Arcam CD72T and CD23T
post-180910
Thread Starter
Post #1 of 7

jkim

New Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Posts
20
Likes
0
I'm using arcam cd72T and thinking about buying cd23T
I have money but I think buying 23T can be waste of money.
In my country, cd23T is 2.5 times price of 72T
And dominant idea in the web site I frequently visit is "above some level, tr amp and cdps are almost same. only output power and sound color is different"
Please advise me if buying 23T can satisfy me more than 72T.
I am using ra-1 + rs-1 and corda + hd600
Thanks.
 
     Share This Post       
post-180927
Post #2 of 7

DanG

Headphoneus Supremus
Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2001
Messages
4,796
Reaction score
10
Joined
Jun 20, 2001
Posts
4,796
Likes
10
Quote:

Jkim wrote:above some level, tr amp and cdps are almost same. only output power and sound color is different


I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "tr amp and cdps." Also, wouldn't the point of upgrading your CD player be to have a different sound?

The difference between the Arcam CD72T and the Arcam FMJ CD23T in engineering terms is that the CD23T uses the famous dCS Ring DAC, considered one of the best around. The CD23T also has a much beefier power supply which may mean better bass response.

From what I've read, the 23T is considered to be noticeably better than the 72T. Try visiting www.AudioAsylum.com and reading the reviews there as well as user comments in the Digital Drive forum. You might also find some commentary here on Head-Fi.
 
     Share This Post       
post-180950
Post #3 of 7

jkim

New Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Posts
20
Likes
0
Quote:

Originally posted by DanG
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "tr amp and cdps."


I meant.. in transistor amps and cdps, sound of much expensive one is not so better than medium priced one..
This is not my idea. I had no chance to try listening many amps and cdps.
I mean I just heard the opinion in a site.
This opinion make me hesitate buying 2.5 times expensive cdp.
 
     Share This Post       
post-180988
Post #4 of 7

aeberbach

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Sep 20, 2001
Messages
1,807
Reaction score
11
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Joined
Sep 20, 2001
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Posts
1,807
Likes
11
What's with the 'T' in "CD23T"? I have one but have always heard it called just CD23, sometimes FMJ CD23. Has the line been updated or something?
 
     Share This Post       
post-180989
Post #5 of 7

jkim

New Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Joined
Mar 22, 2002
Posts
20
Likes
0
Quote:

Originally posted by aeberbach
What's with the 'T' in "CD23T"?


It's minor changer version of CD23.
I heard some component is changed and T version supprt CD Text. CD-RW media
 
     Share This Post       
post-180996
Post #6 of 7

Vertigo-1

Señor Sony
Joined
Jun 20, 2001
Messages
3,251
Reaction score
14
Location
Hawaii
Joined
Jun 20, 2001
Location
Hawaii
Posts
3,251
Likes
14
The T primarily stands for the addition of CD Text, because Arcam ran out of the original Phillips transport used in the previous CD23. They had to switch over to Sony transports, and in the process, picked up the CD Text feature that Sony transports have. In addition, they reconfigured the analog and digital boards to a more simplistic design, and also updated the HDCD chipset to the latest PMD-200.

Here is some thoughts of any audible differences by one person:

Quote:

Arcam does not do this upgrade because too much is involved.
The T model has different drive, digital and analogue boards, power supply and of course the display.
As far as the sonic differences - first, major HDCD improvements.
I have quite few country CDs and a lot of them are decoded in HDCD. Well, couple of older ones had clicking noises on 23 which disappeared with 23T. Also, I would say that there is more space with T.
Second, I would say that new player has better base. I am pretty sure it now goes deeper, more solid. As I mentioned before I had both players running at the same time before the new owner picked the 23 and did extensive comparison.
Was the upgrade worth it? - It was for me.


And to answer the original question, read this:

http://db.audioasylum.com/cgi/m.pl?f...igital&n=43530
 
     Share This Post       
post-187923
Post #7 of 7

planar

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 3, 2002
Messages
154
Reaction score
0
Joined
Jan 3, 2002
Posts
154
Likes
0
it definitely will be different, but will it justify the price? That opens to everyone. I've tried 23 and CD92 and 72. I think 92 is the better buy, 23 sometimes has some "sparkle" over 92. But...sparkles are short lived, everytime i notice those sparkles after they've gone (more like lighting actually, when you see it - it's gone already).

Apart from those sparkles, there's not much different between 23 and 92.

I don't like 72 because it sounds artificially bright and forward, and i believe that is why people have been impressed by.
 
     Share This Post       

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top