RB1080 for 803D?

I currently own the 803D. Sorry, I have no experience with Rotel amp, but I have found that you don't need heaps of power to drive the 803D to very high levels. This is based on my experience with using a pair of Marantz SM17SA (60W per channel) over a year. I briefly tried the Marantz SM11S1 which has an accurate power meter - 99% of my listening was less than 5W!!! The highest power that I noted was for the occassional rock - 45W! I have recently upgraded to a pair of Cambridge Audio 840W that are very smooth and detailed. They are rated at 200W per channel, but again it is the quality, not quantity that counts.

That amp is much better than people give it credit for. It's a good choice.

The diamond tweeter is extremely revealing, the Rotel will stand out with speakers of this caliber.

Purely my suggestion, and of course I don't know your budget, but any vintage of Classe Audio amp would be a vast improvement over the Rotel.

While Rjhalla is right your Rotel is more than enough to get the speakers playing great. Get the speakers... think about amps later. The speakers are 90% of the equation.

I have auditioned both the 803D and 802D on the RB 1080 back to back with Classe' CA-2200 (200 watt amp), in the same room same wires... The 1080 was more than enough to get both sets of speakers moving (I listened at 80db) and sounded pretty good (I would have been happy with the combo). The classe' brought more punch to the bass (slam). Maybe a little more openness to the midrange. I did not notice any difference in the highs (bad source?) I am 27 years old with good hearing (check every 6 months at work...).

The speakers are 90% of the equation.

Hmmmm...I'd have to respectfully disagree.

While I can't offer any specific advice (since I have no idea what comprises the rest of your system, nor what you are trying to accomplish other than spend money), I would say the jump from the 683's to the N803D's is pretty drastic (if not just for the dollar spent alone). You may want to think about your system as a whole and figure out exactly what you are not satisfied with.

Perhaps the real source of your dissatisfaction is that PS-3 you're using for a CD player, or the lap cord you're using as speaker cables. Just a guess.

Say you have 10 grand... You could buy $ 300 ( Bose 301s) and Mcintosh mono blocks or you could buy B&W 803D and an $800 Onkyo reciever.... Speaker make the Biggest difference.

...or, you could spit that $10k 60/40 (allocating either side to speakers, the rest to the amp) and crush both of your scenarios.

Believe what you want. Trust me, I understand your stance, as I once believed it myself. I was wrong.

I just think there are good "budget" amps out there (Musical Fidelity, Arcam, Rotel, etc) that bring a lot of bang for the buck. I think it is best when you start a system to buy the best speakers you can. Buy a good "budget" amp and up grade the amp when you have more money. If you do not have good speakers all benefits of the system up stream will be negated.

Anyway I find the source makes a larger impact than the amp... assuming you are not under powering you speakers...

By speakers being 90% of the equation I meant the character/tone of they system is largely controlled by the speakers.

For example.

#1 Take a Mcintosh integrated amp (MA7000, 250wpc) and a pair of Sophias vs the same Mcintosh integrated an a pair of 802D... you would have TOTALY different sounds.

#2 Now take the same pair of Sophias and change out the Mcintosh integrated for a Musical Fidelity amp (A5 250wpc). The system would sound different but it would not be as drastic as the change in system#1

So I feel my money is best spent on speakers. But respectfully to each their own.