C2 vs 1056

[Armbender]

I did some searches comparing the 2 but came up short. What is everyones opinion on an upgrade from my current Rotel 1056 to the C2. Is it really worth it or should i hold out longer and try to find a C1 second hand down the road?

Cheers

[Chris D]

Heya, Armbender. My personal $.02 is that yes, the C2 would be a step up from the 1056, both in form and function. However, if it were me, I would personally NOT do the upgrade. I am a big believer in the principle that if you're going to upgrade, save your money and then make a QUANTUM jump in performance when you do buy the new item. Buying something similar to what you currently have or with a few new latest bells and whistles does not give you your money's worth. You're spending all the same money and more all over again, for what is pretty much the same unit with just a few extras.

So my personal view on those two units is that the C2 is better, but not substantially enough to warrant an upgrade. You may decide differently. If you really want to upgrade, I'd recommend saving your money, then down the road buying a new model with performance and features that exceed both of those units.

I gotta keep it real.

[Vince Helm]

I agree with Chris. In regards to a used C1... Please know that you will not have any warranty from Parasound and the 5" screen is a little expensive to replace. You would serve yourself better by buying a new one or a "B stock" from a dealer. Best of luck!!!

Vince

[Armbender]

Thanks for the input guys
ill keep thinking. the used C2's do like tempting though for 2k

[MichiganMike]

A B-stock C2 recently replaced my 1068 (purchased new). In my system, the background noise level is dramatically lower with the Parasound, the resolution and bass performance improved and the integration of speakers in 7.1 was much better.

The noise floor of the Rotel was never as low as I expected in my system, particularly with the digital inputs. The specs for the Parasound have a 102 dB SN with digital inputs compared to 92 dB for the 1068. The Parasound's lower residual noise was clearly audible with a "blacker" background. The sound from the side and rear surrounds is also much cleaner.

I purchased the C2 with a 30-day return privilege, expecting it might go back if the difference was minimal. I put the Rotel up for sale after a few days with the C2. The C2 improved sound from all sources. It was well worth the $1000 net expenditure in my humble opinion. Your experience may vary.

[bhuskins]

Very good comparison...both points are valid.

It really depends on where you tend to buy in the product cycle. Lots of people wait to get a deal at the end of a product cycle and others want the latest and greatest now.

IMO though the C2 smokes the Rotel processors and it is easily distinguishable for the exact reasons mentioned above.

[Armbender]

awesome info guys thanks

[MichiganMike]

There are also several features of the C2 that I enjoy that the 1068 lacks. These features may not be relevant to many systems, but are worth noting.

The auto-calibration was easy and quick on the C2. In my opinion, this contributed to better 7.1 settings than I ever was able to achieve manually using my Radio Shack meter and Avia DVD calibration disc with the 1068.

My Classe CD Player uses the balanced inputs on the C2. The balanced outputs on the C2 connect to the inputs on my Parasound A21 amp. This set-up avoids any digital processing in the C2 and has an even lower residual noise level. Note the 107 dB S/N spec on the 7.1 unbalanced input of the C2, which also involves no digital processing. While not listed in the specs, I would speculate the balanced inputs have a similar or better S/N.

The separate very low-frequency sub out on the C2 improves performance of my tactile transducers (ButtKickers) over the standard sub out on the 1068.

[Chris D]

True, Mike, I've been reminded lately of the special, groovy, features on my C1 that really make it perfect for my applications.