Disappointment at Rotel...

[gianni]

I think as ldgibson76 mentioned above, the level of activity on the Rotel forum is a good indicator of the current state of affairs. I remember back 8-10 years ago when Club Rotel was very active here on the forum.

i still use a 10 series RSX and have never really been tempted to upgrade. Like Dmantis, I think issues started with Rotel when HDMI was introduced. You know something is wrong when long time Rotel dealers start moving away from Rotel Pre/Pros and receivers.

I thought there was hope for a Rotel resurgence when the latest RSP came out with a PEQ, but little has changed since then. Their entry level RSX 1550 has been around I'm guessing 5 years now? Not that we need or want a new model every year but the 1550 needs some attention.

If cost is a reason not to update, I would not mind in the least bit if they did away with video processing. How many people really need it in the AVR these days? Take that savings, apply it towards some type of room correction to please those that want it, others can turn it off. I'll be happy using the HDMI for Hi Res audio movie tracks and passing the video straight through. Just get the HDMI to work reasonably well.

I often ponder what I would replace my old RSX 1055 with when it dies or I give in for additional connectivity. How long will I be willing to do without Hi Res BR audio? Because of Rotel's lack of updating and buggy gear, I continue to hold off. It has cost them a sale in my case. More and more, I look at other options such as Marantz and Anthem. None of them are perfect but all of them are much more up to date than Rotel. However, there is something about the Rotel, maybe the great 5 x 75 AB amp that is great for 2 channel music.

Perhaps one day I will bring a new piece into my theater, give it a good listen and conclude that it is time for the Rotel to go. It would be nice to have an updated Rotel AVR to choose from too. Nothing over the top. Just a solid AB amp AVR, solid functioning HDMI (at least comparable to what others are doing), and some type of EQ. Video processing, bells and whistles not required.

If Rotel cant keep me as a customer, they will not keep many.

[madmac]

The ear is not better and what you attribute to it here is really the influence of the brain. That includes biases, habit and adaptation.

What a room correction system, auto or manual, does is objective and what you are doing is subjective. I would much rather start my subjective adjustments from an objectively accurate basis. Of course, do what makes you happy.

Obviously, we are all going to adjust our gear so that it sounds good to OUR ears in the end. I will admit that I have never used auto EQ technology so I would have to try it to see the results. I use my headphones as a benchmark as to when my system is sounding it's best. Good headphones are largely uncolored in their presentation of music. When my system is properly set up, it pretty much sounds like my headphones but with more punch and and pushed air presentation. And obviously, my subs are going to produce a deeper, more rolling bass for LFE in movies.

[Kal Rubinson]

I was not necessarily discussing autoEQ but roomEQ in general with the hand's on approach being potentially superior (in the right hands) and offering the option for subjective tweaking.

As for headphones, I cannot tolerate what they do to the soundstage (unless one uses binaural recordings) and, consequently, would not see their value for system setup.

[madmac]

I was not necessarily discussing autoEQ but roomEQ in general with the hand's on approach being potentially superior (in the right hands) and offering the option for subjective tweaking.

As for headphones, I cannot tolerate what they do to the soundstage (unless one uses binaural recordings) and, consequently, would not see their value for system setup.

Your views on headphones are well documented Kal. I for one, have no issues with the soundstage presentation with my headphones. I agree with you that manual adjustment in'the right hands' will normally achieve superior results though. I don't believe the process is rocket science though and if people take the time, read the manuals, and do it right, the results will be very satisfactory.

Another thing that is problematic is that with this EQ technology, the sub's will not be EQ'd as most subs cannot be. That process has to be done manually and that's where most problems occur in a listening room with 40-100 hz standing waves. Am I wrong on this??.

[lradden]

Audyssey and ARC will EQ the sub down to 20Hz, while MCACC does not EQ the sub. I'm not sure about YPAO.

[Dmantis]

Audyssey and ARC will EQ the sub down to 20Hz, while MCACC does not EQ the sub. I'm not sure about YPAO.

MCACC cuts out around 62hz. So just to top end of the LFE is being eq'd.
But they set the correct level and phase so thats a bonus.
I'm also not sure what YPAO is up to these days.
ARC is full bandwidth sub correction.

[lradden]

Thanks Dean I forgot that MCACC does do standing wave down to 62Hz on the sub. Unfortunately MCACC only EQs down to 62Hz for the other speakers too.

[ldgibson76]

Arg! That's close to what I DID pay for my 1570.

