Arcam or Rotel?

[gianni]

Need some input:

I'm looking for a new digital transport for my system. I currently have a Rotel RSX-1055 powering M&K 850's. My sources consist of an older 300 pound Denon CD only player (DCD-1520) and a Sony SACD/DVD player (non progressive).
My biggest desire is to see if I can upgrade Redbook CD performance and progessive scan DVD would be nice but the DVD can wait a while longer.

I'm considering the following:

Rotel RCD-1072 - will need to use something like Outlaw ICBM.

Arcam CD73T - will also need ICBM.

Arcam DV79 - has bass management which works for all formats including CD, plus I get a better DVD player.

Arcam DV89 - may be able to get one at a very good price. I realise there is no HDMI on this one.

Again, my primary interest is CD playback. Does anyone have any experinece with these units and how they compare sonically? I did briefly compare the DV79 to the CD73 and felt the cd73 was slightly better.

Thanks

[gianni]

I see everyone feels strongly either way. Maybe If I simplify I can engage someone.

Rotel RCD-1072 or Arcam CD73?

[David Meek]

Gianni, I'm not intimate with either of those CDs, but if your goal is truly improved Redbook performance, I'd suggest investing in an external DAC, like the Benchmark DAC-1. Not one of your listed choices, but it will turn almost any reasonably priced CD unit into a better sounding one.

[will1066]

Well, you asked for specific experiences, which I don't have, but Arcam's units are generally considered better than Rotel's. Likely, the Rotel will put out a terrific sound for the price, and the Arcam will exhibit a slightly smoother, more polished presentation. Build quality is about equal.

Maybe jimmyp58 will chime in with his Arcam thoughts.

[Taito]

About 8 months ago, I audtioned the CD73 against the RCD-1070. I ended up buying a 1072 (store only had a 1070 in display). Each player had its advantages and disadvantages. I felt that the Rotel was slightly stronger in terms of dynamics, but that the Arcam was (as will10666 said) slightly smoother and more polished. If I were to make that choice again, I would quite likely buy the Arcam, but having said that, I have had 8 months of joy listeneing to the 1072. I am completely satisfied with it. Once fully broken in, the sound it produces is fantastic.

Go and audition both players, but keep in mind that both are excellent.

-Ben

[David Meek]

Also, Sithlord and Evil Twin just recently purchased Arcam pre-pros/amps so they will have some opinions on that side of the fence. FYI, here's their thread on them: The Arcams Cometh.

[David Meek]

To further cloud the issue, a 1072 is available in our buy/sell forum The Pawn Shop. Here's the thread.

[Andrew Pratt]

Personally I'd be buying a Benchmark DAC-1 if redbook performance is your goal that way you'd be covered in any future transport upgrades (like your progressive scan player)

[gianni]

Thanks to everyone. It looks like a little comparison listening is in order as I do want a new transport but will also look into the outboard DAC as well.

[aud19]

I vote Benchmark Dac1 as well :T

[thyname]

I have heard a lot about Dac1 from Benchmark, however I am not quite sure what a separate DAC can do. Can anybody please explain why a nice CD player like Rotel RCD-1072 that I have is not as good as any cheap cd player coupled with a DAC1? To pose the question otherwise: you think that adding this Benchmark Dac-1 will further improve the performance of my rcd1072 for redbook cd playback?

Thanks a lot for your help!!

[aud19]

To pose the question otherwise: you think that adding this Benchmark Dac-1 will further improve the performance of my rcd1072 for redbook cd playback?

Thanks a lot for your help!!

Yes, it will make inexpensive players sound good and better players sound awesome from what I understand. The key is practically zero jitter :T

[Andrew Pratt]

Do a search on the board for Benchmark and read Jon's review as it will help shed a lot of light on the matter.

[David Meek]

Here's the main thread on the DAC-1 Andrew is talking about.

[tmueller]

My thoughts basically regarding transports:

The Rotel cannot be beat for the price. I have never heard of/listened to a transport that retails for $700 that sounds as defined and musical as the Rotel. That being said we all know the FMJ series by Arcam is better, but it comes at a price. If a guy is looking for the ultimate redbook player the cd36 sounds like the way to go. Sure, there is Chord that would be worth a listen but nobody (in general) competes with Arcam's transports.

