Rotel Can Someone Explain This Or Am I Totally Nuts

[EdwardGein]

I'm hoping someone can provide an explanation for this or am I totally nuts & I just don't care.
I got a brand new Rotel RCD-1072 CD player today- yes it does sound better using analog cables & it does sound excellent with greater detail then my Pioneer Elite PD-59 CD player. However, I actually prefer the sound of the Pioneer to it as somehow to me the bass & drums sound more alive & have a fatter sound then the Rotel & lead guitar sounds more guttier then the Rotel. We're talking 60's/70's recordings such as John Mayall & the Bluesbreakers with Mick Taylor on lead guitar not modern recordings. When I'm listening to the Pioneer somehow I feel the groove of & beat of the music but I don't feel it with the Rotel which from a technical standpoint I guess is better because it offers more detail & perhaps a bigger soundstage. I don't know if this is because I'm use to the Pioneer & not use to the Rotel or this is just my listening taste. I'm aware the Rotel hasn't been broken in but I really can't percieve that making any difference in regards to my listening tastes. I've listed this for a good price if anyones interested on Ebay but failing that I'm going to return it to the store, feeling totally embarassed, as its a really good player.

[paul_pci]

Well yes and no. I think you explained yourself pretty well and perhaps it is a matter of taste which some may find nuts, but at least you understand what you like and you sure keep ebay busy. Sometimes personal taste doesn't fit well with what otherwise might be a rational assessment of all these different players.

[superpanavision70mm]

Are you running both analog ? I am not totally shocked though as I have always stood by Pioneer.

[EdwardGein]

Yeah I ran analog on the Rotel & this is the first time I can honestly say that something sounds alot better to me with analog cables then digital (in this case coaxal). I still very much prefer the sound of the Pioneer PD-59 with the optical cable connected to my Denon 3801 receiver, its not even close. The weird thing is I was biased in hoping I'd love the Rotel more.
I can hear more detail in the Rotel but it sounds sterile even thin compared to the Pioneer.
The only possible explanation is I haven't burned the Rotel in. I played about 4 different Cd's & I felt the same about each of them. It's like with the Pioneer, the sound is just right- not too bright & not too low & you can totally focus on the fat sounding but not overbearing rhythm section & lead guitars have screaming bite. The Rotel seems to spread everything too thin with no bottom you can groove too & almost sounds cold & souless while the ZPioneer sounds like it has balls & sweet warmth. Unless I hear a tube CD player that makes me go nuts, I'm going to stick & be happy with my now 2 Pioneer PD-59 CD players. I actually preferred the sound of the PD-59 to the PD-65 (which perhaps might have been affected by shipping damage- as sound came out OK I'm assuming the sound wasn't affected but it sounded too bright to me) & I returned & got my money back in full.
I bought my first PD-59 for $320 with shipping on Ebay but the second one I got (for my bedroom) in the same condition, only cost $235 with shipping. Neither came with remotes which was no problem as I programmed my Harmony 676 Remote or a manual which I didn't need any way. I strongly recommend anyone to buy the Pioneer PD-59 CD player, which obviously you can get on Ebay, though it doesn't show up that often, between $235 & $320 with shipping & try initially listening to it with a digital connection.This player is no longer available by Pioneer & I don't know how their current Elite series sounds. Note, my thinking is based on how 60/70's rock & blues (generally remastered) CDs sound like. For all I know maybe modern stuff doesn't sound as good on the PD-59 & sounds great on the Rotel.

[kexodusc]

Wouldn't worry about burn-in for the CD players. Any burn in effects are surely accounted for by now.
I'm a little surprised at your observations...That seems like a dramatic difference in sound presentation. I've always observed CD players to have rather small, subtle differences, and almost never in tonality...then again, I've never heard a Rotel CD player, so maybe they just make'em that way.
Looks like an easy decision for you, if you like the Pioneer more you know what you have to do.

[paul_pci]

Wouldn't worry about burn-in for the CD players. Any burn in effects are surely accounted for by now.
I'm a little surprised at your observations...That seems like a dramatic difference in sound presentation. I've always observed CD players to have rather small, subtle differences, and almost never in tonality...then again, I've never heard a Rotel CD player, so maybe they just make'em that way.
Looks like an easy decision for you, if you like the Pioneer more you know what you have to do.

I'm not exactly surprised, as the same thing that Ed currently describes about the Rotel I experience last year when I tried his Cambrige Azur 640 on my system. Great, detailed player, but compared to the Sony, hooked up through an optical cable, the soundstage was leaner with the Cambrige. Although I haven't tried his new Rotel on my system, and may not bel able to before he returns it, what he's describing reminds me of my impressions of the Azur model.