Arcam cd 37 vs. Cyrus 8se

[admin_exported]

Greetings, I've been reading threads or blogs from other sites regarding the arcam and cyrus players and the arcam sounded better. The question is this, are the folks at what hifi over rating these cyrus products, especially when they give the 8se a 5 star compared to 4 bright objects for the arcam? Hi fi choice gives the cd 37 the full monty. What's the deal with this? Imo, placing electronics in a shoe box does not give the breathing room as compared to the standered construction of cdps. ( as common sence would have it ? ) Anyone or bump?

 

[JoelSim]

Depends what sort of sound you are after. You will have to listen to both to decide which one you like. Warm or sharp.

ÿ

 

[manicm]

JoelSim:

Depends what sort of sound you are after. You will have to listen to both to decide which one you like. Warm or sharp.

The 8SE is not traditionally Cyrus sharp, in fact the 'other' mag noted its smooth presentation, and is definitely less sharp than the 6SE even though more detailed.

 

[manicm]

ukadvocate:

Greetings, I've been reading threads or blogs from other sites regarding the arcam and cyrus players and the arcam sounded better. The question is this, are the folks at what hifi over rating these cyrus products, especially when they give the 8se a 5 star compared to 4 bright objects for the arcam? Hi fi choice gives the cd 37 the full monty. What's the deal with this? Imo, placing electronics in a shoe box does not give the breathing room as compared to the standered construction of cdps. ( as common sence would have it ? ) Anyone or bump?

Same said mag also gave the 8SE five stars.

 

[Dan Turner]

I demoed these 2 at home against one another. I nearly didn't bother with the Arcam as my previous CDP was an Arcam CD93 which was particularly warm and stodgy and that's what i was specifically looking to get away from. But I thought I'd give the CD37 a fair chance as HFC had rated it so well.

Anyway for me it was cut and dried, the Arcam was the best. The cyrus had a touch more detail in the treble, but the Arcam was better in every other way - deeper, more powerful bass (but still tight), wider, deeper more stable soundstage, and most notably for me, greater tonal richness and subtlety.

But hey. It's all a matter of opinion at the end of the day. I think it's just good that it you're lucky enough to spend that sort of money on a CDP you have some excellent models to choose between.

 

[Anonymous]

But hey, It's all....... ( can't cut and paste on my web page ) - How absolutely true.

 

[crusaderlord]

I agree that WHF overrates Cyrus in comparison to Arcam - most posts i have read on the forums who have directly compared did also seem to prefer the Arcam.

I also confirm i prefered the Arcam when i demod them recently just to try them out.

 

[JoelSim]

Dan Turner:

I demoed these 2 at home against one another. I nearly didn't bother with the Arcam as my previous CDP was an Arcam CD93 which was particularly warm and stodgy and that's what i was specifically looking to get away from. But I thought I'd give the CD37 a fair chance as HFC had rated it so well.

Anyway for me it was cut and dried, the Arcam was the best. The cyrus had a touch more detail in the treble, but the Arcam was better in every other way - deeper, more powerful bass (but still tight), wider, deeper more stable soundstage, and most notably for me, greater tonal richness and subtlety.

But hey. It's all a matter of opinion at the end of the day. I think it's just good that it you're lucky enough to spend that sort of money on a CDP you have some excellent models to choose between.

My old CD92 was as warm as the inside of a McDonalds apple pie. The CD192 is much different.

 

[Clare Newsome]

crusaderlord:I agree that WHF overrates Cyrus in comparison to Arcam - most posts i have read on the forums who have directly compared did also seem to prefer the Arcam.

I also confirm i prefered the Arcam when i demod them recently just to try them out.

And that's why auditioning is so important.

Just one note - certain forum-posters may be saying they preferred the Arcam (and why not - it's a fine player in many ways: hence its strong four-star rating), but sales figures suggest many more people are taking the Cyrus home.