I guess $2199.00 equates to $3K in Aussie bucks! :E

By the way, isn't the RSP-1580 available in Australia? It doesn't matter because Auto Room Correction isn't featured on that processor either. That's a shame! It's a beautiful looking device!

[B&W_Group_Fan]

As a longtime fan and customer of the B&W speaker and Rotel electronics combo, I also find myself at the same crossroads as many here.

I started with a pretty extensive 10 series config with separates and through home sales and relocation wound up with a 15 series integrated setup. Both with B&W Signature 7s used as part of an HT 7.1 setup.

I’m looking to outfit a new room for HT and, while feeling confident with my B&W speaker choice, find myself questioning whether Rotel will play a role in the electronics.

It’s sad, because I want them to be... Really. I have history and nostalgia, but is that enough? The sound has always been fantastic, but the rudimentary GUI, lack of features, HDMI garbage, I’m leaning towards Marantz separates.

I agree with others here about customer service being great, and have had opportunity to speak with company execs directly - not something likely to happen with other brands.

Rotel... please give us something. You have a loyal following that wants to stick with you. It’s in your court.

[fozzer424]

I've always wondered why Rotel never introduced a 15-series DVD player.

[Dmantis]

I've always wondered why Rotel never introduced a 15-series DVD player.

You mean Blu ray player?

[Mark C.]

I've always wondered why Rotel never introduced a 15-series DVD player.

Easy. It's harder nowadays to convince potential customers that they need to spend $500 to $1500 to get the best home theater experience. My $150 Panasonic displays as good a picture as my oppo in my opinion. I think rotel figured out that they couldn't make any money selling DVD players.

[Blindamood]

I've always wondered why Rotel never introduced a 15-series DVD player.

Personally, I think they reason they have not introduced a 15-series blu-ray player is the difficulty so many companies have had in getting the Java- and HDMI-based equipment to work properly. It's gone back to being a bit of a niche market, and only a few companies (e.g., Oppo) are focused enough to really take advantage of it. I used to love the fact that I could make all of my Rotel equipment "match," but even for DVD there were better alternatives, and now with Oppo out there, there is no way to justify (in my opinion) buying anything else for blu-ray. Let me clarify...blu-ray that also supports "universal" music playback, as I still play a good bit of multi-channel SACD and DVD-Audio on mine.

[wildpanda86]

Personally, I think they reason they have not introduced a 15-series blu-ray player is the difficulty so many companies have had in getting the Java- and HDMI-based equipment to work properly. It's gone back to being a bit of a niche market, and only a few companies (e.g., Oppo) are focused enough to really take advantage of it. I used to love the fact that I could make all of my Rotel equipment "match," but even for DVD there were better alternatives, and now with Oppo out there, there is no way to justify (in my opinion) buying anything else for blu-ray. Let me clarify...blu-ray that also supports "universal" music playback, as I still play a good bit of multi-channel SACD and DVD-Audio on mine.

Interestingly my Oppo BDP-95 has its power supply from Rotel. I've got mine hooked into my RSX-1550 with the 5.1 analogue preouts as well as to a second input on my Rotel for dedicated stereo using the Oppo's DAC's... and it integrates very nicely with my setup

It would be interesting if Rotel was able to convince Oppo to do a Rotel badged Blu-ray player with Oppo 105 internals.

They did it in the past with a Rotel badged power conditioner which was essentially an APC H15 at 4 times the price...

[wkhanna]

The OEM retail from APC for the H15 is $450 US.
It can currently be had new from places like B&H for as little as $250.
What was the original retail price on the Rotel version?

[miner]

$499 was the retail price of the RLC-1040. Mine did not keep a B&W ASW800 sub amp from getting fried. APC paid for the amp and sent me a S20 in exchange.

[lradden]

I think the difference is that the APC version can be had from places like B&H for $250, while the Rotel version is sold through dealers closer the $499 retail price. Even if the dealer gives 20% off it's still $400.

[srb]

Back when I bought the Rotel RLC-1040, the APC was selling for ~ $400 and I bought the Rotel instead for $475. It was worth the $75 premium to me not only because it matched my RSX-1056 and RB-1080, but I just didn't like the look of the APC H15.

You never know whether something like that is going to protect until it doesn't. I have been through many surges, brownouts and blackouts and have never had an equipment failure, but I haven't had any close lightning strikes that I'm aware of either.

Not sure why I would want a rebadged Oppo player, though. Unlike the APC, the Oppo is quite good looking and I think I would have even better customer service with Oppo. BTW, Oppo no longer uses the Rotel power supply in the BDP-105 and the toroidal transformer is now Oppo branded.

