My review of the RMB 1077 & RB 1092 amps

[cfrizz]

Hi I'm new to posting on the board, but I've been a visitor for about 2 yrs.

Over the past 4 months I've been checking out the 2 above mentioned amps since I'm really attracted to the smaller size with the really big sound. Here are the reviews I posted on another board I frequent.

RMB 1077 review Posted Jan. 2006

I didn't know what to expect, but I figured if it is a Rotel it has to be good.
Well I couldn't have been more disappointed! The amp was attached to some B&W 70x somethings. I put in my Carly Simon Cape Cod concert and sat back and listened to 3 of her songs.

Then I had him switch to the 1095 amp. Well it was eye openning!

The first thing that is non existent in the 1077 is BASS! I know this disc inside & out & I could not hear any bass! The next thing I noticed is that Carly's vocals were EXTREMELY muddled, and the back up singers almost couldn't be heard!

Basically it sounded like background music, you could hear it but it didn't make you feel like you were there!

Once he switched over to the 90lb beast of the 1095, the life like YOU ARE THERE quality of the music was back! And I was able to hear this in under a minute!

Well I was hoping to consolidate & just get one box for all of my speakers, but it won't be happening! I won't settle for the 1077. it might sound great as a home theater amp, but if you're like me & need an amp to do both music & movies, than for right now you have to have one of the 80-100lb monsters!

Review of the RB 1092 posted today

I finally got to hear the Rotel RB 1092 2 channel 500 wpc digital amp.

NOW THEY ARE COOKING WITH GAS!

I listened to the the same pair of B&W that I listened to on my other 2 trips. I brought my Carly Simon, Hell Freezes Over & Heavy Organ cds with me.

I put in HFO & was blown away. Clear, clean & powerful was the response. It had good thump in the bass & the highs were crystal clear.

Then I put in my Carly Simon cd that the RMB 1077 failed so miserably with.
It passed with flying colors this time around! It sounded like she was right in front of me & I could finally hear the backup singers, and plenty of bass.

I'm going to write to Rotel & also post on the Rotel forum my findings & ask them to consider making a 5-7 channel 250-500 wpc digital amp.

From what Leland told me though, they are concentrating on updating their DVD players. They are recommending salespeople to sell 2 RB 1092's & 1 RB 1091 to make up the 5 channels.

I want to consolidate down to 1 amp not go up to 3! While it would make Rotel a lot of money having people buy 3 amps to just one, I'm sure I'm not the only person who would bypass this route & wait for someone else to come out with a powerful enough 5-7 channel digital amp.

So if you are looking for a lightweight very powerful 2 channel amp the RB 1092 just might make you very happy!

So those are my thoughts on these 2 amps. There is simply no substitute for lots of power, especially when you are driving full range tower speakers.

I have been a Rotel owner for 16 yrs & plan on staying one so long as they continue to put out good products.

Cathy

[Kevin D]

On the 1077, sounds like one of the speakers was hooked up out of phase. While not everyone likes it, no one has had the experience you had. The way you describe it (no bass, 'missing' items, and unclear vocals) is the same way one would describe speakers out of phase.

I would highly recomend a second demo.

Kevin D.

[Audiophiliac]

Yeah that cant be right. I have caught things in our demo rooms wired bass ackwards before. I dont know how someone who is trying to sell audio can overlook something like that, but I guess everyone makes mistakes.

[cfrizz]

These guys hook stuff up all day long. If there is no difference between the amps, then Rotel would simply make all of them 100 wpc.

I know that there is a major difference between my old 50 wpc amp and the 200 wpc amp I have driving my speakers now.

So it stands to reason that there would be a major difference between 100 wpc vs 500 wpc digital amps.

[Kevin D]

I'm not saying there shouldn't be a difference, I'm saying there shouldn't be a night and day difference between the 1077 and 1092. Rotel actually delayed the 1092 to get it to sound MORE like the 1077.

I'm also coming from experience, running a 1077 on basically B&W 7xx. My CDM 9's have more bass with the 1077 then they did with my old 1095.

Something just doesn't add up. If they hook stuff up all day, there's a greater chance they had an oops.

Kevin D.

[grit]

I have Aerial's... not well known around here. As far as difficulty to drive, rank them more difficult than B&W 803's. I tested the 1077, 1075, and 1095. The 1077 and 1075 did not have the "oomph" to drive them. It took the 200 wpc of the 1095 to pull it off.

All that being said, the 1075 use to drive my B&W 703's quite well. So, from my experience, the 1077 can't always match the power of the 1095. However, I don't understand why the 1077 would leave the 703's sounding like they were lacking bass either.

