rotel

[JamPal]

BTW,

Sorry Bommer I forgot to say, my local dealer stocks Rotel and I really like the more pricey stuff. I haven't heard much of teh budget stuff.

The big Rotel power amp had oodles of grunt and gurcha. Worth a listen.

 

[penance]

Had an RB1090 power amp for a while, good for the money.

 

[meninblack]

Is it my imagination, or has the Wigwam been filling up with arrogant, barmy :naimee: tw@'s recently?

Now I like :naim: kit, at least what I've heard. But I'm starting to think I could never own any, for all the same reasons I could never own a BMW 3-series.

No offence to Hawk or any of the :naimee: at the bake-off, who were all nice guys - but there is certainly a lunatic fringe.

Perhaps they'd be better off staying on their own forum, where they can discuss "audiophile" fuses, getting felt pens exactly the right shade of green to match the badges, and similar topics.

 

[Guest]

The Sugden Bijou range is excellent and it DOES carry a tune.

OK, I'll try to be a bit more balanced about MF then:

For: Unfatiguing sound good for long term listening, great soundstage depth, and sheer headroom. Pleasant tonal balance.

Against: It's sonic wallpaper. It frequently fails to distinguish pitch between certain notes or is just reallyvague about it. Basically, it seems to get the fundamentals of music reproduction wrong in an attempt to deliver an easy-on-the-ear presentation.

But to make a sweeping statement like Steve Toys above, regarding a brand that has hooked many an audiophool into it's charms is bravado at best, and inviting the mother of all flamings at worst.

I agree it's more for audiophools than music lovers. As for flaming that should only occur if MF lovers take personal offence and respond in kind. Bravado, no. I stand by what I say and would be happy to demonstrate it.

 

[earl of sodbury]

Steve Toy wrote:

The Sugden Bijou range is excellent and it DOES carry a tune.OK, I'll try to be a bit more balanced about MF then:

For: Unfatiguing sound good for long term listening, great soundstage depth, and sheer headroom. Pleasant tonal balance.

Against: It's sonic wallpaper. It frequently fails to distinguish pitch between certain notes or is just reallyvague about it. Basically, it seems to get the fundamentals of music reproduction wrong in an attempt to deliver an easy-on-the-ear presentation.

But to make a sweeping statement like Steve Toys above, regarding a brand that has hooked many an audiophool into it's charms is bravado at best, and inviting the mother of all flamings at worst.

I agree it's more for audiophools than music lovers.

As for flaming that should only occur if MF lovers take personal offence and respond in kind. Bravado, no. I stand by what I say and would be happy to demonstrate it.

How ironic, if there's one thing that all MF kit across the range consistently doesn't do especially well it's soundstage depth... Still, to know that you would have had to spend some time with it rather than parroting what you've read on other forums...

Flaming? - am I to understand you see it as a one way process: you make ill-informed and provocative statement, that's fine, 'cause you know what you're talking about; anyone who responds in kind is out of order, because they don't?

You're going to be a barrel of laughs to play with...

 

[Guest]

Perhaps they'd be better off staying on their own forum, where they can discuss "audiophile" fuses, getting felt pens exactly the right shade of green to match the badges, and similar topics.

Whilst the greenink around the rim of a CDdoes work in cleaning up higher frequencies, I've not heard it make any difference on CDsplayed on Naim players.

Fuses do make an audible difference - more due to the rating though.

 

[meninblack]

Steve Toy wrote:

 As for flaming that should only occur if MF lovers take personal offence and respond in kind.

It's much worse than that, Steve: I'm a Cyrus owner.

We are an evil bunch of bastards, driven to a semi-permanent psychotic rage

by the shrieking of our oh-so-bright amplification and the tinny, coarse rattling of our cheap Dynaudio speakers. So there!

 

[Guest]

How ironic, if there's one thing that all MF kit across the range consistently doesn't do especially well it's soundstage depth... Still, to know that you would have had to spend some time with it rather than parroting what you've read on other forums...

It was the Nuvista integrated I heard that did soundstage depth. Otherwise the soundstage tends to be sort ofdeep but behind the speakers. I prefer forward projection personally for a front-row presentation.

As for parroting, my opinions are based on actually hearing the kit.

 

[earl of sodbury]

Steve Toy wrote:

How ironic, if there's one thing that all MF kit across the range consistently doesn't do especially well it's soundstage depth... Still, to know that you would have had to spend some time with it rather than parroting what you've read on other forums...

It was the Nuvista integrated I heard that did soundstage depth. Otherwise the soundstage tends to be sort ofdeep but behind the speakers. I prefer forward projection personally for a front-row presentation.

As for parroting, my opinions are based on actually hearing the kit.

The Nuvista does a reasonable job, but soundstage depth placement, focus and scaling is just not great, even through ESL 989s! Soundstage width, and overall scale and discrimination is however superb. AllIMHO/IME. Anyway, I've heard recent Naim gear do better with depth-related criteria- hence why I questioned your claim.

Still at least we're beginning to see where matters of taste and personal hearing preferences might play a part in all this, which is an improvement on blind predjudice.

Oh, and FWIW, I rather like a lot of recent Naim kit, but it's not quite what I want to live with...

Perhaps we should let Bommer have his thread back soon...?

churz, eofs

 

[Guest]

Flaming? - am I to understand you see it as a one way process: you make ill-informed and provocative statement, that's fine, 'cause you know what you're talking about; anyone who responds in kind is out of order, because they don't?

The above suggests a failure in understandingthe difference between a provocative statement and personal invective. I make provocative statements and don't mind them coming back the other way. It'sjust aquestion of separating provocative statements and their authorsbefore deciding which of these two itwould beappropriate to address or attack.

