Comments on: Review: Rotel RSX-1057 AV Receiver

by: av receiver

Thu, 31 May 2007 07:46:14 +0000

Steve, don’t hold back!

It does seem odd these days to integrate a radio, especially if you have to attach an external antenna to it to make it work.

by: Steve

Tue, 07 Nov 2006 17:59:08 +0000

I should note here that the French translation of “receiver” is “ampli-tuner”, a much more descriptive term, at the expense of only one extra syllable. I think I’m going to adopt this term in English myself.

by: henning

Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:43:01 +0000

anonymous user test

by: henning

Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:40:32 +0000

Both Firefox and IE work fine for me.

by: henning

Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:40:02 +0000

~~IE test~~

by: Steve

Tue, 31 Oct 2006 19:35:10 +0000

I did put those del tags like you said, without the spaces. Here’s another try: strikeout. Maybe it’s Firefox that’s screwing it up, or your forum software that’s expecting IE to screw it up while Firefox is once again stirring up trouble by doing it right instead…

So as far as actual availability of the type of product that I am trying to recommend, it is indeed poor. In stereo-land, it is easy to get a wide range of integrated amplifiers at a variety of prices. But as soon as you go from two-channel to five-or-more-channel, manufacturers have decided that an AM/FM tuner is going to be included whether you want one or not. As I said, this is purely for hysterical (that’s supposed to be struck-out again) historical reasons and the practice should be discontinued immediately! Manufacturers, are you listening??

by: henning

Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:29:41 +0000

As to receivers: I understand your points completely, and plan to own separates one day when I can. But your statement that you can get separates for “exactly the same price as a receiver” is not accurate.

If I wanted to buy separates for $1000, where would I go? I couldn’t. The cheapest separates I know of are from Outlaw Audio, where the least expensive amp / prepro combination is $1400. So for anybody shopping for anything less than $1400, separates are out of the question. Even then, maybe Outlaw’s products are not a good fit. What happens then? There are many many receiver choices at about $1400, and just one separates choice.

It’s only once you start paying significant sums of money do you start to get choice. And for those people, I think that separates are the way to go. I don’t think that buying a $5000 receiver is your best way of spending that money. But if your budget is $1500 or less, receivers are your best, and really only (unless you like Outlaw) choice.

by: henning

Tue, 31 Oct 2006 18:21:53 +0000

~~Works for me!~~

Make sure it looks like this (remove the spaces):

< d e l > Works for me! < / d e l >

by: Steve

Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:51:54 +0000

OK, not so much luck with the “del” tag… I just put it in angle brackets like normal HTML tags and it got completely ignored.

by: Steve

Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:51:21 +0000

Ah I see. Let’s try that: struck-out text

I’m not trying to diss people who own receivers, just pointing out that for exactly the same price as a receiver, you could own an integrated amplifier instead that probably does its job better, without all that extra nonsense about AM/FM that you never use anyway.

And if you really do want AM/FM radio in addition to all your other audio and video sources, buy a respectable tuner (which can be quite cheap, since it only has to do one thing which requires nearly no power and next to no physical space) and you can keep it throughout the rest of your home theater’s life, no matter what happens to your preamp, power amp, integrated amp, etc. That’s all I meant.