[DrJRapp]

cfrizz

I agree there had to be something amiss in the setup, perhaps it was speaker phasing.

While I admit that I don't have a lot of direct experience with a 1095. I do have a lot of experience with a RB 1080 which many have described as being essentially the same amp in a 2 channel package. When compared to the 1077 the 1080 doesn't sound like a much bigger amp. I would call the bass on both very comparable, with the edge in clarity and tightness going to the 1077. This comparison was done over a three month period of time in my own home with several different pairs of speakers. The reason that the 1077 does as well as, or even better than the 1080 in many circumstances is that it has the ability to track the impedance curve of a given speaker at low frequencies, allowing for maximum current transfer. I've actually had to move up to a 5 x 350 wpc amp by another manufacturer to get something that sounds substantially better than the 1077.

I've only listened to the 1092 once in a/b against the 1077 (on B&W 803D) and that was a brief audition. Under the conditions of that audition, at the levels we were listinging, it was difficult to tell the difference between the two amps.

[shadow]

Heard the 1091 monos yesterday with Martin Logan Vantages. Sounded quite good and they ran cold as a cucumber. I tend to agree that there must of been something wrong with the hookup of the 1077 for it to sound so different from a very similarly designed 1092. That is the danger of making a decision on one listening session. I would like to hear that amp at home to assure my initial impressions were valid.

[AVspec]

Strange how in this thread http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=19400 the exact opposite was found? They thought the 1092 did not sound nearly as good as the 1077? Sure does sound like incorrect connections. I wonder with the confusing polarity arrangement on the back of the 1077 that is throwing things off?

[DrJRapp]

I wonder with the confusing polarity arrangement on the back of the 1077 that is throwing things off?

I agree completely. Getting things right on the tiny back of the 1077 isn't an easy task at first. When I first got my 1077 I had hooked up the channels in reverse. I remember reporting this early on in my review as being the cause of a somewhat collapsed and confused soundstage.

[ecthelion]

does anyone listened to rb 1092 with klipsch rf 7 i would be really intrested how that combo works together?

[DrJRapp]

does anyone listened to rb 1092 with klipsch rf 7 i would be really intrested how that combo works together?

No, but I've spent a lot of time with the RF7s and 1077 and that combo was great. While I don't think you will ever need the brute force of the 1092 for the 7s, it's nice to know it's there if you trade up to something less efficient (as I did).

[audiocvk]

The well known reputation with the Klipsch RF-7's are, that the more high-watt/high quality amp you go, the better the Klipsch RF-7's perform and sound, as well as being able to handle the quick 2.8 ohm dips.

[audiocvk]

cfrizz, I agree......something sounds wrong. You should find out what the problem was, and take another listen to the 1077 and I think you will find you will have a different opinion about it, a better one!!! :T

[Joey_V]

"Sounded like background music"

This tells me there was something wrong with the setup.

Cfrizz.... nice to meet you outside the polk forum. :P

[Kobus]

cfrizz, as a 16 year supporter of Rotel you owe it to yourself to do another review.

[DrJRapp]

The well known reputation with the Klipsch RF-7's are, that the more high-watt/high quality amp you go, the better the Klipsch RF-7's perform and sound, as well as being able to handle the quick 2.8 ohm dips.

Sounds like you've been reading too much of Magoo over at the Klipsch forums. Yes the RF7s do present a challenging load to some amps. However, there is only one dip and it doesn't occur quickly. It occurs at the speakers resonant frequency of around 400 hz. That is exactly where the 1077 shines since it follows that dip well without loosing it's ability to preciselly transfer current. That is why I believe that at 100 wpc (actually 120 wpc to fl&fr) it performs better than the 200 wpc 1080.

[ecthelion]

i remember that you were using 1080 with rf7's in the past are you saying that 1077 and is't 100 per channel sounds better?

[audiocvk]

Sounds like you've been reading too much of Magoo over at the Klipsch forums. That is exactly where the 1077 shines - it performs better than the 200 wpc 1080.

No, I haven't been reading any Magoo postings. Just something I've heard word of mouth from many different people, I've never tested it myself so I will take your word for it. I also don't have any personal experience with the Klipsch RF-7 and 1077 so you have an advantage over me there.

However, I do know the sound of the Klipsch RF-7 and Rotel RB-1080, and with the RB-1090. The RF-7 really shines with the RB-1090, sings it's best! My experience with the Klipsch RF-7 so far has been to give it 200wpc or more..... the more the better with high quality gear, and the RF-7 just gets even better! I am sure the new Rotel amp offerings will do well with the RF-7's but I have not personally had the chance to check it out for myself with newest Rotel amps with RF-7's. I will have to compare the 1077, 1091, and 1092 with RF-7's when I can find the time.

