I always have been envied of those guys who get to compare different cars for a living especially those who usually do supercars shoot out. I thought I'd do my own version of poor man supercar shoot out but with these old digital gears. I got some times today so I pull these out to do a quick comparo like they do in the magazines.
My sources are Conrad Johnson LS17 preamp, Sim Audio Moon 3 for amp, QED reference 40 for interconnects, and QED Revelation speaker cables. The sources are fairly neutral if not uncompromisingly neutral but always musical.
So here are the ranking:
#4: Arcam CD92: I actually had a lot of high hope for this cd player but it turned out the be the Biggest Mistake of all my equipment I had purchased online. Interestingly it has the ring DAC and all the high end components and benefits from Arcam deep level of design experience. Despite all it had going for itself, the sound can be characterized as "Hollow" regardless of the types of music or musical instruments. I don't think it can make up its mind whether it should sound laid back or analytical. On the surface it has the detail, but in an artificial kind of way and at the end, the sound is pretentious not authentic. The treble lacks dimension and sounds somewhat flat. The overall presentation itself is flat. Everything is flat. Uninspiring. Lacking involvement. So it is the first Goner by a wide margin.
One caveat: I bought this instrument from AudioGon and it looks always brand new as if it was never used before. People on the online community say that the cd needs unusually long time to break in, but it's been a few months so how long can you wait?
#3: Coming in at number 3 is the Musical Fidelity TriVista 21 DAC. Overall there is really nothing wrong with it. Compare to the CD23, it is a little bit extrovert. There is always a sense of forwardness and it has an additional emphasis in the upper mid range which makes piano sounds a bit glossy although not to a degree that would cause distraction. On some type of music this may actually sound good such as jazz, small instrumentation ensemble recordings. But on opera where the female soprano hits a high note, I tend to want to grab for the remote control to turn down a bit. It actually has better bass than the CD23, but lacking a bit of inner details. With that criticism aside, it's not a bad gear and there are people who may actually prefer it over my next #2 and #1, but it's not for me if there are other options.
#2: For the runner up, here we have the Rotel RCD 0172. It actually is very similar to the CD23 in term of presentation, but just a step behind the in almost category. Its mid range and upper mid range do not have the richness of the cd23. The bass line is not quite as flexible and a bit slow vs. the cd23. The instruments lack air. Sibilance is a little bit more. Overall it does not sound as sophisticated as the cd23, but there is nothing really wrong with it just not quite there, and of course when brand new it costs only a third of the cd23 so for value it's not that bad.
#1: Given the budget, the Arcam CD23 is my go to gal. It's smooth all the way. It got beautiful midrange. The vocal is sensual. There is plenty of detail but always musical. It is one CD player that I can trust regardless of front end, back end equipment, or musical materials. It always has a sense of rightness and whenever I listen to it, I always feel at ease. Is there any area where I could place a minor criticism? I could say the bass in relative could be a bit clearer? On some material or associated equipment, the bass may appear to be somewhat dark and lack a bit of definition, but that is a minor criticism, since the overall sound is so lovely and enjoyable that a minor thing can be overlooked.
Back so to supercar analogy, if these were car, how should I compare them?
The CD92 would be like the BMW E92 M3. It has all the right ingredients but fails to put together a cohesive experience. The MF TriVista would be like the Mercedes AMG C63 - a bit brash but good nevertheless. The Rotel RCD1072 is like a Toyota. There is nothing wrong with just not quite there with the high end. The Arcam CD23 is like the E46 M3 CSL. One drive you'll understand why.
My sources are Conrad Johnson LS17 preamp, Sim Audio Moon 3 for amp, QED reference 40 for interconnects, and QED Revelation speaker cables. The sources are fairly neutral if not uncompromisingly neutral but always musical.
So here are the ranking:
#4: Arcam CD92: I actually had a lot of high hope for this cd player but it turned out the be the Biggest Mistake of all my equipment I had purchased online. Interestingly it has the ring DAC and all the high end components and benefits from Arcam deep level of design experience. Despite all it had going for itself, the sound can be characterized as "Hollow" regardless of the types of music or musical instruments. I don't think it can make up its mind whether it should sound laid back or analytical. On the surface it has the detail, but in an artificial kind of way and at the end, the sound is pretentious not authentic. The treble lacks dimension and sounds somewhat flat. The overall presentation itself is flat. Everything is flat. Uninspiring. Lacking involvement. So it is the first Goner by a wide margin.
One caveat: I bought this instrument from AudioGon and it looks always brand new as if it was never used before. People on the online community say that the cd needs unusually long time to break in, but it's been a few months so how long can you wait?
#3: Coming in at number 3 is the Musical Fidelity TriVista 21 DAC. Overall there is really nothing wrong with it. Compare to the CD23, it is a little bit extrovert. There is always a sense of forwardness and it has an additional emphasis in the upper mid range which makes piano sounds a bit glossy although not to a degree that would cause distraction. On some type of music this may actually sound good such as jazz, small instrumentation ensemble recordings. But on opera where the female soprano hits a high note, I tend to want to grab for the remote control to turn down a bit. It actually has better bass than the CD23, but lacking a bit of inner details. With that criticism aside, it's not a bad gear and there are people who may actually prefer it over my next #2 and #1, but it's not for me if there are other options.
#2: For the runner up, here we have the Rotel RCD 0172. It actually is very similar to the CD23 in term of presentation, but just a step behind the in almost category. Its mid range and upper mid range do not have the richness of the cd23. The bass line is not quite as flexible and a bit slow vs. the cd23. The instruments lack air. Sibilance is a little bit more. Overall it does not sound as sophisticated as the cd23, but there is nothing really wrong with it just not quite there, and of course when brand new it costs only a third of the cd23 so for value it's not that bad.
#1: Given the budget, the Arcam CD23 is my go to gal. It's smooth all the way. It got beautiful midrange. The vocal is sensual. There is plenty of detail but always musical. It is one CD player that I can trust regardless of front end, back end equipment, or musical materials. It always has a sense of rightness and whenever I listen to it, I always feel at ease. Is there any area where I could place a minor criticism? I could say the bass in relative could be a bit clearer? On some material or associated equipment, the bass may appear to be somewhat dark and lack a bit of definition, but that is a minor criticism, since the overall sound is so lovely and enjoyable that a minor thing can be overlooked.
Back so to supercar analogy, if these were car, how should I compare them?
The CD92 would be like the BMW E92 M3. It has all the right ingredients but fails to put together a cohesive experience. The MF TriVista would be like the Mercedes AMG C63 - a bit brash but good nevertheless. The Rotel RCD1072 is like a Toyota. There is nothing wrong with just not quite there with the high end. The Arcam CD23 is like the E46 M3 CSL. One drive you'll understand why.
Last edited: