Audiolab looks like a gas stove with those three knobs. One day early morning you'll be half asleep when you'll realise you were trying to cook your omlet on top of the amp 🍳
I had requested this comparison in a different video and you added this so quickly, so thank you for listening to my request. My own take after listening to the comparison is that CXA81 sounds a little bit more open at the top end and punchier, also better sound stage. However the Audiolab sounds amazingly close for being 300$ cheaper. I own the Audiolab 6000A and very happy with it so far.
Can you also do a comparison of these two amps with slightly more forward/brighter speakers like KEF LS50? @Lars Topac also mentioned that the results will be interesting with a brighter speaker. Thanks in advance! Other idea would be Audiolab with the EVOs and KEFs
I owned a cxa81 and it was a fantastic amp for the money. The reason I sold it was the volume control from the remote goes up and down with a factor of 5. In other words rather than going from 10 to 11, the remote takes the volume from 10 to 15 to 20 ect. This is unacceptable especially at lower listening levels. Aside from that it was the best amp I have owned.
I agree! Thankfully, i got myself an RME ADI-2 DAC FS which allows for 0.5DB adjustments and Tone Controls (its got auto variable loudness as well). Takes the bass performance (both quality and quantity) of the CXA81 two notches higher!
I appreciate all the amp comparison videos @E Project, but in all honesty, this video is no exemption, listening via a high-end headphone I can hear absolutely no difference when you switch between amps, which isn't unexpected :D
cannot choose which sounds better... the available options and connections would make my purchasing decision. the 81 has balanced inputs so I would probably pick it.
What a head to head fight between these two terrific integrated amps. You can't go wrong with these two. Thank you! And I hope we could see the match up again with the LS50 meta.
Had these two amps with these speakers at home for testing.As much as i liked well controlled bass on audiolab the rest of the spectrum is much better on cxa.
Both sound fantastic……..probably Caimbridge will be a better choice for someone who wants to play loud since it doesn’t harden the sound when pushed hard……i d like to listen those speakers with Rotel!!!!
i have the 6000a and matched well with my bw606s2. the 81 is a brighter amp and matched really well with the evo which is a darker speaker.the 6000a is a nuetral amp and matches well with bright speakers like the bw606s2 and kef ls50.
I disagree. I have the CXA81 and Evo 4.2 and they are a terrible match. The Evo 4.2 is already good at digging up resolution though it is not a bright speaker per se. Add the CXA81 into the mix and it becomes a bright speaker, losing almost all semblence of warmth. Most of my friends who have the Evo 4.2 drive it with the Alab 6000a and they love the said combination. Not surprising since the Audiolab and Wharfedale are related concerns and the Amp was developed at the same time as the Evo 4.2
The 81 has a very distinctive (signature) sound, overall tilted treble and bass and warm sounding mids. It's more forgiving for bad recordings. The 6000a is, imo, the most neutral sounding, where you listen to your chain components, not the amp's signature. The 6000a shines when you turn up volume, complete lack of SS hardness, often experienced with Solid States. In the end it's a matter of taste, as they both sound great, but for me the 6000a is more 'true to the source' and much cheaper. That said, the 81 got more option like XLR inputs, etc. For both amps you need relative easy-to-drive speakers, like 89+ dB sensitivity and 8 ohm for best dynamics. Soundstage and imaging for both is excellent, perhaps for the 81 it's slightly better. I found the treble on the 6000a a bit more substantial, like more real. Both lack tonecontrol, something to consider. The 81 doesn't have a phonestage, where the 6000a does (and a good one). Both DAC's in amps are very good, not an afterthought. Still, it can pay off to buy a DAC or phonestage seperatly. Great comparison again E Project, as I wondered how the EVO would sound. I'm so happy with the changed songs 😄
the only tune worth listening to is the jazz tune as is way less compressed (perhaps, even, completely uncompressed). both amps are really nice. the cambridge is 'fatter' giving some extra warmth, but not sacrificing clarity; the audiolab is nimble and agile and more honest to the source. wonderful amps!
