Rotel RSP-1570 vs. Denon AVR-4310CI

16941 Views 14 Replies 9 Participants Last post by xyzzy, Apr 9, 2012

eboettn

Discussion Starter · Aug 26, 2009

I need some help deciding between these two.

First off, here is my current setup:

B&W DM603 S3 Floor Standing (Mains)
B&W LCR600 S3 Center
B&W DM600 S3 Bookshelf (Rears)

Speakers powered by Rotel RMB-1075 multi-channel amp.
SVS PB12-Plus Subwoofer

Currently, I'm using a Yamaha HTR-5890 as my pre/pro and that is what I am wanting to replace. I will take any suggestions people give me, but I am partial to Denon and Rotel (and Yamaha to some degree). My main question is about the RSP-1570 vs. the AVR-4310CI.

My use is mainly HT (probably around 80/90%) but I do care about music as well.

Thanks everyone in advance for any and all help!!

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

eboettn

Discussion Starter · #2 · Aug 28, 2009

Let me ask another question. Maybe something easier.

In general, what are your thoughts on Rotel vs. Denon?

I really like the sound of Rotel products and since I have one of their amps, I would like to get a pre/pro to match. However, I also like some of the features that the Denon has, like iPod connectivity, XM/Sirius radio, and especially the Audyssey EQ.
But my main concern is performance / sound quality.

So here is my question: Rotel without room correction, or Denon with Audyssey EQ?

GregBe

· #3 · Aug 28, 2009

I personally would go with the Denon. In my opinion, depending on how treated your room is, the room eq is a big deal. I have a Pioneer with MCACC, but same point. the newer room eq's are really nice. You already have a good amp, and the amp section is usually the most compromised part of a receiver. I am not that familiar with the Denon, but you may want to research some of the lower level Denons that have preouts. Unless the 4310 has some features that the 3xxx series does not have, why pay for the higher end amps in the 4310, when you already have the 1075 amp.

Sonnie

· #4 · Aug 29, 2009

I agree... what is in the 4310 that the 3808 does not have? I do not know, just curious. Maybe it does not have quite as many features that you are looking for.

To me, Audyssey in the upper range has not been that great, but for the bass region it has worked really well. I have not seen a poll anywhere, but it does seem that I read about as many stating they do not use Audyssey as I read that are using it.

Sound quality wise... I cannot imagine there being any difference between these two units as far as preamp sections, unless one or the other is coloring the sound in some way, both should provide a neutral path, short of the obvious equalization features.

Sycraft

· #5 · Aug 30, 2009

Well I personally decided to get a Denon receiver just recently, so that'd be what I recommend. I have a Rotel amp, which I still use, but I dislike their receivers/pres. The problem I have is they cost too much for what you get, and they are behind the times.

Room EQ is well worth the price of admission IMO, even if you have a fairly good room. Unless you have amazing speakers, your speakers can still stand for some correction. In the case of B&Ws one thing I know for sure (having some of my own) is their highs are a bit laid back. So even if you have a perfect room, and like most of us you probalby don't, it can help fix speaker imperfections.

I settled on a Denon 3808CI since it was the cheapest receiver with MultEQ XT in Denon's line. I highly recommend it. Problem is, you may not be able to get it anymore, which would leave the 4310CI as the cheapest MultEQ XT option.

Also the Denon receivers seem to have really good amps. Not that you really need it, as you'd keep using your Rotel since it is better, but if you decided to add more channels (the 4310 supports width and height channels, in addition to surround back).

So I'd get Denon, just off of the room EQ. I cannot say enough good things about MultEQ. Denon also has the best implementation IMO since you can change the target curve, where some like Onkyo don't give you a choice.

Sonnie: The features the 4310 has over the 3808:

1) Audyssey Dynamic EQ and Dynamic Volume built in. The 3808 can have these, but it is a $100 upgrade, it comes with the 4310.
2) Audyssey DSX and Dolby ProLogic IIz. These allow for you to have height speakers, and front wide speakers in the case of DSX.
3) AL24+ Processing on all channels. Not sure how much this matters, but it has it.
4) 4th Edition Denon Link. I don't know what changes were made between the 3rd and 4th editions. Also, only high end Denon Blu-Ray and DVD-A players use Denon Link.
5) 2 HDMI outputs, as opposed to the 3808s 1. However it has only 1 component output, the 3808 has 2.
6) Sirius input. The 3808 can support Sirius with the $100 feature update, but has to use a couple of different inputs. The 4310 has a dedicated Sirius input.

