AVS Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I recently purchased a 507 for used in HT and 2-channel music. My first thoughts were 70 HT / 30 music. However, I found the opposite to be true, I'm more along the lines of 80 music / 20 HT, so the original goals of my system has changed. I've been listening to the BK for about 2 weeks now and wanted to get a side-by-side comparison with another AVR to determine, if the B&K was musically up to the challenge. I packed my B&K, several CD’s and my wife and off to local hi-fi dealer we when. I was a bit smug as we waltzed into the door, knowing that my receiver that lists for $3,900 would blow simply blow away today’s chosen competitor, a Rotel RSX-1065. After all, the list price of the Rotel is about $2,000, how it compare to a unit that cost twice as much.


I started the test by popping Stevie Ray Vaughan’s – Live at Carnegie into Musical Fidelity CD player connected to the BK, which was driving B&W 9nt speakers. The music was lively to the point or irritation, so I decided to tone it down and try something a bit more laidback, so we selected Keith Jarrett ‘s Inside Out (EMC). In comparison to the Rotel, B&K was quite forward – the cymbals were very metallic, bass response was not as sharp and separation and soundstage was a bit muddled. Both of the units were set to direct mode, which I believe bypassed internal DAC’s and tone control on the B&K. I was told by the sales rep the Rotel was set to direct mode. The differences between the units sound quality really surprised me. From all the reviews on the B&K, I really thought it blow away less expensive AV receivers – I’m still hoping that I’m right and that I didn’t configure the B&K correctly.


I’m considering by the Rotel RSP-1066 processor and a used Bryston 3B St amp for 2-channel, a mono amp for the center, and using my old Sony to drive the rears, for less to, or equal to cost of the B&K receiver.


I would like feedback from users who really enjoy listening to music as a priority and HT as a very close second.


What are your opinions?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,125 Posts
Hmmm,


Nobody, huh?


I compared the Rotel 1055 to the BK 507 today through 9nt's and found the BK richer clearer and with a better soundstage. It wasn't a true AB since I had to take the cd out to put in a different player to hear the BK. Both were very, very nice.


bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,814 Posts
I've heard both with 9NTs, I liked the Rotel over the B&K. Besides, for me, when I approach the $4k mark, I'd go with seperates.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,125 Posts
Quote:
Originally posted by Rmassey
I've heard both with 9NTs, I liked the Rotel over the B&K. Besides, for me, when I approach the $4k mark, I'd go with seperates.
Which Rotel?


tx


bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
As a Rotel 1065 Owner, I can testify to its musicality and warmth. The thing about the 1065 is that Rotel approached it as an integrated amp from a design perspective. Home theater is more of a bonus!!

Virtually all other AVR's in this price range include 7 channels of on-board amplification, while the Rotel uses 5. Why? Focus on getting the 5 right, and then add on another amp for the less important 6th and 7th channels. The rotel features a high output torroidal transformer, while most competitors (and the Rotel 1055) use an EI core transformer topology. The 1065 is really like the 1066 and 1075 combined in one chassis. Ir rocks, especially for MSRP 2000$. I am a Rotel dealer, so my price was amazing!

Barry
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,814 Posts
Barry, Since you are a dealer, what are my other purchase options other than my local Rotel dealer. I refuse to do business with the local shop.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,125 Posts
Barry,


Does the different transformer design between the 1055 and 1065 make a huge difference in sound? (Besides the 75/100 wattage difference)


I thought the 1065 was just a higher powered version of the 1055.


thx


bob
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
The issue with the transformer topologies really only comes into play when driving fairly difficult speakers or when playing 2-channel material at high volumes. The 1065 seems a little more effortless when resolving difficult musical passages. When you open up the hoods of the 1055 vs. 1065 the 1065 simply looks like a little amplifier in the middle surrounded by pcb's stacked around the amp. The 1055 looks like a buch of pcb's only. It doesn't have the extensive heat sinking and high end capacitors of the 1065.

In my opinion the 1065 vs the 1055 is like a Pioneer/Pioneer Elite, Onkyo/Integra -esque dividing line.


Just my op...


Barry


P.S. I just got a pair of Revel Performa F-30's which are rated at 87 db sensitivity and are fairly large speakers, and the 1065 handles them beautifully.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,200 Posts
I've narrowed my search for a receiver that's great with music down to the Rotel 1065 and the NAD T762 (partially based on comments on other threads regarding how people love these for music). Has anyone heard the Rotel vs NAD, and have any comments. I realize the Rotel is more expensive and am not sure if it is worth it?


John

Quote:
Originally posted by Rmassey
I've heard both with 9NTs, I liked the Rotel over the B&K. Besides, for me, when I approach the $4k mark, I'd go with seperates.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top