Bryston BP25 v Rotel RC1090 v Moon P3

[the hand of boredom]

Hey there fellow audio nerds. I've been looking at a few pre-amps to complete the musics system. The problem is I have yet to listen to them side by side since they are all in different system at different dealers.

Has anyone here listen to any two or all three in the same system? If you have, which one did you like best?

I know that the Bryston is GOOD! I have had it on demo in my system and it is clean, really brings out the soundstage and has sensational dynamics. This is the last of its kind and I can get it for just less than $2000 CDN inlcuding taxes with the phono stage.

The Rotel is nice also, neutral sounding and had good dynamics. It was demonstrated with Rotel CD and Amp driving a pair of B&W 805s. The system was quite impressive and it played very loud before starting to get harsh. I was quoted $1400 CDN before the tax.

The characteristic of the Moon gear that completely shocked me was the build quality. The P3 is anchored together really well and has interesting design lines. Sonically, it is extremely transparent and very, very smooth. It was in a system with the Musical Fidelity 308 CD and Amp with Monitor Audio GR20. This system raised a brow or two of people that walked into the store. The only problem is that it will run about $2400.

[RGA]

Well all might be fine -- what is best will betermined by how it all works together with your speakers. The Rotel may be better suited with the N805 than using a Bryston -- the reverse might be true with a Paradigm speaker -- some speakers will prefer tubes or SET etc.

[GlenNewdick]

buy the Bryston. Better then the Rotel hands down and that 20 year warranty. the moon is nice but over priced.

[MikeyBC]

Your gonna have to get the Moon into your system to be really sure what works best, the Rotel is kind out of its league with the Bryston and Moon. At their price points an extra $400 is a small price to pay if the Moon makes you happier. If you buy the Bryston just to save 400 knowing that the Moon was a little better will soon have you regretting it.

[RGA]

i'm always the voice of dissent -- take the Rotel equivalent home -- it is often said to be out of its league only I prefer the sound of Rotel to Bryston which can sound fatiguing at times -- especially the new crop. Rotel is underrated because they don't charge enough -- same goes for their new integrated amps which are BETTER to me than a number of more expensive units (or at least no worse).

Why throw money away when you don't have to -- the warranty is great but most well constructed amplifiers will last at LEAST 20 years...and don;t kid yourself you are PAYING for that Bryston Warranty.

Bryston is good and all but I'd take em home to try side by side -- you might be surprised how nice Rotel power amps sound. Rotel's weakness used to be preamps.

[kexodusc]

HOB:
I have a Rotel RA-1070. RGA's right...Rotel use to make some pretty mediocre pre-amps IMO...I listened to a bunch of amps and pre's and integrateds and went with this not because I thought it sounded the absolute best, but because it sounded the best for the money. Most Bryston setups I've heard are anything but fatiguing...I find them a bit on the warmish side, but there's something about them I love. I didn't buy Bryston this time around because I just couldn't justify the cost when I had other things to upgrade. There's a just a point in my mind where you have to be sure you've done all you can for room treatments, speakers, source components etc, before you drop that extra amount of cash on amplification. At this level the differences between good and bad amps isn't as much as you'd think.

Why throw money away when you don't have to -- the warranty is great but most well constructed amplifiers will last at LEAST 20 years...and don;t kid yourself you are PAYING for that Bryston Warranty.

This notion is as absurd as they come, and RGA keep repeating this here whenever Bryston comes up. Hopefully today I can teach him something. I'm sure we can agree Bryston wants to remain competitive price-wise. It will only pass off the cost of the warranty claims. RGA mentions that a good amp shouldn't have any problems over 20 years, and he's right, I'm pretty sure nobody here will argue me when I say most amp faults happen in the first year, probably 90%...And probably something as high as 99% in the first 5 years, which is what most other brands offer at this level (as a minimum). After that it's rare something will go that would be covered under warranty. The additional cost of offering a 20 year warranty is simply a mathematical function of the probability of claims times the expected cost. We've already established the low probability. It's probably less than 1% above what a typical 2 year or 5 year warranty would be. . The repair cost is probably very low as well..it's doubtful most repairs are more then $200 or $300 especially for Bryston to fix. Multiply the two and you get a what, less than $3. Hell, you could even add another $7 for the 1/2 hour (being generous) of wages Bryston will play their clerical employee if you think there's even 1/2 hour of paper work to be done in a warranty claim...you're still under $10...hardly the high cost RGA is implying...
Ask yourself, is that $10 such a massive waste of your money, is it going to let you afford another amplifier? Probably not, and it's doubtful you could buy insurance over 20 years for $10. Let's say the fault is a disastrous catastrophe, and is a $600 repair...that's still only a passed of cost of $13. Whoop-dee-doo.

