Deep bass, full midrange, detailed and smooth treble, great build quality

No HDCD (if that's a weakness)

I must have spent at least six months trying to find the "ideal" CD player for under $500. Of course, there is no such player. When I found out about HDCD, I set out to find a HDCD comaptible player, which led me onto the wrong track. A CD player should sound good with the CD's you have and will buy, not the ones that you don't have and probably wont buy, because your favourite artists don't release HDCD disks. HDCD can, at the most, only be a slight improvement of the standard 16-bit CD format. After all, it's encoded with "random noise" in the least significant bit of the 16 bits. Actually, an HDCD disk must sound worse on a non-HDCD player, since the LSB is used for other purposes.

Anyway, in my quest for HDCD players, I listened to H/K HD760, which sounded pretty good, but the treble was too harsh (nice bass, though). The Denon DCD-1450/1550 (no HDCD) were way to bright for my taste (great build quality, however). The Marantz 6000OSE (no HDCD) had a very warm and nice sound, but the treble was almost "cut off", and it couldn't handle CD-R very well. NAD C541 had a great, balanced sound, but the build quality and looks were poor. I then realized that there were no good HDCD players in my price range.

Actually, the very first CD player I had auditioned, before I started looking for HDCD players, was the Arcam DIVA CD72. At the time, I thought it was way too expensive ($700). I really liked it, though. It's big brother, the CD92, has HDCD, but is ridiculously expensive. I really wanted an analogue sounding player, since I was sick and tired of the harshness of my old Sony CD player.

When I realized, after som listening and some research, that HDCD wasn't going to save the world and be the solution to all things digital, I came back to the CD72 and found (again) how great a player it is. The bass is deep and tight, the mirange is full (some say slightly forward) and the highs are detailed and smooth. Especially the highs are wonderful. YOu really get a vinyl feel, which is exactly what I was after, but without losing the details.

This player is a bit expensive, in my opinion, but has the best price/value ratio I could find. It will make you want to listen to all your CDs again, without tiring your ears with harsh treble. The build quality is great, not like the old awful plastic Arcam players. It doesn't have a lot of functions, no CD text, etc, but who cares? It's a player.

My system:
pre-amp: Linn Kolektor
power-amp: Rotel RB-991
interconnects: Cambridge Pacific
speakers: Infinity Kappa 90
speaker cables: LS Kabel (German make for bi-wiring)

Similar Products Used:

None, but compared to H/K HD760, Sony SACD940, Denon DCD-1550, Marantz 6000OSE and NAD 541

everything but remote

remote has small buttons with smaller type

this is the second best player I've ever heard anywhere near it's price range. ($20,000 cd players are a little much.) I have not heard the cd92 or fmj cd23 yet. the kinergetics 20A has better sibilance in the vocals and is slightly more clear overall, but they don't make it anymore and you can't even find it used.

This player has wonderful clarity, bass, depth, warmth, etc. I'm not too good with all the buzz words that audiophiles use. I just know how this and all of the "similar products used" sound like the back of my hand and when I listen to the cd72 I just get filled with this warm feeling from head to toe. I can't explain it.

aside from sound quality, it has excellent program features for those of you who don't just listen to a disc all the way through.

For anyone who cares, I normally use an arcam p75 and paradigm reference studio 40s with it. I've put 60s, 100s, etc. with it though. For the cable: standard monster interconnects with some symo cable spade plugs. I've switched to $1000 dollar silver interconnects. they made it sound even better overall. I switched out the supplied power cord with an MIT Z cord which made the sound a lot more distinct, especially the bass. I also switched between 16 guage twisted pair and MIT t5. the mit cable made a smaller difference than the z cord. Not to get into a cable review, I just want to demonstrate that I take the time to really evaluate things thoroughly.

Similar Products Used:

denon, sony es, pioneer elite, kinergetics

Fantastic sounding player. Neutral yet involving detailed sound that really hits the mark. Great looks, solid build.

None as yet.

Having listened to the Marantz, 7se, and the nad I was impressed by both sonically. I was put off the nad player by reliability horror stories and I just could'nt live with the looks of the 7se when spending close to £300. The Marantz player sounded good but - Then came the cd72. Sonically it was very similar to the 7se but more refined and detailed. The looks are unarcam like in that they are very stylish, miles ahead of any player of a similar price. However, obviously we buy a player for its sound and the Arcam cd72 does not disappoint. If you are looking at players such as the ones mentioned above, the cd72 may cost a little more but it is worth every penny. You won't regret spending £100 more to have the pleasure of owning this player. Also important to note is that Arcam is British.

equipment. B&W 603 s2
Arcam a85
Ecosse ca1 reference connects
qed biwire cable

Similar Products Used:

Nad 541. 7se, 6000osele

Sound

I am impressed by this CD-player with its astounding sound quality.

