Integrated amp for Monitor 5

[ANWKLO]

Which of the following Integrated amp is bes for Monitor 5 please?

1. Rotel RA-1062 60-watts per channel
2. Rotel RA-1070 100-watts per channel

http://www.rotel.com/UK/products/index.htm?cat=21


3. NAD C352 80-watts per channel
4. NAD C372 150-watts per channel

http://nadelectronics.com/products/hifi-amplifiers

[engtaz]

Adcom 555 or 555II

engtaz

[BaggedLancer]

I use an Adcom 535II on mine and it sounds great.

[lightman1]

I know it's not integrated, and before Jason ran off to the hills with The 5's. I had a carver c-2 and m200t rockin the kitchen. Easy on the budget great on the sound. Tuners can be had cheap.

[tbyrne]

I am looking at the same amps. The Rotels are pricier, but very nice. The NADs offer the best bang for the buck. It depends on how loud you like them - 60 watts of Rotel is like 90+ of many AV receivers.

[lakesailor]

I think I would go with the NAD’s Both of these NAD models you are looking at are rated down to 2ohms with tons of reserve power and good headroom; so you know you are dealing with some pretty solid amplification to do that.

The Rotel’s boast “hi-current” amplification but do not publish voltage output to confirm nor do they publish output ratings below 8 ohms. Any amp can put out at 8ohms; it’s the good amps that can put out down in the 4ohm range. I like that NAD is running right down to 2ohms and posts their numbers at the same time.

[Jonesy]

I can't speak to any direct experience with any of the models you listed but I know for sure (and bear witness to everyday) that my duaghter is more than happy with her Monitor 5JR+ and Rotel Rx-402 receiver combo.

[geoff727]

Some very good choices, all of them. I know that I've read favorable reviews of the NAD 372 in the past. Maybe it was in The Absolute Sound. Rotel's generally get all-around excellent reviews, also. When I bought my last amp, I was strongly considering both Rotel and NAD. I looked at both. The NAD styling didn't appeal to me, but that's a personal choice. I eventually wound up over-budget, but absolutely in love, with a McIntosh.

I can't remember what magazine I read it in, but it was a comparison between several integrateds in that general price range...the NAD 372, a Creek, a Cambridge, and a couple more. As I recall, the NAD received very favorable comments, and had the "beefiest" looking innards (the Rotel was not in the comparison group). The bigger amps of the two brands would surely give you the option of driving much more than a Monitor 5. My old Yamaha (85 wpc/8 Ohm) drove my Monitor 5's for almost 20 years with never a whimper.

[geoff727]

The Rotel’s boast “hi-current” amplification but do not publish voltage output to confirm nor do they publish output ratings below 8 ohms. Any amp can put out at 8ohms; it’s the good amps that can put out down in the 4ohm range. I like that NAD is running right down to 2ohms and posts their numbers at the same time.

The Rotel's have outputs for two pairs of speakers (min. 8 ohms for both, 4 ohms when using one pair). But I always wondered why they didn't list the power output at 4 ohms, too. It's definitely worth asking the dealer the question over.

That Rotel 1070 is awfully sharp looking with the black faceplate.

[lakesailor]

The Rotel's have outputs for two pairs of speakers (min. 8 ohms for both, 4 ohms when using one pair). But I always wondered why they didn't list the power output at 4 ohms, too. It's definitely worth asking the dealer the question over.

That Rotel 1070 is awfully sharp looking with the black faceplate.

I completely agree. By contrast Harman/Kardon has always been a company that made their name by offering hi-current amplification, and helped establish the important of high current capability in the amplification process.

Even to this day if you look at a component such as the Harman Kardon 3485 receiver they not only include the rms/ch ratings of 120/ch @ 8 ohms and 150/ch@4ohms they also include the fact that the H/K can put out 45 amps of high instantaneous current capability. There is no reason why a company like Rotel cannot do the same; the devil, as they always say; is in the details.

I do agree with you though, the Rotel is a very sexy looking unit.