rb 1090 or rb 1092???

[ecthelion]

i was almost ready to start looking for rb 1090 and now you got this coming in im talking about new amp that rotel is having(rb 1092) a lot lighter smaller and the price (2500$)seems not that bad either.how do i know that new one is going to sound better IM NOT SURE WHAT TO DO ??does any one out there listened to one already ???

[Kobus]

Nobody around here has listened to it yet. We are hoping for something soon. If the 1092/1 is even slightly better than the 1077, then it is going to be a tough call. I would go 1092 even if the sound is the same as the 1077....i think.

Kobus

ps: what is the rest of your setup.

[ecthelion]

its not much of a setup i i'm into 2 channel i have marantz sr 8500 & klipsch rf7 just want to go separates and improve thats all

[ProStereo]

I would go with the RB-1090, it's long proven to be one of the best amps out there today, and Stereophile has said probably one of the best amps ever in performance and value. It's gotten very hot press and reviews, even amongst some of the best.

Digital Amps still have ways to go before they develope into what the best analogs amps can do today. Many are certain they will get there but time will be needed before it's there, as digital brings many new issues into the equation that has to be dealt with, we have just begun into the baby stages of digital, stay safe and go with the RB-1090 and give the digital technology time to develope, out of the gamma stage.

The RB-1090 has a remarkable stunning sound with the Klipsch RF-7's as you will read here in Club Rotel and the Klipsch forums from many who run those configurations. It's a combination that is very hard to beat amongst anything else without spending 5 to 8x the cost, if even then.

[grit]

I did demo the 1091x2 the other day and compared it to the 1080 (a more detailed post is in this thread.). I'd keep with the 1090.

[spkerguy]

I'm in a similar predicament to the original poster. I'm going to be upgrading my HT from 5.1 to 7.1 and am wondering how to proceed. I am using an old lexicon DC-1 as a processor which I'll upgrade once a new one comes out. I currently have a Rotel 1095 and am powering Energy Veritas (2.4is in the front, and veritas center and rears). I like the sound coming from the 1095 but want to add the extra 2 channels.

Option number 1: I was thinking about getting the new digital 1092 and using it to power the fronts. Getting 2 1091s for the fronts is also an idea as well. The 1095 would then power the center, sides and rears.

Option number 2 selling the 1095 and getting a 1077 to power the sides, center and rears while using a 1092 to power the fronts.

Having the idea of a smaller amp would please the WAF and would make it easier in the future to move those heavy guys, but I absolutely do not want to take a step backwards in 2-channel sound quality (about 50% of my listening).

What does everyone think on here?

Thanks,

Ken

[spkerguy]

ALso,
Here is an article that I found interesting. Although I'm still trying to make sense of it!

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/audioprinciples/amplifiers/digital_classD_amplifiers.html

[ALS]

The RB-1090 has a remarkable stunning sound with the Klipsch RF-7's as you will read here in Club Rotel and the Klipsch forums from many who run those configurations. It's a combination that is very hard to beat amongst anything else without spending 5 to 8x the cost, if even then.

You are right ProStereo, BTW which pre you are using with 1090?.

I own Klipsch RF3 & RB991. One of my audiophile friend moded this 991 (power supply & by pass Caps etc) & it's sounding well with RF3. I'm planning to upgrade the amp to 1090 form 991.

[abqnmusa]

I do hope Rotel finds success with their new digital amps. I suspect Rotel has taken the time to do the job right.

Personally, I chose to buy a new RB-1090 last week over the option of the 1092 or two 1091's. I was choosing an upgrade for the fine RB-1080 amp I was using. The speakers are B&W 802 S3's.

The result ...

I find the 1090 has more headroom than the 1080. I assume that is the result of extra power and the 1090's handling of 4 ohm loads. The 802's can offer less than an 8 ohn load under dynamic musical conditions. Sudden music or effects in movies are more pronounced and stronger in depth & volume. The music reproduced by the 1072 CD player with the 1090 has better control over the bass cones of the 802 with more defined bass notes.

The RB-1090 is a fine match for the B&W Nautilus 802 S3 speakers

[Race Car Driver]

Thats good to hear, same delema Ive been in.
Wanting new amp/amps for my N802's.
Was looking at the 1091s or poss a 1090.
Something about nice heavy paperweights have my attention.
Im american, i like things big and heavy!...... cept my women :T

May I whats the retail on the 1090?
Thanks

[Joey_V]

$2k.

[Andrew M Ward]

I would go with the RB-1090, it's long proven to be one of the best amps out there today, and Stereophile has said probably one of the best amps ever in performance and value. It's gotten very hot press and reviews, even amongst some of the best.

