Smooth highs, detail, atmospheric sound, great build quality

Exaggerated low-end bass, serious lack of mid-bass, midrange too cozy, lacks drive, punch and attack

When I first heard this player, I was blown away by the smooth and detailed highs, the warm midrange and the ultra-deep bass. It doesn't have any of that digital harshness that so many CD players have, and I have discovered bass lines that I didn't know existed in my record collection. After a few months, I started feeling that the music wasn't punchy enough. It was like the bass drums were gone in the mix. Just for fun, I pulled out my old $120 Sony CDP-227ESD from 1988. All of a sudden, the bass drums were back! I compared the players with many different types of music and eventually realized that I enjoyed my old $120 Sony more than my new $700 Arcam... I was seduced by the Arcam CD72 (see my previous review). Its sound is very pleasing at first, but I have since identified the following weaknesses: - the deep bass is exaggerated and there is a serious lack of mid-bass. - the midrange is too creamy and has poor focus on vocals. - the highs are so smooth that they round off the edges of everything. The result is that rhythmic music that relies on mid-bass and drums lacks drive. You get the feeling that the music is off-beat, that there is something wrong in the rhythm department. Vocals lack focus and electric guitar lacks attack and sounds far too nice. I reasoned that, if a $120 Sony CD player from 1988 sounded this good, then the best CD-only player (not SACD) they have today should sound even better. This player is called CDP-XB740. I ordered it on-line for $300 without even auditioning it. I've had it for a couple of months now and all I can say is that the XB-740 is an absolutely amazing player. It beats the Arcam CD72 in every single department: sound, build quality and features. It has no problems with minimally scratched CD's, like the Arcam had. And all this for less than half the price! I have lived with the Arcam for a year and a half, so I know what I'm talking about. I'm not saying the CD72 is crap, but you must really like the rather peculiar sound it produces. Don't buy it without auditioning it (preferrably in your own system). If you listen to rock music (like me), you should definitely stay away from the CD72. If you listen to ambient or classical, however, you might like it. It alters the sound in a such a way that it seduces your ears. I have found the Sony CDP-XB740 to be a better player for all types of music.

Similar Products Used:

Sony CDP-XB740

Warmth, transparency, you can turn the display off. Basically everything is positive!

None as far as the player per se. But the remote isn't my favorite... Bad range. Can't reach the player from pretty good angles where you should be able to. The color of the remote may not be a big deal but I think it should be black if the player is black. I would like the buttons to be of metal instead of plastic, even if they really look metal!

WOW! What a player!!! This is really a CD player. And with the Nordost Solar Wind interconnectors it sounds wonderful. It beats any CD player in this price range! Naim is obviously a better choice, but you have to add $2000 and the question is, is it worth it? I don't think so!

Close live sound,warm, detailed, much bass punch, really good looking machine, CD-text is standard feature,

Remote for DVD & CD, my wife hates it... The Arcam doesn't like minimally scratched CDs.

To cut a long story short. I've tried several CD Players over the years, didn't yet find a in every way musical player like the CD 72 T. The player discovers details in music without presenting it in a clinical way at all. The Sound is warm an compared with sharp/harsh sounding players like Marantz CD 6000 OSE as well as the LE Version. The bass is very precise and several times I found another bassline, no player before gave me the possebility to to listen to. Listen to the machine at your lokal Arcam Dealer, the time can't be wasted. Also not a cent to be spend in a better way... Listening to the NAD 541i in direct comparision for nearly two hours I found the CD 72 T the better player in all categories: allround player, musicality, detail. The music seems to breathe played on the Arcam. While the keyboards on Joe Jacksons song "sentimental thing" on the CD 72 T sound warm and creamy, the NAD creates a really poor sounding synthie on this ocassion. The closely analogue sound of the Who's Next Album gave me the last kick to buy the Arcam. A long way of suffering from CD sound had come to an end.

Similar Products Used:

This should not be misunderstood: a kind of similar might be the NAD 541i ++, Pioneer PDS 601 ++; Marantz CD 6000 OSE + LE (I was badly impressed what these highly recommandet players did to my ears

Amazing resolution and depth compared to my previous rotel. Bass a lot tighter and wider soundstage. Had to listen to my whole cd collection again, it all sounded so much better!

er...um...oh yeah, I bought mine 2 weeks before the newer tweaked model arrived...but mine still kicks ass.

Amp: Marantz pm6010ose Speakers: Tannoy M15 Due to replace the amp with a valve one now. This Arcam certainly rocks!

Recreation of music with resolution and clarity - without being overbearing and hard on the ears (as I found with Naim and Musical Fidelity's A3 CD player). The ability to upgrade to a ring-dac (CD92T).

Doesn't play HDCD disks.