The bass is firm, the midrange is detailed and the higher regions is light and smooth.

No signs of getting "tired" when listening to the ViVA 72. This is a great buy with a small pricetag.

Similar Products Used:

Denon DCD1520
Sony DE-J 911

Great detailed sound, very smooth clear and crisp.

None

I've really just begun upgrading my system in the last 10 months. Last Xmas I bought the Marrantz SR7000 a/v receiver and over the summer have purchased Paradigm Studio 80 speakers.

I went to London Audio and talked to Michael and told him what I had in equipment and that I was relatively pleased with my Home Theatre, but I was set on improving my Audio Sound. As soon as he found out that I was using a Toshiba 3108 DVD Player for my audio source, he quickly recommended the ARCAM DIVA CD72. Other dealers had told me to improve cabling, amplifier, etc etc first. But Michael told me these three words - SOURCE SOURCE SOURCE. He set up a Marrantz 5000 Reciever (just one down from mine) and setup the ARCAM CD72 and a DVD player. We went back and forth from the DVD Player and the CD player and I was so impressed with the improvement. Diana Krall's voice actually sounded different, like it was a different singer. The CD Player better represented the true vocals much more than DVD. We tried a few different CD's and I was sold. He proved to me beyond a shadow of a doubt what my next purchase would be.

I week later I borrowed the ARCAM CD72 for an evening. My wife and I absolutely loved the sound. Neither of know all the techie buzzwords to use, but our ears new the difference. Every CD we owned sounded so much better. I hadn't been listening to about 75% of my CD's because on the real high quality cd's sounded good on the DVD player. We must have listened to every CD we own in one night. The next day we purchased the unit.

I highly, highly recommend the ARCAM CD72 and London Audio. They're very knowledgeable and willing to prove their recommendations.

I plan on possibly getting a Amplifier and Processor in the next 6 months or so. Rest assured that when that time comes, I'll be sticking to ARCAM, London Audio, and Michael.

Current Equipment:
Marrantz SR7000
ARCAM DIVA CD72
Toshiba SD-3108
Paradigm Studio 80's
Paradigm Titan's (Rears)
Paradigm C-370 (Centre)
Cerwin Vega (Sub)
XLO Interconnects
Crankin Cable 12 gauge

Similar Products Used:

Heard Rotel, NAD, SONY (in store)

Ergonomics, build, treble, detail separation.

Mid-bass.

The Arcam CD72 costs $700. How much better is it than my old $300 Yamaha CDX-490? About 10-20%. Despite the glowing reviews here, the CD72 is not dramatically better than a good budget player. Yes, it is more airy, it has more detail resolution on the top end, instruments are better separated and it is a nice player to look at. It may even be the best $700 CD player but it's not anything that is going to knock you down if you're used to a relatively good sound already. A particular weakness is the mid-bass. On many jazz recordings it sounds as if a whole octave is missing, like the player took a walk (say 80-150hz). Down at 40 or 30 Hz it is quite present however. Some may like this sound but I feel it saps a lot of the warmth of recordings and makes some sound a bit clinical. Certainly one must have a capable and slightly warm sounding amplifier to match. Hopefully with more running in, it will soften up. 3 days with power and play does wonders.

Similar Products Used:

Rega Planet 2000, Yamaha CDX-490

transparency, dynamic range, looks

not much, maybe lack of drive if i were to be picky.

As other reviewers, i was torn between this and the 7SE.

I painstakingly reseached prices to get the best deal, and initially managed to find a Ex-demo 7SE for £175 and a CD9 for £300, although i couldn't manage to listen to either. I had however listened to the CD72 and was very impressed.

Eventually i ordered the 7SE, only to cancel a week later as the dealer was mucking me around with delivery dates and i couldn't bear the plasticy look, poor reliability & power hum stories etc. (as well as not having had the chance to listen to it).

I then purchased a new CD72 (non text) for £300 (wanted the CD72T for £360 but they were out of stock), and think i made the best decision.

Compared to the NAD 521 i was using previously, the CD72 sounds much more transparent /airy and uncovers substantially more detail, stero imaging is also much improved. Rhythm and drive have been sacrificed to some extent (the NAD had more 'bite', but the result is a much smoother,(maybe softer) fuller sound. The dynamic range is also much more preserved than the NAD.

