• If you ever spot Spam (either in the forums, or received via forum direct message) please use the Report button at the bottom of each post to make sure a Moderator can handle it quickly. Thanks for your help in keeping things running smoothly!

Should be receiving a CDP...

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.

plastic penguin

Well-known member
Apr 28, 2008
1,637
84
19,770
keeper of the quays said:
plastic penguin said:
keeper of the quays said:
plastic penguin said:
keeper of the quays said:
So you have a leema amp? Blimey they good..so a arcam cd vs electrocapaniet..(arcam good but compared to high or low high end? Lol..will sound good but not fab) i think you must have cheap speakers? I saw somewhere re cheap speakers at end of good kit? Its nonsense...if this isnt the case then im stumped!
Depends on what you call cheap speakers. If you mean PMC TB2i then they are spankingly good.
nice speakers..is it possible you have been abducted by aliens? And in the spacecraft they fiddled with your ears? This is the only other explanation that explains this anomaly?
The answer is simple: I just prefer the Arcam sound to the Electro presentation. And as vinyl and radio is the prime source of music, the cheapo Arcam will suffice and which means the Electro has now become redundant in my system.

I owned Arcam amps for 14 unbroken years before buying the Leema, so it isn't surprising I've gravitated towards the CD73.
Its that simple then..no aliens? Oh well...as long as your happy with it! :)
Nope. No aliens, just a CDP that compliments the system and a certain coziness you only get with familiarity.
 

plastic penguin

Well-known member
Apr 28, 2008
1,637
84
19,770
BigH said:
drummerman said:
keeper of the quays said:
So you have a leema amp? Blimey they good..so a arcam cd vs electrocapaniet..(arcam good but compared to high or low high end? Lol..will sound good but not fab) i think you must have cheap speakers? I saw somewhere re cheap speakers at end of good kit? Its nonsense...if this isnt the case then im stumped!
Mmmmh, perhaps you have to prepare to be stumped ... ?

There have been numerous occasions where speaker or amplifier manufacturers have upturned the hifi status quo by pairing one expensive with one not so during demonstrations to (very) good reported effect.
Yes I think its been demonstrated decent amp with budget speakers can sound good, also some expensive speakers with poor amp will not sound good, in fact it may not even work.
Yup. My A65+ I dem'd with PMC GB1 (originals) was a sound revelation. The Arcam retailed at £350 and PMCs, at the time, sold for approx £1250.
 

NSA_watch_my_toilet

New member
Aug 24, 2013
7
0
0
And for Plastic Penguin, in response to your 18# post : your hearing is probably perfectly fine (even if I don't know a natural room that will not need some improvement). You probably listened to your gear without expectation bias and it's the reason why you remarked the vicinity of those two cdp's of very different classes. As we discussed it on the Turntable section (I believe it was you), there is not a lot to tune for a cdp, because even normal designs work pretty well.
 

NSA_watch_my_toilet

New member
Aug 24, 2013
7
0
0
Quote Big H : "Yes I think its been demonstrated decent amp with budget speakers can sound good, also some expensive speakers with poor amp will not sound good, in fact it may not even work."



It's a little more difficult than that. It's already starting witht the term "bad amps" vs "good amp". So what is a "bad amp" ? -> It's an amplifier that is not able to give the correct amount of power in the needed intensity for the speaker ; resulting in a loss of quality cause of a not ideal function of the speakers. Another thing is : not every expensive speaker will be good (in the meaning of accurate). Because, like in every other hobby, they are brands with a tendency to sell their steel to the price of gold.

On some ATC SCM100 this is the picture of a bad amp :



On some PMC fact8, This is the picture of a good amp :



After that, our tastes in quality and in visual are the main factor. So a good amp is at first pleasing to our eyes, to our moneypurse and gives the needed current to the speakers.
 

Thompsonuxb

New member
Feb 19, 2012
129
0
0
MajorFubar said:
The truth was all but nailed on Post 18, but every time I try to point out the reality of this [in other threads] certain people shoot me down (what ever did happen to ThompsonUXB?):

plastic penguin said:
4) Is it that [digital] sources don't give you as big an upgrade as amps or speakers?
Forgive my edit of the original post, for clarity. But yes, compared to changing your amp and speakers, throwing cash at the (digital) source-end of the chain will never reap the same dividends.
Lol....I was in a place with no internet.....

I'll not disagree with PP - I'm a bit surprised by his findings though, I'll admit.