I have auditioned the Rega Planet. It is a great player but truly only a hair better than the Rotel at nearly double the price. Diminishing returns hits fast and quick from upgrading a 1072 to the Planet. I think a guy is better off getting the 1072 or a Diva CD73 by Arcam and being happy via the performance to dollar value equation. Then a person could save up for the cd36 in the future while getting a maximum return for his dollar in the meantime.

Between the CD73 and 1072 it's a tough call. I essentially have both (I also own an Arcam Solo) but I cannot isolate the cd73 in my system because it is an all in one. For that reason I may consider leaning towards the 1072 because I can isolate it and therefore I have experience with the players’ qualities as a standalone unit. I have read the reviews, also tested and enjoyed the player, and overall I am extremely pleased with the product. (FWIW I believe the 1072 to be Rotel's best product.)
No matter what you choose you are certain to be smiling when it’s all hooked up.

Enjoy.

Tyler T. Mueller

[thyname]

Yes, it will make inexpensive players sound good and better players sound awesome from what I understand. The key is practically zero jitter :T

For me RCD-1072 was not cheap though.... Now, how do I convience my fiance that I need another toy (DAC-1)? I would also assume I need some quality and expensive RCA cables as well.

[aud19]

Honestly, for now I'd just use your current equipment and get the DAC1 now. If she let's you upgrade again later on the 1072 (or a newer, likely better model) will make it sound all the sweeter. At least that's what I'd do if it was my $$$

Edit:

I just noticed it seems you ALREADY have the 1072.... Well then my friend your screwed :lol: Either that or you have to come home with the DAC1 AND something with diamonds in it for her at the same time :rofl:

[gianni]

For me RCD-1072 was not cheap though.... Now, how do I convience my fiance that I need another toy (DAC-1)? I would also assume I need some quality and expensive RCA cables as well.

How about a premarital agreement? :-)

[thyname]

Great to hear that I am screwed guys :-) Anyway, enough with diamonds for now, I have spent already a lot....

Somebody suggested that instead of getting an external DAC, I should modify my RCD-1072 with something like Superclock 3 by Audiocom (????) I was told they cost $300. However, I don't think I can install and do all this work myself. Any idea on the above??

[audiofan]

try rcd-1072 with musical fidelity tube buffer output X10-V3. THis is what i have. the sound is sweeter. I saw X10-V3 on audiogon.com arount $300 once.

[thyname]

try rcd-1072 with musical fidelity tube buffer output X10-V3. THis is what i have. the sound is sweeter. I saw X10-V3 on audiogon.com arount $300 once.

I have never heard of a "tube buffer output" and am not quite sure what it is. I would really appreciate some more info, is another word for "DAC"? I googled it but they did not seem to explain what the concept is. $300 is a good price. Do you think that it will remove the sibilance I often notice in my system ?(RB1080/RC1070 RCD1072, Axiom M60s towers). I would really like to know what it improved in your (already awesome) system.

[Taito]

Thyname, a tube buffer (or just a plain old buffer, for that matter), is a component that has a very high input impedance, and a very low output impedance and has the ability to provide a (relatively) large current at its output. This means that where you would have originally connected component A to component B, you place the buffer in between components. As the buffer has a high input impedance (higher than B's input impedance), component A has an easier time driving it (has to provide less current for a given voltage). This can result in less distortion. As the buffer has a low output impedance (relative to A) and can supply a large current (relative to A), It will have an easier time driving B than A would. It basically means that A sees a friendlier load (asking for less), and B sees a friendlier source (willing to give more).

A buffer is not a DAC, and would be connected in the analogue signal path.

The fact that it is a tube buffer (rather than transistor) will likely give the music a characteristically warmer sound. This is (probably) largely due to the distortion characteristics of tubes Vs. transistors.

Hope this is helpful, Ben

[Kens1]

Very good explanation Taito - I never really knew what the MF tube buffer did, although I have read many good things about it.
The Benchmark DAC, however, I am confused about. I know it is an external DAC but I have seen it described as a Headphone amp/ DAC. I assume you can use it without headphones? Is it just a matter of hooking it up to the cd player with interconnects and then again to the receiver/ pre?
How much improvement would I see with my cambridge audio 640c cd player?
Any answers are greatly appreciated.