Nothing major, but it does have some updates. The 3310, which is the new 3 series receiver, unfortunately doesn't have MultEQ XT, it has only the regular MultEQ, since it lacks a second DSP chip.

Personally I think the 3808 is great, however Denon seems to have decided it isn't needed anymore. Almost nobody has any left in stock.

See less See more

hugoalvim

· #6 · Aug 13, 2010

In my opinion:

Denon has more features (e.g. Audyssei)
Rotel has more sound quality.

I have a RSP-1570, RMB-1565 amplifier and B&W CM speakers, and sounds good.

Jungle Jack

· #7 · Aug 14, 2010

Hello,
Eric, since you are using an Outboard Amplifier, I would definitely pick the Denon over the Rotel. I could not possibly be a bigger fan of Audyssey MultEQ XT. And since you have an Amplifier, the fact that the 4310 only weighs 34.8 Pounds is not an issue.

It still bothers me that the 4310 costs 2000 Dollars and weighs that little, and does not offer THX Processing. While I do not think the Amplifiers would meet Ultra2 Plus Certification, they should meet Select2 Plus.

I am quite fond of Denon's Industrial Design. They truly make some of the most attractive AVR's on the Market.
I also like the GUI and Remote Control and that the 4310 is Manufactured in Japan.
Cheers,
JJ

bambino

· #8 · Aug 14, 2010

Not sure if i missed it but are you useing any of the amp section of the AVR?:whistling:
I guess either way i'd still ride with the Denon.:T

xyzzy

· #9 · Apr 5, 2012

I'm several years late but....

Pick the Denon if you want antiseptic dull sound devoid of presence and lifelike bloom.
However, you will get 878 surround sound modes of which you will use none and a fake wattage rating and a useless THX certification.

Pick the Rotel (or Arcam, or Cambridge Soundworks, etc) if you want lifelike sound with bloom, depth, immersion and realistic presence. These AVRs will, however, leave out the "features" like 878 surround sound modes which you will never use. And you may not get the useless THX rating.

Its all up to you....

Jungle Jack

· #10 · Apr 5, 2012

Hello,
I am pretty sure 3 years on, the OP has come to a decision. As for the differences between Denon and Rotel/Arcam/Cambridge, do bear in mind he is using Outboard Amplification. Regardless, I am glad to read you have had such a positive experience with the above 3. I do think Arcam's AVR600 is one of the best sounding AVR's I have ever encountered.
Cheers,
J

lcaillo

· #11 · Apr 6, 2012

xyzzy said:
I'm several years late but....

Pick the Denon if you want antiseptic dull sound devoid of presence and lifelike bloom.
However, you will get 878 surround sound modes of which you will use none and a fake wattage rating and a useless THX certification.

Pick the Rotel (or Arcam, or Cambridge Soundworks, etc) if you want lifelike sound with bloom, depth, immersion and realistic presence. These AVRs will, however, leave out the "features" like 878 surround sound modes which you will never use. And you may not get the useless THX rating.

Its all up to you....

Strong opinions, on mostly subjective assessments, but do you have any facts to back up the allegation of "fake wattage rating?" That would be a rather easy measurement to quantify and should not be subject to debate. If you have some tests that indicate such, we need to post them so that people have accurate information.

xyzzy

· #12 · Apr 6, 2012

Jungle Jack said:
Hello,
I am pretty sure 3 years on, the OP has come to a decision. As for the differences between Denon and Rotel/Arcam/Cambridge, do bear in mind he is using Outboard Amplification. Regardless, I am glad to read you have had such a positive experience with the above 3. I do think Arcam's AVR600 is one of the best sounding AVR's I have ever encountered.
Cheers,
J

Tickled and pleased that you also hear differences between AVRs. Being new and cruising thru other threads I see a lot of "they all sound the same if they have the same watts and distortion ratings". Nothing is further from the truth. :rubeyes:

xyzzy

· #13 · Apr 6, 2012 (Edited)

lcaillo said:
Strong opinions, on mostly subjective assessments, but do you have any facts to back up the allegation of "fake wattage rating?" That would be a rather easy measurement to quantify and should not be subject to debate. If you have some tests that indicate such, we need to post them so that people have accurate information.

