2. home-theater
  3. 1104425633

Rotel 1072 vs. Arcam CD73

Does anyone have any further thoughts on this subject? I've read the posts of the previous months and have previewed both players but am still having trouble arriving at a decision.

Unfortunately I had to hear each player at two different dealers, through two different amplifiers and two different sets of speakers. The Rotel had a commanding sound which is very detailed, whereas I didn't find much noteworthy about the Arcam. Later, after reading various reviews, I found that there is some agreement on this: people say the Arcam has a more "natural" and relaxed sound that you grow accustomed to and grow into while Rotel has a brighter, more enthusiastic sound. However, they also seem to say that the Arcam is better built, with the Wolfssen DAC, 24 bit, while Rotel uses older Burr Browns (how many bits?).

Reviewers seem to disagree about which has the wider and deeper soundstage. Does anyone have any opinions?

My intuition says to go with the Rotel, but I know my ears and tastes well enough to know that what I like on first listen is often not what I really like long term.

Furthermore, my receiver is an HK AVR-110, and the speakers are old Boston Acoustics A150s. With these speakers, I feel also that the brightness of the Rotel is a better companion than the Arcam.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.
rfprice
Ag insider logo xs@2x
knownothing
1,574 posts
 
Fjd523,

Interesting review of these players. I had a similar experience with these three players and selected the Cambridge 640C because of a personal preference for detailed presentation. Have since traded in the 640C v1 for the version 2. My retailer in Seattle (hawthorne stereo) was kind enough to exchange after a few months for only the difference in list price of the two units.

Don't know if you compared the Arcam cd73 to the version 1 or 2 of the 640C, but the version 2 is considerably better in terms of bass weight and resolution, overall imaging and sound stage compared with the original player. I reviewed these three players and some others here,
http://www.audioreview.com/cat/digital-sources/cd-players/cambridge-audio/PRD_299480_1586crx.aspx#review0

I am still enjoying the 640C v2. Glad you are happy with the Arcam. Different strokes.
pdn
438 posts
 
The Rotel RCD-1072 employs an 18 bit DAC but don't let that fool you just because it's not a 24 bit. I love mine and as I've said in a number of other threads, I believe it excels at playing smooth jazz (i.e. Boney James, Lee Ritenour, Larry Carlton, Norman Brown, etc) and that's what I use it primarily for. I have a 2nd Marantz CD player I use more for classic rock where I need a bit more slam and punch. Van Morrison CD's sound fantastic on the Rotel.
fjd6523
6 posts
 
Knownothing, I enjoyed your response. I did go back and forth auditioning the 640C and the CD73. It was my impression that the 640Cv2 did have more detail as you also concluded. Certainly both these players share the same level of quality as they directly compete with each other. These British units do share a similarity, best bang for the buck at these price points. I think , just as with speakers, it comes down to personal preference and presentation. I do believe the Arcam CD192 was superior to CD73 as well and would have walked away with that one if I could. I just wanted to tell my story in response to the original thread. I have since added another unit, an Arcam DV137 which basically continues on the same sonic signature to the 5.1 realm. This is still a work in progress and something that I have been wanting to do for a time while without sacrificing that level of playback quality that has spoiled me so much in the 2 ch world.

I am enjoying the subject of these posts to see what everyone has come away with in their sonic preferences for CD players.
More to discover