[Taito]

Thanks Kens, as to the DAC1, it works just like any other stand-alone DAC, but also has provision for headphones. Yes, it would simply be a matter of connecting the digital output from the CD player to the DAC, and the analog output from the DAC into your receiver/pre. As far as the improvement that you would see, I can't answer than one. I have never heard your CD player, nor the benchmark DAC1. Some people on the forum have used a DAC1 with the Rotel RCD-1072 with good results, and I understand that the Rotel and the Cambridge audio gear are of similar quality. I guess the best you can do is audition one for yourself and decide. I'm sure there are plenty of people wo whould be interested in hearing your findings. In the mean time, you could run a search on this forum. I believe Jon Marsh wrote a pretty detailed review at some stage.

-Ben

[thyname]

Thank you Ben (Taito) for the info, it really shed some light on what a buffer is! I was wondering if somebody with RCD-1072 like AudioFan has to say on specifically what has the above-mentioned improved to their system.. Is it a worth investment? Would I be able to hear a difference. And yes, I am interested in getting rid of the sibilance with my system...

As for the Benchmard DAC-1, in another forum, people suggested that this may not be a worth investment, since my RCD-1072 comes with a decent DAC and nowdays DACs cost so cheap ($1 they say!!!!???)...

[8thDwarf]

When my 1072's internal dac was singing its best(Isolation platform+roller bearings+excellent diy cable)I turned to an old Audio Alchemy digital chain which had been collecting dust.This consisted of a DTIpro32/DDEv1.1.
This chain always worked well with the less than stellar recordings having a smoother laid back sound.

My point is you can create 2 digital paths with differing aims.Perhaps a non-oversampling tube dac since the stock dac of a 1072 is very detailed and, quite good in its own ways.

Just a different road you can study.

[audiofan]

When i put X10-V3 in between cdp and pre-amp, the sound is warmer (like many tube fan mentioned , even though i have never heard of tube sound). The soundstage is wider , more depth....It's hard to explain. One thing i realize that the sound is less harsh. I guess it's just because of the distortion like someone mentioned.

Anyway, i may try DAC-1 with rcd-1072 once i have money...

[pearsall001]

For what it's worth I tried the Benchmark DAC1 w/ my HK DVD22 player. The HK is not high end by any means so I figured the DAC1 would elevate the performance level. Boy was I ever wrong, I kept the DAC1 for the alloted 30 day trial period & listened, listened, & listened some more. For the life of me I couldn't hear any difference. I sent the unit back. I recently upgraded to a stand alone CD player - Opera Audio Consonance Droplet5.0 tube player. Now I absolutely hear the difference in every musical note & by a huge margin. The HK is now doing DVD only & does a great job on video & 5.1 sound.

[audiofan]

Now , i guess DAC-1 only performs at its best when connected to mid to high-end cdp. If that's true, then getting one great piece is better than having two pieces, not encounter interconnect.

[pearsall001]

From what I can gather from talking to guys at different hi-end stores none of them really recommend a DAC. Kind of like their old hat. Everyone recommended looking into getting a higher end CD player. Checked out quite a few until I fell in love w/ the Consonance Droplet5.0 Very glad I did.

[comeup]

Need some input:

I'm looking for a new digital transport for my system. I currently have a Rotel RSX-1055 powering M&K 850's. My sources consist of an older 300 pound Denon CD only player (DCD-1520) and a Sony SACD/DVD player (non progressive).
My biggest desire is to see if I can upgrade Redbook CD performance and progessive scan DVD would be nice but the DVD can wait a while longer.

I'm considering the following:

Rotel RCD-1072 - will need to use something like Outlaw ICBM.

Arcam CD73T - will also need ICBM.

Arcam DV79 - has bass management which works for all formats including CD, plus I get a better DVD player.

Arcam DV89 - may be able to get one at a very good price. I realise there is no HDMI on this one.

Again, my primary interest is CD playback. Does anyone have any experinece with these units and how they compare sonically? I did briefly compare the DV79 to the CD73 and felt the cd73 was slightly better.

Thanks

I think Rotel and Arcam sound much the same. If I had to choose between the two I would have to go with the Rotel they look alot more expensive and appear to built better.