Steve

[wkhanna]

a Rotel badged power conditioner which was essentially an APC H15 at 4 times the price...

A bit of an exaggeration, apparently.
Still roughly a 38% dealer mark up at $400.

But it is no secret that dealers have substantial mark up.
It is the only way they can cover overhead of being a Brick & Mortar retailer.
Someone who uses a B&M retailer should know this.

And when you do, it is as if you are making an investment in the brand.
By patronizing the B&M shop the mark up is in essence assuring that you will have a representative of that product locally & you will have a walking, talking, breathing, living, real person to communicate with.
A person who supposedly has expertise & information to insure you get the most value from the choices you make & then stands behind the product in long run & provide assistance if ever a problem arises.

Some consumers find this business model preferable.
Some find no value at all in such a format.

[Blindamood]

Ha, I bought (and still have) the RLC-1040 because it looked great with my 10-series components at the time. I now have the 15-series processor and amp, and my power conditioner is still going strong. Even though it no longer matches, it still operates and looks great!

I agree, too, that the Oppos look great now as they are. They used to look a bit cheap, but I think Oppo has done a great job in making them look and feel more substantial. So, no need for Rotel to repackage them.

[Dmantis]

Interestingly my Oppo BDP-95 has its power supply from Rotel. I've got mine hooked into my RSX-1550 with the 5.1 analogue preouts as well as to a second input on my Rotel for dedicated stereo using the Oppo's DAC's... and it integrates very nicely with my setup

It would be interesting if Rotel was able to convince Oppo to do a Rotel badged Blu-ray player with Oppo 105 internals.

They did it in the past with a Rotel badged power conditioner which was essentially an APC H15 at 4 times the price...

I'm not into rebadging of anything. Whoever made the gear , I'd like their name on the faceplate. How can anyone be proud of a product by putting their name on it if they had nothing to do with building it?It just makes no sense to me.
I know over the years this has been going on , look what happened to Lexicon with Oppo. Thats a huge turn off IMO.

[Dmantis]

$499 was the retail price of the RLC-1040. Mine did not keep a B&W ASW800 sub amp from getting fried. APC paid for the amp and sent me a S20 in exchange.

WOW , APC really took good care of you. I don't like hearing about failures when connected to power centers that are suppose to protect your gear. What if you have a piece that can't be replaced?
The only company that I have seen surges and Lightning hit their boxes and didn't damage anything connected is Panamax. They are doing something very right as I have seen many Monster Cable power centers get hit and fry all the electronics connected. Shame as these kind of things can tarnish one from wanting to use one.

Fortunately I have been using both APC and Panamax for over a decade now and I never had anything get fried(Knocks on wood). I also get a new one or 2 every few years.

[miner]

Yes, APC certainly stepped fwd and did what they said they would do in an event such as this. The amp was too damaged to repair so I had to replace it. I will do business with APC again.

[Audio_ElF]

I'm not into rebadging of anything. Whoever made the gear , I'd like their name on the faceplate. How can anyone be proud of a product by putting their name on it if they had nothing to do with building it?It just makes no sense to me.
I know over the years this has been going on , look what happened to Lexicon with Oppo. Thats a huge turn off IMO.

Not a rebadging; but Rotel could follow Cambridge Audio and Primare (and others) and purchase the basic Oppo player hardware and tweak it with power supply and audio improvements and produce something worthy of the Rotel name...

[ldgibson76]

That sounds great Audio_ElF, but if the price of a proposed Rotel modified Oppo digital device goes ridiculously beyond pricing of the 103 or 105, why in God's name would anyone buy it!?! I'm sure Lexicon thought along the same lines. Improved power supply, heavier chassis and Lexicon glitz and badging, charge $4-5K just to keep up the hi-end perception! I would truly consider a Rotel Universal player if it's priced reasonably.

[Lex]

I am going to say pass on a 4-5K Lexicon rebadged oppo. For conspicuous consumers I guess. I can't afford that luxury now.

[Kal Rubinson]

That sounds great Audio_ElF, but if the price of a proposed Rotel modified Oppo digital device goes ridiculously beyond pricing of the 103 or 105, why in God's name would anyone buy it!?! I'm sure Lexicon thought along the same lines. Improved power supply, heavier chassis and Lexicon glitz and badging, charge $4-5K just to keep up the hi-end perception! I would truly consider a Rotel Universal player if it's priced reasonably.

But that is not what Lexicon did. They just plopped the intact Oppo into a case of Lexicon armor.

