Help - System Setup

[tekboy]

Hi,

Need suggestion on a new system. I am currently using an Integra DTR 7.3 AV receiver and wanted some thing better. My speakers are Dynaudio Audience 72, Dynaudio Audience 122C and Dynaudio Audience 42. My main goal for next setup is to have excellent soundfields, excellent midrange and excellent soundstage. My room size is 15' X 10'. My listening is 60% music and 40% movies.

My choices are:

1) Rotel RSP - 1068 and Rotel RMB - 1075
2) Rotel RSX - 1056 and Rotel RMB - 107T
3) Harman Kardon AVR 7300
4) NAD AVR T-773

Thanks for any suggestions or advices.

[Claude D D]

I've had a chance to listen to the Dyn's in our store with the RSP-1068/RMB-1075 and it sounds very good.Very open sound with good detail.Nice combo.If music is your main interest say away from A/V receiver based systems and go for separates.Much better sound and easier to do upgrades. :T

[RebelMan]

First, the Rotel RSX-1056/RMB-1075 combination is virtually identical to the Rotel RSP-1068/RMB-1075 combination. However, the former is several hundred dollars less than the later. Second, I don't have much experience with the HK AVR 7300 but it "seems" to have acceptable specifications, although some I like to see are missing. Finally, I am not a big fan of fans and the NAD AVR T-773 has three of them!

Personally, I would choose the RSX-1056/RMB-1075 combo. You get the benefits of components at integrated prices.

[Claude D D]

the Rotel RSX-1056/RMB-1075 combination is virtually identical to the Rotel RSP-1068/RMB-1075 combination

Dude, that's like saying a 6cyl Mustang is virtually the same as a Mustang GT.Have a look under the hood and you'll see huge differences.
If you read elsewhere in this forum you will find there are numerous reasons why separates out perform even a receiver with an external amp.The RSX-1056 and the RSP-1068 may share several of the same components but there are many differences that make the 1068 superior to the 1056 for use as a pre-amp(more so if you were using a RCD-1072 for a 2 channel CD source and less apparent in HT).We've played around with the 1056 as a pre-amp only at our store and the 1068 easily out performs it.Especially with the caliber of gear you have, you shound notice a big difference.(by the way, very nice system RebelMan. If you can get a chance,try out a RSP-1098 on your system.Very sweet) :T

[DrJRapp]

James

I agree with Claude, the rest of your system ( ie all those B&Ws) deserves better than a 1056 front end. You already have the 1080 now all you need is a 1098 and 1075.

[RebelMan]

Dude, that's like saying a 6cyl Mustang is virtually the same as a Mustang GT.Have a look under the hood and you'll see huge differences.

LOL :lol:, hey Claude, funny that you would pick a Mustang to do your comparison, I used to own a '67 hardtop. Actually, a better comparison, I think in this case, would be a Mustang 289 V8 vs a Mustang 302 V8. Needless to say, while there are some differences between the 1056 and 1068, I have found none significant.

The RSX-1056 and the RSP-1068 may share several of the same components but there are many differences that make the 1068 superior to the 1056 for use as a pre-amp(more so if you were using a RCD-1072 for a 2 channel CD source and less apparent in HT).

According to Rotel, the 1056 and 1068 use an identical chipset for all of their DAC and ADC processing. What other components do you speak of that make the processing of these signals superior on the 1068?

If you read elsewhere in this forum you will find there are numerous reasons why separates out perform even a receiver with an external amp.

We've played around with the 1056 as a pre-amp only at our store and the 1068 easily out performs it.

I agree, separates will usually provide a cleaner (less noise) signal which can result in a better sound and Rotel's (distortion) specifications for the 1068 show's this. However, everything else about the two systems respective specifications are identical. I suspect you would be hard pressed to detect the (subtle) differences in a blind ABX sound test.

Especially with the caliber of gear you have, you shound notice a big difference.(by the way, very nice system RebelMan. If you can get a chance,try out a RSP-1098 on your system.Very sweet) :T

Thanks for the kind words, you to Jerry. Honestly, I would love to add the 1098, and the 1095 for that matter, but the 1056 will have to do for now. Though I'll admit, you are doing a good job of tempting me!