Having compared the cd73 to the Marantz Cd63 many moons ago and preferred the latter.
 

plastic penguin

Well-known member
Apr 28, 2008
1,637
84
19,770
Having listened more to both since I received the 73T, the Electro is technically a better machine but the Arcam IMHO is more involving. By that I mean, the Electro you tend to listen to technical side of a recording, whereas the Arcam just lets you listen to the music, if that makes sense.
 

MajorFubar

New member
Mar 3, 2010
690
3
0
plastic penguin said:
Having listened more to both since I received the 73T, the Electro is technically a better machine but the Arcam IMHO is more involving. By that I mean, the Electro you tend to listen to technical side of a recording, whereas the Arcam just lets you listen to the music, if that makes sense.
Makes sense to me. Sounds like the difference between my three year old HRT DAC and my 22 year old PCM II CD player.
 

plastic penguin

Well-known member
Apr 28, 2008
1,637
84
19,770
MajorFubar said:
plastic penguin said:
Having listened more to both since I received the 73T, the Electro is technically a better machine but the Arcam IMHO is more involving. By that I mean, the Electro you tend to listen to technical side of a recording, whereas the Arcam just lets you listen to the music, if that makes sense.
Makes sense to me. Sounds like the difference between my three year old HRT DAC and my 22 year old PCM II CD player.
How we interpret what is "better" is so personal. As I'm a 'music first' person, the device that lets you hear the music as opposed to sitting there so you can hear every bead of sweat dripping off the drummer...

On that basis alone the Arcam wins hands down. Nevertheless, the difference between the two in a technical sense - or hi-fi reproduction - is negligible.
 

Thompsonuxb

New member
Feb 19, 2012
129
0
0
plastic penguin said:
MajorFubar said:
plastic penguin said:
Having listened more to both since I received the 73T, the Electro is technically a better machine but the Arcam IMHO is more involving. By that I mean, the Electro you tend to listen to technical side of a recording, whereas the Arcam just lets you listen to the music, if that makes sense.
Makes sense to me. Sounds like the difference between my three year old HRT DAC and my 22 year old PCM II CD player.
How we interpret what is "better" is so personal. As I'm a 'music first' person, the device that lets you hear the music as opposed to sitting there so you can hear every bead of sweat dripping off the drummer...

On that basis alone the Arcam wins hands down. Nevertheless, the difference between the two in a technical sense - or hi-fi reproduction - is negligible.
Subtle differences.....I understand that and how they can effect ones enjoyment of music......it is the cable debate.

Ray Lamantge's 'Trouble' my favourite track of his has a drum 'blow out' at the end of the track.

Via my 2 players the rendition differs slightly - my NAD player offers more seperation, detail and space around the drummer you imagine the man totally immersed during play - the rendition paints a vivid picture.

The Marantz is more 'general' neither better as such but I have my preference.

But causally, you'd hear no difference.
 

plastic penguin

Well-known member
Apr 28, 2008
1,637
84
19,770
Thompsonuxb said:
plastic penguin said:
MajorFubar said:
plastic penguin said:
Having listened more to both since I received the 73T, the Electro is technically a better machine but the Arcam IMHO is more involving. By that I mean, the Electro you tend to listen to technical side of a recording, whereas the Arcam just lets you listen to the music, if that makes sense.
Makes sense to me. Sounds like the difference between my three year old HRT DAC and my 22 year old PCM II CD player.
How we interpret what is "better" is so personal. As I'm a 'music first' person, the device that lets you hear the music as opposed to sitting there so you can hear every bead of sweat dripping off the drummer...

On that basis alone the Arcam wins hands down. Nevertheless, the difference between the two in a technical sense - or hi-fi reproduction - is negligible.
Subtle differences.....I understand that and how they can effect ones enjoyment of music......it is the cable debate.

Ray Lamantge's 'Trouble' my favourite track of his has a drum 'blow out' at the end of the track.

Via my 2 players the rendition differs slightly - my NAD player offers more seperation, detail and space around the drummer you imagine the man totally immersed during play - the rendition paints a vivid picture.

The Marantz is more 'general' neither better as such but I have my preference.

But causally, you'd hear no difference.
I think if we were to analyse the music everytime we spun a disc it would drive us bananas. So in terms of listening enjoyment the word "casual" becomes very appropriate.

With music and hi-fis in particular, it's crucial, like having a good partner, to have a bit of yin and yang. A little bit of neutrality and colour.... there, after a while, you can hit the sweet spot (hopefully).
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts