What do you prefer NAD or Rotel?

[dvjorge]

Hi guys,

Just trying to get opinions. This is a big controversy like B&W and Paradigm. I like to know what is different between these two sounds and what amplifier we can consider better Nad or Rotel. Is there some difference in sound quality?

Thanks for any answer.
D.V. Jorge

[Tom Bombadil]

Heh...all my listening is subjective, biased, casual...no DBTs...(as is everyone else's)...since there have been no DBTs...with that disclaimer...we can proceed...

NAD Amps have been quite consistently good - for their price...they have been made in China as far back as I know them ... circa 1996...and have been very good. They try to achieve a "Neutral" sound - which is a good ideal on this board. I have Owned one and listened to many. As always Used will be a good deal - there are plenty of people with the upgrade bug - and they have the cash for it.

I have listened to ROTEL Power Amp 1080 - supposed to be one their good ones $1000 - found it to have the following negatives:
- quite some noise
- low volume presentation sounds completely different from high volume, liked the high-volume but not the low-volume. Not sure what that translates to but all my other four amplifiers kinda sound the same high or low volume (just louder)...so in geeky language it is probably changing frequencies at low volumes....not your ideal "straight wire with gain"..
- fatiguing...could be the frequency shifting it was doing...it gave us a headache pretty quick.

Oh...yes while auditioning make sure all the cables/polarities are connected properly...can make huge difference...this will totally screw-up the soundstage etc. I actually do not know whether dealers do this on purpose...but I have had to rectify this a number of times.

Tom

Hi guys,

Just trying to get opinions. This is a big controversy like B&W and Paradigm. I like to know what is different between these two sounds and what amplifier we can consider better Nad or Rotel. Is there some difference in sound quality?

Thanks for any answer.
D.V. Jorge

[kexodusc]

Great question, I own both NAD and ROTEL gear right now. Two NAD integrateds, and a Rotel integrated, as well as a Rotel power amp. Here's my take:

NAD Amps have been quite consistently good - for their price...they have been made in China as far back as I know them ... circa 1996...and have been very good.

They had a dismal few years from 1996-1999 or so...seemed to have corrected any issues though. Lately I've been hearing a lot of feedback badmouthing a few of their models though as being terribly inconsistent in sound...that's a first.

They try to achieve a "Neutral" sound - which is a good ideal on this board. I have Owned one and listened to many. As always Used will be a good deal - there are plenty of people with the upgrade bug - and they have the cash for it.

I own two NAD amps, and I would definitely NOT consider them Neutral...I know most find them warm sounding, and I'd agree with that, though there is a slightly airy detail there too I usually don't hear with most gear. I'd almost call them an aggressive, warm sound. To me they sound very similar in the very high frequencies as my Adcom's, with just a smidge less brightness.

I have listened to ROTEL Power Amp 1080 - supposed to be one their good ones $1000 - found it to have the following negatives:
- quite some noise
- low volume presentation sounds completely different from high volume, liked the high-volume but not the low-volume. Not sure what that translates to but all my other four amplifiers kinda sound the same high or low volume (just louder)...so in geeky language it is probably changing frequencies at low volumes....not your ideal "straight wire with gain"..
- fatiguing...could be the frequency shifting it was doing...it gave us a headache pretty quick.

Oh...yes while auditioning make sure all the cables/polarities are connected properly...can make huge difference...this will totally screw-up the soundstage etc. I actually do not know whether dealers do this on purpose...but I have had to rectify this a number of times.

I've listened to that particular amp on several occasions and it definitely does not have any noise issues, nor any difference in presentation as volumes increase. In fact, if you heard that you can bet your testicles it was the result of another part of the chain...my guess is speakers struggling with increased loads. One thing you can count on amps to do if driven within their limitations is to be almost mathematically uniform in performance as volume increases. If you had said you liked the low volume and NOT the high volume, I might have been tipped off at flaws not being revealed until a certain volume was met.

Rotel and NAD have 2 different sounds. And these differences are subtle. I'd put Rotel closer to Neutral with a bit of a bright edge providing a bit more detail...NAD is definitely more on the warm side, emphasizing bass a bit more...To me, their midrange, imaging abilities, soudnstaging, etc, might as well be identical. Depending on your speakers, both are great. I find NAD to have a bit more noise, but the noise in both is so insignificant that it shouldn't even be considered in a purchasing decision. If you're hearing noise, you need a more powerful amp. To me, NAD's are just a bit less refined and natural sounding compared to Rotel gear. But NAD has a slight edge in the value department for gear under $800, IMO. In fact,

My NAD 3140 integrated has been taking alot of punishment for over 20 years and refuses to die, or even show signs of deterioration.

