw...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>
>
> > The power IIRC was 30 WPC into 8 ohms with a complementary bipolar
power
> > amp. To save cost it had a frame transformer, which did colour the
sound
> > slightly for the worse.
>
> Interesting. Can you explain how the transformer 'coloured' the
sound due
> to being a frame construction? Are you meaning an electronic
alteration of
> the signals of some kind (e.g. worse hum spectrum) or do you mean
something
> like audible mechanical 'buzz'? Or... I am wondering what the root
of the
> problem was, and how it manifested. I have only used toroids in the
past as
> mains transformers in amplifiers, so am curious about what you
wrote.
>
> Slainte,
>
> Jim
>
> --
induced some hum into the electronics - especially the phono stage as
you might expect. It also was not a particularly well regulated
transformer compared with the toroid that followed it and there was
some audible effect there too.
Moral - use a toroid where possible if you want the best performance
:-)
John Dawson (Arcam)