[ldgibson76]

But that is not what Lexicon did. They just plopped the intact Oppo into a case of Lexicon armor.

My bad Kal, I thought I read in another forum that a power supply upgrade was one of the minor differences. I stand corrected..... No power supply upgrade, but supposedly had THX Certification (the glitz)! And for the record, it is heavier by 5lbs! (Lexicon armor) BD-30: 16.3 lbs vs. BDP-83: 11.2 lbs.

[Audio_ElF]

That sounds great Audio_ElF, but if the price of a proposed Rotel modified Oppo digital device goes ridiculously beyond pricing of the 103 or 105, why in God's name would anyone buy it!?! I'm sure Lexicon thought along the same lines. Improved power supply, heavier chassis and Lexicon glitz and badging, charge $4-5K just to keep up the hi-end perception! I would truly consider a Rotel Universal player if it's priced reasonably.

Well the Cambridge Audio products are price competative (in the UK at least) to the Oppo. I would think the Rotel casework may make it more expensive but by how much?

Primare's offering is more expensive (£3250) but they do more extensive modifications.

Eloise

[ldgibson76]

Hello Eloise. The Cambridge Audio 752BD is a nice product, no doubt but at an MSRP of $1199.00, the Oppo BDP-105 is a better value. Not to mention that it's safe to say that the 103 is a no-brainer! I say that because the 752 is based off of the 103. Can you imagine the price tag of the 752 if it was based off the 105!?!8O And for Primare, at $5K USD, you passed the law of diminishing returns $3500 ago! The only reason why I haven't replaced my Denon DVD-3930CI and Sony BDP-S5000ES with the Oppo is because I still have hope that one of the boutique manufacturers will produce a universal player without Oppo's DNA being part of the construct, but at the same time having an aggressive feature set and produce similar performance ratings, but not costing $3K+!!!! Wishful thinking, right?!:roll:

[Audio_ElF]

Hello Eloise. The Cambridge Audio 752BD is a nice product, no doubt but at an MSRP of $1199.00, the Oppo BDP-105 is a better value.

Well in the UK the prices are £799.99 for the 752BD vs £999.99 for the Oppo 105BD (I believe prices are $1,299 vs $1,199 in US). In terms of sound quality the 751BD (I havn't heard the 752BD yet) is a step above the 93 and is different rather than better or worse than the 95. You can also go for the Cambridge Audio 651BD which is basically the Oppo 93 with different analogue audio.

Not to mention that it's safe to say that the 103 is a no-brainer! I say that because the 752 is based off of the 103. Can you imagine the price tag of the 752 if it was based off the 105!?!8O

Erm... I think you are missing something here. The 105 is also based on the 103. Well technically neither (CA 752 nor Oppo 105) are based on the 103 - they are both based on reference design from Oppo's parent company. The 103 (or CA 651BD) is a no-brainer if you are using the HDMI output rather than analogue output.

And for Primare, at $5K USD, you passed the law of diminishing returns $3500 ago!

Well there is always a law of diminishing returns ... I'm not arguing the value but the Primare is quite different to the other devices.

The only reason why I haven't replaced my Denon DVD-3930CI and Sony BDP-S5000ES with the Oppo is because I still have hope that one of the boutique manufacturers will produce a universal player without Oppo's DNA being part of the construct, but at the same time having an aggressive feature set and produce similar performance ratings, but not costing $3K+!!!! Wishful thinking, right?!:roll:

Well who do you count as Boutique manufacturers?

Your original post I replied to said...

if the price of a proposed Rotel modified Oppo digital device goes ridiculously beyond pricing of the 103 or 105, why in God's name would anyone buy it!?!

Well I think my point is that (based on the example of Cambridge Audio) the pricing doesn't have to be ridiculously beyond the Oppo.

Eloise

[ldgibson76]

Maybe I'm using too many generalizations when comparing/describing the CA and the Oppo Universal players. But the bottom line: Oppo is the source, it's were it all starts. It's primarily their design. And you're right, the 752 sits somewhere between the 103 and 105. Looking at the specs, and design, the 752 back panel is very similar to the 103's. There a some differences but for the most part, it's a 103. The internals definitely favor the 752. As far as the internals are concerned, the 752 looks like a 103! Again, some minor differences in implementation, but for the most part, it's a 103.

752BD



BDP-103



BDP-105



When I say boutique manufacturers, I mean Rotel, Anthem, Arcam, Meridian, Parasound Halo, Music Hall, Music Fidelity, NAD/Master Series, etc,....

