Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Yamaha-Denon-Rotel-Harmon kardon-Marantz

Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Marantz SR4320, Harmon Kardon HK-3480 Yam RX-777.
Rotel RX1052 URL<http://www.rotel.com/products/specs/rx1052.htm>
Bg

Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Brad Clarke" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:6cgn619s2v4o4lb2ans86vq3lftg64rkob@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 22:30:06 -0400, "James" <jnipperxxx@nospamfdn.com>
> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>
>>>I am looking for a high-quality STEREO-ONLY receiver. I have no
>>>interest in multi-channel equipment.
>>>
>>>I had decided on the NAD, but they quit making it. Their only 2-channel
>>>receiver they now make includes a cd player, which I do not want in this
>>>purchase.
>>>
>>>Can anyone tell me of a "high quality" stereo receiver ?? I am
>>>looking
>>>in the $500-750 range, and would like 75-100 watts per channel.
> Take a look at the Yamaha RX-777 or RX-596 models (should be the same
> model numbers in the US).
>
> http://www.yamaha.ca/av/stereocomp/RX777.jsp
>
> http://www.yamaha.ca/av/stereocomp/RX596.jsp

I found it interesting that Yamaha says nothing about what these receivers
do, but whatever it is, it does it wonderfully!

Norm Strong

Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"James" <jnipperxxx@nospamfdn.com> wrote in message
news:3OudnVuTBZcfqvHfRVn-pg@comcast.com...
>
>
> Really, you think NAD and Rotel are Chinese junk ?? Wow, I
thought
> these were considered pretty good receivers.....
>
> I will have to look at the other names mentioned.
>
> I appreciate all of the nice responses thus far.
>
> --James--
>
>

As a point of interest, NAD is British designed and Far Eastern built.
Much of the better Rotel kit is also British tweaked.


--
Woody

harrogate2 at ntlworld dot com

Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On 4/25/2005 10:22 AM, Dan wrote:
> On 4/23/2005 9:30 PM, James wrote:
>
>> I am looking for a high-quality STEREO-ONLY receiver. I have no
>> interest in multi-channel equipment.
>>
>> I had decided on the NAD, but they quit making it. Their only 2-channel
>> receiver they now make includes a cd player, which I do not want in this
>> purchase.
>>
>> Can anyone tell me of a "high quality" stereo receiver ?? I am
>> looking
>> in the $500-750 range, and would like 75-100 watts per channel.
>>
>> Thanks for any advice !!
>>
>> --james--
>>
>>
>
> Check out Marantz.

http://www.cambridgesoundworks.com [...] rec_stereo

Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Thank you, but I am looking for a stereo receiver. As stated in my OP, NAD
no longer makes a stereo-only receiver. It is all multichannel hype etc
etc.

Perhaps Rotel, but someone has noted that is built in China, which surprised
me.

--James--

--------------------

If you like NAD I would consider one of their integrated amps. There are
several models. You can add a cheaper conventional am/fm tuner, maybe even
used, or a satellite radio tuner to provide radio capability.

Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

In rec.audio.tech James <jnipperxxx@nospamfdn.com> wrote:
> Thank you, but I am looking for a stereo receiver. As stated in my OP, NAD
> no longer makes a stereo-only receiver. It is all multichannel hype etc
> etc.
>
> Perhaps Rotel, but someone has noted that is built in China, which surprised
> me.

So what? China is perfectly capable of making high quality items. Just
look at the build quality, rather than the 'manufactured in' tag, and see
if it meets your standards.

Personally, I'd trust Rotel far more than most brands.

Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"James" <jnipperxxx@nospamfdn.com> wrote in message
news:3OudnVuTBZcfqvHfRVn-pg@comcast.com...
>
> Really, you think NAD and Rotel are Chinese junk ?? Wow, I
thought
> these were considered pretty good receivers.....

I remember the same kind of comment being made about Japanese goods.

Mass-produced products are made by machine; the machines don't know what
country they are in - they work just as well in China as anywhere else.

The cost of the components in mass-produced products is small; and so it's
perfectly practical for a manufacturer to set up shop somewhere where taxes,
wages and profits means that products can be sold at a smaller multiple of
the component price.

