NAD 752, or Rotel 1055, or something else?


I'm considering the NAD 752 and the Rotel 1055 receivers, and would love to get anyone's thoughts... I recently bought a pair of B&W 603 Series 3's. I've fallen in love with these speakers, can't believe the sound they produce from my 15-year-old 65-watt Sony stereo receiver. This old receiver is better than what Sony produces these days, but doesn't do justice to these speakers, so now (as expected) it's time to upgrade. I want to buy a high-quality surround receiver, and add center and surround speakers as budget allows...

I've read some very positive and helpful comments about the NAD 752, as well as some concerns about reliability. I'm wondering if anyone has had a chance to compare it with the Rotel 1055. I'd been leaning towards the NAD, which is quite a bit cheaper than the Rotel. The Rotel is cooler looking and has more features (which I may or may not ever use), but it costs hundreds more - does it justify the higher price in terms of actual sound quality? Is it worth springing for the Rotel? This will be my first surround receiver, I don't want to sacrifice stereo quality while listening to music.

Thanks for your advice!

(Recommendations for any other receivers in a similar price range would also be helpful... THANK YOU)


I have heard and compared them both. I like both very much, although they do have very different sounds. The Rotel is cooler, and a bit more crisp, but is very accurate and clean. I would also say that the sound is leaner sounding than the NAD. I was struck by how clean and precise the sound was when I listened to the Rotel.

By contrast the NAD is warmer, more powerful sounding, but clean and clear sounding as well. When I listened to it, I was really impressed by the cellos on a classical recording as they sounded so rich and lush, like the finest instruments I have ever heard.

I do not believe it is a question of whether it is $400 better nor whether one does a better job of resolving the sound better because in that regard, they are equal. Where they differ is in the sound of their amps and whether the Rotel is worth the extra money depends upon whether you like its leaner sound or not. This is personal preference time here. If you do like the leaner sound, then the Rotel is worth the difference. If not, or if it doesn't matter to you, then it probably isn't worth the difference.

Hawk: Thanks, this is great advice. I'll see if I can demo them both and hear how they sound w/ my speakers, although from what you said the NAD would probably make me quite happy.

I do have one additional question... The Rotel offers the ability to connect with a PC and get software updates, the NAD (like most receivers in its price range) does not. I've been listening to stereo my whole life so I don't know how big an issue this is likely to be - will the NAD be obsolete in a few years without these updates, or will the current sound formats likely keep me happy for many years? As a newbie to the multi-channel world I'm trying to distill the important issues from the hype.

Thanks again!


I have noticed that Marantz also has a serial port for flash upgrades of the BIOS, but when they offered an upgrade for the 8200, they charged $200 for it. I don't know what the upgrade was supposed to do, but it sure sounds like they learned this trick from Bill Gates.

The alternative, which makes more sense to me, is that you can buy an outboard decoder if there is some new format that you need in the future. As these receivers have 5.1 or 7.1 inputs, they can accept an outboard decoder through those inputs and amplify the new format, so there is more ways than one to accept new formats.
« Previous Thread Next Thread »

Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us