I don't think you can go wrong with either, nor is there a singular best in terms of sound quality, just different flavours that will appeal to different ears.

[topspeed]

Neither. I prefer PS Audio (hey, you asked for opinions )

As KC rightfully noted, NAD had serious QC issues a few years back while Rotel has enjoyed a stellar reputation for quality and bang-for-buck for over 20 years. That alone would make me lean more towards Rotel.

Bottom line however is that you'll need to hook both of them up to your speakers and see which sounds best as a system. Many people overlook system synergy whereas in reality, it's not hard to take a collection of gear that looks great on paper but when hooked together sounds horrible.

[kexodusc]

Bottom line however is that you'll need to hook both of them up to your speakers and see which sounds best as a system. Many people overlook system synergy whereas in reality, it's not hard to take a collection of gear that looks great on paper but when hooked together sounds horrible.

This is so true...In my tower speakers in my studio, the NAD's didn't do my towers justice. I tried some offereings from Adcom, NAD, Rotel, Parasound, PS Audio, and even a Bryston before settling.

Some speakers are more forgiving of amps, some are really fussy. You won't know until you try.

[topspeed]

This is so true...In my tower speakers in my studio, the NAD's didn't do my towers justice. I tried some offereings from Adcom, NAD, Rotel, Parasound, PS Audio, and even a Bryston before settling.

Some speakers are more forgiving of amps, some are really fussy. You won't know until you try.

Which PS Audio and Parasound did you try?

[kexodusc]

Topspeed: I tried the HCA2/PCA 2 combo and the Parasound A23 (or A21?)/P3 combo.

I'll risk being flammed here but I wasn't impressed at all with the Parasound stuff, not for the money anyway.
My ears would have ranked in the following order: Bryston, PS Audio, Rotel, Adcom, NAD, Parasound.
I'm a little disappointed with the current Adcom catalog...doesn't seem to me to be as good as the older 3 digit models.
I'll believe everything you and Geoffcin write about the PS Audio HCA2 (the pre-amp was okay, the amp was amazing). There was something immediately different sounding about it.

As I said, I settled (and that's the right word) for a competent Rotel integrated, which to me was about 80-85% as good for alot less money. (which I later used to buy 2 more speakers and a sub for the home theater, so much for fiscal responsibility).

I don't regret my decision though, this is the first piece of Rotel gear I've ever owned and so far I'm happy as a clam with it. Big time value, IMO...if not as sweet sounding and rich as the Bryston or PS Audio...maybe next time around.
Oh, that was the first PS Audio gear I'd ever listened to as well...not familiar with any of their other stuff, but I've been told their smaller amps are their best sounding.

[Tom Bombadil]

my guess is speakers struggling with increased loads

I used Magnaplanars MG 1.6 QR which are supposed to be 4 Ohms - making them appear to be a burden on Amps - but this impedance is not supposed to vary as much as Cone-type speakers making them a lighter burden.

I now have some KEFs so I may try these too next time I do some auditioning...

Thought the Rotel 1080 Amp may have been a bad piece - but saw another review - on this site talking about a "Jekyll & Hyde" transformation when the volume is increased...so I knew then it was not a single Amp failure.

Great question, I own both NAD and ROTEL gear right now. Two NAD integrateds, and a Rotel integrated, as well as a Rotel power amp. Here's my take:


They had a dismal few years from 1996-1999 or so...seemed to have corrected any issues though. Lately I've been hearing a lot of feedback badmouthing a few of their models though as being terribly inconsistent in sound...that's a first.



I own two NAD amps, and I would definitely NOT consider them Neutral...I know most find them warm sounding, and I'd agree with that, though there is a slightly airy detail there too I usually don't hear with most gear. I'd almost call them an aggressive, warm sound. To me they sound very similar in the very high frequencies as my Adcom's, with just a smidge less brightness.



I've listened to that particular amp on several occasions and it definitely does not have any noise issues, nor any difference in presentation as volumes increase. In fact, if you heard that you can bet your testicles it was the result of another part of the chain...my guess is speakers struggling with increased loads. One thing you can count on amps to do if driven within their limitations is to be almost mathematically uniform in performance as volume increases. If you had said you liked the low volume and NOT the high volume, I might have been tipped off at flaws not being revealed until a certain volume was met.

