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.
I'd say it probably depends on the price point. My guess is that under $750 they all sound the same. Marantz has some much more expensive players and you'd hope you get something tangible for all those additional dollars.
The same applies to Denon. I really like my Denon 3910 - it far from sucks. At its list price of $1500 or so, I think you're getting to the diminishing returns point.
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.