Rotel 1056 vs NAD 763 [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Rotel 1056 vs NAD 763



jjjanzen
05-15-2005, 12:22 PM
Any opinions on this head to head? I've narrowed down my choice to these two receivers. They seem to get similar reviews, with one exception: that the NAD may have quality control issues (the hiss), although this seems to be a fairly hotly contested topic.

Any comments on QC issues, musical performance, HT performance, video performance or just general experience with either receiver would be great.

I plan on matching them up to Totem Sttafs, MiteTC, and probably Lynks rears in a 5.1 setup.

Thx

anamorphic96
05-15-2005, 12:37 PM
NAD seems to have had some QC issues and so has Rotel in this department. Both have had hiss issues from what I have read. But I think these problems where isolated to the x62 series. The 63 series seems to have resolved these issues.

Have you considered an inexpensive reciever like the HK AVR 235 or Marantz SR4500. Both offer pre outs and can be connected to a much more powerful amp that will drive the Totems better. Amps have no moving parts and tend to be safe bets when bought used. You can find great deals on used 5 channel amps that will out muscle most AVR's. Totems tend to be inefficient and like power to be heard at there best.

You could probably save some money going this route too.

jjjanzen
05-15-2005, 01:00 PM
Here's what I've heard on your two recommendations: The HK's have QC issues, not hiss related but simply in their construction quality, and they also don't pump out the power they claim to. As with the HK, Marantz, while being better in terms of QC, still don't have the power output listed on the box. The NADs actually have output beyond their stated number, although that's based on tests my local HiFi guy did on them. Seeing as he sells NAD, Yamaha (the worst in terms of claimed vs actual power output), Denon, HK, and Marantz (best, other than NAD, but still not as powerful as claimed), there is some trustworthiness to his claims. He does not sell Rotel so no test info there.

Also, musically, both HK and Marantz lag behind the Rotel and NAD. I plan on using these about 50/50 music/HT. I put on emphasis on music, because I figure (and there is some debate to this) that if a receiver can produce good music, the HT sound should also be good. This doesn't necessarily work the other way around.

My budget for a receiver is about 1300US, so I'd like to keep the comparissons in that price range.

anamorphic96
05-15-2005, 01:05 PM
I wasnt saying use the receivers to drive the speakers. Use them as processors and invest in larger amps to drive the Totems.

anamorphic96
05-15-2005, 01:06 PM
Rotel makes some outstanding 5 channel amps. Pick one of these up used for 6 to 700 and and one of the receivers for 4 to 500 and your under budget and have better flexibility in the future for upgrades. Even the NAD 743 with an external amp will keep you in the same price range maybe a touch more in price.

Flexibility is the main thing im trying to offer here. Especially considering how much you are spending.

edtyct
05-15-2005, 01:13 PM
Your choices based on your stated goals seem sound to me. I haven't heard the NAD, but when I heard the Rotel, I liked it a lot--so much so that I bought it for the livingroom. I have a history with separates exclusively. Both NAD and Rotel rate their power either conservatively or truthfully, with all channels driven. They were designed to handle music as well as they do films, wasting little space and expense on unnecessary features. Most of the quality-control issues, with the Rotel at least, are rectified quickly and effectively by firmware updates that users can access themselves. I believe that hiss is one of them.

Ed

anamorphic96
05-15-2005, 01:26 PM
Here is a link to a great Rotel amp that will sound much better than any receiver. Especially with a good receiver as a processor. The HK and Marantz are great at 400.
http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?ampsmult&1120975146

jjjanzen
05-15-2005, 01:36 PM
Do you notice a big difference in Pre/Pro than with all-in-one? Does a company like Rotel use different companents in a straight amp then in their A/V all-in-ones?

As for HT, do most receivers generally have the same capability with reagrd to sound quality?

Bit of a noob at this stuff.

anamorphic96
05-15-2005, 02:12 PM
With an external amp such as the Rotel. They can put all there efforts into the amp and not have to worry about how there going to integrate a processor to make a certain price point. Compromises have to made with receivers to get to those price points. The Rotel amp alone costs as much as those receivers.

You will see a much larger power supply, bigger capacitors, bigger output stages and better componets used through out. Seperate amps can also drive a 4 ohm load with much greater ease than a receiver can due to more robust power supply sections. This in turn will offer greater control and better clarity with tighter deeper more defined bass and better dynamic contrast when things really get busy. ( Some of the Totems are 4 ohms. )

The amp will not have to drive the rest of the componets in the receiver as well. In a year or two you could then add one of Rotel's processors and be way ahead of the game and have system thats much better than waht a receiver can offer.

The NAD 743 at 699 and the Rotel amp I showed you at 800 will bring you upto 1500 which is over your budget but will offer sound quality that out performs both receivers you mentioned. Even the HK and Marantz will sound better with the Rotel amp and you would come in under budget.

One other thing to mention is HK offers some of the best bass management in an AV receiver today. You can adjust the cut off receiver for each speaker invidually which can help integrate the system better. Where as the crossover frequencies on the Rotel and NAD are global and the same for all the speakers.

To many people dismiss HK as being a cheap receiver thats sold at Circuit City when its quite the opposite. They have one of the more robust power supply sections in AVR's.

I dont mean to sound pushy I just want to see you get the most for your money and seperates is always the way to go IMO. Especially when your dealing with high quality and revealing speakers such as the Totems. Plus you get greater upgrade flexibiy for future upgrades. :D :D :D

jjjanzen
05-15-2005, 02:23 PM
Thanks for the great reply.

I'll look into getting seperates around my price point. Flexibilty would be great as I now live in an appartment, but plan on eventually moving into a house. Planning for the future is great!

anamorphic96
05-15-2005, 02:27 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=14973&item=5774967537&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=14973&item=5774780419&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=14973&item=5774386209&rd=1&ssPageName=WDVW

Here are few more links and examples of great deals. ATI and Parasound are on the same level as the NAD and Rotel.

The ATI listed is an amazing deal.

jjjanzen
05-15-2005, 03:35 PM
Maybe I'm asking a dumb question. but if I bought simply an amp such as
www.nadelectronics.com/ht_amplifiers/T973_framset.htm (http://)
(NAD T973...not sure what price it is, only for example), and I had a DvD and CD player to hook up to it, why do I need anything else? My DvD decodes all sound formats, so I get the HT, and my CD player obviously plays CD's, so i get music.

If the only reason I need another component is to hook up video, why couldn't I just hook it up directly to the TV? Seems like that would be a better connection anyway then to go through a video processor, and THEN to the TV.

anamorphic96
05-15-2005, 04:02 PM
You need a pre amp stage to amplify the analogue(low voltage) signal coming off of the DVD/CD player. Plus you need the ability to adjust the output levels for all the speakers. Plus you get the other formats such as Dolby Pro Logic 2 which allows you to here surround from stereo sources such as TV broadcasts. The other main thing is the bass management. This is needed so you dont over load the surrounds and mains with to much bass. The bass can then be directed to the sub.

What model of DVD player are you using ?

The other thing is the facilities you get to add other componets such as a cassete deck, video game system or MP3 player.

The T973 is around 2000.00.

One of these calibration discs will help set everything up. I have heard great things about the AVIA disc. http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=10847


Hope this helps.

edtyct
05-15-2005, 04:58 PM
I'll confuse the issue a little more. First of all, as good as the Rotel receiver is--and I think that it's very good--a separate two-channel amp as mentioned for the front two speakers in stereo/direct mode, or to carry some of the sound load for films, would be an upgrade. Receivers (#), even the better ones, often benefit from that kind of relief; as anamorphic96 said, they have a lot to do under one roof. You would also thereby free up amplification for 7.1 channels or for another zone. For technical reasons, the Rotel warns against 4-ohm loads. It will accommodate them in a pinch, but an external amp would audibly cut down on the strain.

Separates at the Rotel's price point aren't necessarily a bad idea either, but I'm not convinced that they will be hugely better performers in every respect, especially if you add a secondhand power amp (#) at a reasonable price to the Rotel receiver (leaving aside the issue of flexibility for the moment). You'd get a decent switching section, preamp (#) functions, audio programs, clever bass management, etc. (I know nothing about the HK option. It might do all of these tricks capably as well; I just happen to have the Rotel in my sound inventory.) Another option, though it bumps you up to $2000, is the Arcam receiver, which is often compared to separates at a much higher price. If it's anywhere near as good as people say, and the convenience of a receiver is tempting to you, it may be worth a little trouble to find. I say these things as someone who's long-confirmed as a user of separates. I just think that these days, at the $1300 to $2000 price point, certain receivers have a lot to offer vis a vis entry-level separates. However, if you can get used separates from an upper tier at a matching price point (and don't mind losing a sound field or two and inheriting some depreciation in the process), that would be a good way to go as well. I like to think that the people who bought my used equipment over the years got good deals.

Even if your DVD player has DD and DTS built in, you'd still need the volume control and switching that a preamp (stage) would afford and might want the other sound-program possibilities that a preamp, or preamp section, would offer through its digital inputs to enhance and even create surround. In the video case, you'd be wise to go directly into the TV if possible under any conditions (unless you opted for a separate deinterlacer/ scaler), but having a few extra inputs available if you should need them wouldn't hurt.

Ed

jjjanzen
05-16-2005, 12:34 PM
Thanks for the replies and education on seperates.

I think I will stick with my original plan of buying either the Rotel 1056 or NAD 763, and later purchasing a 2 or 5 channel amp.

I guess the question is still out there as to what people prefer, Rotel or NAD. But I think either way I can't go to wrong.