Using Cambridge Audio as an example when it comes to building a Universal player with Oppo DNA with reasonable pricing IMO is stating the obvious. Cambridge Audio's mantra is building high quality audio devices at a reasonable price. So I wouldn't expect anything less from them. But if Rotel, Anthem, Arcam, Parasound Halo where to build players with similar features sets and performance levels based on OPPO DNA, I wouldn't expect to see them priced below $2K! The perception of higher-end is everything! Buy the OPPO and save a grand! :huh: Again, if Rotel could produce a true hi performance Universal Player from the ground up and it proved reliable and provided Rotel-like audio performance and video performance on par with other devices in it's price class (Oppo 105/Denon DBP-3313/CA 752BD), I'd be all over it.

[ldgibson76]

Well there is always a law of diminishing returns ... I'm not arguing the value but the Primare is quite different to the other devices.
Eloise

And the Primare is a gorgeous device. Without question, they took a different approach and made it theirs! If there are similarities to Oppo, its totally internal. Nothing is shared on the exterior. It's all Primare!




But is asking $5K a above my pay grade!

[srb]

One rather large difference between the Cambridge 752BD and the Oppo BDP-103 is that the 752BD has one coaxial and one optical digital input for use as a DAC (lacking the asynchronous USB input of the BDP-105), whereas the BDP-103 has no external S/PDIF DAC functionality at all.

Based on price, the BDP-105 wins hands down, but the DAC functionality of the 752BD makes it a bit more desirable and worth more than the BDP-103, but still overpriced compared to the BDP-105.

Steve

[Audio_ElF]

Maybe I'm using too many generalizations when comparing/describing the CA and the Oppo Universal players. But the bottom line: Oppo is the source, it's were it all starts. It's primarily their design. And you're right, the 752 sits somewhere between the 103 and 105. Looking at the specs, and design, the 752 back panel is very similar to the 103's. There a some differences but for the most part, it's a 103. The internals definitely favor the 752. As far as the internals are concerned, the 752 looks like a 103! Again, some minor differences in implementation, but for the most part, it's a 103.

Your photos actually show the situation perfectly. At a simple level there are three (or maybe four) parts to each of these players.
First is the transport and digital & video board - this is the lower centre of the photos (the transport) and the board visible in the 103 and 752 upper right corner (it's hidden by the audio board in the 105) but extends along the back. This is the heart of the players (especially if using HDMI for audio) and these are all using Oppo design but (AFAIK) basically following Mediatek's design. This board is also responsible for network communications.

Next is the power suppy - this is the circuit board in the lower left corner of each photos. The Oppo 103 uses a SMPS of Oppo's design; the CA 752BD use an SMPS of Cambridge Audio design and the Oppo 105 use a hybrid SMPS (for digital and video circuitry) and linear PSU (for the audio circuits).

Finally there is the analogue audio board - this is the circuit in the upper left corner of the photos. This is where the designs diverge - the Oppo 103 uses an ESS DAC, the 105 uses multiple ESS Sabre DACs and the Cambridge Audio use their Anagram upsampling technology alongside Wolfson DACs.

Along side the physical hardware is the firmware running on chips such as the Mediatek which have been customised for Cambridge Audio. There is a similar story inside the Primare with the same transport and digital board with Primare designed power supply and analogue boards. The photo I attached doesn't show it well as the important digital board is hidden.

Primare don't hide the fact that their player is based on the Oppo BDP-93 - infact a google search for "Primare BD32 Oppo" will easily find the BD32 Design Brief off Primare's website.

I believe that a large amount of the Cambridge Audio player is manufactured along side the Oppo players (all in China - Oppo Digital Inc. of California is just a marketing company AFAIK).

When I say boutique manufacturers, I mean Rotel, Anthem, Arcam, Meridian, Parasound Halo, Music Hall, Music Fidelity, NAD/Master Series, etc,....

Well Arcam and NAD have already produced their own BluRay players though not Universal. Meridian (like Classe) have stated they have no interest in building a bluray player as they can't see that they can add anything to basic players (they have used bottom of the range Sony players to demonstrate £100,000 video projector. Parasound, Musical Fidelity and Music Hall don't (currently) produce any home cinema equipment. And as far as I can tell Anthem have never produced source players. And Anthem produced a BluRay player but as far as I can tell it's no longer available.

Eloise

[lradden]

When I say boutique manufacturers, I mean Rotel, Anthem, Arcam, Meridian, Parasound Halo, Music Hall, Music Fidelity, NAD/Master Series, etc,....

