Arcam A18/CD17 Break-In Time

My advice would be to try stripping your cabling back to basics.  Try some good quality multi-strand copper speaker cables and some OFC interconnects such as the Van Damme ones.  I suspect this might take you closer to the sound you are looking for without the expense of changing your speakers.  If you ever do decide to change your speakers, do audition the PMC DB1i.  When I had the A18/CD17 combination I did just that and the PMCs sounded stunning with the Arcams.  Trouble was, in the end I could not afford the speakers and I couldn't achieve the results I wanted with cheaper ones so I sold up and moved in a different direction.

Let us know how you get on if you try some more basic cables.  Also pay attention to speaker positioning and experiment a bit.  I did just that with my own system recently and, to my surprise, found that moving my speakers quite subtly had a big impact on the overall sound.

I would give it another 8 hours, if by then it's no better then I doubt it's going to change anymore. Speaker positioning may help,after that you could try cables but you shouldn't need to spend even more money if you have good cabling to begin with. 

Agree with Matthew - first look at cables. The SilverScreen work very well with Arcams.

Should you decide to change speakers hears a nother vote for PMC DB1i. They are truly a cracking monitor. Alternatively Focal range work amazingly with the brand too.

Thanks to everyone who wrote in so far. I read somewhere that it can take up to 100 hours for a new component to fully break in? I can't imagine myself that the sound will change that much anymore. I played it for 3 hours the first day and about 9 hours yesterday. I'll give it a further good run in this weekend.

I'm getting a sharp sound with sibilance, the T and S sounds with voices are very shrill. Somwhere in the upper midrange and lower treble region is the part that is bothering me. I guess I can be pretty sensitive to this. A componet needs to be smooth in this area for me.

I owned a used Arcam Diva A70 for a very short time about a year ago and I don't remember it being as bright as the A18 is. I paired it with my Proac's and the sound was smooth with very few traces of harsh sibilance.

The one varible that I also changed in my system is my CD player. I still have my old one and haven't sold it yet. It is a Cambridge Audio 840c. I think the C.A. might be a bit better player than the Arcam is? Not sure. I got the Arcam CD17 because I wanted it to match the Arcam A18 and I heard that it's good. But maybe the CD17 is the culprit? I'll have to get the 840c back out of its box and make a comparison. 

The cables I'm using are known for being smooth and for taking off any slight edge in the sound. That's why I'm using them. Perhaps I can still try some other brands and types. I never heard the PMC's in person before. That might be somehting to look into as well. My Proac's are getting on in age, 12 years old now. 

One other note, my last amplifier was a Creek 4330. It broke down on me a few weeks ago so that's why I bought the Arcam duo. Now that is a great amp! Smooth and sounds powerful. They don't really make them like that anymore. Passive pre amp and mosfet output stage. Never had any brightness problem with it. The Arcam does beat it in detail retrival though and with smooth recordings can sound quite magical.

i recently bought a new amp and straight out of the box sounded nothing like what i've expected-thin and not much bass,i thought i made a mistake..however a few days later,some 15-20 hours of listening  there was a favourable change of sound and much better than in the beginning,same with my speakers...so i for one do beleive that equipment does need some time to settle in just like new shoes

Having owned both the A18 and the Creek 4330R, I'd personally say the Creek is the better amp and I think another Creek would have made a better replacement - something like an Evolution 2.

It would be worth trying your Cambridge 840C CD player as I suspect it might help to resolve your issues to some extent, good though the CD17 is.  You've got nothing to lose so give it a go!

.............

I'll hook up the Cambridge Audio 840C tomorrow. I thought about getting another Creek but I didn't bother to look at them because the design of most of their models has changed since my 4330. The new Evolution uses an active pre stage and a bi polar output stage. Only the Creek Destiny 2 uses the same old formula, Mosfet output stage and choice of active gain pre amp stage or pure passive. Very nice. Would have bought that one but I can't afford it. 

Me too, my new NAD sounded nothing like it should from the box. It only took around 10 hours to loose the shrill upper mid and lower treble. The bass gained a lot of wheight too. I Don't think it should take more than a handful of decent listening sessions to settle in. I would say if after a week of using for a about 3 hours a day that should be pretty well ran in and sounding how it should. 

This is indeed a little strange, as in theory, it should sound smooth.

- I would put the CDP on repeat and let the system run, if possible for a few days....just to rule out "break-in".

- I don't think this is likely to be a cable problem.

- If you have heard the speakers sounding well, then they are not the problem.

