2. digital
  3. 1014944570

I Need a Reference Point

Hi folks, I have a brand new Arcam CD-92 which I love because it is the first high-end CD player I've ever had. I used to think digital was digital was digital. Not anymore! Crisp, clear sound is what I hear now that has blossomed into open detail. Once spoiled, always spoiled, and I'd like a good player for my office where I listen to music all day.

So what I would like to understand is where the Arcam CD-02 fits into the high-end CD player spectrum. Is it generally considered clinical/analytical sounding? Is it generally considered warm sounding? I need a CD player that does not get tedious to listen to all day.

It will play through a Magnum Dynalab CD-208 receiver (unless I futz with a new FT Audio LW-1 that is coming in the mail). I have not selected the speakers yet, but was considering the Tannoy System 600 nearfield monitors (I love the Tannoy sound), but I might also consider Merlins or some other small speaker.

Thanks!
budrew
abstract7
541 posts
 
Let your ears be the judge. Overtime you might decide your CD player is fatiguing, or not as detailed, or doesn't provide the 3D imaging you'd like. That happens over time--don't rush it, while you can, enjoy what you have. When you feel it's not giving you what you want--then go buy a new CD player. But don't do it because someone says your Arcam doesn't measure up. Your ears have to decide if it measures up--not someone elses.
killerpiglet
374 posts
 
Well said. Get mileage out of the puppy!

KP
natalie
404 posts
 
Enjoy the player and dont worry where it fits.
You likeed it enough to buy it.Dont let someone who has never heard it bum you out with dumb comments.
budrew OP
467 posts
 
I wasn't clear enough. The CD player would be a second one for my office. I was asking more about where the Arcam fits in the analytic to warm spectrum. More out of curiosity. I do like the sound of the Arcam and I would consider another one.
More to discover