An objective assessment of perceived sound quality means comparing the sound you hear from any set of equipment to a live unamplified instrument or voice. If you spend time listening and objectively evaluating the sound you hear over time one can become quite good at discerning what you are hearing against what you have heard as a reference. Subjective to the untrained ear. But No different than learning to play a sport or learning to draw or learning to ride a bike. You become better over time.

Don't be sucked in by measurements because how a measurement is done is vague and can be manipulated. Most common for mass market gear is to quote wattage output or distortion at only a certain frequency or with only one or two channels driven (what I mean by fake). Not all five channels driven full range as most honest high end gear is rated. And even in high end measurements mean squat because there are perceivable difference in the sound reproduction between high end gear that have the same ratings. Good for a high level assessment of how loud it will get or can it drive my speakers. But useless as a gauge of the reproduction quality to bring out nuances in instruments and voices.

See less See more

Jungle Jack

· #14 · Apr 6, 2012

xyzzy said:
Tickled and pleased that you also hear differences between AVRs. Being new and cruising thru other threads I see a lot of "they all sound the same if they have the same watts and distortion ratings". Nothing is further from the truth. :rubeyes:

Hello,
AVR's are not often thought to all sound the same given the huge number of variables. The same cannot be said about Power Amplifiers where when level matched, there is a great deal of debate in regards to being able to hear differences.

For me, this is simply a debate I try to steer clear of. I do believe in owning Amplifiers with very large Toroidal Transformers. huge Capacitor Banks, and excellent Build Quality. Thanks to this, I have had the same 3 Amplifiers for over a decade while using Thiels, PSBs, Paradigm, Martin Logan, and other brands over this time while never needing to worry about having enough power and current to get the best out of the Speakers.

While a hotly contested AV Forum discussion topic, I think folks should purchase Amplifiers that suit their needs and bring them pleasure without having to defend their choice. For those deciding to use a lower priced Professional Amplifier like a Behringer, I believe the same to be true as if they had chosen a Levinson, Krell, Plinius, or any other Amplifier.
Cheers,
JJ

See less See more

xyzzy

· #15 · Apr 9, 2012

Jungle Jack said:
Hello,
AVR's are not often thought to all sound the same given the huge number of variables. The same cannot be said about Power Amplifiers where when level matched, there is a great deal of debate in regards to being able to hear differences.

For me, this is simply a debate I try to steer clear of. I do believe in owning Amplifiers with very large Toroidal Transformers. huge Capacitor Banks, and excellent Build Quality. Thanks to this, I have had the same 3 Amplifiers for over a decade while using Thiels, PSBs, Paradigm, Martin Logan, and other brands over this time while never needing to worry about having enough power and current to get the best out of the Speakers.

While a hotly contested AV Forum discussion topic, I think folks should purchase Amplifiers that suit their needs and bring them pleasure without having to defend their choice. For those deciding to use a lower priced Professional Amplifier like a Behringer, I believe the same to be true as if they had chosen a Levinson, Krell, Plinius, or any other Amplifier.
Cheers,
JJ

There isn't any debate over Amps sounding different if one is listening in a system that has the resolution to bring out the differences. I have yet to meet anyone who after some time spent in my basement (where my system is setup) comparing and evaluating components that doesn't come to the same conclusion.
And you are on the right track looking for amps with good build quaility and beefy components.

No arguement that folks should buy what brings them pleasure. My only arguement is that folks try to do the best they can for their budget and their level of interest. If one is spending time on the site then one has the interest. But to say everything (amps, preamps, AVRs) sounds the same if they have the same specs is untrue and usually said by folks who have not spent honest time listening to equipment and evaluating.

Entry level high-end is affordable at price points well below where higher priced mass-market units are sold.

See less See more

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.