Rotel 1072 & Arcam 73 comparison

HKPearl,
In my opinion, Azur 640C is rather on Rotel 1072 side than Arcam's side in terms of characteristics. Azur 640C does things little less satisfying compare to Rotel 1072 to my ears. But the low freq. is more aggresive (in good way) than the Rotel which might be strong point to some audiophiles. I prefer to have excellent midrange sound, so Azur 640/540 lost against the Rotel in my system.

I was actually forgot to comment on the construction of the Rotel and the Arcam. Arcam's look is very nice a few feet away from the unit but when I touch to operate it, it is just not as good as the Rotel nor the Cambridge. But it is better than NAD. Rotel 1072's construction is very nice and feels solid or unbreakable. HOWEVER, at the end of the day the look doesn't really matter to most of us, I believe.

Enjoying the Rotel since early this year,very nice machine.Sound is especially good with an HDCD disc.
I printed a masterlist from the new HDCD site now owned and run by Microsoft.Turns out I have many HiRez recordings already,what a bonus.Eminently resalable stepping stone,keeper or both.No upgrade itch concerning anything digital since getting it.

That means british brand CD players got the upper hand.

I was just researching these two players (the Rotel and Arcam) and ordered the Arcam CD-73. It will be replacing a Classe CDP-10, which replaced a Sim Audio Moon Eclipse. I've been stepping down, selling my gear, pocketing the $ and still trying to be happy with the sound.

To me the Eclipse was really resolving and recreated the acoustic space really well, but a little dry and not too rhythmic. The CDP-10 was sweeter than the Eclipse, more analogue sounding if you will. Soundstage was slightly smaller, instruments less delineated than the Eclipse... still not great rhythm. The Eclipse had a stronger low-end than the Classe.

Subbing-in while I wait for my CD-73 to arrive is a very old Sony X111ES. This player is not any where near as sophisticated sounding as the others I have had, but it really has drive and gets my toes a tappin way more than the other players. I decided on the Arcam from what I read it had the music and rhythm thing called out in almost every review. What my Sony has convinced me of is that musical involvement through rhythmic drive is very important to me and the music I listen to. Hopefully the Arcam will have the Sony's pace with a little of the Classe's analogue-ness, and a dose of the Eclipse's definition and low-end response.

If the Arcam doesn't do it for me, I'll try the Rotel.

One huge thing I realized is that I was able to notice differences between the players I have had in my system, but those differences were quite subtle and not worth the price differences.

I have also had the original Rega Planet and Cambridge D500SE. I have also heard the Creek 5330 and the Arcam FMJ23 in my system. All the players I have had (or have heard in my system) have all had their own subtle qualities. Not a one did all things well, no matter what the price. I believe I can find a less expensive player (like the Arcam or Rotel) that does one or two things well, is well enough built (the Sim was an incredible piece of craftsmanship!) and matches my priorities close enough to stay. (I’m hoping the Arcam doesn’t feel cheap.)

My reference is my Rega p25 turntable with Dynavector 10x5 thru Gram Amp 2se. This is my example of meeting key priorities: Rhythm and musical meaning. Its bass is lacking and it's not really defined around instruments. Its imaging is fairly focused but there's a nice sparkle/air to the highs. This is what I'm looking for in a CD player.

PS Augustine, I really liked how you described the players (Rotel = 'A concert Grand Piano played by a rising star pianist.' Arcam is like 'Upright piano played by a maestro pianist.') I imagine the maestro would have rhythm and timing and the ability to convey musical meaning down pat. If he/she could play on a baby grand, perhaps I could be happy ;-)

Thanks for the post...I believe the Arcam 73 doesn't do HDCD though, so if you are listening to HDCDs on both systems it won't be a fair comparison.

I prefer the Arcam sound myself. I didn't buy a 72 when I got my first system together because the $400 difference between a Rotal RCD-961 and the Arcam 72 wasn't worth it to me at the time. But I liked the spaciousness more than the Rotel's accuracy, or what some might call brittleness.

My Rotel has also had some problems - it had a period last year where it wouldn't play anything for a week, then mysteriously the problem went away. Recently it's had some dropouts, but I got myself one of Herbie's Grungemaster CD stabilizers and that problem has also disappeared (and I got a noticable improvement in smoothness, clarity and a wee bit more of soundstage - almost like an Arcam!) too so I'm happy for now. Probably just needs the head realigned or some such, but it's out of warranty.