or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Rotel RSX-1057 vs. Denon 3806?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rotel RSX-1057 vs. Denon 3806?

post #1 of 45
Thread Starter 
Is anyone familiar with these two recievers? I've been trying to decide which one would suit my needs. I'm not looking for bells and whistles. I just want the best sound quality between the two. There's not much written about the rotel that I can find, I'm hoping some of you may have some more experience with these two. Any opinions would be appreciated!
post #2 of 45
best sound quality would be the rotel hands down. You will get 75 watts per channel of clean undistorted power with this. There is most definitely a different "house" sound if you will with denon vs rotel. So your ears will be the judge ultimately. The denon is rated 120 x 7 if i'm not mistaken, but you will probably get more (current) out of the rotel as they rate their "power" more conservatively. The question is do you listen to a lot of 5.1 or 7.1 channel audio, or dvds. If your emphasis is music, the rotel is the definitive way to go imo. Cleaner highs, mids, tighter bass, etc...
post #3 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tino D'Voe View Post

Is anyone familiar with these two recievers? I've been trying to decide which one would suit my needs. I'm not looking for bells and whistles. I just want the best sound quality between the two. There's not much written about the rotel that I can find, I'm hoping some of you may have some more experience with these two. Any opinions would be appreciated!

Tino, despite the other post, the receiver has practically nothing to do with the sound you hear. That is almost completely a factor of room acoustics and speaker choice. Get those items right and you have better sound than than 99%of others with similar budgets. Unless your speakers are hard to drive, either of the two receivers you mentioned will be fine if it has the features you want. Good luck.

Nick
post #4 of 45
While this is true, its not the be all and end all of how a system sounds. Go into a store, listen to both units in the same space with the same speakers, demo some movies but importantly music, and you will hear the difference. If you want features tho' the Denon's yer man, if its all about the sound grab yerself a Rotel !
post #5 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick250 View Post

Tino, despite the other post, the receiver has practically nothing to do with the sound you hear. That is almost completely a factor of room acoustics and speaker choice. Get those items right and you have better sound than than 99%of others with similar budgets. Unless your speakers are hard to drive, either of the two receivers you mentioned will be fine if it has the features you want. Good luck.

Nick

This statement only applies if your speakers are junk.The preamp in the avr is most definitely what you hear.The Rotel is much more musical,if it's all about HT the Denon is ok.
post #6 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elmo C View Post

This statement only applies if your speakers are junk.The preamp in the avr is most definitely what you hear.The Rotel is much more musical,if it's all about HT the Denon is ok.

That is a common misunderstanding, but blind testing testing time and again has shown it to be untrue. If Rotel purposely colors the sound to make it distinctive, then that is another matter.

Nick
post #7 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick250 View Post

That is a common misunderstanding, but blind testing testing time and again has shown it to be untrue. If Rotel purposely colors the sound to make it distinctive, then that is another matter.

Nick

I agree. To imply the the Rotel or any other receiver is more "musical" than another is ancedotal. Any good quality receiver will pretty much sound like any other. It's the speakers and room. Buy the one that you can get the best deal on and then forget about it and enjoy.

post #8 of 45
I've done a test with Rotel and Denon (same price) before. Same everything, except the receivers were swapped out. Everyone that heard the test preferred the Rotel. It was not close.

Go do a test for yourself and decide what you like.
post #9 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by epiney View Post

I've done a test with Rotel and Denon (same price) before. Same everything, except the receivers were swapped out. Everyone that heard the test preferred the Rotel. It was not close.

Go do a test for yourself and decide what you like.

This post exactly defines what the word "ancedotal" means.
post #10 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by atdamico View Post

This post exactly defines what the word "ancedotal" means.

Call it what you want. I was determined to buy a Denon, I bought a Rotel instead. It was controlled test. What scientific evidence do you have?

Besides, everyone is entitled to an opinion, I wouldn't be so rude as to make fun of yours.
post #11 of 45
I find that different receivers have different sound as well. I auditioned a denon 3806 vs pioneer elite 74 and found the pio to be warmer sounding and more musical where the denon seemed to be more articulate and precise (thinner). The speakers were b&604s3's in a dedicated listening room at a local hi-fi shop with a switchboard for quickly a/b'ing the receivers. 2 channel music only. Don't really like using words like this when describing sound that I hear, but don't know another way to put it. BTW, all of the tonal controls were flat and spl levels were reference according to my dealer. I prefered pio over the denon for 2 channel music was my assessment. I did not know which receiver was which until i decided the sound i prefered. I don't understand how it could be assumed similarly priced receivers in the mid-fi range all sound the same. Not trying to start a pissing match here, but I believe my own ears.
post #12 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick250 View Post

That is a common misunderstanding, but blind testing testing time and again has shown it to be untrue. If Rotel purposely colors the sound to make it distinctive, then that is another matter.