 

[Anonymous]

Cyrus much better to my ears when i ehard them both (I currently own neither)

 

[Anonymous]

Clare Newsome:
Just one note - certain forum-posters may be saying they preferred the Arcam (and why not - it's a fine player in many ways: hence its strong four-star rating), but sales figures suggest many more people are taking the Cyrus home.

Clare, that may also be explained as that many people have a lot of faith in review ratings...

 

[Anonymous]

You'd be a bit mad to throw a grand at a cd player (especially in todays economic climate) without hearing it - and sourcing similarly priced alternatives for a listen too!

 

[Anonymous]

I completely agree that is total madness, but still there is so much emphasis on 'stars' and I don't necessarily believe that people who buy in the one grand segment are not influenced by that. Moreover what will be a 1000 quid burden to one may be 400 quid to someone else. All this of course not especially related to these two players...

 

[Clare Newsome]

Well I (and many others in the team) enjoy some four-star products in our own systems because they were the best match for our set-up and tastes - and we stress in every issue that auditioning is paramount as certain four-star products may actually be a better fit for your specific needs, rather than the all-round appeal/value a five-star offers.

 

[Anonymous]

And for me, although sound is the most important factor, as it should be, I also have a wife who hates the look of standard size stereo boxes, which is what led me to upgrade and eventually choose Cyrus.

The fact they are shoebox size has nothing to do with quality of sound or their potential to 'breathe'. I love the detail of Cyrus and now have a pair of well-matching speakers, so I love the sound. There's no lack of low end either. Plus my wife doesn't find it visually obtrusive and wish it weren't there, so everybody wins!

Use the star-ratings in mags as a guide for a shortlist and then buy what you prefer the sound of and, if you are like me, think about what also suits your lifestyle and living space.

 

[d_a_n1979]

See; going against my own grain so to speak; id be going for the Cyrus every time!

Dont get me wrong; i love Arcam BUT having heard both along with Cyrus, Roksan, Arcam, Primare and Yamaha amps; M/A, B&W, Spendor, Rega and ProAc speakers, the Cyrus won every time...

The Arcam CDP is superb and sounds brilliant, to my ears, along with a decent Arcam amp and M/A or B&W speakers BUT the Cyrus just had that bit more about it.

The overall clarity was better; it isnt overly forward at all but the bass depth it reproduced as well as the smooth and detailed midrange was astounding.

That's why my other half has it now with her Cyrus 8v2 integrated and XPower and the B&W CM7 speakers.

Im not jealous... Honest!

 

[JoelSim]

Clare Newsome:

crusaderlord:I agree that WHF overrates Cyrus in comparison to Arcam - most posts i have read on the forums who have directly compared did also seem to prefer the Arcam. I also confirm i prefered the Arcam when i demod them recently just to try them out.

And that's why auditioning is so important.

Just one note - certain forum-posters may be saying they preferred the Arcam (and why not - it's a fine player in many ways: hence its strong four-star rating), but sales figures suggest many more people are taking the Cyrus home.

I don't think you can underestimate the strength of a WHF 'best ever CD sound' set of reviews on sales figures compared to a 4 star rating and a 'safe' tag. 60k issues per month vs smaller mags gives WHF far more weight in the market. I suspect there will be many people who bought a Cyrus straight on the back of your reviews without listening.

 

[crusaderlord]

i too think this happens a lot - a set of award winners in WHF is better than any marketing campaign. I think this last few issues of WHF will have helped Cyrus hugely and without people even listening to it before buying.

 

[Anonymous]

Well..., I have a confession to make. I used the whf publications to purchase my arcam system ( cd 92, a85 ) without a listen. 2001 was my first issue. Recently hfc issues are apart of my reading.because, obviously , deals with just hifi. My system sounds just great but there are some bad apples in my cd collection that just don't cut it.Whf also introduced me to naim. I just morgaged the apt.

and I just bought a xs cd5x and a flat cap! Have to wait a couple of weeks before it arrives. Did not have the pleasure of reviewing a cyrus kit because there are few and far between ( if not any ) cyrus dealers to locate.