My concern is which sounds more correct ? The cxa81 seems better to my ears, but if i was listening to just a speaker, i woulld say it is because it has slightly elevated mids/highs. Is "blacker blacks" a more accurate amplifier ? Either way, without tone controls, neither is an option for me. I'm in a bigger room, far away, and listening volumes deeper into the fletcher-munson curve. Thank you for the opportunity to hear some excellently reviewed amps.
Thank you for the superb comparison and for adding more songs in your tests. In my opinion Audiolab is the winner in price/performance quality. Really like that amp. Cambridge results less open but has got better high frequencies. The real question is Audiolab 6300 vs Audiolab 8300. Is it worth it? Hope you test them soon. Thanks -Nick
Cambridge Audio CXA81 loses-little dynamics, pressure, sibilants emphasizes, loudly. AUDIOLAB 6000A is a correct, dense, dynamic sound.AUDIOLAB 6000A plays naturally!!!In 2021, the best amplifier of the year is again what hifi AUDIOLAB 6000A magazine!!!
I really like these comparisons and they are very helpful. BUT: I just think it is awful to have to make judgements based upon horrible music samples! I have no clue what to listen for in relation to these samples, and sure you're consistent, so over time one could perhaps discern differences, but why have great equipment to listen to crappy music?
totally agree! dreadful over compressed music!! the only tune to check both amps is the old jazz tune, which is definitely less compressed, allowing instruments to breath. that tune allows for an assessment of speakers or amp qualities and weaknesses.
With this speaker the Cambridge sounds cleaner and punchier, but neither have tone controls, and I won't buy any amp with no tone controls. I'd go for the Cambridge AXA25 or 35, both of which have tone controls, or, if you need more power, the AXR85 and 100 receivers, which also have tone controls, and all four of them cost a lot less than the 81 or the Audiolab. The Audiolab also sounds more veiled and compressed to me than the Cambridge amps
@@34332 oh ok, must admit I don't have the audiolab, only thought I'd seen tone controls in a review. The Cambridge defo doesn't though. Seen lots of people complaining about that 😉
To me Audioloab sounds just a tad bit veiled, but not by a whole lot. I have the audiolab paired with Triangle BR03s and I can tell you it sounds pretty nice and open and clean
@@Chris-hy6jy For some reason, I just assumed the Cambridge had tone controls accesible thru the menu. In that case, I would get the AXA25 or 35, both of which do have tone controls, or thr AXR85 and 100 receivers which also have tone controls> I have edited my OP to reflect that neither of these amps have them
The measurememts for the CXA81 just came out on ASR. Objectively, it is awful. Subjectively, it is what you think it is pr what you want it to be. There.
sounds like there's just a little more clarity on the mids and highs with the CA. Thanks for the great video! I love these type of sound comparisons.
You are doing fantastic work. Really appreciate. Thanks!
Cambridge FTW... I love the new songs.. nice variation, this format is MUCH better than the normal 2 songs.
Audiolab looks like a gas stove with those three knobs. One day early morning you'll be half asleep when you'll realise you were trying to cook your omlet on top of the amp 🍳
7000A VS CXA81 MKII please! for a fear comparison :)
I had requested this comparison in a different video and you added this so quickly, so thank you for listening to my request. My own take after listening to the comparison is that CXA81 sounds a little bit more open at the top end and punchier, also better sound stage. However the Audiolab sounds amazingly close for being 300$ cheaper. I own the Audiolab 6000A and very happy with it so far.
Can you also do a comparison of these two amps with slightly more forward/brighter speakers like KEF LS50? @Lars Topac also mentioned that the results will be interesting with a brighter speaker. Thanks in advance! Other idea would be Audiolab with the EVOs and KEFs
Cambridge Audio is the winner: hands down, i heard them live. A superior amp. With tone controls it would be unbeatable for its price and well above.
Both fine amps..I have the 81 and won't be changing it..
Both sound good but I prefer the bigger and more spacious sound of the CXA 81. Good test with many various comparisons.
I owned a cxa81 and it was a fantastic amp for the money. The reason I sold it was the volume control from the remote goes up and down with a factor of 5. In other words rather than going from 10 to 11, the remote takes the volume from 10 to 15 to 20 ect. This is unacceptable especially at lower listening levels. Aside from that it was the best amp I have owned.
I agree! Thankfully, i got myself an RME ADI-2 DAC FS which allows for 0.5DB adjustments and Tone Controls (its got auto variable loudness as well). Takes the bass performance (both quality and quantity) of the CXA81 two notches higher!
Thanks for the video! Just what I wanted to hear. What I hear is that both amps makes Evo 4.2 to shine!
I appreciate all the amp comparison videos @E Project, but in all honesty, this video is no exemption, listening via a high-end headphone I can hear absolutely no difference when you switch between amps, which isn't unexpected :D
cannot choose which sounds better... the available options and connections would make my purchasing decision. the 81 has balanced inputs so I would probably pick it.
What a head to head fight between these two terrific integrated amps. You can't go wrong with these two. Thank you! And I hope we could see the match up again with the LS50 meta.
How wrong you are !.
Had these two amps with these speakers at home for testing.As much as i liked well controlled bass on audiolab the rest of the spectrum is much better on cxa.
I wish the 6000a was better looking, makes you want to put a tea towel over it . However the sound is just Wow .
LOL. yes looks like a cheap hotel clock radio
I couldn't agree more! I thought that it was just me who thought this way about it's looks!
Czasami "mały" może więcej@@errorsofmodernism9715
@@LeoRousseau i buy silver version. Looks like normal. Better than the black version
The Audiolab looks like a small Bryston. Cool.
6000a has tighter, faster, more focused bass but less of it than the CA. I like them both though.
Both sound fantastic……..probably Caimbridge will be a better choice for someone who wants to play loud since it doesn’t harden the sound when pushed hard……i d like to listen those speakers with Rotel!!!!
Which Rotel you got?
Comparing 50 w to 80 w amp? Why not compare with 8300a?
i have the 6000a and matched well with my bw606s2. the 81 is a brighter amp and matched really well with the evo which is a darker speaker.the 6000a is a nuetral amp and matches well with bright speakers like the bw606s2 and kef ls50.
I disagree. I have the CXA81 and Evo 4.2 and they are a terrible match. The Evo 4.2 is already good at digging up resolution though it is not a bright speaker per se. Add the CXA81 into the mix and it becomes a bright speaker, losing almost all semblence of warmth. Most of my friends who have the Evo 4.2 drive it with the Alab 6000a and they love the said combination. Not surprising since the Audiolab and Wharfedale are related concerns and the Amp was developed at the same time as the Evo 4.2
Huh I think the complete opposite to what you said tbh.
My choice cxa81. Such nice
Cambridge sounds brighter, seems to give more Space to these electronic sounds. When it comes to Jazz Audiolab is my favorite. 👍
Cxa 81 sounds very nice with the evos.
what do you think if i combine cxa81 with polk r200? Thanks
\
The 81 has a very distinctive (signature) sound, overall tilted treble and bass and warm sounding mids. It's more forgiving for bad recordings. The 6000a is, imo, the most neutral sounding, where you listen to your chain components, not the amp's signature. The 6000a shines when you turn up volume, complete lack of SS hardness, often experienced with Solid States.
In the end it's a matter of taste, as they both sound great, but for me the 6000a is more 'true to the source' and much cheaper. That said, the 81 got more option like XLR inputs, etc.
For both amps you need relative easy-to-drive speakers, like 89+ dB sensitivity and 8 ohm for best dynamics. Soundstage and imaging for both is excellent, perhaps for the 81 it's slightly better. I found the treble on the 6000a a bit more substantial, like more real.
Both lack tonecontrol, something to consider. The 81 doesn't have a phonestage, where the 6000a does (and a good one). Both DAC's in amps are very good, not an afterthought. Still, it can pay off to buy a DAC or phonestage seperatly.
Great comparison again E Project, as I wondered how the EVO would sound. I'm so happy with the changed songs 😄
HHmmm, they're both class a/b, not SS.
@@martyn5416SS means solid state.
Beautiful Cambridge
Test the Arcam SA10, ordered mine and it's arriving Tomorrow.