Using Cambridge Audio as an example when it comes to building a Universal player with Oppo DNA with reasonable pricing IMO is stating the obvious. Cambridge Audio's mantra is building high quality audio devices at a reasonable price. So I wouldn't expect anything less from them. But if Rotel, Anthem, Arcam, Parasound Halo where to build players with similar features sets and performance levels based on OPPO DNA, I wouldn't expect to see them priced below $2K! The perception of higher-end is everything! Buy the OPPO and save a grand! :huh: Again, if Rotel could produce a true hi performance Universal Player from the ground up and it proved reliable and provided Rotel-like audio performance and video performance on par with other devices in it's price class (Oppo 105/Denon DBP-3313/CA 752BD), I'd be all over it.

Same here if Rotel builds it themselves and it has stellar the performance I'd pay the 2k for it, but I'm not paying 2k for an Oppo in Rotel clothing when I can just buy an Oppo without the Rotel logo for a lot less.

[Audio_ElF]

Same here if Rotel builds it themselves and it has stellar the performance I'd pay the 2k for it, but I'm not paying 2k for an Oppo in Rotel clothing when I can just buy an Oppo without the Rotel logo for a lot less.

What I've been trying to say is that these players are a lot more than just Oppo in Primare or Cambridge Audio clothing.

One thing you have to realise is there are two different "Oppo" companies - there is Oppo the manufacturer who is (I believe) either the same company as BBK or an offshoot of BBK. Oppo Digital is a brand name created to sell their products to the US market (and now similar companies in Europe and some other regions).

Eloise

[lradden]

Fair enough but is it still an Oppo and not designed and built by Primare or Cambridge? My point is that I'm not paying the boutique price unless it's designed and built by the boutique company. Otherwise Oppo used their basic design and the boutique company contracted them to modify that design to their specs and then threw their label on it and sold it for a lot more. For my money that's still an Oppo.

For instance Outlaw Audio sold the 990 pre/pro that was built by Sherwood Newcastle and sold as the Sherwood P965. Sherwood built the P965, modified it to Outlaw's specs and re-badged it as the Outlaw 990. It's still a Sherwood P965 no matter how they spin it.

For my money unless it's designed and built by Rotel, it's not a Rotel.

[ldgibson76]

What I've been trying to say is that these players are a lot more than just Oppo in Primare or Cambridge Audio clothing.

One thing you have to realise is there are two different "Oppo" companies - there is Oppo the manufacturer who is (I believe) either the same company as BBK or an offshoot of BBK. Oppo Digital is a brand name created to sell their products to the US market (and now similar companies in Europe and some other regions).

Eloise

Eloise, I respect your advocacy of the manufacturers opting to plagiarize a successful concept and design. Plagiarism the ultimate form of flattery. But, for the manufacturers that subscribe to the concept, it's disingenuous to charge an absorbent amount because they changed out a power supply or repositioned an analogue stage or used Wolfson instead of ESS DAC's, or used a different casing and lets not forget the badging, doesn't justify Lexicon asking $3500 or Primare charging $5K! Even Cambridge Audio asking $1299.00 USD for the 752BD is at best, crazy! Can you actually justify a $700.00 USD premium over the Oppo BDP-103 because the 103 lacks the outboard DAC feature set (24bit/192KHz which is nothing special?! If they really wanted to impress/justify pricing, they would at least have the Sabre 32bit/384KHz DAC's). And let's not forget the Anagram Technologies chip or the fancy remote/charging base combo. !:roll:

Like Iradden articulated it's still an Oppo! If it comes from and Oppo factory be it Oppo or Oppo Digital it's still in Oppo! Not a bad thing mind you, because they are all incredible devices, but there's no justification for asking a premium for choosing the Primare, Lexicon or Cambridge Audio because they want to maintain the image.

On the contrary, if they want to introduce a product that deserves a small premium, then base the construct off of the BDP-105. Believe me, that's a market segment that would pay maybe $3-400.00 more for a dressed up 105. Imagine if Primare's introduced BD32 with a 105 feature set, but of course, incorporated their little mods and priced it at say, $1500.00! For those who are where willing to spend a little more for a boutique/hi-end named player, it would sell. But Oppo knows that and would never allow it. It would severely affect the 105's market share. But, I believe that there is a segment out there waiting for such a model to become available. Meaning, those who are not enamored with the Oppo namesake. (vanity in it's obnoxious form):W

Like Irraden, I'm a principled individual. I would never pay a premium for a rebadged device. That's just me. Being that this is a Rotel thread, I would prefer that Rotel made their own universal player. That's a tough endeavor though. It's a challenge just producing a pre-pro with reliable HDMI switching!