Tim

Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Charles Richmond wrote:
> Tim Martin wrote:
>>
>> "James" <jnipperxxx@nospamfdn.com> wrote in message
>> news:3OudnVuTBZcfqvHfRVn-pg@comcast.com...
>>>
>>> Really, you think NAD and Rotel are Chinese junk ?? Wow, I
>>> thought these were considered pretty good receivers.....
>>
>> I remember the same kind of comment being made about Japanese goods.
>>
>> Mass-produced products are made by machine; the machines don't know
>> what country they are in - they work just as well in China as
>> anywhere else.
>>
> Yes, the machines may be the same...but what about "quality control".
> Do the plants in China have inspectors that are as good as Japan???
>
>
>> Charles and Francis Richmond It is moral cowardice to leave |
>> undone what one perceives right |
>> richmond at plano dot net to do. -- Confucius |
> +----------------------------------------------------------------+

Mid-Fi stuff hasn't been produced in Japan for at least 15 years. I think we
need to get over it. Only flagship stuff is made there anymore.

I work on lots of mid-fi, that is Sony, Onkyo, Pioneer, Yamaha, Denon,
Marantz. Quality is mostly pretty good, you'd be hard pressed to find any
quality differences compared to Japanese manufactured stuff.
However, there is a qualifier here as regards the original posts, which is:
much of the stuff isn't Chinese as such, but made in Malaysia, Indonesia,
Taiwan and Korea.
Some Chinese stuff I've seen, such as the Marantz models made for Marantz by
a firm called Anam, aren't so great, though there's some new higher-end
stuff I haven't seen yet, such as the SR-8400, etc.
The Chinese produced Denon stuff I've seen is fine. Yamaha has kept their
quality at a high level, but they're not Chinese-built (was it Indonesia?).
I would put Onkyo at a small notch below those two as to quality on their
receivers, but I'd say stay away from their dvd players, which are
Philips-sourced (and Chinese built).
Sony has been dumbing down the engineering of their cheaper stuff the past
three or four years as more HTIB stuff is sold. The receivers aren't too
bad, but I wouldn't want to be perceived as arguing too strongly in their
favor.

Mark Z.

Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

Dogs Breath wrote:
> As far as value for money goes , you will go a long way to better
> Rotel.
>
> "Tim Martin" <tim2718281@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
> news:n3Zhe.8254$yY4.3835@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
>>
>> "James" <jnipperxxx@nospamfdn.com> wrote in message
>> news:3OudnVuTBZcfqvHfRVn-pg@comcast.com...
>>>
>>> Really, you think NAD and Rotel are Chinese junk ?? Wow, I
>>> thought these were considered pretty good receivers.....
>>
>> I remember the same kind of comment being made about Japanese goods.
>>
>> Mass-produced products are made by machine; the machines don't know
>> what country they are in - they work just as well in China as
>> anywhere else. The cost of the components in mass-produced products is
>> small; and
>> so it's
>> perfectly practical for a manufacturer to set up shop somewhere where
>> taxes,
>> wages and profits means that products can be sold at a smaller
>> multiple of the component price.
>>
>> Tim

Not familiar with the Rotel, but lots of people like them.

Mark Z.

Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

On Tue, 17 May 2005 01:21:56 -0700, Charles Richmond
<richmond@plano.net> wrote:

>Tim Martin wrote:
>>
>> "James" <jnipperxxx@nospamfdn.com> wrote in message
>> news:3OudnVuTBZcfqvHfRVn-pg@comcast.com...
>> >
>> > Really, you think NAD and Rotel are Chinese junk ?? Wow, I
>> thought
>> > these were considered pretty good receivers.....
>>
>> I remember the same kind of comment being made about Japanese goods.
>>
>> Mass-produced products are made by machine; the machines don't know what
>> country they are in - they work just as well in China as anywhere else.
>>
>Yes, the machines may be the same...but what about "quality control".
>Do the plants in China have inspectors that are as good as Japan???

Anyone who thinks that quality is improved by inspection, is about
forty years out of date. Quality assurance in volume manufacturing
comes from the design, from the assembly equipment, and from the
manufacturing processes. Inspection is irrelevant, all it can tell you
is whether something's gone wrong with the process.

--

Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering

Archived from groups: alt.audio.equipment,rec.audio.misc,rec.audio.tech (More info?)

"Stewart Pinkerton" <patent3@dircon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:8juq819kce8f7vbfjbs27t5cdruedkfcef@4ax.com...
> Being made in China is no indication of sound quality. I just bought a
> 'Chinky cheapy' Pioneer DV-575A 'universal' player which sounds
> identical to a $3,000 'high end' Meridian 588 dedicated CD player.


This is a UK model. I wonder what the US equivalent is?
John