[Another] Boring question about CDP comparisons CD 192 and CD 37

[plastic penguin]

I know I know... DACs are still favourite BUT if it were your money and you were looking at the best Arcam CDP (forget the SACD of the 37 and the s/hand value of the 192)SQ-wise, does the 37 do enough to justify the price tag?

 

[Craig M.]

i've never heard the 192 pp, so this might not be much help, but i had a cd37 on home dem when i had a dacmagic - the difference was heart stoppingly small. i had them both plugged in at the same time playing the same song, when switching inputs i couldn't hear any difference. it took longer sessions to discern a difference - the dm had a bit of an edge to the treble in comparison, but otherwise very similar presentation. the 37 had great build quality though, don't know what they dampen the case with but it works! i had a roksan caspian here at the same time which wiped the floor with the dm and the 37 - imo.

 

[plastic penguin]

Interesting: I heard the 192 (very briefly about 19 months ago) and sounded very good, but not the 37.

There's a couple of reasons for starting this thread: The first is is it worthwhile buying something as a short-term fix? or just hang on to the 73T? the second reason is whatever source I choose will determine the speakers I nominate.

Cheers, Craig.

 

[Anonymous]

Why would the CD player define the speakers? There's not a deal of difference between CD players at a given price level, so I'd say you should be looking at things the other way round. Find the speakers you like, then take the rest from there.

 

[plastic penguin]

Why would the CD player define the speakers? There's not a deal of difference between CD players at a given price level, so I'd say you should be looking at things the other way round. Find the speakers you like, then take the rest from there.

Agree - there isn't a world of difference, but after fairly recent and comprehensive listen to Totem Arro and PMC DB1s at home for three days, the tonal differences are highlighted more with better speakers/source. If I was to choose the Totems the better CDP would be Arcam, whereas if I go the PMC route they are slightly more receded in the midband, as opposed to the more feisty Totems.

WHFI review of the 192 went to the tune of:"...snappy, articulate presentation...". The 37 has been referred to as a, "rich, broad character...". so, in real terms does this mean the 37 is warmer than the 192?

 

[Sorreltiger]

I upgraded from my CD72 last year and auditioned the 17, but not the 37, at Frank Harvey. The Rega Apollo was a better player and the Saturn (which I chose) was the best of all by some margin. I'd definitely put it on your audition list - there are some excellent prices around if you look carefully!

 

[plastic penguin]

Already considered Rega and dismissed it. I have nothing against the sound but because it's top loaded (and I have a wheelchair user in the house) it makes it tricky to accommodate.

 

[crusaderlord]

i started off with an Arcam CD73t 3 years ago which was a lovely player - but had an opportunity one day to listen to the CD73t, the 192 and the CD36 back to back in a demo.

i was very impressed by the CD36 and bought it (admittedly it was on clearance sale at £699 and i felt a bargain). Against the 192 it was richer and more body to the music and better bass - but if you like everything leaner then the 192 would more than suffice i would think.

this year i sold my CD36 and bought a 2nd hand CD37 for little extra outlay (one of the nice quirks about ebay) - i can confirm the CD37 is better - it retains the richness of the CD36 but the vocals are a little more forward (the one issue i had after 2 years with the CD36 was the vocals were a little laid back in the presentation)

before i sold the CD36 i listened to the CD37 against a Naim CD5XS and prefered the Arcam - for me it a great player and SACD does in fact sound better with the few discs i have which is a nice bonus

so overall i would say the CD37 is worth the money and is the best of the Arcam players - but against that you have see how low you can get a 192 for as 2nd hand this goes for a song.

 

[Anonymous]

You'll need to listen to both PP side-by-side IMO as they do both have different soundstages

The CD192 is a superb player; very fast, agile and articulate sound but so does the CD37. However the CD37 has a bit more of the original 'Arcam warmth' to it

 

[plastic penguin]

Thanks guys for the positive responses.

To hifilover: I would love to hear the CD192 alongside the 37 but as I would have to purchase one first from the bay, unless, of course, I'm lucky enough to stumble across a dealer-used model.

Crusaderlord: From a personal perspective are you saying the 37 is a 'typical sounding' Arcam? If so then it could well be the 192 maybe more my cuppa char. I should be more open to other brands, and indeed the brief affair I had with the new Audiolab, Cyrus and Naim Nait 5i certainly proved worthy, but as always, 'old habits die hard'... 😉

 

[Anonymous]

What about Exposure?

 

[crusaderlord]

Tricky question 'is the CD37 a typical Arcam sound' - yes in the sense that it has the same tonal style / presentation - i find the CD37 slightly brighter, slightly more forward than the CD36 so in that sense it is arguably more like the 192 that i recall - although I have only heard the 192 once in a demo so its hard to say much more - the CD37 retains the body and depth of the CD36 that i think was less evident on the 192.

The CD37 remains the best Arcam player i have heard though.

 

[6th.replicant]

I've gone from a 73 to a 37. Before opting for the 37, I home demo'd a mate's 192. Thought the 192 was wonderful, but then I demo'd a 37...

IME, the 37 has more detail, depth, texture and 'life' but without brightness or sibilance, with tighter and deeper bass, while classical and acoustic instruments still sound realistic.

Before grabbing a 37, I also tried a Cyrus CD 8 and a Naim CD 5 (ex-dem) but IMHO both sounded synthetic/too forward compared to the 37, especially with classical.

AND, the 37 is a stonkingly glorious SACD player 😉

PP, you must grab a 37 for a demo 🙂

 

[plastic penguin]

What about Exposure?

Ooooh, nice player. Alas I've only heard the 2010S which was a lot different to the 73T, in terms of attack and stonking treble, however, it didn't have the intimacy of the Arcam. The other issue with Exposure is there isn't any immediate dealers. The 2010 I heard was from a very friendly Exposure rep... ah, and another, quite justifiable reason for sticking with Arcam: Mrs. p will think it's my old player. There is madness in my method... 🙂

 

[plastic penguin]

Thanks 6th and crusaderlord - very interesting (scratches chin). Food for thought.