[Audio_ElF]

Eloise, I respect your advocacy of the manufacturers opting to plagiarize a successful concept and design. Plagiarism the ultimate form of flattery.

Personally I think it's disengenous to suggest this is "plagerism". Plagerism suggests illigitemacy or decipt. Why is it wrong for a company to buy in expertise? Lets face it, the Oppo is only building a device to Mediatek's reference layout.

But, for the manufacturers that subscribe to the concept, it's disingenuous to charge an absorbent amount because they changed out a power supply or repositioned an analogue stage or used Wolfson instead of ESS DAC's, or used a different casing and lets not forget the badging, doesn't justify Lexicon asking $3500 or Primare charging $5K! Even Cambridge Audio asking $1299.00 USD for the 752BD is at best, crazy! Can you actually justify a $700.00 USD premium over the Oppo BDP-103 because the 103 lacks the outboard DAC feature set (24bit/192KHz which is nothing special?! If they really wanted to impress/justify pricing, they would at least have the Sabre 32bit/384KHz DAC's). And let's not forget the Anagram Technologies chip or the fancy remote/charging base combo. !:roll:

The way I see it there is a big difference between what Lexicon did (take the Oppo 83 and rebox it without ANY change - they just submitted it for THX certification) and what Primare do which is take the Oppo digital board and build their own analogue interface around it.

As for pricing, as I explained in my initial posting, the price of the Cambridge Audio vs Oppo is much different if you compare them in their native market places (Cambridge Audio being a UK based company).

As for the Wolfson vs ESS Sabre - this is an argument that can run and run: there are a lot of high end DACs which don't use ESS Sabre chipset which will give the best ESS Sabre based DACs a run for their money if not provide a better DAC. There is a lot more to building a complete digital to analogue converter than just the headline DAC chip.[/quote]

Like Iradden articulated it's still an Oppo! If it comes from and Oppo factory be it Oppo or Oppo Digital it's still in Oppo! Not a bad thing mind you, because they are all incredible devices, but there's no justification for asking a premium for choosing the Primare, Lexicon or Cambridge Audio because they want to maintain the image.

In some respect yes it is an Oppo, in other respect its not. It depends on your requirements. The power supply is important in both analogue and digital sections and the analogue board is important if you are running the bluray player without using HDMI for audio.

On the contrary, if they want to introduce a product that deserves a small premium, then base the construct off of the BDP-105. Believe me, that's a market segment that would pay maybe $3-400.00 more for a dressed up 105. Imagine if Primare's introduced BD32 with a 105 feature set, but of course, incorporated their little mods and priced it at say, $1500.00! For those who are where willing to spend a little more for a boutique/hi-end named player, it would sell. But Oppo knows that and would never allow it. It would severely affect the 105's market share. But, I believe that there is a segment out there waiting for such a model to become available. Meaning, those who are not enamored with the Oppo namesake. (vanity in it's obnoxious form):W

No, no and no again. There is no point starting with an Oppo 105 if you are going to improve the parts I mention (PSU and Analogue Audio). Strip away the parts that Cambridge Audio and Primare do and the Oppo 103 and 105 are identical.

Like Irraden, I'm a principled individual. I would never pay a premium for a rebadged device. That's just me. Being that this is a Rotel thread, I would prefer that Rotel made their own universal player. That's a tough endeavor though. It's a challenge just producing a pre-pro with reliable HDMI switching!

I respect your point of view - personally I see nothing wrong with utilising Oppo's expertise and building on it and I don't see what Cambridge Audio and Primare do as a rebadging exercise. I'd rather a company like Rotel bought in expertise and produce a product which improves in areas where Rotel excel (i.e. audio) than produce a half-assed product which does nothing well. I guess (to me) it's a similar argument to accepting that the Classe processor has no auto room correction but allows the user to calibrate it with a good manual Parmetric EQ.

Eloise

[Audio_ElF]

Fair enough but is it still an Oppo and not designed and built by Primare or Cambridge? My point is that I'm not paying the boutique price unless it's designed and built by the boutique company. Otherwise Oppo used their basic design and the boutique company contracted them to modify that design to their specs and then threw their label on it and sold it for a lot more. For my money that's still an Oppo.

Parts where Oppo excel are designed and built by Oppo. Parts where Primare / Cambridge Audio excel are designed and built by Cambridge Audio.