[DrJRapp]

The RF7 with the 1077 was significantly better than with the 1080. In fact the 1077 was darn close to the performance of the RF7 with my Aragon 3005 (300 wpc@8ohms). The Aragon is much better at nuances and high end clarity than a 1080. My 1080 now serves to drive the center backs, and my RF7s now live elsewhere.

[cfrizz]

Hey Joey nice to see you too!

All right, I will go take another listen to the 1077 at some point soon.

However, no one yet has explained why if the 2 amps sound identical, then why was one made significantly more powerful & just for 2 channel.

[ecthelion]

good question!!!!!!!!!

[ecthelion]

i mean point

[Sim reality]

In one word: Marketing.

[DrJRapp]

no one yet has explained why if the 2 amps sound identical, then why was one made significantly more powerful & just for 2 channel.

One was made for typical HT the other for power guzzeling 2 channel speakers.

[RebelMan]

However, no one yet has explained why if the 2 amps sound identical, then why was one made significantly more powerful & just for 2 channel.

They do not sound identical. They each have their target audience one being primarily HT and the other stereo. However, the former turns out to be more musical than the latter. Rotel knows it, I know it, and most people that have conducted a comparison of the two know it. Like Jerry mentioned, the 1092 was built to deliver insane amounts of power, in a small package, but anyone who has been in this hobby long enough will tell you that more power does not necessarily mean more musical. Got SET?

[RebelMan]

The RF-7 really shines with the RB-1090, sings it's best!

There are a number of RF7 and RB-1090 owners on these boards that would agree with you.

[RebelMan]

Strange how in this thread http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=19400 the exact opposite was found? They thought the 1092 did not sound nearly as good as the 1077? Sure does sound like incorrect connections. I wonder with the confusing polarity arrangement on the back of the 1077 that is throwing things off?

Agreed. The connections are either out of phase (like others have already stated), or the (speaker side) pigtails are not properly utilized, or the (low frequency bi-wire) connections were so lose as to slip out. I have seen at least one of these three issues occur with just about evey dealer I have ever visited. Mistakes happen. Trust your dealer but verify the demos!

[DrJRapp]

Got SET?

Not yet....just DLP...lol

James

I was back to my dealer today to buy some new center back speakers and I again got to a/b the 1077 and 1092 on 803Ds in a 14x16 room. Damn they are too close sounding for me to ever say what you do about the differences.

[shep]

RB-1090 vs. RB-1092

finally paired my B&W 804s with a borrowed RB-1090 - now I have some idea what these speakers were meant to sound like... but my dealer still hasn't bothered to order a display model RB-1092. I am interested by the debate forming over the RB-1090 vs. RB-1092, but won't be able to compare side by side unless I look for another dealer that believes in stocking new products...

Without the ability to judge the two Rotels for myself, I am on the verge of moving to the 803s and an RB-1090 at the same time, saving digital for a future upgrade.

[DrJRapp]

Unless you are absolutely hell bent on having 400-500 watts, I think you'll find that a 1077 will do very well with both those speaker selections. Plus with 7 channels available, you can bi-amp you fronts and center with one amp!

My understanding from one Rotel dealer is that besides being big and heavy the 1090 is also a great heater for those cold winter nights.

[htsteve]

Bi-Amping with 1077

Dr JRapp,

Good suggestion on the 1077.

shep,

I just ordered a 1077. I have N804's and an HTM1 across the front. I plan on bi-amping these three with the 1077. They are currently powered by a 1095 and 1080 (no bi-amping currently). I spoke with Rotel about bi-amping with a 1077 vs moving up to 1092's or 1091's. He (Mike I think) felt that bi-amping the 804's was just as effective as the 109X's (and even that the 109X's were probably a bit of overkill).

My assessment (based on conversations with Rotel and dealers who have heard these amps) is that the 109X's are probably best served for the bigger members of the Nautilus family.

Hope this helps.

[bzrk]

Unless you are absolutely hell bent on having 400-500 watts, I think you'll find that a 1077 will do very well with both those speaker selections. Plus with 7 channels available, you can bi-amp you fronts and center with one amp!

My understanding from one Rotel dealer is that besides being big and heavy the 1090 is also a great heater for those cold winter nights.

how do i bi-amp my fronts? i have a 1068 prepro and a 1077 offcourse...

[audiocvk]

The RB-1090 amps that we have do not heat up, they get hardly even warm to the touch when running all day. I've actaully been very surprised at how cool they have been running here with 8 or 4ohm loads.

My choice would be to go with the RB-1090 but it's alway a good idea to listen with your ears and see what best suits you.

