I have owned the Arcam CD62T for a few years now I also have a Cambridge 340 CD player,and a few others. The Arcam has a much better sound quality than the Cambridge,for the price the Arcam is a well made unit , it is heavy in weight. A well made unit, but it is when you play the CDs that you notice the superb sound.

This is a nice CD player. I got this off Ebay when my NAD c350 amp blew up and I replaced it with a marantz PM7200, the grey plastic of my NAD c520i just didn't work with me any more. I decided on this as a result of the previous experience my brother had with his A65 amp. There is beauty to be revealed from CD's, suffcient weight (a tad lean for my tastes) and sonic depth for a massive range of music from Sigur Ros to Nick Drake and beyond. I wish for a lititle more sparkle, but, hurt by Johnny Cash has me collapsing in on myself with contentment. Use with thoughtful gentle music, almost beautiful music, it lacks the authority to really kick it and rock! Once I get my KEF Q5's back from the shop (currently using my "spare" Q1's) I'm sure it will be better and will have the presence that it desrves.

A Nice CD player I spent £200 (approx. $420 at the time) and don't regret it!

Warm and detailed sound Great readable display Good build quality and tray

Poor build quality remote control CD read speed slow compare to the Rotel

Since I was using a DVD player for listening to my music, I knew that it was the weakest link of my system as far as sound reproduction. I decided to bring my DVD player (Marantz DVD 4200) with me to some hi-fi stores and compare it's sound reproduction against some dedicated CD players to see if it was worth the extra bucks. To my surprise, the sound improvement was a lot more then I expected. I compared the Arcam CD62 with the Cambridge Audio D500SE and the Rotel RCD-02. This three players sounded great but the arcam sounded better to me and my friend. Enought to justify is higher price. Voices, especially, sounded more warm and alive with the CD62. The sound is detailed and seems a little more engaging to me. I can understand that some people prefer the two others, as they both sound great too, but a little less involving for me..It can be just the system used for the test (B&W 603 S3 and Arcam A85 amp). I tried one HDCD CD (Tool - Lateralus) and compared it with the Rotel RCD-02 wich have a HDCD decoder and to my surprise the Arcam still sounded better.

Similar Products Used:

Rotel RCD-02, Cambridge Audio D500SE, Nakamichi MB-10.

Excellent bass and midrange. Superior soundstage compared to both Marantz CD67 units previously owned.

Tendency toward slight brightness on top but not so annoying as to bring on listener fatigue.

I didn't really want to buy a new CD player. Was forced to do so when my Marantz CD67SE suddenly crapped out. Was quite pleased with the sound quality of the Marantz. But this was the second Marantz CD67 unit that crapped out unexpectedly after one year's use. I negotiated a deal with GNP Pasadena to buy their one-month old in-store demo unit Arcam CD62. Turns out to be the best 584 bucks I ever spent on an audio product. The Arcam has a sonic signature that puts the Marantz to shame. Pure tonal accuracy from bass fundamentals through upper midrange. Slightly bright on top. But by comparison the Marantz is tonally inaccurate in every key respect. Low level details come through with Arcam that Marantz just blurs. The Arcam also tracks even the most difficult CD with aplomb. My cherished Toscanini farewell of 4/4/54 was a minefield with Marantz. Arcam tracks it all flawlessly. I feel I am hearing everything for the first time.

Similar Products Used:

SUMO NINE CLASS A AMP; ADCOM GTP500 PREAMP/TUNER; DYNAUDIO AUDIENCE 42 speakers. REGA P2 turntable. Arcam is so good it gives the REGA P2 SERIOUS COMPETITION (like no other CD player I've ever owned).

guitard and piano sound great build look

the sound is a little bit shinny and close

very great player with superb sound.very well build quality and made in uk!

Similar Products Used:

nad marantz sony sacd

Great ! The best cd player of his category of price. I've tested also NAD C541i and new Rotel CD2 and Arcam 62 always was best. Also I want to say that the CD62 has the same superb sound of his famous brother CD72.

Similar Products Used:

Arcam diva cd72

see above

cheaper remote, but remember- remotes dont make music. Hey- this is an Arcam cd player for under 600 bucks. no more need be said.

i demo'd the arcam against the NAD C541i. Price difference was a mere 100 bucks, giving the NAD a bit of an advantage. I was certain that unless there were some dramatic sonic improvements, the NAD was the winner before the start. To say the least, there are some major differences in the way each player approaches a cd. The NAD plays its cards a bit closer to its chest. the soundstage is a bit more reserved, laid back, subdued without being muffled. there is plenty of detail in the upper and midrange, and its very pleasing on the ears. no way to fatigue listening to this one. It presents its lower frequencies and all bass with a lingering, echoey quality. it rolls into the notes and holds them their. this can be enveloping but also steals detail from the range. The Arcam, was a different story entirely. Lively, detailed, dramatic, emotional! I got excited about the music. Amazing, up front soundstage. Effortless imaging. right-there vocals. detail and detail to spare! So nice. there is a certain surgical precision to this player that a lover of detail is consumed by. Bass is delivered with that same razor quality, having impact and depth in spite of its immediacy. A true delight to listen to. Removing layers of gauze from the music? it really is true here. just wonderful. A rare beast in this country of mass market machines. A must-buy.

Similar Products Used:

cambridge d-500se, NAD c521i and 541i, rotel, pioneer