Arcam CD82T versus CD72T

The 72T is a sleeper and is better sounding than the FMJ. I would recommend keeping the 72 and consider an upgrade at the preamp or amp end. Until you make that move, you will not truly get the most out of the upgrade to the CD player.

I HAD A72T WITH A "YAMAHA 640" AV RECIEVER AND MISSION 753 SPEAKERS. I ALSO HAVE SENNHISER 590 AND RECENTLY 650 HEADPHONES. I FELT THAT THE CD73T DEMOED IN A HIFI SHOP SOUNDED BETTER THAN THE 72T BUT WAS UNCONVINCED UNTIL I HEARED THE CD93T. I THEN DECIDED TO UPGRADE TO THE CD 82T AND CAN HONESTLY SAY THAT THE SOUND IS MUCH MORE DETAILED AND CLEARER WITHOUT BEING ANALYTICAL :( WHICH IS A PUT OFF ) HERE IN THE UK THE UPGRADE COST £199 AND TOOK A COUPLE OF HRS.
THE MINIDISC RECORDINGS OFF THE 82 HAVE FAR MORE MUSICAL INFORMATION THAN THE 72. I COULD DEFINITELTY HEAR ENOUGH OF A DIFFERENCE ESPECIALLY WITH THE HEADPHONES WHICH ARE VERY PRECISE. IS IT WORTH £199?: THAT IS A VALUE JUDGEMENT YOU CAN MAKE BUT ONLY ON YOUR SYSTEM AND TASTE IN MUSIC.WITH ROCK, METAL OR GARAGE A BETTER AMPLIFICATION /PRE AMP MIGHT BRING BETTER BENEFITS

Aptly, I spent today auditioning the CD73 and CD82. I spent some time whacking backwards and forwards between the two, testing the same tracks, and it became clear that the 82 had a more transparent, and projected a 'being there' feel. Yes, it was £180 more, but I decided that it was worth the extra cash just to get the best from my ever-enlarging record collection. Irony is, at the moment I'm listening mainly to Scratchy old blues records. Not very Hifi.