When we bought the '82, we compared it with the '72 and the '92. The difference between the '82 and the '72 was large enough to justify the '82, but the difference between the '82 and the '92 was small enough that we weren't actually able to distinguish reliably.
The '92 was subsequently replaced by the '192 and the 72 improved by the 73, obviating the need for an '82.
IMHO, a CD36 upgrade would be more substantial. Ideally you should try to do some A/B listening - do you know anybody with a CD92 you could borrow?
I don't unfortunately, but if general opinion is it's not that much of an upgrade I shall forget the '92. Might see if my local dealer has a 36 or 37 to try, though to be honest I'm not looking at investing too much into my current setup as at some point I'd like to go a little more "high end". Would the CD192 be a bigger step up?
What you should know is that the Arcam CD92 is a "collector" model from Arcam.
Why is that ?
Simply put : because it features the infamous RingDAC that Arcam and dCS have developped together. The heirs of this DAC are now fitted in dCS own products that are considered amongst the world's best CD players and go off the shelf for about 10k £ !
I own a CD23T, the last FMJ model to carry this DAC and used to have a CD82T before that. Difference between both players where simply "night and day".
Can't tell much about the 92, except that when I bought my CD82, I listened to it and it sounded indubitably better... but was at the time financially out of reach.
Thanks for your input, after having another listen last night I think what I'm after is just a touch more sparkle on the top end. I've added a little treble on the A85 and it has improved things but it's still a little laid back.
I demo'd my RX2's with an Arcam A18 (but a Rotel CD) and they had a lot more of what I'm after in the shop, so could this be an amp issue?