Nick

Nick you are so far out of touch it is sad.Anyone that has a good ear will spot a Rotel right off the bat,It is better in every way than Denon yamaha ect.Just because you can not hear the difference does not mean others can not.To the original poster get the Rotel,You will be very happy.By the way I own Yamaha and Rotel'BUDDA
post #13 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by buddahead View Post

Nick you are so far out of touch it is sad.Anyone that has a good ear will spot a Rotel right off the bat,It is better in every way than Denon yamaha ect.Just because you can not hear the difference does not mean others can not.To the original poster get the Rotel,You will be very happy.By the way I own Yamaha and Rotel'BUDDA

Well, I'm not Nick. But there are a LOT of us around here that have been here for many many years that disagree with your position. Of course you have the right to think what you want, but anytime someone states a position and then suggests that you have to have "good ears" or "golden ears" or "rabbit ears" or whatever sort of "ears" you decide one has to have to be able to actually "hear" the difference, I start thinking about snake oil. Its the same old argument that is used by high end cable advocates, speaker break in advocates, and on and on and on. Ears are ears and it doesn't neccessarily take an extraordidary set of ears to hear or not hear things that don't exist. There has not been any evidence of any study or ojbective experiment ever introduced on this site that has proven or demonstrated that one amp or one receiver sounds any different than any other. The evidence is ancedotal. And that is not an insult, perhaps an earlier poster might actually pull out a dictionary and look up the word before they naturally assume that it is an insult to suggest that evidence is ancedotal. Regardless, you can feel sorry for whomever you want, but that doesn't change the fact that a Rotel does not sound any more musical than a Yamaha, Denon, or Pioneer receiver of similar qualities and power abilities. Now I'll leave all of you to it.
post #14 of 45
What some of these people tell you is that it does not matter what receiver you buy since they all sound the same. Not true in my experience. Its kind of funny they even disparage comparative listening. This makes no sense since NO ONE has bought a component that sounded worse in compartive listening. Suggest you listen to both and buy the one that sounds better to you. If they sound the same, go for the one with the features you most want.
post #15 of 45
Nick, please tell us what equipment you have.
post #16 of 45
if you can't hear a difference between 2 receivers by different manufacturers, then get the one that is cheaper by all means. the situation is only as complicated as to which sound one prefers. if you like features of the sony over the rotel or whatever receiver at hand then buy it. to your ears, the sony or yamaha is just as good. so then to you the rotel would be a waste of money with less connectivity. Of course, if this were true, rotel wouldn't make a receiver because they wouldn't be able to sell a product that sounded the same as every other product. A lot of people like tide laundry soap, if every other laundry soap smelled and washed clothes equally, then a lot of people wouldn't pay extra to get it.
post #17 of 45
its not a matter of who is or who is not an "audiophile"
its a matter of what would sound better. If your cannot discern a difference then save your money for something you will notice a difference on like speakers.
post #18 of 45
Whether it's true or not almost every salesperson I've spoken to will tell you that Yamahas, while feature rich and reliable, tend to be harsh sounding. I've also been reading this over and over on this and other forums. At the same time I've also been hearing/reading, over and over, that Rotels and Arcams have a more natural, balanced, ''easy listening'' sound. Popular misconception or fact?
I happen to own a Yamaha RX-V1500 - I've tried hundreds of EQ settings, different speakers/speaker settings, switched speaker cables a few times, carpet, curtains, etc. and in the end, while not completely dissatisfied, am still searching for that right ''balance''. I've also been introduced to sibilance, something I had never experienced on any of my high, medium, or low end stereo systems. Is this something inherent to most AV receivers or just Yamahas in particular? I suppose the only way I will find out for sure will be to go out and buy a Rotel, Arcam or maybe Marantz and draw my own conclusions.
post #19 of 45
I searched for a reciever a while back. I did audition the Rotel on B&W 700 series at a local dealer. ( a dealer I have purchased many items from over the years) I found out of all that I listened to the Arcam 300, the Sherwood 965, the B&K 507 and the HK 7300 sounded the best. They all lacked to the seperates I have owned in the past to my ears but the HK 7300 was the best compromise to me in a HT set up. I do not mean you should go out and buy one because I did I am just pointing out you need to listen on your own to the options and see if you can demo them in your system. If you find one you like much better choose it as said before if they are of similar quality pick the one you can most easily live with budget wise. I keep hearing allot of two channel listening as the end all of a reciever. (arcam is very nice for that) I would never try and combine the two if I didnt have to . I would take an older tube amp from CJ or Research over a Rotel reciever anyday for two channel. I know you need a preamp but there are even nice tube integrateds out there which are better than a Rotel or the others for two channel. The Rotel is definitely worth a listen as is the Denon only you can decide.( to show you how opinions are different I listen to the pio elites and was very disappointed in them)
post #20 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by atdamico View Post

