| Author |
Thread: Rotel vs NAD separates |
    
New member Username: Calto
Post Number: 3
Registered: Jun-05
|
| Posted on Thursday, June 09, 2005 - 11:45 pm: |
|
I am considering these 2 setup. A rotel RCP1068/RMB1075 or the NAD T163/T973 combo. The NAD are more expensive though. Which setup would be worth the $$$ in terms of sound and quality.
cheers |
|
|
|
New member Username: Hoanghai2k
Melbourne,
VIC
Australia
Post Number: 2
Registered: Oct-05
|
| Posted on Sunday, October 30, 2005 - 09:15 am: |
|
i will get the rotel
cheaper ( as U said)
great look
THX cer for rmb1075
sound hard to reco from the NAD, but depand on your type of speaker and listening ...
What do U really mean by term ..quality.....????
*note that rotel has 5 yrs warranty
|
New member Username: Allen
Post Number: 6
Registered: Sep-05
|
| Posted on Thursday, November 17, 2005 - 01:46 pm: |
|
You must hear both.Nad is warm, mellow and less detail while the Rotel is bright, very detail and sounds lean.
good luck |
Silver Member Username: Hawk
Highlands Ranch,
CO
USA
Post Number: 695
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, March 16, 2006 - 08:05 pm: |
|
I have both NAD and Rotel setups in different rooms and Lhendong is exactly right--they sound different and it really comes down to what sound do you prefer. Also, what speakers are you driving? For example, I like JMlabs cobalt speakers, but paired with a Rotel is one legitimate definition of hell. The Rotel is lean and surgical in its presentation and paired with Cobalts, it would be extremely bright sounding. But, with a more relaxed sounding speaker such as Paradigm or my Heybrooks, the Rotel is great. The NAD is much more warm sounding and handles difficult speaker impedences much better (such as Dynaudios and Totems). It will also produce more power, in fact, a lot more power (if that is important to you).
This may not mean anything to you, but Rotel is like Davies Symphony Hall in San Francisco and NAD sounds like Carnegie Hall in New York. |
Bronze Member Username: Angello
Post Number: 46
Registered: Oct-05
|
| Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 08:44 am: |
|
about rotel and jmlabs can't agree more with Hawk.
not understand what you try to tell with halls hawk... |
Silver Member Username: Hawk
Highlands Ranch,
CO
USA
Post Number: 718
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, March 23, 2006 - 04:14 pm: |
|
Angello:
Sorry about that. I have had the opportunity to hear concerts at both halls and both are frequently used in classical recordings. I tried to use that as an example of how the electronics sound differently, but I should have known it was a bit too remote to make the point. Davies Hall is known for its rather clean, almost clinical sound and Carnegie is the very definition of warmth as the reflective surfaces are all in the right places to reinforce the sound from the performers. Some people prefer Carnegie and some prefer Davies. That was all I meant. |
Silver Member Username: Dfantom32
Irvine,
CA
USA
Post Number: 110
Registered: Feb-06
|
| Posted on Monday, June 05, 2006 - 06:45 pm: |
|
Sorry to jump to this thread guys but I have a questions and it seems that kind of related with this topic...
I just want to know if there's a difference in terms of sound quality between AVR + AMP and Pre/Pro + AMP? What I mean is what are the advantage & disadvantage between AVR & Pre/Pro? Because my friend has SR7500 and planning to buy a RMB-1075(rotel) to match it but he's thinking if it's ok to keep his AVR or replace it with RSP-1068 (rotel)or any pre/pro unit.
ANy inputs will be a big help.
Thanks!
 |
Silver Member Username: Hawk
Highlands Ranch,
CO
USA
Post Number: 859
Registered: Dec-03
|
| Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 04:03 pm: |
|
Adrian:
I see no reason why your friend couldn't use his AVR as a pre/pro and power an external 5 channel amp. I have considered doing this myself. However, I do wonder why as the Rotel and his Marantz are almost exactly the same power. Does he simply prefer the sound of the Rotel? |
Gold Member Username: Artk
Albany,
Oregon
USA
Post Number: 3515
Registered: Feb-05
|
| Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 09:42 pm: |
|
The setup would sound light years better with the pre/pro and amp but he can use his receiver and the external amp and it will be an improvement over his present setup. |
Gold Member Username: Nuck
Post Number: 3854
Registered: Dec-04
|
| Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 10:49 pm: |
|
Adrian, I did the same thing about 2 yrs ago. I added a 5 channel Rotel amp(100w) onto a H/K avr55 and fount a real improvement in speed of delivery. Not much else.
Fast forward to your friends setup.
That Marantz, regardless of power, is vastly superior to my 10 yr old avr.
I cannot see any profit in the deal at all.
Considering power, I see even less, only appearance value, especially if the interface is with cheap cables.
Pre/amp, most definately. |
New member Username: Rabbitgrey
PORTO,
PORTO
PORTUGAL
Post Number: 5
Registered: Sep-06
|
| Posted on Wednesday, September 27, 2006 - 11:22 am: |
|
Could you answer this question for me, please ?
The next step of a preamp Nad PP2 (audio system Nad 352CT + Rega P2 /denon DL 110 / + Ikon 2) a better one but not very expensive, itīs the preamp ?.... Thanks for your time. |