- Is there anything about the room that could be making things worse (laminate floors, large areas of glass or tiles etc)?

- If the CA CDP sorts out the problem, then that is great, but I would be surprised if it did.

- It's possible that the combination of the A18 and the Proacs are highlighting worse recordings.

At a guess, the problem could be synergy between amp and speakers, mixed with possible room acoustics.

Trial and error will be the key.

Hello Everyone,

Well I had an interesting few days breaking in the Arcam units and comparing and contrasting. First of all I have to say that the Arcam A18 and CD 17 both sound a bit better than they did before. Played them all weekend and on Monday. The sound has smoothed out some but not 100% to where I would like it. But the sound has opened up more and they now sound more dynamic. Bass is better and the treble slightly smoother. I think I have become more used to the sound. The clarity is quite amazing that these two budget components offer. The sound can be very beautiful at times and I can hear every detail in each recording. Some recordings I hear detail I never noticed before. The Arcam duo does have a slightly soft and laid back sound. Still a bit too bright though in the upper midrange and treble. I notice this area more than most people. Not bothersome on any music but only sometimes on some recorded voices. The S and T sounds sounding a bit too sharp and artificial. Overall though the sound has grown on me. I suppose I can't really ask for more at the price. 

I hooked up the Cabridge Audio 850c to compare to the CD17. Yes, the C.A. does sound a bit smoother and the soundstage is perhpas a bit wider. Yet, the clarity of the Arcam still won out. I can hear more detail through the Arcam. With  C.A. most of the detail is there but I feel like it's smoothed out too much and too processed even. The Arcam Cd17 is a bit brighter, maybe a bit rougher, but also it is a more interesting listen. Some could easly say the C.A. is the better player, however I have more fun listening through the Arcam. 

I am impressed with this duo. It's not perfect, but then nothing is at this price. I guess there is some truth to this break in time after all. The sound did change, but not dramatically. I'll let you all know if the sound changes any more. 

Interesting because, going by reputation, the CA should be brighter.

Sibilance isn't much fun to listen to, although listening to live performances I'm often taken by just how strong plosives, s and t can actually sound. Similarly, brass (particularly trumpet) and strings (like violins) can also have a suprising amount of bight when heard in the flesh. Not everyone actually wants to hear that, or hear it emphasized, when listening at home.

Yes, I am fairly sensitive about sibilance too.

Arcams, as far as I know, usually measure well so its unlikely to be distortion unless you are listening at higher volumes and drive the amp into clipping on peaks. The OP's previous creek has perhaps been unusually rolled off or/and may have had some component deteriation, which can happen over the years.

regards

That is true ID. Concerts in person can sound bright too. But perhaps it's the more focused sound from the speakers that can emphasize this more? In a concert it is there also but we are sitting in a large hall where the sounds are more diffuse. Just a theory... 

You are right about Cambridge Audio in general sounding bright. However, the 850c CD player was somehting quite special and sounded a bit different from the rest of thier range. It has gotten praise from all the mags, most saying that it sounds smooth, and to my ears it does. Now the newer C.A. 851c is entirely different sounding. Compared to the 850c it is more forceful and bright sounding from some of the reviews I have read so far.

ID. curious, what components are you using in your audio system? How do you like it? 

drummerman,

I usually don't listen to the Arcam past level 40 on its electronic indicator. It is a medium loud range. Never listen too loudly and my Proacs are 87db 8ohm speakers, not too hard to drive. So I am fairly certain that I never clip the Arcam. 

The Creek 4330 was old for sure. The voume pot gave out. I think the Creek sounded smoother than the Arcam for two reasons; 1. A lot of audio sounded smoother 15-20 years ago. These days I feel like all the manufactures are going for more resolution and brighter sounds. 2. The Creek uses a passive preamp section along with mosfet output devices. The Arcam uses an active preamp and Sanken bipolar output devices. From personal experience whenever I have listened to a mosfet amp it has had a slightly warm and more rounded sound to it. I have also heard a few other passive preamp integrated amps before such as the Acurus DIA-100 and also a McCormack passive preamp with power amp. The passive preamps seem to give good resoulution but can also sound a little on soft side. 

My favorite integrated amps have been the Audio Innovations Alto and Creek 4330. The brightest sounding integrated I have ever tried at home was an Audiolab 8000s. Wow was that bright! Almost tore my ears clean off. 

This Arcam A18 is pretty darn good. It is musical and has clarity. I guess I'll just have to put up with some occasional brightness with singers. I guess not too bad for the price point.