Digital Amps still have ways to go before they develope into what the best analogs amps can do today. Many are certain they will get there but time will be needed before it's there, as digital brings many new issues into the equation that has to be dealt with, we have just begun into the baby stages of digital, stay safe and go with the RB-1090 and give the digital technology time to develope, out of the gamma stage.

The RB-1090 has a remarkable stunning sound with the Klipsch RF-7's as you will read here in Club Rotel and the Klipsch forums from many who run those configurations. It's a combination that is very hard to beat amongst anything else without spending 5 to 8x the cost, if even then.

I completely disagree,
I just wanted to say that, although the RB1090 is long proven (and all that) I believe that if preconceived notions were placed aside and blindfolds were used instead, we would all be buying RB1092,

(BTW: Class D is not digital, as implied by the quoted poster above)

Class D is a sufficiently mature technology and had multiple generations, development and testing that we should all be past the bug hunt stage and into the personal discovery portion of our journey...

The whole "stay safe" notion is becoming tiresome (frankly exhausting)

Just my 2 cents

[Joey_V]

I completely disagree,
I just wanted to say that, although the RB1090 is long proven (and all that) I believe that if preconceived notions were placed aside and blindfolds were used instead, we would all be buying RB1092,

(BTW: Class D is not digital, as implied by the quoted poster above)

Class D is a sufficiently mature technology and had multiple generations, development and testing that we should all be past the bug hunt stage and into the personal discovery portion of our journey...

The whole "stay safe" notion is becoming tiresome (frankly exhausting)

Just my 2 cents

What makes you say that? Have you heard both blindfolded?

[Kevin D]

What makes you say that? Have you heard both blindfolded?

Knowing Andrew, most likely he has..

Kevin D.

[mattburk]

Well if that is the case, How about a good review?

[Andrew M Ward]

Well,
I haven’t blindfolded myself before listening to them....

But I have free and easy access to both amplifiers and they are both (within reason) exceptional products. The RB1090 has a great track record and I would hate for folks to think I don't just love it...

But to say:

"Digital Amps still have ways to go before they develope into what the best analogs amps can do today. Many are certain they will get there but time will be needed before it's there, as digital brings many new issues into the equation that has to be dealt with, we have just begun into the baby stages of digital, stay safe and go with the RB-1090 and give the digital technology time to develope, out of the gamma stage."

I don't know much about "digital" amplifiers like this guy does... but I know that class D amplifiers are pretty incredible when executed properly.

As he says above: we have just begun the baby stages of digital

This could not be more incorrect, in fact there have been generation after generation after generation of class D development... I repeat; it is a sufficiently mature technology that we should be past the bug hunt stages and long into the realm of personal discovery... That means we should be listening to them and reading about them before we make broad (incorrect) blanket statements about them, misinforming people who are looking for true answers to real questions.... and what’s the "gamma stage" ?

Then he says:
Many are certain they will get there but time will be needed before it's there, as digital brings many new issues into the equation that has to be dealt with

"Digital brings many issues" here he is talking about the RB1092 (which he's never heard) and calling this class D PWM design a digital amp.... insert game show wrong answer buzzer sound...

Guys,
I just don't get the scare tactics? .... Why?

And what are the issues with class D amplifiers, if you're going to call them out as not very good, then at least explain why they are not very good....

Anyway, I just think people should give them a serious listen because in so many ways they are a vastly superior design concept than traditional Caps and Torroid A/B amplifier.

For just one example: The RB1092 is stable (perfectly stable) at 2 ohms, and it wattage doubles as resistance halves (nice) to build a traditional amplifier to be stable at 2 ohms costs so much money it's prohibitive... this effortless wattage doubling characteristic of Class D has a cool wide-open powerful kind of feel to it, the way Class D amplifiers control speakers is phenomenal.

:Z

[Kevin D]

I just don't get the scare tactics? .... Why?

And what are the issues with class D amplifiers, if you're going to call them out as not very good, then at least explain why they are not very good....

I don't get it either. Everyone that has listened to the 1077 or 1091 has never hated it. A good majority like it. Those that don't state that while it doesn't fit what they are looking for, they can see it's a good amp.

Of course people still curse CD's and class a/b amps today..

Kevin D.

[Indytown]

Well if that is the case, How about a good review?

I think it would be a time consuming task to say the least. Sonic signatures change from speaker to speaker, amp to amp, etc.

One could give a generalization compared to a CAM 400, MAC 501, KRELL 450, Bryston 7B SST, etc.

All these amps sound different hooked up to BW 804, 803, 802 and 800D speakers, especially to the 800D.

Think about it:

CAM 400 hooked up to 5 different speakers.
MAC 501 hooked up to 5 diferent speakers.

Get the idea.

Then throw in the type of music you like to listen to 80% of the time.

And finally the room you have to live with.


Just some thoughts.

Indy