Wow, I can't help but write a review after reading the previous review. I know that Naim has plenty of cachet with the audio world - I've listened to Naim, as well as Creek, Rega, and Arcam. In my own opinion the Arcam CD72T beats anything in its price range. The only player that even came somewhat close was the Creek (the older model, not the new silver one). As far a Naim is concerned, I listened to a Naim system at a dealer that really pushes the brand - I liked the sound at first, but after some time my ears started hurting a bit - perhaps too much resolution, for me, anyway. Possibly the previous reviewer listened at a dealer which had poorly set up the unit. My humble Carver HR732 Receiver/Polk 10B monitor (old stuff) system has never sounded so good. I believe a large part of this is the inclusion of Kimber PBJs and 4TC Speaker wire in my system, along with Audioquest's inexpensive RF collars. By the way, after lengthy comparison of integrated amps, I have ordered a Bryston B60R - excellent sound and a 20 year warranty. Eat my dust, Naim. (Just kidding, sort of)

Similar Products Used:

I had a Carver CD player from the early 90s. It was pretty damn good - I do feel that the Arcam CD72T is better. My Carver HR732 Receiver is pretty damn good too, especially for $500 list.

Treble fine and crisp. Bass goes deep Bouncy and lively-may suit certain styles/taste

Synthetic and very ''digital'' sound Voices poorly resolved Ultimately very unsatisfying musically-lacks natural flow and timing

Oh dear. Why so few stars amidst all these good reviews? Let me explain I auditioned the CD72 vs a Rega Planet 2000 (both well run-in etc) for my second home system comprising Audiolab 8000a and Dynaudio Audience 42. Interconnects by Chord, spkr cable Naim NACA5. My main system is all Naim, CDX/XPS 52/Scap 140x2 active SBL''s. Now I know that this means judging lesser systems is always going to be about compromises but at the price of the Arcam/Planet I expected entertainment at least. So what is good. Well it certainly does detail well, and the accuracy at the top end is nice and sharp. It also does not have the thick and sl soft ''Arcam sound'' i have heard via some of their CD/amps in the past. Indeed everything bounces along with an extended (if poorly resolved) bass and a character that is immediately engaging. But listening more I realised it is all so ersatz, such a fundamentally synthetic and (cliche alert) HI Fi sound. the music has no natural flow or grace and voices in particular sound thin and lifeless. Their is no grit when needed, no spine tingling moments. When it plays classical it is all sweet and organised without ever exciting. Fast complex rock just has it all in bits, not so much congested as cluttered and disorganised. The planet 2000 sounds different. The first impression is less impressive but a good listen shows that everything is more balanced and natural. The bass is noticeably less extended but has detail and character. Voices have an edge and life and faster tracks remain integrated without crashing into pieces as the Arcam. For me the Planet played music, connecting you to the recording in a way the Arcam just approximates. My all-Naim kit has a distinctive style which others may not like. The Arcam is the antithesis of this, ultimately a superficially impressive player that I could never live with on a regular basis. I wonder if it may impress many on brief demo, and dissapoint many after extended ownership. I bought the Rega.

Similar Products Used:

Rega Planet 2000 Meridian 506.2 Naim CDX/XPS

Detail, bass , dynamic, perform as 2 times player

None in this price

I bought this player last year and very happy with it, very detail and musical.well built My system Electrocompaniet ECI3, Dynaudio contour 1.1, Audio craft intercinnect, Cardas crosslink 1S cable.

Really musical.

none in its price range.

I thinked I made a wise choice although the price I paid a bit too high. I thinked this cd 72 would work perfectly with my Mission 782.

Similar Products Used:

Denon

Taut bass, great soundstage, clear presentation with excellent separation.

Keeps me up at night while I play ''just one more track''.

OK so Brad and others (previous reviews)have given you the lowdown on this machine. This is one fantastic player. It has replaced the excellent Arcam Alpha 7SE which, when I bought it, I thought was fantastic. The CD72T however takens things to a whole new level. From the moment when you first press the ''open'' button and the tray smoothly glides out you know that this is a product of real quality. The sit back and listen - its a revelation! CDs that I have been listening to for years have been given a whole new lease of life. The bass is much tighter than the 7SE, and the separation of the instruments is much more evident. I found that the 7SE excelled at acoustic and classical music but was a bit light when it came to rock and dance - the taut bass just wasn''t there. The CD72T is much more of an all-rounder that excels with the full range of my eclectic taste - from X-Ray Spex/Clash to Elgar/Schoenberg. It is doubtful whether you will get a better machine for under £500 (certainly from those I''ve auditioned). My system: NAD 370 Amp (bags of power with lots of sensitivity) Tannoy Revolution R3 speakers (not rockers like B&W 603s2 but great all-rounders) QED Silver Anniversary bi-wire (clean and crisp) VDH III Hybrid 102(superb interconnect that will enhance any system)

Similar Products Used:

Alpha 7SE, Marantz 6000 OSE LE, NAD 521

detailed and easy to listen to

none

Not used to doing reviews, but I wanted to put this info out about the CD72.

I listened to the Arcam Diva CD72 at a store in town and absolutely loved it. The price is a bit more than I can afford at the moment ($799), but I believe the price is right.

I listened to this along-side a Linn at $1600, the Arcam Alpha 7 SE, and a bad NAD (can't remember the model-around $500).

The Linn sounded great, but was tiring to listen to after a while. Incredible strength. Very forward.

The NAD was very flat. Sorry I can't remember the model.

The Alpha 7 SE was nice and detailed, but doesn't have the 24/96 chip--not the greatest concern, but definitely a consideration.

The CD72 was very pleasant. There was presence to the sound without it being in my face. I felt like this is something I could spend hours listening to. It sounded very "right"--like I knew this was the one.

The CD72 costs more than I can spend right now, but I feel it is worth it, and I will consider buying it in the future.