Rotel and NAD have 2 different sounds. And these differences are subtle. I'd put Rotel closer to Neutral with a bit of a bright edge providing a bit more detail...NAD is definitely more on the warm side, emphasizing bass a bit more...To me, their midrange, imaging abilities, soudnstaging, etc, might as well be identical. Depending on your speakers, both are great. I find NAD to have a bit more noise, but the noise in both is so insignificant that it shouldn't even be considered in a purchasing decision. If you're hearing noise, you need a more powerful amp. To me, NAD's are just a bit less refined and natural sounding compared to Rotel gear. But NAD has a slight edge in the value department for gear under $800, IMO. In fact,

My NAD 3140 integrated has been taking alot of punishment for over 20 years and refuses to die, or even show signs of deterioration.

I don't think you can go wrong with either, nor is there a singular best in terms of sound quality, just different flavours that will appeal to different ears.

[Tom Bombadil]

Several cases of reported Bipolar Personality compring how this sounds at Low Volumes Vs High Volumes.

I found this out later...and thus realised that what I heard was not an isolated case...seems pretty well known...design issue probably...unfortunately me not likee high-volume and the darn thing was only okay at high-volume.

Even the dealer "Stereoland" did not contest this...when I told him that this was being compared with Musical Fidelity HT100, Bryston 3B, Myryad MA240...he just shrugged and said that those were all better amps for stereo main system - which is listened to rather critically.

See review:
http://www.stereophile.com/amplificationreviews/608/
"RB 1080 displayed fewer symptoms of its bipolar personality"

Also there are forums "Club Rotel"
http://www.htguide.com/forum/archive/index.php4/f-20

So I rest my case - had some difficulty locating info on the web that documents this Bipolar Disorder...but look for a couple of minutes and you will find plenty of documentation....non DBT...non scientific...but IMNHSO - in the absence of perfect such I will use it....as also I will change lanes in traffic without DBTs...thank you very much.

Hi guys,

Just trying to get opinions. This is a big controversy like B&W and Paradigm. I like to know what is different between these two sounds and what amplifier we can consider better Nad or Rotel. Is there some difference in sound quality?

Thanks for any answer.
D.V. Jorge

[kexodusc]

This was quite easy....I went to my local Rotel dealer last night and actually played with the freakin thing through some Totem Model1 and Studio 100's...
Neither exhibited any case of "Bipolar Disorder"...Mine certainly does not. While I'd agree with slightly grainy sound on the highs, the rest of the reviews aren't worth the cyberspace they occupy.

As for finding web documentation, take a look at the "bipolar disorder" that plags NAD's too...which I equally believe is hogwash. No DBT needed, just go listen. Amps don't arbitrarily amplify certain frequencies, they rely on the preamp section for gain. There's something else at play there.

[psonic]

This bipolar disorder is indeed true of Rotel separates. My RB980BX 120/ch amp displays similar behavior. I have been talking about this for some time...this amp stinks at lower volumes.It sounds a bit rounded, conjested and dead. Once the volume is turned up she starts opening up and really shining (much better imaging, clarity, resolution, scale). My 4ohm speakers are somewhat tough on an amp, this may be related, I don't know.

[kexodusc]

Tom, Psonic:
I only have a Rotel Integrated, and the few other Rotel owners I do know have not heard this phenomenon.
Is this an intermittent problem that exist on a few models, or on a certain %? As I said, I work right next door to a Rotel dealer, and can demo these things every day (and often do)...this is an absolute first to me.
Is it only in the separates, and if so, the Pre-amps, or the amps?

[topspeed]

Hmmm... I'm with KC on this one as I've never heard any Rotel products exhibit this Jekyll & Hyde behaviour. I've heard both integrated and separates and neither had this problem. This is not to say it doesn't occur, just that I haven't experienced it.

One thought, are we sure it's not the speakers instead of the amp? Some speakers will need more juice to coalesce correctly. Take those Maggies for example. They don't have a heck of a lot of bass anyway so the more you feed them, the more dynamic they become (at least in my experience). Just a thought...

KC,
You're not the first to find the PCA somewhat wanting compared to the HCA2. I'm unsure if this is because the PCA isn't that great or simply because it isn't as dramatically different as the HCA2 and therefore hides in it's shadow. PSA kinda made their name with their pre-amps way back at the dawn of time so there's no question Paul knows what he's doing. My 4.6 ran flawlessly for 15 years and as a passive unit, it was one of the most transparent I've heard (or rather not heard).