The evidence is ancedotal. And that is not an insult, perhaps an earlier poster might actually pull out a dictionary and look up the word before they naturally assume that it is an insult to suggest that evidence is ancedotal. Regardless, you can feel sorry for whomever you want, but that doesn't change the fact that a Rotel does not sound any more musical than a Yamaha, Denon, or Pioneer receiver of similar qualities and power abilities. Now I'll leave all of you to it.

I know what the anecdotal means. To me, keeping all other attributes the same except the receiver is scientific enough for me for this application. This is not cancer research.

C'mon, this is a hobby at best. Electronics are meant to be enjoyed. I passed on my experience and suggested the OP go listen for himself. If he can hear a difference then great, if not then great too. Go spend your money and enjoy what you buy. You can't hear the difference. That's great, save some money. Let the OP decide for himself.

It's OK to have an opinion, but to be so strong about it and suggest that everyone who disagrees with you is wrong is doing a diservice to the question.

Back to the original question: I usually find that Denon has more features for the money than Rotel. I like the sound of Rotel better. However, I will say that Rotel electronic gear has had the shortest life of any brand I have owned before it started to develop glitches. The display on my Rotel pre/pro just went blank. It did last 8 years though, got more than enough use out if it. My Rotel DVD player only lasted 4 years before it died.
post #21 of 45
Not to get too far off the topic , but Ultimate AV has a review of the Rotel 1057

http://www.guidetohometheater.com/av.../506rotel1057/

For what its worth they didn't exactly give it a rave review.

Also, I had a queston - the reviewer states the receiver has hdmi 1.1 and is ready for multichannel PCM from Blu-ray and HD DVD players, but is that accurate with this receiver??

I looked through the Rotel manual and it seemed to me that it only does video switching and requires a seperate connection for audio. If that's the case then it would seem to not be ready for multichannel PCM. Can anyone confirm which is true?
post #22 of 45
Has anyone who has a similar opinion with Nick's tried to do a A/B comparison? I am curious to know why someone would have such a different opinion.

I have liked electronics since I was 12 years old. I don't claim to know everything about electronics even though I got an E.E. Ph.D. degree a long time ago. My opinion is that the specs for amplifiers are not complete to define the characteristics of amplifiers. Additionally, there are many ways to build amplifiers and each approach has its own pros and cons.

Forget all the theory for now. Can one of you do a real life A/B comparison and tell us what you find? Thanks.

David


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nick250 View Post

That is a common misunderstanding, but blind testing testing time and again has shown it to be untrue. If Rotel purposely colors the sound to make it distinctive, then that is another matter.

Nick
post #23 of 45
Quote:


I've done a test with Rotel and Denon (same price) before. Same everything, except the receivers were swapped out. Everyone that heard the test preferred the Rotel. It was not close.

Go do a test for yourself and decide what you like.

Did you level match the output of both receivers with a VOM at the speaker/amp interface? Were you able to switch between the two within a few seconds (because thats how long the human auditory memory lasts)? And lastly was this test 'double-blind' meaning neither you nor the switcher knew which receiver was playing at a given time?

If you answered NO to any of the questions, then I am afraid to say that your evidence is purely anecdotal, as someone else pointed out earlier.

And if you still dont believe me, then there is someone I know that has $10,000 waiting for you, if you really can hear a difference between the two receivers in question.

Quote:


C'mon, this is a hobby at best. Electronics are meant to be enjoyed.

...and drooled over and evidence (not anecdotal) suggests that people drool over a Rotel more than a Denon or a Yamaha. You will always find more drool over a McIntosh, a Pass or a Levinson compared to a Rotel or a Parasound, etc, etc.
post #24 of 45
My opion is for HT Yamaha is good as one needs..You get so much for your money.All the extra goodies.Rotel will have better sound but a lot less gimicks and video scaling.The guy with $10000 is a quack.Their is a huge difference in brands of recievers.Some have a warmer sound some colder some have better bass ect.For Ht any of the main brands will sound great.BUDDA
post #25 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by arjun_m28 View Post

Did you level match the output of both receivers with a VOM at the speaker/amp interface? Were you able to switch between the two within a few seconds (because thats how long the human auditory memory lasts)? And lastly was this test 'double-blind' meaning neither you nor the switcher knew which receiver was playing at a given time?

