Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion Home Theater Receivers... how 'bout Rotel?

I was going to wait to see if JohnK would have responded by now, but I guess I'll respond to these two posts in the meantime.

My perception of the widening of the sweet spot (or more specifically, the increase in the resolution of the sound I heard) could very well be all in my head. But I really doubt it. I'd like to invite anyone else over to my place who disagrees with me to do a comparison between the two amps to see/hear for themselves. This would be very interesting to me. I purchased the Acurus amp online before I ever tested it out, and I only got it because I found a deal. I actually hooked it up thinking that it probably won't be too much of a difference, but I was thrilled at the difference in sound quality. I didn't just dream this up.

In regards to comparing a McIntosh setup to an entry level Sony receiver, I really would suggest that you go out to a high-end shop and take a listen to the difference for yourselves. I am not a proponent of high end esoteric audio equipment because of a lot of reasons, so I don't want to be taken here as an audio snob. But, with that said, I'll stick with the McIntosh and Sony examples since I mentioned them earlier. A low-end Sony receiver has a lot of bells and whistles on it all in an effort to make the sound reproduction "better." Things like "enhanced bass output," all sorts of DSP settings, even on down to seperate bass and trebel controls or maybe a cheap EQ. I'm sure I won't be the the only person here to agree that all these "ad ons" do not much more than color or distort the sound. When you compare, side by side, a unit like a Sony as I've just described to a McIntosh setup, which usually doesn't even have bass and trebel controls because they want the sound to be as acurate as possible without adding or taking away anything from the original recording, I really think you'll be in for a shock. All the studies and lectures in the world really don't take the place of sitting down and experiencing something for yourself in a willing hi-fi shop, which I suggest you guys may want to do in this situation.

We're all friends here, so please don't hesitate to take me up on my offer to come do a comparison at my apartment in Los Angeles. It would be a nice education for all of us I think.

-Kev

how many of you arguing have had any electrical engineering education? how many of you have an electrical degree?


hrm.... answer that please...




if you have had any formal electrical education, then you would understand what part of there receiver is worth paying for, and what part, any 100$ receiver can do just as well has a 2000$ receiver... no im not going to be specific, because it seems to me the educated people here "know what they are talking about" the others are going by what they have been "told"... and not by a professor…


and yes, i do have formal electrical engineering education... and yes, some receivers are better than others, but in many way the solid state receivers of today, are all the same [censored], just different quality components manufactured with in certain tolerances... some times you dont even need that exact of a tolerance, to get the job done other times its damn nice to have that tight of tolerances...




you have to keep in mind, this business has a lot of emotion involved in it, why else would there be so damn many lights on the receivers ect.. i could go on.... but im not, i have to go to bed... past my bed time ....

My own take on the situation is that the price/performance curve on electronics is asymptotic (anybody remember your geometry?) meaning that the curve approaches, but never attains perfection.

I don't know how to link to a curve which illustrates my idea, but hopefully this will be clear enough. The numbers presented are for illustrative pruposes only.

Your entry level Sony, for instance, will get you 99% of the way to perfect. A middle range receiver from Denon, Onkyo, H-K, or similar will get you 99.9%. Go to the flagship receivers from these companies, or Rotel, and you get 99.99% of the way to perfection. Whip out the Krells, or other ultra-expensive esoterica, and you are 99.999% of the way there.

The point is, that after a certain point, you pay an order of magnitude more money for an infinitesimal benefit. Personally, I don't think I can tell the difference between 99.9% perfect and 99.99% perfect, but maybe some people can.

For most people, I think it would be a waste of money to buy anything more expensive than a mid to upper eange Denon, Onkyo, H-K or Yamaha. There are probably some people who are capable of hearing that increased .001% of performance, and who are willing to spend 10 times as much money to get it, and to them I say, knock yourself out. Just don't try to tell me that my equipment sounds "harsh" or "lacks soundstage".

The reason that Onkyo makes the integra line is to make money. There is a higher profit margin on expensive gear.

Don't even try to tell me that you didn't expect your new amp to sound any better than your old amp. In my experience, your brain can alter your perception of sound far more than any change in equipment.

Mark

["Are they made by the same company? No they are not"]

That's not my point. My point is similar devices can look similar and achieve a similar goal, but they are NOT the same animal and they do NOT perform the same.

That's all.

I do plan on auditioning some Rotels

["Yes, no noticeable difference"]

Yeah, to a deaf person.

["solid state amps are subtle if they exist"]

Unless you have an audiophile's ear.

Sure, there's marketing envolved... almost EVERYTHING has marketing. But, to say there's little difference between solid state receivers is 100% bullshit.

My first receiver, a Technics (100w), was okay. When I bought my next receiver, the Onkyo (80w), I didn't even need to do an A/B test-- the Onkyo was far ahead of where the Technics was-- same speakers and same cabling BUT more clarity and more sound (not louder). The difference was HUGE. Seriously, it was like I was listening to my music again for the first time.

Granted, the further up you go, the more it'll plateau, BUT, there are significant differences... you probably don't have the ear for it.

["Also, Japanese receivers have the same frequency response characteristics as those designed in any other country and therefore sound identical to them"]

What are you talking about?

Frequency response is a spec. And, like all specs, they don't mean [censored]. This is where auditioning comes into play.

["I don't believe your'e going to win the argument about differant sounding amps with JohnK"]

More than likely.

It helps when the other person knows what they're talking about.

["how many of you arguing have had any electrical engineering education? how many of you have an electrical degree?"]

Let us know when you have a Physics degree. This is acoustics, pal. We're not trying to make a light bulb glow.

["My own take on the situation is that the price/performance curve on electronics is asymptotic (anybody remember your geometry?) meaning that the curve approaches, but never attains perfection"]

You are correct!

It's completely ignorant to say it's all marketing. Yes, there is some marketing. If it wasn't marketed, nobody would buy it. BUT, if it was ALL marketing, manufacturers would go under VERY quickly.