On the flipside though, don't be scared to buy equipment without a 20 year warranty.

[the hand of boredom]

HOB:
I have a Rotel RA-1070. RGA's right...Rotel use to make some pretty mediocre pre-amps IMO...I listened to a bunch of amps and pre's and integrateds and went with this not because I thought it sounded the absolute best, but because it sounded the best for the money. Most Bryston setups I've heard are anything but fatiguing...I find them a bit on the warmish side, but there's something about them I love. I didn't buy Bryston this time around because I just couldn't justify the cost when I had other things to upgrade. There's a just a point in my mind where you have to be sure you've done all you can for room treatments, speakers, source components etc, before you drop that extra amount of cash on amplification. At this level the differences between good and bad amps isn't as much as you'd think.

This notion is as absurd as they come, and RGA keep repeating this here whenever Bryston comes up. Hopefully today I can teach him something. I'm sure we can agree Bryston wants to remain competitive price-wise. It will only pass off the cost of the warranty claims. RGA mentions that a good amp shouldn't have any problems over 20 years, and he's right, I'm pretty sure nobody here will argue me when I say most amp faults happen in the first year, probably 90%...And probably something as high as 99% in the first 5 years, which is what most other brands offer at this level (as a minimum). After that it's rare something will go that would be covered under warranty. The additional cost of offering a 20 year warranty is simply a mathematical function of the probability of claims times the expected cost. We've already established the low probability. It's probably less than 1% above what a typical 2 year or 5 year warranty would be. . The repair cost is probably very low as well..it's doubtful most repairs are more then $200 or $300 especially for Bryston to fix. Multiply the two and you get a what, less than $3. Hell, you could even add another $7 for the 1/2 hour (being generous) of wages Bryston will play their clerical employee if you think there's even 1/2 hour of paper work to be done in a warranty claim...you're still under $10...hardly the high cost RGA is implying...
Ask yourself, is that $10 such a massive waste of your money, is it going to let you afford another amplifier? Probably not, and it's doubtful you could buy insurance over 20 years for $10. Let's say the fault is a disastrous catastrophe, and is a $600 repair...that's still only a passed of cost of $13. Whoop-dee-doo.

On the flipside though, don't be scared to buy equipment without a 20 year warranty.

My best friend just purchased the RC1070 pre-amplifier, he wanted a 'basic' preamp to fill the needs of his living room sytem (of which includes a MF A3 cd, Anthem MCA20, and Monitor Audio B3; my sytem I am upgrading from). He doesn't ever listen critically, but appreciates sonic integrity. I must say, that for the $650 CDN he paid for it, the unit does a fantastic job. It is surprisingly clean. Kudos to the Rotel people for this product. Definitely the steal of the year as far as I'm concerned.

As far as the warranties go, there is definitely a sense of security knowing that a product is guaranteed to work for as long as you would like to use it. A 5 year warranty is useful, but if you are paying over 2k for any piece of equipment, you don't want it to faulter after 7 years to any dollar value of damage, it should just work for ever. I have had a serious look through the Moon P3, and I'm quite sure it is built to last... but, you just never know.

I did get a chance to demo the Rotel 1090 v. the Moon P3 this weekend, and the Rotel did hold its own at about a $1000 cheaper than the Moon. However, the Moon did come out on top in overall smoothness and fine detail. The presentation was larger with the Moon, and I would have to say on performance alone, the Moon is the clear winner for me. It's just a matter of the performance difference being able to justify the cost difference.

Keep you all posted.