No matter I s'pose as the new Gain Cell preamps promise to be as revolutionary as the original HCA2. Alas, no more audio gear until I address the video side of the rig...

[Tom Bombadil]

This was Power Amp RB-1080 only. It is supposed to be a 200W behemoth - so supposed to be quite sufficient for the Maggies 1.6 played at low levels... Formerly what I was satisfied with was a Musical Fidelity XA-100 R which is 75 W per channel and is no power-monger. It is not quite a Bryston for Bass. It was the midrange that we had problems with because (for us) this is the easiest to identify. Bass problems are not easy for me to identify - cos of room interactions etc...quite complicated...High Frequency problems are again not all that easy for me to identify...so it must be midrange that it is messing about with at low volume levels....could be some "Class A" circuit that is messed...and at higher volume levels it switches to NON-Class A operation...just guessing.

It must be the 4 Ohm load somehow...but many other Amps (both Power and Integrated) I have tried do not exhibit this Mr. Hyde to Dr. Jekyll effect.

Believe me I really WANTED the Rotel - it looked so good and seemed to be made well, good heat sinks, good contacts for speaker wire etc. whatever external that I could observe was very well made. Ended up keeping the dumpy looking Myryad that cost exactly the same and was only 120 W per channel - where the Rotel was 200 W per channel. So the difference was not small.

In the past I have realised differences and made choices based on budget - acceptable loss in quality etc. E.g. When I got the Musical Fidelity XA-100R it was up against Bryston B-60. The B-60 was clearly the better but was $300 more for the same functionality (including Remote)...so knwing what I was going to miss, I kept the more affordable.

In this case I would have kept the Rotel (if it was comparable) because I wanted its good looks and reading good reviews (having missed the Dr. Jekyll reference that time ) was convinced that it would be excellent.

Tom

Tom, Psonic:
I only have a Rotel Integrated, and the few other Rotel owners I do know have not heard this phenomenon.
Is this an intermittent problem that exist on a few models, or on a certain %? As I said, I work right next door to a Rotel dealer, and can demo these things every day (and often do)...this is an absolute first to me.
Is it only in the separates, and if so, the Pre-amps, or the amps?

[kexodusc]

KC,
You're not the first to find the PCA somewhat wanting compared to the HCA2. I'm unsure if this is because the PCA isn't that great or simply because it isn't as dramatically different as the HCA2 and therefore hides in it's shadow. PSA kinda made their name with their pre-amps way back at the dawn of time so there's no question Paul knows what he's doing. My 4.6 ran flawlessly for 15 years and as a passive unit, it was one of the most transparent I've heard (or rather not heard).

No matter I s'pose as the new Gain Cell preamps promise to be as revolutionary as the original HCA2. Alas, no more audio gear until I address the video side of the rig...

I wouldn't say the PCA was bad, I just wasn't wowed by it. I'd probably buy it with the HCA if I went that way. There's only a few pre-amps that impress me, offerings from Krell, Musical Fidelity, and Bryston come to mind. The rest I've just sort of viewed as necessary components. I'm not pre-amp buff by any means though, I'll readily admit...I've only ever owned a few pre's, NAD and Adcom, which I'd put again in the bang-for-the-buck category rather than audio nirvana category of things. To me the amp and speakers are the sexy gear, pre-amps are probably overlooked. I tend to prefer integrateds, as I can generally get the same components of a higher-end product line in one value added box, than I can with separates...then I add power amps if necessary or desired. I haven't generally heard much difference, if any, between an integrated and comparable separates
in the budgets I've had. I suspect that may change someday as my system evolves.
Someday I hope to buy a nice Bryston or Krell system..Maybe when my student loans are finally wiped out and I pay for the wedding.

[Cougar Guy]

I can't say as though I've heard this "jekyl and hyde" disposition with my RB-1080. I'm using it with Paradigm Studio 80's and I have no complaints. It has performed flawlessly in my system and it sounds great.

Also, I think the earlier comments posted from the the Stereophile review are a little misleading without being put into context. Look at the speakers it was driving when those comments were made . . . likely not the type of gear you would expect to drive with a $1000 amp. I think this comment from the review is more telling:

"When I ran the RB 1080 via its unbalanced inputs with more compatibly priced speakers, such as the Paradigm Reference Studio/20 or Studio/60, I had no complaint. The Rotel provided all the power the Paradigms could handle, and I heard no low-level limpness"