Yes
post #26 of 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by zimmermatt View Post

Not to get too far off the topic , but Ultimate AV has a review of the Rotel 1057

http://www.guidetohometheater.com/av.../506rotel1057/

For what its worth they didn't exactly give it a rave review.

Also, I had a queston - the reviewer states the receiver has hdmi 1.1 and is ready for multichannel PCM from Blu-ray and HD DVD players, but is that accurate with this receiver??

I looked through the Rotel manual and it seemed to me that it only does video switching and requires a seperate connection for audio. If that's the case then it would seem to not be ready for multichannel PCM. Can anyone confirm which is true?

Once again, another reason not to rely on commercial reveiwers. While his feature recital and video information on the 1057 was helpful and complete, his sound impressions were skewed at best. Driving Martin Logan Prodigies full range and being disappointed in power output of a 1057 in a large room is unrealistic at best. A $1300, 75 wpc receiver driving $10,000 full range electrostatics to high levels is not going to work as anyone who has tried the big Logans can easily tell you.
post #27 of 45
So I can use a $200 Sony reciever with some reasonable powered amps, and it will sound the same as a nice Krell Prepro & Amp combo of the same power output?

DACs, Distortion Levels, noises from integrated amp and prepro, can't be heard?

Hmmmmm. I wonder if I can get my B&W dealer to throw a $200 reciever on his 800D speakers and see if we can hear a difference between the cheapo reciever and the Krell Evolution Seperates you usually uses.

I wonder if I could get the words "it is for a test", before he put a foot in my @ss.

Ok, I doubt he would let me take the cheapo reciever into his top showroom, but I will see if he will let me A-B his cheapest reciever and a Krell Preamp, through the same source/amp/speaker set.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjun_m28 View Post

And if you still dont believe me, then there is someone I know that has $10,000 waiting for you, if you really can hear a difference between the two receivers in question.
post #28 of 45
Quote:


Yes

Then you better get in touch with Richard Clark (the e-mail address of whom I'll forward tomorrow as I have it on my work computer) and lay claim to your 10K and buy yourself a good set of separates and let us know how it went with him. You might be the first scientifically proven 'golden ear' to go down in the history books.

I'll send you the info tomorrow.

Best of luck.
post #29 of 45
Quote:


So I can use a $200 Sony reciever with some reasonable powered amps, and it will sound the same as a nice Krell Prepro & Amp combo of the same power output?

DACs, Distortion Levels, noises from integrated amp and prepro, can't be heard?

Hmmmmm. I wonder if I can get my B&W dealer to throw a $200 reciever on his 800D speakers and see if we can hear a difference between the cheapo reciever and the Krell Evolution Seperates you usually uses.

I wonder if I could get the words "it is for a test", before he put a foot in my @ss.

Ok, I doubt he would let me take the cheapo reciever into his top showroom, but I will see if he will let me A-B his cheapest reciever and a Krell Preamp, through the same source/amp/speaker set.

If both amps were operating with in their linear response they would sound identical and you or no one else would be able to pick out one from another to any statistical significance (or at least hasn't so far). Remember even a deaf person would have a 50-50 chance picking out one from another. With sufficiently revealing speakers you might be able to pick out one from another if one of them has a higher level of background noise, but if you were asked to do that in a full surround setup in a normal (not studio) environment (with 25-30db background noise) you would have a tough time identifying one from another to any statistical significance (with even 85% confidence level). The problem, I or any other objectivist has is when people claim day and night differences between amps, preamps, DACs etc as if they would be able to differentiate between them to a 100% confidence level, that is to say they will be able to differentiate them 10 out of 10 times in a DBT, which certainly hasn't been proven in any DBT so far in the history of mankind. So when someone says amp A blows amp B 'out of the water', or 'is better hands down', or 'there is no contest' its pure baloney. They are only justifying their purchase based on 'drool factor' or 'snob factor'. Not that there is anything wrong with it, but at least be aware of that.

So to answer your original question, a Krell and a Sony would sound 'identical' hooked up to some easy to drive 100db speakers. Now if they were hooked to some demanding MLs or Maggies then of course you would be able to pick out the Krell from the Sony, no question about it, but that is not the point of discussion here. The OP is comparing two identically priced and built receivers and if some one says they can hear a day and night difference then they should send me an IM and I'll direct them to the 10K that rightfully belongs to them.
post #30 of 45
To all the 'golden eared' audiophiles, here is Richard's email so you can get in touch with him and take his 10K amp challenge, that I believe is still open.

a2000rich@aol.com

Best of luck.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Receivers, Amps, and Processors
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › Receivers, Amps, and Processors › Rotel RSX-1057 vs. Denon 3806?