[Claude D D]

RebelMan,the 1068 easily out performs the 1056 as a pre/pro.Without being technical(I'm not really a techy guy)even the same dacs when implemented differently can have dramatic differences in the way they sound.The power supply in the 1068 is superior to what's in the 1056.There is no tuner in the 1068(better isolation,hense usually a lower noise floor).There is no power output transistors in the 1068(better not to share a power supply even if you are not using the onboard amps in the 1056).You don't have to believe me if you don't want to I'm just stating the fact that the 1068 sounds better.Anyone in the Edmonton area can come down to the store for a demo of both set-ups.The only way you would not hear a difference is if there was a weak link in the system that was choking off the 1068(ieoor quality cables,source,source material,ears etc.)
RebelMan if you really can't hear a difference you could have saved yourself a bundle of cash and went with a pair of DM604's instead of the 803s. :W
PS. by the way RebelMan in 1967 the Mustang did not have the 302 as an engine option.In early 1968 you could get a 2bbl 289 but not a 4bbl 289 and the 302 was first issued as a 4bbl version and then the 2bbl or something along those lines from what I recall.(I used to be very into Mustangs and have owned half a dozen or so 66-72 Stangs and currently have a 02 6cyl coupe) Plus the 289 HiPo in the 67 easily out performed the 302 in the 68 so not a good comparison :T

[DrJRapp]

James

If were you I too wouldn't opt to make a move from a 1056 to a 1068. Save your sheckels to buy the 1098. Although much has been said about the 1068 being a 1098 "lite" after having poked around inside both, I can tell you that there is a huge difference in build quality between the two. The three power supplies of the 1098 are most impressive. With a bit of good haggeling you probably can convince a dealer to take the same profit on a 1098 as he would on a 1068, and therefore the difference won't be $1300 but closer to $700.

[Claude D D]

Yeah Jerry I agree the 1098 outperforms the 1068. By about the same margin that the 1068 outperforms the 1056.But as per pricing I can tell you the cost difference between the 1068 and 1098 is more than what you quoted(at least here in Canada)which may put it way over tekboy's budget.If a guy can swing it the 1098 is the way to go. :T

[RebelMan]

Actually Claude, I was aware of the power supply differences and the missing tuner which do lend themselves to the lower noise floor of the 1068. Admittedly, once again, this helps provide a cleaner signal but not necessarily a better sound, under normal circumstances. I don’t dispute that control/processing circuits when implemented differently can have an effect on sound. However, it is a pretty well know fact that Rotel has a remarkable ability to make their equipment sound consistent throughout their product lines. Even if Rotel did implement the circuits differently, I suspect it would be for technical reasons that would not jeopardize their high standards of sound reproduction.

RebelMan if you really can't hear a difference you could have saved yourself a bundle of cash and went with a pair of DM604's instead of the 803s. :W

In all honesty, I spent most of my critical listening of the B&W 600, 700 and 800 series with the 1098/1095 combination so I think I have a pretty good baseline from which to judge. I knew going in that most of my budget, this go around, was set aside for the speakers. Since I needed to keep my component expenses in line, I requested a demonstration of the 1056/803 paring. To my dealer’s surprise, he found this paring to perform remarkably well and so did I. It’s not that I don’t believe you when you say the 1068 sounds better than the 1056. I just don’t believe that the difference is significant let alone dramatic. I believe the 1056/1075 combination is very suitable given the original poster’s choices.

Plus the 289 HiPo in the 67 easily out performed the 302 in the 68 so not a good comparison :T

The Mustang comparison did not insinuate the 1967 model year per say, but your right about a hi-performance 289 besting a 302 under some conditions, and this was the reason why I had one (4bbl Holley)! I was hoping you would see through that.

By the way, don’t you think it is time to ditch that 02 and trade up to the 05?!!! :wink:

[RebelMan]

James

If were you I too wouldn't opt to make a move from a 1056 to a 1068. Save your sheckels to buy the 1098. ... With a bit of good haggeling you probably can convince a dealer to take the same profit on a 1098 as he would on a 1068,...

I am planning to. Yeah, I think a 20% discount would be reasonable.

[Claude D D]

By the way, don’t you think it is time to ditch that 02 and trade up to the 05?!!!

Most definately!!!Check out my post. :T THe irony of the situation is that the 02 was the first brand spanking new car I ever purchased and my wife drives it not me.At least I get no grief from her when I buy new audio gear. :T

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=14245

[RebelMan]

LOL :lol:

Too funny!