For instance Outlaw Audio sold the 990 pre/pro that was built by Sherwood Newcastle and sold as the Sherwood P965. Sherwood built the P965, modified it to Outlaw's specs and re-badged it as the Outlaw 990. It's still a Sherwood P965 no matter how they spin it.

I believe this was another instance where the product was claimed to be different but in actuality were identical. This list can also include Lexicon bluray and Integra processors and recievers which are identical to Onkyo in other markets.

For my money unless it's designed and built by Rotel, it's not a Rotel.

See my comment in the post above.

[ldgibson76]

Personally I think it's disengenous to suggest this is "plagerism". Plagerism suggests illigitemacy or decipt. Why is it wrong for a company to buy in expertise? Lets face it, the Oppo is only building a device to Mediatek's reference layout.

The definition of plagiarism is in the eye of the beholder! Not to mention, the degree of deceit. There are various levels of both. It's a fine line.

Okay, we have discussed three different examples of manufacturers using the Oppo technology to introduce a universal blu-ray player to the market. As different as each approach is, the bottom line is they all have one thing in common.....OPPO! It starts with Oppo technology and for the most part, ends with Oppo technology. No doubt, the degree of plagiarism varies from manufacturer to manufacturer, but in the end, it's plagiarism. Putting the lipstick on a pig doesn't take away the fact that it's a pig.

Here's a question for you Eloise..... If using Oppo's technology to build a universal player is such a popular idea and so smart, especially when arguably, Oppo is making the best device on the market. Why haven't all of the other manufacturer's lined up at Oppo's door with check books in hand, ready to sell out!?! I'll tell you why..... PRIDE! Trying to hold on to what dignity they have left in this forever compromising industry! If it was such a great idea, don't you think those that do not have a UBDP like Classe, Parasound Halo, Anthem, Arcam, ROTEL, Sony and the like, I could go on and on...... would subscribe to the idea? They'd rather do without, Ex.: Classe! And yes, there are some companies that already produce their own universal players (Marantz, Denon, Onkyo/Integra, Yamaha, Pioneer) and if you read the reviews when compared to the Oppo products, they are either close in performance or lagging behind. Why wouldn't those companies tap Oppo for a suggestion or two? I'm not saying some of these manufacturers haven't considered it, and may still consider doing so. But it's a risk I doubt any of the aforementioned companies are willing to take.

[lradden]

Parts where Oppo excel are designed and built by Oppo. Parts where Primare / Cambridge Audio excel are designed and built by Cambridge Audio.

It's still an Oppo player with a few parts switched out so a boutique manufacturer can put their badge on it. I understand your position. To you it's not an Oppo anymore. Somehow it's been transformed into a Cambridge by switching a few parts and putting a Cambridge badge on it.

We'll never agree on this. I'm not paying a boutique price for an Oppo in Rotel clothing. You see it takes more than switching some parts to make a Rotel, Lexicon etc... It has to be designed and built by them to actually be Rotel or Lexicon. Otherwise I'd just buy the Oppo and not pay the extra for the badge.

You can't just take a Mustang engine and drivetrain and drop it in a Lambo body. Well you can but that's not a Lambo it's called a kit car.

So if Cambridge made the player and Oppo switched out a few parts and put their Oppo badge on it what is it now an or a Oppo or a Cambridge?

[carlsen]

I would buy a Rotel player

I have been reading all these comments with interest and both sides have valid points.

I dont wish to try validate my point of view - at the end of the day, I would purchase a Rotel badged Blu-ray player if it wasnt ridiculously overpriced, even if it was fundamentally an Oppo player. And I would probably be able to add a couple of other souls to that list as well.

That's not saying it's wrong or right - it is simply the fact that myself - and presumably others - would be prepared to buy a Rotel badged player even if it wasnt an indigenous design ( and lets face it, not too many people have awful things to say about an Oppo ).

[ldgibson76]

Don't get me wrong when I used the lipstick on a pig analogy. The Oppo Universal player is no pig, by any stretch of the imagination. In regards to purchasing a Rotel tweaked Oppo digital device,.... I don't know if I'd go that far. You're right, many praise Oppo Digital, as they should, but I just could not see Rotel going to that extreme. We are talking about a company that refuses to incorporate Auto Room Correction in it's AVR's and Pre-Pro. And you better believe that the pressure is on high for them to do so. But they stand by their reasoning why (Parametric EQ'ing) they won't, knowing that they are going to lose potential customers and current Rotel device owners that want the feature. Talk about stubborn!:roll: