NAD & ROTEL CD players

[rgb1111]

Hi everybody,
I am considering NAD 542 OR Rotel 1072 for my proposed investment in a CD player- any experieince / advise ?
Thanks in advance for your feed back

 

[mike c]

whichever is the cheapest with the features you want
or
whichever matches your existing equipment in looks

 

[Seth=L]

In my personal experience, buying new CD players is not an investment (at least not in the resale value sense).

Sorry, I am just picking bones.

 

[rnatalli]

Save your money and buy an Oppo universal player.

 

[cfrizz]

Hi RGB. I will actually answer your question!

I have a RCD 1072 & I love it. it is my second cd player from Rotel. The first one I had was the RCD 855 it lasted for 17 yrs!

I can tell the difference between a cd player & using a dvd player for cd duty. I prefer to have a stand alone cd player.

Good luck with your decision.

 

[Seth=L]

I can tell the difference between a cd player & using a dvd player for cd duty. I prefer to have a stand alone cd player.

Statements like these completely apply.

My Magnavox CDB-650 and CDB-560 have lasted for 21 years, OH SNAP!

 

[dorokusai]

NAD lost me in the vintage years due to squirrely (Is that a word? reliability, as I've seen dozens drop dead or turn up on milk cartons. The Rotel is a very nice unit but as mentioned previously, this isn't a hobby for investments, in most cases. I also prefer a standard CD transport over a combination CD/DVD for my 2CH rig but I wouldn't kick one out of bed if it was nice and brought me a beer.

One idea is to simply buy used unless you're not comfortable with that process. You can save a decent amount of money at that point and that's what I would do. Good luck.

Mark
Polk Audio CS

 

[rgb1111]

Hmmm, I need to think. Let me do more research

 

[mtrycrafts]

...
I can tell the difference between a cd player & using a dvd player for cd duty. I prefer to have a stand alone cd player.
.

If I see them, I can tell as well, with my glasses on.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Hi everybody,
I am considering NAD 542 OR Rotel 1072 for my proposed investment in a CD player- any experieince / advise ?
Thanks in advance for your feed back

Are there special considerations for looking at these two?

 

[rgb1111]

Ya, its because I will use it more for audio and because of (my) common belief of audio based product being better built for that purpose (hifi audio)rather than a general CD+DVD player. Am I mistaken?

 

[mike c]

Ya, its because I will use it more for audio and because of (my) common belief of audio based product being better built for that purpose (hifi audio)rather than a general CD+DVD player. Am I mistaken?

they'd probably say that there was no difference in sound quality.
I personally don't know myself...
but i did buy a dedicated CD player but for different reasons:
-fast ON/boot(this will take ages on a DVD player)
-fast eject (dvd players will try to read the disc first or the absence of a disc before ejecting)
-fast play (again, since dvd players can also play mp3's it will take ages to play audio compact discs)
-easy programming of order (most dedicated CD players have prog buttons right on the remote or faceplate, most dvd players will need you to program using the OSD which means you need your TV on as well to listen to music)

 

[Seth=L]

I agree with what Mike said, stand alone CD players are much easier to use. They also seem more graceful in appearance and in use than traditional DVD players. Decent stand alone CD players are typically more hardy as mentioned before. As far as sonic differences between players, I don't think you would be able to hear many if any in double blind level matched evaluation.

 

[jcPanny]

Transport options.

You might also consider a Squeeze Box 3 or other options for storing and streaming music to your receiver.

I have found that an iPod with my music library in Apple lossless is much more convenient than using a single CD/DVD player or my old CD jukebox.

 

[Pyrrho]

they'd probably say that there was no difference in sound quality.
I personally don't know myself...
but i did buy a dedicated CD player but for different reasons:
-fast ON/boot(this will take ages on a DVD player)
-fast eject (dvd players will try to read the disc first or the absence of a disc before ejecting)
-fast play (again, since dvd players can also play mp3's it will take ages to play audio compact discs)
-easy programming of order (most dedicated CD players have prog buttons right on the remote or faceplate, most dvd players will need you to program using the OSD which means you need your TV on as well to listen to music)

I agree that it is nice to have a separate CD player for those reasons. And I agree with the other advice regarding buying used, if you are comfortable with that process. I once bought a Marantz CD player in a thrift store for $20. It worked and it sounded just like it ought to sound. I ended up selling it for a profit, and now use a brand that is less highly regarded that sounds the same. It, too, was purchased in a thrift store for next to nothing.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Ya, its because I will use it more for audio and because of (my) common belief of audio based product being better built for that purpose (hifi audio)rather than a general CD+DVD player. Am I mistaken?

No reason why that would be the case. The sensor still has to detect the pits and lands, the DAC has to convert it to analog someplace, in the player or external to it. This is not a difficult process, nor expensive process. And, if you pass the digital signal, then it really makes no difference. Other preferences excluding.

 

[HiFiDan]

Dedicated Audio SACD or CD Player vs. DVD player

As the other posts have stated, you are almost always going to get higher quality sound from a dedicated audio CD player compared to a DVD player, for multiple reasons. It's a little like comparing a thoroughbred race horse to a quarter horse. Do you want great sound or a jack-of-all-players?

Regardless of your purchase, I urge you to check out the warranty (of course longer is better). Many off-the-shelf players in the $500 to $2000 range offer crappy warranties (2 years or less). In this situation you can expect defects as soon as the warranty expires.

I purchased a Rotel RCD-02 player new but after it went out of warranty (2 years), with about 1000 hours of play time in total, it began to skip consistently. The only repair option was to send it to Rotel in New Jersey and they wanted $80 just to tell me it had a problem (not including shipping or repair cost).

This will be the final Rotel product that I purchase. These guys (Rotel) want you to keep upgrading to their higher-end products and keep you as a customer for life. But that will not happen for me as they have failed to make a decent first impression. I think its important to know where the product is assembled (avoid China - there is a reason many products are assembled there). For a real warranty, you may want to check out Bryston and some of the companies in that calibre. You really do get what you pay for.

I can only state that based on my experience, as far as quality audio goes, so long as they manufacture in China, Rotel is just another company in the same farm-team league as the other consumer audio makers like Sony, Yamaha, and Denon.

 

[mike c]

China has NOTHING to do with the build quality. it's the company's QC that matters.

 

[bandphan]

China has NOTHING to do with the build quality. it's the company's QC that matters.

dont feed the birds please

 

[mike c]

dont feed the birds please

that's VERY freaky.