Rotel RCD 991 vs. Rotel RCD 1072

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Hi there, I need your advice on something.

I have the option of trading in my Rotel RCD-02 for either a new
RCD-1072 or a used RCD 991. Both for about the same price and both
with same warranty and service.

What would you do? Cd player is presently running through a RA-02
Intergrated amp (next to be upgraded) and then onto a pair of B&W
matrix 802's.

The only thing I am really worried about is that the 991 despite all
the rave reviews, stopped production 4 years ago...is it really out of
date???

Please reply via newsgroup...my email has been flakey lately.

Thank you very much in advance!

Archived from groups: rec.audio.high-end (More info?)

Thanks, I was thinking "go with the new one" ....but then I have heard
so much about the 991 and how everyone was upset rotel did not make an
upper level model anymore.


nabob33@hotmail.com wrote in message news:<d1ajnm02bee@news4.newsguy.com>...
> Dermegy wrote:
> > Hi there, I need your advice on something.
> >
> > I have the option of trading in my Rotel RCD-02 for either a new
> > RCD-1072 or a used RCD 991. Both for about the same price and both
> > with same warranty and service.
> >
> > What would you do? Cd player is presently running through a RA-02
> > Intergrated amp (next to be upgraded) and then onto a pair of B&W
> > matrix 802's.
> >
> > The only thing I am really worried about is that the 991 despite all
> > the rave reviews, stopped production 4 years ago...is it really out
> of
> > date???
>
> Only in the sense that it has some mileage on it. Rotels tend to be
> built to last, but a new one should last just a little bit longer,
> which is why I'd go for the new one. There certainly have been no great
> (or even moderately small) advances in Redbook reproduction in the last
> 5 years, so performance-wise these should be a horse apiece. If you
> really believe that one might sound better than the other, you should
> listen and compare for yourself. (But compare them without knowing
> which is which.)
>
> bob