Rotel RA-10 VS Sony TA-FB940R

78finn

Well-known member
May 8, 2009
18
4
18,525
Visit site
I have had my Sony TA-FB940R for over 12 years now, it's a really good amp (good review from what HiFi) back in the day.

however, it recently died and I bought a Rotel RA-10 for under $400 (Aus) a replacement. Also obviously a good amp.

But I recently had a hi if store said that they could easily fix the sony for around $100, which I will do as they sell for $350 here in Aus no problem.

so my question is which one to keep? which is the better amp.

The Rotel is 40W per channel, the Sony 80W. The Sony was more expensive at time of purchase. Does newer mean better or not so?

I like both amps really...but can't afford to hang on to both and not a lot of point as one just will not get used!

any thoughts or help would be much appreciated.
 

78finn

Well-known member
May 8, 2009
18
4
18,525
Visit site
Should add that all I run is a Rega P-3, so I only use the phono stage and an iPad through the aux on occasion (less critical).

i know the phono stage on the RA-10 is supposed to be fantastic at the price, but does it out class the Sony?

i have a pair of Wharfedale Diamond 9.2 (6 ohm) speakers
 

ID.

New member
Feb 22, 2010
207
1
0
Visit site
The answer is, of course, whichever one you prefer the sound of :twisted:

To be honest, amplifier technology is pretty mature, so I don't personally feel that there have been any great leaps forward over the past 12 years, unless we are talking about the spread of class D and digital amps which mainly give advantages in terms of efficiency, meaning they generate less heat and can be more compact. So, no, newer doesn't necessarily mean better. I think that over longer time periods you get a different presentation/sound from amps, but that is more down to user preference rather than improvements in amplifier design or technology.

If you don't already have a preference, I suppose your options are:

(1) Spend $100 to get the Sony repaired, compare them and then sell on the one you rate as 2nd best

(2) Spend the $ to get it repaired and use it to set yourself up with a 2nd system for the bedroom or wherever

(3) Cut your losses and just keep the Rotel if you are happy with it.
 

78finn

Well-known member
May 8, 2009
18
4
18,525
Visit site
I thought this might be the answer.

a friend of mine has an old amp hooked up to a set of really old speakers (30 years old)...and it's still the best thing I have ever heard.

its seems whilst the technology evolves the sound doesn't necessarily get 'better' ?

The only real difference I can hear is how loud the Sony goes compared to the Rotel...but that's pretty irrevalent to me. Both sound good at low volume. The Sony takes about 30mins to 'warm' up before it sounds great. Where as the newer Rotel sounds good straight away....maybe this is where the newer tech comes in...not in the sound, but at the efficiency? I'm not sure though...

I know the phono stage sounds really good on the Rotel, probably nicer than the Sony.

i also use a QED uplay puck....sounds about the same on both.

think I will most likely end up selling the reconditioned Sony. If nothing else, the Rotel is more power efficient so my bills will be less....and it's in black, which sounds pathetic I know, but it blends into the room a bit nicer than the hunk of steel of the Sony.
 

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts