I had the nad I now have the 25 I don't need the phono and headphone I used my rme dac I had both 25 and 35 and no real difference sent the 35 bk thanks to richer sounds
Axa25 is lower class. Congested in comparison. Axa35 is sweet with weight but maybe slower and sounds more Japanese. Nad is leaner but with more body in midrange and more colourful,makes different notes sounds different. Smoother too. I had them both for many months. Kept the NAD
A thing as well about the NAD and that’s if you look at the circuit design inside of the amp it uses quite a bit more standard inexpensive resistors and parts versus the Cambridge which seems to utilize quite a lot of IC chips and things. I don’t know I just envision 10 years down the road the little controller chip that governs the dotmatrix display going bad and you not having a way to get another one. I had an old Sony cassette deck like that and it had an issue with the controller chip that made the buttons work on the front panel went bad.I took it to a local electronic repair shop, and this guy does great work but he couldn’t fix it because that chip he couldn’t find anywhere and neither could I. I mean I guess at the end of the day because the Nad uses simpler parts I imagine in 10-15 years time you being able to go on Mouser or take it to a repair shop and them being able to fix it no problem.
As stated prior to this comment, the transition from C to A was almost not noticeable to me. A to B and B to C were noticeable. Even with some hearing loss, B sounded the most natural and relaxed to me. With that said, I think the room that you play any of these in will affect the sound more than any of these three amps by them selves. B was my favorite, A and C were very similar. Room coloration could change this as well as speaker location though. I love what I am hearing from the Wharfedale 12.2's and I believe they will soon be my first " bookshelf or stand speaker " purchase. I'm currently using Definitive Technology BP-6's ( floor standers from the mid 90's ) and they are still awesome for the money, even back then.
Thank you so much for this vid E! This has been the vid I was waiting for. The major difference I hear is that the NAD has definitely a wider and spacious soundstage. The axa35 and 25 is not much different, close your eyes and most of the time you wont notice the switch from C to A. But the switch from A to B and B to C is noticeable. The reason why some say the 25 performed the worst here is most probably caused by sighted biasness, knowing that an amp has less power will make it sound less good. Bet most of you didnt know which was which in the first part of the vid and that is why I asked for a blind test. E Project should have not given the answers in the same video. Many would fail in telling apart which is which, especially the axa25 and 35 on less demanding tracks. As for me, I dont think Ill be getting any of these amps for my 12.2 as more power is the safest bet, especially for a speaker like the 12.2. These amps seem to be limiting what the 12.2 can do, I would rather the speaker be at the limit than the amp. Thank you so much once again E, you are the best!!!
@@davidmuller8399 a simple no nonsense amp like the DA-9 or PA5 with a good DAC like the D70S is all that is needed for the 12.2s to start singing. After months of owning the 12.2, the most neutral and revealing amps are the best match.
Excellent comparison. Glad you did it for us. I see you went back to using stands wich I think is good. Nice lighting on the speakers. Unfortunately some of your track clips are a bit short to demo three components in, but it's still pretty telling. The differences are mainly as I felt before. Reasonably small but they can definitely be heard. The AXA25 is fine for it's low price and power. The AXA35 is slightly cleaner, smoother and more polished sounding. In those ways the best of the three to me. The NAD has an advantage in dynamics, but has slightly more forward upper mids, and a little less warmth, wich can be percieved as more clarity and detail, but I think with respect to distortion it's only in the middle of the three.There's enough difference to be taken into account in speaker matching and personal tastes. 👍
Another great comparison. I prefer the AXA35 although all 3 are good amps for the price. I recently heard an AXA25 in a store with Monitor Bronze 300 floor standing speakers and was blown away by how great it was. It had amazing power for a little 25 wpc amp. I think that for the extra money the AXA35 with its extra 10 wpc and features would be an even better value. Thanks again for doing this for us.
I don’t know I think the NAD for me is the way to go and that’s mostly down to build quality. I mean by in large it seems difficult to find somebody who has had a Cambridge amp longer than 10 years and also look at how many refurbished amps Cambridge sells on its eBay store. Plus the NAD has simpler parts inside of it that in the long run will be easier to find and cheaper to buy and ultimately cheaper to fix. Plus I’ve had both of them and the Cambridge is good certainly better than the older topaz iteration but the Nad for me just sounds better and draws you into the music more. The Cambridge by comparison it feels like if you’re not actively focusing on the music to appreciate it then whatever you’re listening to seems to become background music.
Yeah, I kind agree with you here. The AXA35 has a more background sound compared to the Nad which is more frontline. I have uses for both and currently own an AXA35 but if i had to choose one i would choose the fighter not the lover. I would choose and have chosen the Nad to replace my AXA35 as I want a bit more bite in my front room.
So many factors will change the sound, ie speakers, room,music, instruments, etc! Just get wut has the features you need, or the look you like, or price...THAT'S ALL! Don't worry about the "tone" this or "openess" that, etc...your ears will like ANY of these amps!
Cambridge is more full bodied and the NAD sound thinner. The AXA 35 is a better buy being $100 cheaper with a longer warranty. But the real deal is the 25, at $225, if you don't need phono or headphone it's build quality and sound make it a bargain.
Build quality, Cambridge audio, are you kidding? I have a friend who worked at various hi-fi dealers in Ottawa and he said of the warranty claims he handled Cambridge audio was 10 times what Nad was. To further echo that claim with my own experience I’ve had over the last ten years 4 Nad amps and 7 Cambridge Audio products and all the Nad gear never has had an issue but the two dacs I got and the CD player and the receiver from CA had to be warrantied. After that receiver which was two years ago I had to basically concede that while I love the sound of Cambridge audio products unfortunately they just seem to have crap build quality and made the decision to not purchase any more of their products
@@Audiorevue Thanks for sharing. Cambridge does sound amazing but there just seems to be too many QC issues with their products. Ironically after looking at reviews all over the internet the AXA 25 and the AXA 35 had the least problems compared to their higher end models. No one wants to spend 400 plus dollars for them to break down in less than 5 years
The 35 is the winner here, although the NAD comes closer than I expected. The 25 is disappointing, which surprises me, since I liked it in other videos. And the taller stands really do clean up the bass and mids, so thanks a lot for that
@@musiconvinylisbetter.1449 I'm not tryna blast you but to me that's like saying all cars are slightly different. On the merits of 4 wheels, seats and a steering wheel.
There arent a lot of differences to me, except maybe the treble where I feel like the Cambridges (35 esp.) pair well with the Diamonds. Other than that its a close call.
None of these sound different enough from each other, heard through the internet on consumer desktop speakers (with sub), that it's going to make much of a difference. I own the NAD and like it (using 6 Ohm Tannoy SBM studio monitors from the late 1990s). I suspect that any perceived differences in opinion are going to boil down to speakers and room size/treatment. Ultimately: Choose between these amps based on your wallet, build quality, and black/silver aesthetic preference.
I would opt for the AXA35 and NAD. The NAD is more spicy, but the AXA sounds more relaxed. Preference for the AXA35 in this case.
I had the nad I now have the 25 I don't need the phono and headphone I used my rme dac I had both 25 and 35 and no real difference sent the 35 bk thanks to richer sounds
Nad, all day every day...knocks off the tininess at the top end and adds lower heft on the bottom end and the mids.
Axa25 is lower class. Congested in comparison. Axa35 is sweet with weight but maybe slower and sounds more Japanese. Nad is leaner but with more body in midrange and more colourful,makes different notes sounds different. Smoother too. I had them both for many months. Kept the NAD
The 35 has a torridal transformer, the 25 has the standard EI transformer but still sounds very good.
Thanks for sharing
A thing as well about the NAD and that’s if you look at the circuit design inside of the amp it uses quite a bit more standard inexpensive resistors and parts versus the Cambridge which seems to utilize quite a lot of IC chips and things. I don’t know I just envision 10 years down the road the little controller chip that governs the dotmatrix display going bad and you not having a way to get another one. I had an old Sony cassette deck like that and it had an issue with the controller chip that made the buttons work on the front panel went bad.I took it to a local electronic repair shop, and this guy does great work but he couldn’t fix it because that chip he couldn’t find anywhere and neither could I. I mean I guess at the end of the day because the Nad uses simpler parts I imagine in 10-15 years time you being able to go on Mouser or take it to a repair shop and them being able to fix it no problem.