I suppose you are ell palying it trogh integrated DACs of ams right?
i cant chose which is better, cxa81 for the look, 6000A for the best price
the only tune worth listening to is the jazz tune as is way less compressed (perhaps, even, completely uncompressed). both amps are really nice. the cambridge is 'fatter' giving some extra warmth, but not sacrificing clarity; the audiolab is nimble and agile and more honest to the source. wonderful amps!
My concern is which sounds more correct ?
The cxa81 seems better to my ears, but if i was listening to just a speaker, i woulld say it is because it has slightly elevated mids/highs.
Is "blacker blacks" a more accurate amplifier ?
Either way, without tone controls, neither is an option for me. I'm in a bigger room, far away, and listening volumes deeper into the fletcher-munson curve.
Thank you for the opportunity to hear some excellently reviewed amps.
Hi, what are those pads Evos are laying on?
CXA81 is better.
But Audiolab is very good too.
Thank you for the superb comparison and for adding more songs in your tests.
In my opinion Audiolab is the winner in price/performance quality. Really like that amp.
Cambridge results less open but has got better high frequencies.
The real question is Audiolab 6300 vs Audiolab 8300.
Is it worth it?
Hope you test them soon.
Thanks
-Nick
In Cambridge, the sound stage is much more serious. Real 3D sound. Audiolab cannot do that.
What mic are you using?
thanks, at this time, two MXL V250, now I am using two MXL V250 + Zoom H8
What cables do you use?????
monster standard thx certified 16 gauge speaker cable
I couldn't find any difference at all. I mean at all. And I think the sound source didn't actually change but the image...
Cambridge 99.1%
Audiolab 99%
Audiolab 6000A
very close one.
Cambridge Audio CXA81 loses-little dynamics, pressure, sibilants emphasizes, loudly. AUDIOLAB 6000A is a correct, dense, dynamic sound.AUDIOLAB 6000A plays naturally!!!In 2021, the best amplifier of the year is again what hifi AUDIOLAB 6000A magazine!!!
I really like these comparisons and they are very helpful. BUT: I just think it is awful to have to make judgements based upon horrible music samples! I have no clue what to listen for in relation to these samples, and sure you're consistent, so over time one could perhaps discern differences, but why have great equipment to listen to crappy music?
totally agree! dreadful over compressed music!! the only tune to check both amps is the old jazz tune, which is definitely less compressed, allowing instruments to breath. that tune allows for an assessment of speakers or amp qualities and weaknesses.
There are slight position changes between amps try to avoid this. You also do not mention what connections you use.
Same )
With this speaker the Cambridge sounds cleaner and punchier, but neither have tone controls, and I won't buy any amp with no tone controls. I'd go for the Cambridge AXA25 or 35, both of which have tone controls, or, if you need more power, the AXR85 and 100 receivers, which also have tone controls, and all four of them cost a lot less than the 81 or the Audiolab. The Audiolab also sounds more veiled and compressed to me than the Cambridge amps
I think you have that the wrong way around? The Cambridge has no tone controls, the 6000A does.
@@Chris-hy6jy
Not sure re. the Cambridge, but the Audiolab 6000A does NOT have tonecontrol, just balance and 3 DAC filters. I own the 6000A ;)
@@34332 oh ok, must admit I don't have the audiolab, only thought I'd seen tone controls in a review. The Cambridge defo doesn't though. Seen lots of people complaining about that 😉
To me Audioloab sounds just a tad bit veiled, but not by a whole lot. I have the audiolab paired with Triangle BR03s and I can tell you it sounds pretty nice and open and clean
@@Chris-hy6jy For some reason, I just assumed the Cambridge had tone controls accesible thru the menu. In that case, I would get the AXA25 or 35, both of which do have tone controls, or thr AXR85 and 100 receivers which also have tone controls> I have edited my OP to reflect that neither of these amps have them
🤔🎧🎶🎶🎶🎶CXA81 👍👍👍👍👍🇵🇱
Both are same
Check out Audio science review, they measured the cxa81 !.
Pretty obvious. The Cambridge blew that 6000a out of the water… as expected.
God I hate these songs!
The measurememts for the CXA81 just came out on ASR. Objectively, it is awful. Subjectively, it is what you think it is pr what you want it to be. There.