From: jshamilt@cayley.waterloo.edu (J.S. Hamilton)
Subject: Re: ad-com vs Rotel
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 13:04:08 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.181634.4763@gw.wmich.edu>, 92marsh@gw.wmich.edu writes:
> 
>          Cheers,
>            I am shopping for a new amp/preamp system or an integrated. 
>          I spent half of today comparing Rotel to Ad-Com. 
>          ...... Rotel is quite a bit
>          more impressive in the $700 area.  I am looking at their
>          RA980BX model (100 watt int. amp.).
>            The ad-com sound seems lighter and airy.  The Rotel sound
>          seems focused and solid.  Both demonstrated a great deal of
>          depth.
  
           Surprise! Truth be known, Rotel and Adcom are built side by side 
           in the same factory. From experience, I can say both are well
           made amplifiers representing the beginning of "low-high-end" audio.

>            I am looking for comments on Rotel.  I have heard that
>          years ago they had a terrible record for service, but now
>          they have drastically improved (since the British bought the
>          company).  I have only listened to the system for 20 minutes
>          or so, so when I go back, I want suggestions on what to
>          listen for.  What are Rotel's classic weaknesses?  I would
>          get a five year warantee, so repairs do not fighten me.

           IMHO I am in an interesting situation to comment.  Two years ago
           I purchased an Adcom GFA 555 (first generation) while my friend
           bought a Rotel RB960. The Adcom is 225 W into 8 ohms, the Rotel
           160 W into 8 ohms. We both acquired Magneplanar SMGa speakers and
           are using Nakamichi CDP 2A CD players. The only real difference
           in our systems is that he has a PSAudio pre-amp and I have an Adcom
           GFP 555 (first generation). Over the last two years, we have listened
           to both these systems intensively, although we have never had them  
           in the same room to do an A-B comparison. I perceive the Rotel to be
           slightly more brash at high frequencies than my amp. Both these amps
           however, are not "warm" sounding. They are fairly detailed, and with
           the Maggies imaging and soundstage is often impressive. The bass 
           extension is good with the Adcom, which is especially important with
           speakers that roll off so quickly on the bottom end.

           At different times we have both used these amplifiers to drive not 
           only the panels (4ohm) but 2 15" subs wired in parallel on each                 channel, effectively reducing the load to approximately 8/3 ohms.
           Interestingly enough, the Rotel amp had no trouble with this 
           arrangement (although it did get mighty hot) while the Adcom blew
           its fuses after a minute or so.

           A year ago I lent my Adcom to a friend (never do this) who tried to
           drive poor equipment and blew the right channel. Although the amp 
           was no longer covered under warranty (I had bought it second hand)
           Adcom fixed it for free and did a diagnostic on it as well. We have
           never had any trouble with the Rotel.   
> 
           As well, we have had them both apart at the same time. The layout
           of the Adcom appears to be more "heavy duty" than that of the Rotel.
           Its heat sinks are larger, and its transformer is much larger. 
           (Hopefully indicating the ability to produce the 20Amp current swing
           that is advertised.)

>            Am I being a fool to choose Rotel over ad-com?  Has anyone
>          else out there owned an ad-com or rotel and can tell me how
>          they felt?
> 
           They seem to be both decent amps for the price, buy the most power
           you can afford.

           J.S. Hamilton