I've waited a while to post this, because I wanted to really run through the paces. My old system consisted of a RSP1098, RMB1095, a RMB1066 (with four channels bridged for center rears), and a RDV1040. The new system has a new 1098, the 1077, and a RDV1050.
So aside from the 1050 (that should be the same as the 1040) and a new 1098, the only changes that could skew the results are going from two different amps with different power (1095 & 1066) to a single amp with equal power all around.
So with that, no speaker was moved, all connections remained the same, and the only settings that changed from the original 1098 were speaker levels. Also keep in mind that I generally keep to 3 results: sounds worse, sounds better, sounds the same. I don't analyze sound, I enjoy it. So I won't be in much help of subtle differences, I just give my honest opinions.
Now with all that out of the way, holy crap what an amp!!! Throw everything you know away. This thing easily blows away my 1095. No fatigue at higher levels, my 1095 would get really loud and make noise. The 1077 gets equally as loud, but is just as clear as it is at lower levels. I watched a DTS clip of Master and Commander and could clearly pick out subtle sound elements on top of the cannon-ball destruction, the 1095 just gave me really loud cannon-ball destruction. On music, I've found myself moving back to stereo more than PLIIx. It would usually take PLIIx to get to the sound quality and clarity I need for my exaggerated listening levels. The 1077 still gives me great imaging at high levels, not to mention better bass from my CDM9's (Before I liked PLIIx for the extra umph given to the bass).
So for the techie's, here's some of the 'details' I've noticed:
1) Stage width is decreased a tad. Goes from speaker to speaker instead of 1' to the outsides.
2) Imaging is better at moderate volumes, extremely better at higher levels.
3) Stage height range is increased by 3-4 feet. Before the height range would equal the speaker height. Now it actually has range! (this more then makes up for the decreased width)
4) Improved bass response out of all speakers++++
5) Slight roll off in treble, works out great with my B&W's. With the 1095 I had to go -1 to -2 on the HF tone controls to not get fatigued, all tone controls are set to bypass with the 1077.
6) My Wife heard a difference!! Amazing feat in and of itself.
7) More room in my rack for other goodies..
The only downside I can see is visually, this does not make your rack very impressive. It really looks like I've added a Rotel line conditioner. I wish they would have added some fake heatsinks or some speaker LED indicators. I guess next year I'll have to add some of the 500w guys to gets some looks back.
Kevin D.
So aside from the 1050 (that should be the same as the 1040) and a new 1098, the only changes that could skew the results are going from two different amps with different power (1095 & 1066) to a single amp with equal power all around.
So with that, no speaker was moved, all connections remained the same, and the only settings that changed from the original 1098 were speaker levels. Also keep in mind that I generally keep to 3 results: sounds worse, sounds better, sounds the same. I don't analyze sound, I enjoy it. So I won't be in much help of subtle differences, I just give my honest opinions.
Now with all that out of the way, holy crap what an amp!!! Throw everything you know away. This thing easily blows away my 1095. No fatigue at higher levels, my 1095 would get really loud and make noise. The 1077 gets equally as loud, but is just as clear as it is at lower levels. I watched a DTS clip of Master and Commander and could clearly pick out subtle sound elements on top of the cannon-ball destruction, the 1095 just gave me really loud cannon-ball destruction. On music, I've found myself moving back to stereo more than PLIIx. It would usually take PLIIx to get to the sound quality and clarity I need for my exaggerated listening levels. The 1077 still gives me great imaging at high levels, not to mention better bass from my CDM9's (Before I liked PLIIx for the extra umph given to the bass).
So for the techie's, here's some of the 'details' I've noticed:
1) Stage width is decreased a tad. Goes from speaker to speaker instead of 1' to the outsides.
2) Imaging is better at moderate volumes, extremely better at higher levels.
3) Stage height range is increased by 3-4 feet. Before the height range would equal the speaker height. Now it actually has range! (this more then makes up for the decreased width)
4) Improved bass response out of all speakers++++
5) Slight roll off in treble, works out great with my B&W's. With the 1095 I had to go -1 to -2 on the HF tone controls to not get fatigued, all tone controls are set to bypass with the 1077.
6) My Wife heard a difference!! Amazing feat in and of itself.
7) More room in my rack for other goodies..
The only downside I can see is visually, this does not make your rack very impressive. It really looks like I've added a Rotel line conditioner. I wish they would have added some fake heatsinks or some speaker LED indicators. I guess next year I'll have to add some of the 500w guys to gets some looks back.
Kevin D.
Comment