I just wanted to say.. thanks so much. I've been binging all of your stuff trying to decide.. every other day I rethink my decision xD
As stated prior to this comment, the transition from C to A was almost not noticeable to me. A to B and B to C were noticeable. Even with some hearing loss, B sounded the most natural and relaxed to me. With that said, I think the room that you play any of these in will affect the sound more than any of these three amps by them selves. B was my favorite, A and C were very similar. Room coloration could change this as well as speaker location though. I love what I am hearing from the Wharfedale 12.2's and I believe they will soon be my first " bookshelf or stand speaker " purchase. I'm currently using Definitive Technology BP-6's ( floor standers from the mid 90's ) and they are still awesome for the money, even back then.
Thank you so much for this vid E! This has been the vid I was waiting for. The major difference I hear is that the NAD has definitely a wider and spacious soundstage. The axa35 and 25 is not much different, close your eyes and most of the time you wont notice the switch from C to A. But the switch from A to B and B to C is noticeable. The reason why some say the 25 performed the worst here is most probably caused by sighted biasness, knowing that an amp has less power will make it sound less good. Bet most of you didnt know which was which in the first part of the vid and that is why I asked for a blind test. E Project should have not given the answers in the same video. Many would fail in telling apart which is which, especially the axa25 and 35 on less demanding tracks.
As for me, I dont think Ill be getting any of these amps for my 12.2 as more power is the safest bet, especially for a speaker like the 12.2. These amps seem to be limiting what the 12.2 can do, I would rather the speaker be at the limit than the amp. Thank you so much once again E, you are the best!!!
Smile~, sorry for giving answers in the same video, I didn't even think about that...
thanks for you big support!
Which amp would you recommend for the Diamonds 12.2?
@@davidmuller8399 a simple no nonsense amp like the DA-9 or PA5 with a good DAC like the D70S is all that is needed for the 12.2s to start singing. After months of owning the 12.2, the most neutral and revealing amps are the best match.
I absolutely loved this comparison !! I was exactly confused between these 3!! That would it be worth it to go for NAD! Thanks so much
Excellent comparison. Glad you did it for us. I see you went back to using stands wich I think is good. Nice lighting on the speakers. Unfortunately some of your track clips are a bit short to demo three components in, but it's still pretty telling.
The differences are mainly as I felt before. Reasonably small but they can definitely be heard. The AXA25 is fine for it's low price and power. The AXA35 is slightly cleaner, smoother and more polished sounding. In those ways the best of the three to me. The NAD has an advantage in dynamics, but has slightly more forward upper mids, and a little less warmth, wich can be percieved as more clarity and detail, but I think with respect to distortion it's only in the middle of the three.There's enough difference to be taken into account in speaker matching and personal tastes. 👍
WE NEED A FULL AXA35 VS NAD C 316BEE V2 COMPARISON. PLS
Another great comparison. I prefer the AXA35 although all 3 are good amps for the price. I recently heard an AXA25 in a store with Monitor Bronze 300 floor standing speakers and was blown away by how great it was. It had amazing power for a little 25 wpc amp. I think that for the extra money the AXA35 with its extra 10 wpc and features would be an even better value. Thanks again for doing this for us.
Thanks for sharing!
I don’t know I think the NAD for me is the way to go and that’s mostly down to build quality. I mean by in large it seems difficult to find somebody who has had a Cambridge amp longer than 10 years and also look at how many refurbished amps Cambridge sells on its eBay store. Plus the NAD has simpler parts inside of it that in the long run will be easier to find and cheaper to buy and ultimately cheaper to fix. Plus I’ve had both of them and the Cambridge is good certainly better than the older topaz iteration but the Nad for me just sounds better and draws you into the music more. The Cambridge by comparison it feels like if you’re not actively focusing on the music to appreciate it then whatever you’re listening to seems to become background music.
10 years is good, I hope for at least 5
Yeah, I kind agree with you here. The AXA35 has a more background sound compared to the Nad which is more frontline. I have uses for both and currently own an AXA35 but if i had to choose one i would choose the fighter not the lover. I would choose and have chosen the Nad to replace my AXA35 as I want a bit more bite in my front room.
axa35 - oberon 1 the best combination
So many factors will change the sound, ie speakers, room,music, instruments, etc! Just get wut has the features you need, or the look you like, or price...THAT'S ALL! Don't worry about the "tone" this or "openess" that, etc...your ears will like ANY of these amps!
