Rotel 1095 vs 1080 - input needed

[grit]

I'm looking to drive Aerial 7b's and a cc3b (if you're not familiar with them, think B&W 803's and htm3s, but more power hungry). I've already determined that a 100 watt Classe amp is *not* enough power for the 7b's, as the bottom end disappers. The Rotel 1095 seems to drive them pretty well. What I'm wondering is what sonic quality differences (if any) you personally observed when a/b testing the 1095 vs 1080, particularly with their ability to drive speakers that are considered to be a difficult load.

For now, I'm mostly concerned with 2-ch music.

Thanks for any input anyone has.

[csuzor]

How about a comparison of bi-amping with 1075 Vs a single 1080 (at the same price), and Vs bi-amping with 1095?
I haven't tried the 1080, but bi-amping is definitely a big plus with the 1075 (have you tried bi-amping your 703s with the 1075? That is my config).

[htsteve]

Grit,

I have both the 1095 and the 1080. I have B&W N804's (smaller versions of 803's). The 1095 was driving them well. I upgraded to the 1080 to drive the N804's. The 1080 is a definite improvement in performance over the 1095. The soundstage was deeper, the bass was noticeably tighter, smoother at the top, more refined. Overall, I've been pleased with the decision to go with the 1080.
I do not think the N804's are as hard to drive as the 7b's, but they seem to love power but based on my experience, I would recommend the 1080. To csuzor's point, have you considered biamping. I am planning on bi-amping the 804's soon. The 1095 will power the mid/hi's and the 1080 (with it's better control :T ) will power the bass. I'm interested to see how this idea will work.

Hope this helps.

[UCLAman]

Grit,

I have both the 1095 and the 1080. The 1095 will power the mid/hi's and the 1080 (with it's better control :T ) will power the bass. I'm interested to see how this idea will work.

Hope this helps.

I too have this combo 1095 and 1080. However I have the 803s. My dealer actually said the reverse. The 1080 for the highs and the 1095 for the lows. Maybe this weekend I will reverse them as I will be reorganizing my components into a new rack. Everything will be rack mounted. I will try out the reverse and respond back with my findings. :

[htsteve]

UCLAman,

I'll be interested to hear about your switch. I to am reorganizing my system. I'm probably a couple of weeks out though, while I wait for upgrades and time in the schedule to do the re-org. I will also plan to do both scenarios and see which I like better.

[grit]

I too have this combo 1095 and 1080. However I have the 803s. My dealer actually said the reverse. The 1080 for the highs and the 1095 for the lows. Maybe this weekend I will reverse them as I will be reorganizing my components into a new rack. Everything will be rack mounted. I will try out the reverse and respond back with my findings. :

Ditto, can't wait to hear what your a/b shows.

csuzor, as for bi-amping, I'm trying to avoid it, but that would be a possibility to compensate for the center channel. It has the same power requirements, but I would be running it bi-amped off the 1075.

[PewterTA]

First thing, I would not recommend psuedo bi-amping with the 1095 and 1080, they have different imaging to them and will really distort where a particular sound is coming from. The 1095 images with a much bigger (more focused) phantom center feel to the speakers. The 1080 gives a wider sound stage. This will give very weird results with 2 ch listening. I've tried it both ways and it's just not better than having either the 1095 or 1080 drive the speakers. You'd be better off with 2 of the same amp if you are going to bi-amp.

Your best bet to drive such difficult speakers is find an RB-1090, that thing will crush the 1095/1080 in every aspect.

[grit]

Oops. When I said bi-amp, I meant using the remaining channels of the 1095 to do so. Good point though, that would sound bad mixing the 2.

[DL86]

PewterTA, you mention the rb-1090 will crush the 1095/1080, does that include bi-amping a speaker with two rb-1080's? Because I was planning to get another rb-1080 to bi-amp my paradigm studio 100v3's. If you beleive the rb-1090 is better than two 1080's than I might look at getting an rb-1090 or an rb-1092 when they come out.

Cheers, David

[Kevin D]

In most every situation, 400 watts from two amps is not going to equal 400 watts from one amp. You would be sending 200 watts to the low frequencies and 200 watts to the high frequencies. If you went with the 1090, you would be sending 400 watts to the entire speaker, and it would decide how to devide it up based on what speaker needs more power.

Kevin D.

[DL86]

Never looked at it that way. Interesting stuff, looking forward to the rb-1092, now I just gotta save up : .

Cheers, David

[PewterTA]

Yeah I want to hear the RB-1092/1091 and those might replace my 1095 and 1080! Just depends on how they sound.

[blues651]

Well guys I had to try this bi-amping ,( 1068 , rmb 1075, source cd, studio 100's) ( I've heard by many it does't help and some say it does) so me and my girlfriend sat down and listened to two songs twice to get a good feel for them at the same volume level , I started out bi-amped, then I quickly changed the setup and started the first song, it hadn't played for more than 30 sec. and she said she liked the other way ( bi-amped) by that time I too had made up my mind I agreed with her , we did go ahead and listen to both songs . I would say it made at least a 20% difference as the bass was more controlled and the mids & hi"s were more detailed !

[srb]

blues651,

Are you saying you compared running your L & R first with one channel of the RMB-1075 to each speaker, and then passive biamp with 2 channels of the RMB-1075 to each speaker?

If so, I would expect the results you got - a little better.

But what Kevin D was saying was that a 380W/ch non biamped setup would probably sound better than 2 - 200W/ch amps biamped.

The woofer on average would consume 3-4 times the power that the tweeter would consume, and therefore the larger amp would more effectively deal with that power consumption split and low frequency impedance dips.

[csuzor]

Well guys I had to try this bi-amping ,( 1068 , rmb 1075, source cd, studio 100's) ... I would say it made at least a 20% difference as the bass was more controlled and the mids & hi"s were more detailed !

Exactly true about bi-amping.

a 380W/ch non biamped setup would probably sound better than 2 - 200W/ch amps biamped.

The woofer on average would consume 3-4 times the power that the tweeter would consume, and therefore the larger amp would more effectively deal with that power consumption split and low frequency impedance dips.

Sounds plausable, but can someone confirm? Does a 1080 or 1090 sound better than bi-amping using a 1095?

Anyone here made any comparisons using a 1077 for bi-amping?

Thanks
Christophe