The only person with any logical reason to take umbrage at my statements about MF would be Mr. Michaelson himself. He'd do better taking the criticisms on board or demonstrating that things have improved, though.

As I said, all imvho.

 

[nsherin]

Not heard much of their kit, but I'm very pleased with the RT-940AX tuner I bought second-hand recently.

 

[Guest]

Oh, and FWIW, I rather like a lot of recent Naim kit, but it's not quite what I want to live with...

For the record I'm not all that keen on the newer Naim stuff. To me it falls into two categories: so so, or impressive but bloody expensive with it.

The Olive range did what it did very well, but forget sonic niceties like imaging. I tend to cherry-pick Naim kit, using just a Naim CD player and speaker cable in my rig.

If you want good ol'Pace, Rhythm and Timing there are other options out there to consider like Rotel, Rega, Densen, Primare, Sugden, Exposure etc.

 

[earl of sodbury]

Steve Toy wrote:

The above suggests a failure in understandingthe difference between a provocative statement and personal invective. I make provocative statements and don't mind them coming back the other way. It'sjust aquestion of separating provocative statements and their authorsbefore deciding which of these two itwould beappropriate to address or attack. The only person with any logical reason to take umbrage at my statements about MF would be Mr. Michaelson himself. He'd do better taking the criticisms on board or demonstrating that things have improved, though.

As I said, all imvho.

This is a hifi discussion forum - logic takes a back seat, and well you know it. But in case it's temporarily slipped your mind, here's how it works:

1. you make a provocative statement about equipment you don't own

2. people who do own it get pissed off

3. they call you a cunt

4. you get pissed off and call them cunts back

5. and repeat for the next 96 posts

It's a great system, and it works.

As for Michaelson, his lack of interest in the opinions of his customers is the stuff of legend - he has probably scraped things from the cleatsof his brogues that he holds in higher esteem than customers. I've never met him, but on the basis of hearsay I'dpositthathe's probably a bit of a cunt, too.

churz, eofs

 

[Davewhityetagain]

only person with any logical reason to take umbrage at my statements about MF would be Mr. Michaelson himself.

I must ask why would he be bothered ?

anyone up to speed will know why

 

[Guest]

1. you make a provocative statement about equipment you don't own2. people who do own it get pissed off

3. they call you a C**t

4. you get pissed off and call them C**ts back

5. and repeat for the next 96 posts

That about sums it up. I state that the problem beginsfrom #3 not #1 though.

Is thebeing pissed off in direct proportion to personalexpenditure on the kit being slagged off, or the severity of the slagging off?

I mean, I couldn't give a toss if someone slagged offmy kit the day before or after I bought it, or at any time since. In fact, I welcome constructive comments about my kit and evenact upon them where appropriate. Folks should refrain from getting anal and het up about theirmaterial purchases. Hi-fi exists to do a job...

 

[Guest]

Steve Toy wrote:

1. you make a provocative statement about equipment you don't own2. people who do own it get pissed off

3. they call you a C**t

4. you get pissed off and call them C**ts back

5. and repeat for the next 96 posts

That about sums it up. I state that the problem beginsfrom #3 not #1 though.

Is thebeing pissed off in direct proportion to personalexpenditure on the kit being slagged off, or the severity of the slagging off?

I mean, I couldn't give a toss if someone slagged offmy kit the day before or after I bought it, or at any time since. In fact, I welcome constructive comments about my kit and evenact upon them where appropriate. Folks should refrain from getting anal and het up about theirmaterial purchases. Hi-fi exists to do a job...

you are 100% right steve good to have you here , at last someone who is not affraid to speak his mind. good on you fella.

 

[dudywoxer]

To kinda get back to the question, when the Musical Naim double act go back into the respective prams. From what I remember the higher end rotel fear is pretty good, good timing, not not soundstage, but the dealer would insist on using B&W speakers, not my cup of tes but did seem a good match. 3K for a CD/amp gives you all sorts of options, How about finding a few local dealers, abd enjoying the search.

try to hear Denson, Copland, Rega, Denon's New range, Primare, Exposure on the being a PRat side of things. and of course Rotel

 

[Miller-8]

I got a Rotel RA-1062 last week. First impressions:

Compared to what I was using before, an Exposure VII pre with AVI S2000MA power amp (90wpc, was over £1000 new 10 years ago) the Rotel is actually pretty impressive. The Rotel of coarse retails at £600 new in the UK.

The thing I noticed first was the effortless bass, it really seems to go way down the register with ease. I would say the bass is more impressive than the AVI. The treble detail is also right up there, it has a slightly different texture to the AVI. In the midrange I would say the AVI is more attractive, delivering an amazing amount of emotion to voices. The AVI's midrange is also slightly fuller. But the Rotel doesnt disgrace itself at all, and I would say it has a bit more attack for drums etc. The power from the Rotel is just effortless.

I only got the AVI a month or so ago, won the Rotel on eBay by accident after I'd bought the AVI (oops

) . I've get to use the AVI with the Rotel but I'll be interested to see how they perform together.

I'm going to sell the Exposure pre and I think I'll keep the Rotel because it's a very good amp. My only critisism of it is the midrange is maybe slightly lean. Detail is top notch.

 

[A.N.]

ive heard rotel and i likes it. the bottom of the ladder rung sounds excellent for the price.

 

[Geordie]

I had the RA-01 and did compare it with several amps and I liked it for the price - a lively and engaging sound for not much money. It absolutely anihalated the Cambridge A500 Mk2 I had before I owned it, and it showed a clean pair of heals to a Pioneer A400 as well.

A big, bold lively sound with punchy bass, and good dynamic power.

If it had a weakness, I'd say that perhaps it wasnt the sweetest sounding amp at times, sometimes feeling a bit strident.