[audiocvk]

My assessment (based on conversations with Rotel and dealers who have heard these amps) is that the 109X's are probably best served for the bigger members of the Nautilus family.

Hope this helps.

Basically this is correct but there are benefits, it can also add better control in all aspects, especially at higher volumes, which is a must for the larger B&W speakers if you want the best out of them, that they can give!

Some are saying that the 1077 can give out as/or as much as the 1092 but I would have to hear it for myself to believe it.

[nikos]

how do i bi-amp my fronts? i have a 1068 prepro and a 1077 offcourse...

You need an RCA "Y" cable. The single sided end will go in the 1068 out and the the 2 other ends will feed two of 1077 channels. then you run a separate speaker wire from each of these 2 channels to the dual binding post at each front speaker. Make sure you remove the bar that is in the back of your speakers (that is used to short the binding post when you're only using one speaker cable...)

If your speakers dont have this I dont know how to do it...

Hope this helps.

Nikos

[bzrk]

yes this helps.

i thought i also had to change some settings on the 1068....

thnx

[gd]

If you're new to bi-amping, do a search on this forum.

What nikos described above is passive bi-amping, the easier of two methods... it may or may not yield discernible results.

Active bi-amping involves opening up the speaker, disabling its crossover, and adding / installing an outboard crossover which you set up yourself... this more complicated mod is said to produce better results, but a not-insignificant number of peple also report only modest improvements (or differences).

You don't really know until you try... but know your options.

It's never appealed to me... I'm reluctant to introduce more electronics into the chain, not to mention fiddling with a carefully(?)-designed speaker crossover -- all for an uncertain result... I usually opt for more powerful amplification.

But it is a 'tinkering' hobby...

[shep]

Dr JRapp,

Good suggestion on the 1077.

shep,

I just ordered a 1077. I have N804's and an HTM1 across the front. I plan on bi-amping these three with the 1077. They are currently powered by a 1095 and 1080 (no bi-amping currently). I spoke with Rotel about bi-amping with a 1077 vs moving up to 1092's or 1091's. He (Mike I think) felt that bi-amping the 804's was just as effective as the 109X's (and even that the 109X's were probably a bit of overkill).

My assessment (based on conversations with Rotel and dealers who have heard these amps) is that the 109X's are probably best served for the bigger members of the Nautilus family.

Hope this helps.

Both good suggestions. I have the RB-1070 now, but originally felt that it underwhelms the 804s. I don't listen at high volumes (rarely beyond 10 o'clock on an RC-1070 preamp), and the room is rather cozy ( 14 x 18 ). Was looking for better dynamics at lower listening levels, but have found that my existing amp stacks up pretty well (for the money) with the RB-1090. While I do hear an improvement with the 1090, I am wondering how much of a discount my dealer would have to give me before it would be worth it to upgrade. My next question for him is whether the 1080 would be the better match - would I get nearly as much an improvement...

Only if I do plan to eventually step up to the 803s would the 1090 (or the 1092, etc.) start being necessary... and as you said, it also makes a great space heater.

If I can find a place to listen to the 1077 and 109X, I will. Still have a few weeks to use the dealer demo before I need to return it and make a decision. I am sure that I won't regret a new stylish spaceheater, although it just may be overkill for my needs - thank god I installed a new dedicated 15 amp circuit before hooking this thing up, though... :roll:

[RebelMan]

... and as you said, it (RB-1090) also makes a great space heater.

Hmm, maybe we should qualify these statements with some empirical data? A cool amp better than a warm one??? Hmm... I doubt that. Some of the best sounding amps stand on the "warm" side of neutral (it's a double-entendre). :W

[DL86]

My 1090 barely heats up. I don't think it will act as much of a room heater.

[DrJRapp]

Hmm, maybe we should qualify these statements with some empirical data? A cool amp better than a warm one??? Hmm... I doubt that. Some of the best sounding amps stand on the "warm" side of neutral (it's a double-entendre). :W

Can't you guys EVER lighten up?!!!! You need to grow a better sense of humor.

[grit]

Can't you guys EVER lighten up?!!!! You need to grow a better sense of humor.

I thought it WAS a humerous post.

[audiocvk]

Can't you guys EVER lighten up?!!!! You need to grow a better sense of humor.

Take a deep breath, relax, exhale, now just relax and lighten up, it's going to be alright!

[shep]

Still thinking. Still wondering if I should just go with the 1090, and maybe do some A+B comparisons of the 804 and 803. Would take a big bite, but would be satisfying to make both upgrades (RB-1090 and B&W803) at once. Anyone compared the 804 and 803 using the RB-1090?