Cambridge is more full bodied and the NAD sound thinner. The AXA 35 is a better buy being $100 cheaper with a longer warranty.
But the real deal is the 25, at $225, if you don't need phono or headphone it's build quality and sound make it a bargain.
Build quality, Cambridge audio, are you kidding?
I have a friend who worked at various hi-fi dealers in Ottawa and he said of the warranty claims he handled Cambridge audio was 10 times what Nad was. To further echo that claim with my own experience I’ve had over the last ten years 4 Nad amps and 7 Cambridge Audio products and all the Nad gear never has had an issue but the two dacs I got and the CD player and the receiver from CA had to be warrantied. After that receiver which was two years ago I had to basically concede that while I love the sound of Cambridge audio products unfortunately they just seem to have crap build quality and made the decision to not purchase any more of their products
@@Audiorevue
Thanks for sharing. Cambridge does sound amazing but there just seems to be too many QC issues with their products. Ironically after looking at reviews all over the internet the AXA 25 and the AXA 35 had the least problems compared to their higher end models. No one wants to spend 400 plus dollars for them to break down in less than 5 years
The 35 is the winner here, although the NAD comes closer than I expected. The 25 is disappointing, which surprises me, since I liked it in other videos. And the taller stands really do clean up the bass and mids, so thanks a lot for that
thanks!
So little difference between these amps compared to differences between speakers.
Nearly nothing! Like all amps.
@@musiconvinylisbetter.1449 I think if you heard different amps in person you would disagree with the statement 'all amps sound alike'
@@erics.4113 I have and there is a slightly different sound between them.
@@musiconvinylisbetter.1449 I'm not tryna blast you but to me that's like saying all cars are slightly different. On the merits of 4 wheels, seats and a steering wheel.
@@erics.4113 You can't compare amps with cars! They are truly different!
There arent a lot of differences to me, except maybe the treble where I feel like the Cambridges (35 esp.) pair well with the Diamonds. Other than that its a close call.
None of these sound different enough from each other, heard through the internet on consumer desktop speakers (with sub), that it's going to make much of a difference. I own the NAD and like it (using 6 Ohm Tannoy SBM studio monitors from the late 1990s). I suspect that any perceived differences in opinion are going to boil down to speakers and room size/treatment. Ultimately: Choose between these amps based on your wallet, build quality, and black/silver aesthetic preference.
Can you do a demo of Wharfedale Diamond 12.2 and Polk R200 with Rotel A11 Tribute? Thanks and more power!
Thanks, I don't have Rotel A11 yet. How about A12 instead?
@@eprojectEllie Thanks, I'm fine with 12.2 vs R200 on A12. 😁
Hi, i'm interested in the 12.2 & axa25 pairing. How's your assessment hearing them in person? Thanks.
El nad 316 mejor
Plus d'espace dans le Nad..🤔 le 25 est stupéfiant ,pour le prix
Where do I get that wooden plate underneath the amplifiers? Great!
Some tone controls instead of the pointless display on the 35 would've been nice!
The AXA35 has tone controls, just like the 25.
NAD.
NAD
🤔🎧🎶🎶🎶🎶Nad✌🏻👍👍👍👍✌🏻🤔🇵🇱
My axa 35 lasted for only 2 weeks then the right channel failed. No more Cambridge for me anymore, i use Rotel now
From greece please test mission lx3 mk2 ευχαριστώ πολύ!!!
Felling Nothing different bwtween a and c But b different with them.
Tres proches
Vorrei ascoltare AXA 25 - bronze 100
Per favore grazie!!!
What ,s amp
No differens between them as usual.
Je préfère le son Cambridge
no discernable difference
no difference
mmmm sorry maybe its the speakers. They all have a sound of mud.
The AXA25 sounds too weak.The AXA35 doesnt sound enough open.The NAD 316 sounds a bit broken in the upper midrange.I wouldnt by any of these amps.
La différence entre eux est vraiment minime. La sonorité de tous ces amplis ne me conviennent pas. Mais en 1er pour moi l' Ax35 , le Nad Ax 25
Close your eyes and you will hear no difference at all. LOL at claiming to hear a difference.
POINTLESS....WOW