I think build quality is good, but could be a little better, for example the loading mechanisim is a little flimsy.

The remote doubles up as the ARCAM DVD player controller, great if you have the DVD, but annoying to have all that wasted space / buttons if you don't.

I'm still intrigued as to the sonic differences between the CD72 and the CD72T (and if there is an upgrade to it or not). Anyone compared them?


ARCAM CD72
NAD C370
B&W DM602 S3

Similar Products Used:

NAD 521

Detail- best in class Bass-- tight and stong to the bottom Air/Space- great layering effect

None. Some ultra expensive cd players have minor refinements.

I had been agonizing over cd players I could afford, in the sub $2,000 range. I had gotten pretty numb from trying to find any significantly detailed for that price range.
If cost is no object, I am sure a LINN cd-12 or Musical fidelity Nu-vista cd player would be on my list. But those are insanely expensive. They should be beyond any real criticism.
Most cd players I listened to, including the crop of tube output cd players from the cheapest Jolida, and ah tjoeb, to amc and sonic frontiers all had glaring problems. The bass wasn't great, nor was the slam. They all seemed to forfeit resoloution for euphonic musicality.
I decided, a solid state cd player was going to be my target.
First off, let me say that n various dealers, I did use high res amps, cabling and speakers: a few are listed here:
Avalon opus, Joseph audio rm25, VMPS ribbons, Aerial acoustics, avante garde duo, and dunlavy sc-IV. I made sure I heard the more expensive cdp's on as many of these speakers as I could. Especially the Arcam.
I used amps like Theta, Proceed, Conrad johnson, and other high end amps the dealers had setup. I wanted proof that this cd player handled the music, delivered the detail and what might be better for the money. The best way to do this was to take my time, and listen in as many combinations as possible.
My verdict: the Arcam cd-72 was capable of extracting even minute detail off a cd that other cd players didn't know was there. There is an amazing neutrality and layering of the sound. This cd player is not laid back like some of the Alpha series has been accused of.
The bass was FAR better than any of the tubed cd players I heard, including the meridian 506.20. There was simply no contest with the rotel and NAD. The vaunted sony 777es failed to impress me on redbook cd playback. I fail to see how this got an A+ . The NAD [$499] held it's own as a cd player against the 777es. [SACD is a different deal].
The Arcam was capable of that musicality, slam and detail that makes you say WHOA!...you just don't know what you are missing. It leaves Japanese vintage players for dead. [Denon, sony, Yamaha]
I believe this is one of those players that is so good for the money, that it seems to be the point of diminishing returns. Just for giggles, I went to the wadia/avalon room. The Opus are smooth characters, not the MOST revealing. So differences in playback between the wadia 861 and this player were so bloody subtle it took deep listening for an afternoon to put you're thumb on what the wadia did differently.
I am not challenging the vaunted $20k Wadia...but for a player that is this price, NOT to be embarrassed by a player that is $19,200 MORE is impressive. It still didn't leave me feeling the Arcam had any serious flaws.
Nothing was significantly lacking in it's presentation that it needs to be criticized. There are few cd players under $5k that can say that. Believe me when I say that some cd's over $1,000 have fatal flaws. The ARCAM doesn't.

Similar Products Used:

Rotel rcd-991, Adcom GCD-750, Denon, Meridian 506.20, Sony 777es [2 channel], Amc cd-6b, NAd c-541, and more

Full range highs, details, ok soundstage, good mids
no better machine for the money.

Fow mids non existing, eq like shaped sound, little grain

Exciting enough, expressive and involving.
Highs are fully reproduced, but from low mids down it seems manipulated: low mids are muted and lows overblown, does not handle fast transients that good, mids and vocals thou quite good.
I'ts this one or 2000$other.

Similar Products Used:

Rotel rcd 965bx (costed 500$ still the best), Marantz 6000ose, Nad 541.

warm, clarity, sweet,detail

no

My recent system:
- NAD C370 Integrated
- B&W 601s2 as front speaker with cabletalk 3 biwire
- QED Qunex2 interconnect
- Lovan Speakerstand
- and CD72 Cd player
For the firstime I'm very confuse choosing between this nice player and the older 7SE but after several weeks I think cd72 having build and sounds better than 7SE. Some people say it's better buy the older one's because it's cheaper but if you looks for the best never seen the cheaper ones just listen to the good ones and ejoy.... all the sonicaly sounds.