Get the NAD.
7 responses Add your response
I cannot speak for the Marantz, but the bottom few octaves were one of the major differences between the NAD 541i and the Rotel RCD-02 I auditioned when I bought a new player in late 2002. The NAD had thick, fat bass that lacked a bit of definition and tended to overpower the rest of the spectrum. While the RCD-02 has excellent bass extension and definition, IMHO, it is a bit polite in terms of output. Yet, when the recording calls for it, the bass dynamics on the RCD-02 seem pretty good to me. I bought the Rotel, but not because of its bass qualities (I felt it did other things better than the NAD). I like the RCD-02, but I agree that it is on the bright side of neutral.
Now, the equivalent models are the RCD-06 and the NAD 542, neither of which I have heard, so an audition is in order, if possible.
With all due respect to the Denon lover I think they suck. I'm awaiting delivery on a Marantz SA 14 that has been modified by a high end outfit. I'm assured I will be blown away. One of my oldest contacts in the audio business carries Rotel and I still won't buy it though I did come close to getting their big amp. The better Marantz players shoud get the nod here.
Based on my experiences all three players: Rotel, NAD, and Marantz are not known for their bass extension, slam, & punch. If you seek these qualities, I suggest looking into Cary, Krell, and Esoteric to start off. These players are known for their bass extension, slam, & punch. At least that's what I heard when I auditioned them and from reading reviews.