Rotel RSX-1056 or a Marantz, thoughts?

**mattburk** · 17 February 2006, 02:35 Friday

I have had a ton of avr's and rotel separates. I started with the rotel 1075 and rsp 1066. I wanted to conserve space so I went to the Marantz sr-8400. Of all the avr's I think marantz has the best overall presentation for music, movies and features.
Sound will got to the rotel (in competitive price brackets). I would say in going from the 1066 to the 8400 was one slight step down in sound quality.
I would rate them like this based on music.
1. Marantz sr9600
2. Rotel rsx1067
3. rotel rsx1056
4. Marantz sr8500
5. sr 7500
Rotel entry level separates would be up their at #1, but I have not had time to a/b them. At the time I was buying the 8400 it was the second to the top marantz. I compared it to the 1056 and found it so close it was hard to tell. I took the marantz for the features. Just to sum up my thinking:
1. Marantz had 4 more channels of power, so I could run 7.1 and zone 2.
2. I like the remote on the maratz better.
To answer your questions
1. depends on how much the slight improvement in stereo is worth it to you.
2. Keep up yes, if your going with the 8500 or higher.
3. video switching is great in both.
4. I think the onscreen menues are good on both, you have to know how to tweak them. Lowest cross over on the 8500 is 80, but you can set the fronts to large with sub so the fronts get a full signal. The 9600 goes down to 40.
5. I like the remote on the marantz better than the rotel, easier to program, don't have to mess with that flip down screen.
6.yes I did
7. Another reason I went with the marantz.

To be fair, I miss separates and the rotel did have better stereo, again slightly but it's hard to give up anything. If I had it to do over I would not have changed anything. I will use the marantz in a second room, and upgrade to separates soon. I am looking for a killer 2-3 channel amp right now.

**Alloroc** · 17 February 2006, 06:37 Friday

Hi Guys,

While I can't give as detailed a response as Matt has, I can give you something to work from. I went from Marantz to Rotel a couple of years back.

As a Marantz fan for many years, I decided to venture into the world of proper HT, I purchased Marantz equipment matched with KEF Q Series speakers, and it was good, really good. I went for the SR8200 and it was a sweet sounding device. I then upgraded to the SR8400 a few years ago, and that was another very

We bought a second house, in the countryside, a weekend retreat so to speak so I moved the SR8200 and the KEFs there, and I continue to enjoy them every other weekend. I replaced the 8400 with the Rotel 1056 and the B&W 703/HTM7/DS?/ASW750 set of speakers. I did a comparison at the time with the 8400 and the 1056 on the B&Ws and as I remeber, the Marantz was possibly a might tighter and sweeter for 2 channel but the Rotel had the edge for Movies and TV, to my ears anyway. That said, I also had plans to buy a power amp for the 703s but as yet, have not got around to it. Interestigly enough, I also bought a DV8400UDP when I got the SR8400 and am still using that with the Rotel and I feel it works better with the Rotel than the SR8400.

Anyhow, the SR8500 is the current offering and I have not heard it, so can't comment. I remain a fan of Marantz and have a shelf full of old equipment. Up until a couple of years ago I was using the PM-14 in my stereo setup and that was, and is an amazing integrated amp, even had a great phono stage.

Another option(in case you're not already confused enough!), if spending that kind of money and you want a very musical receiver (read stereo) is the Arcam AVR300. I've heard it and it's a lovely, lovely device. I don't know how readily availible it is in your part of the world, but in mine it's now the number one receiver in this price range.

Anyway, hope this all helps.

**ds22030** · 17 February 2006, 18:52 Friday

Here is another data point. I have a Rotel 1068+1080 system and a Marantz 8400. My speakers have the Vifa ring tweeter which gives alot of detail.

Of course, Marantz 110 watts was not going to compare to Rotels 200w. HOwever, I did do an A/B of the 1068 and the 8400 as pre/pro, both using 1080 as the amp. It was very close indeed. In the final analysis the 1068 had slightly more spaciousness and airness to the music and the sound was a bit more delicate. The sound difference was pretty small but there. The user interface, Rotel is much better. Of course, 1068 is supposed to have better sound than Rotel's receiver 1067 and 1056...

Your post is not exactly clear as to which Rotel you are considering. I would be surprised if 1056 can beat the 8400 or 8500 which has more power, toroidal supply, copper chassis, etc. But I would also not be surprised if the 1067 edges the Marantz. I would give Marantz a serious consideration. (8500 is basically an 8400 with updated video connections and auto eq and a bit more power...7400 gives an EI supply, no copper chassis but is pretty much the same as 8400).

Good luck on the audio quest

**spinners** · 17 February 2006, 19:14 Friday

eh, yeah, that means more power per channel on paper, not with all channels driven at the same time. That's a winner for Rotel. I guess with all the artificial features on the Marantz it seems to have more power, but in 2 ch. stereo the Rotel is better in detail and soundstage. The Marantz sounds a bit muddy in 2 ch, the Rotel very detailed. I did an A-B with both sr 8500 and RSX 1056, and every time I switched to the Rotel, it was like somebody pulled away a blanket from the front of my speakers.

**IronBone** · 19 February 2006, 09:21 Sunday

Many thanks.

Everyone,

Thank you very much for the insight and sharing your past experiences with this equipment. Matt, very detailed, muchos gracias! I'm going to setup an A/B on the Marantz 8500 and the Rotel 1067 at the local shop. I will do some research on the Arcam as well but will most likely stay with one of the two first mentioned.

I will get back to you all with what I end up with.

Rotel RSX-1056 or a Marantz, thoughts?

Rotel RSX-1056 or a Marantz, thoughts?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment