Rotel RB-1072 vs. RB-1080

[Bananaman]

Hi guys,

I an thinking about purchasing RC-1082 and RB-1072 or RB-1080. While RB-1080 has a very good reputation being proven over time and produces more power - 2 x 200W, RB-1072 should have a completely redone electronics and is one in Rotel's new series of D class amps.

It would drive Vandersteen 2CE Signature speakers that like a bit more power, and I usually listen to music at somewhat lover aplification levels.

Does anyone have any experiences comparing RB-1072 and RB-1080? What would you recommend? Classic one with more power or new D class?

Thanks in advance :T

Boris

[cug]

I haven't compared the two but I really want to, as Rotel is still in the race for me for upgrading.

The RB-1080 measures with around 290W/550W into 8/4 Ohm, while the RB-1072 measures around 130/250W (if it is comparable to the RMB-1077). So the 1080 has about twice the real power of the 1072, while the new digitals often have a bit flatter frequency response and both ends of the bands - which means more detailed high and punchier low freqs. Or, the other way around warmer and less "in the face".

All this doesn't mean one of them sounds better, just that they probably will sound different if no leveling is made with an EQ (what I personally don't want to do).

So, overall, I'm also really unsure with the choice - I'd like to see a 200W class D amp from Rotel but there is nothing in sight.

One other consideration that will be disregarded by most "audiophiles" here, but is an important topic for me: idle power consumption and efficiency is way better with the RB-1072. Meaning lower electricity bill and less "wasted" energy.

I also take the RB-1092 into consideration but I'm not sure about whether it's worth the money. Same is true for amps from other vendors.

And yes, I believe in amplifier sound - as long as they are NOT leveled in freq. response with a high qualiity EQ and complex analysis equipment. [1]

Conclusion: I'd buy a 200W class D Rotel right away. I'm not sure with the RB-1072, but I'm also not sure with the old RB-1080 - while this is certainly a very good amp, it represents yesterdays technology for me and I don't want to "waste" energy.

[1] http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

[Bananaman]

One more potential plus for RB-1080 - the balanced input. I would actually also like to try a Parasound Halo P3 with RB-1080 over balanced cable and, if possible, compare it to RC-1082 + RB-1072 over unbalanced. Not sure if I'll be able to get the P3 paired with RB-1080 before purchase, though.

[cug]

One more potential plus for RB-1080 - the balanced input.

As far as I know the Rotels might have balanced inputs but not a balanced design. Meaning they connect to the same connectors internally than the unbalanced inputs.

[Mikael]

Hi Cug
The RB-1080 measures with around 290W/550W into 8/4 Ohm, while the RB-1072 measures around 130/250W (if it is comparable to the RMB-1077). So the 1080 has about twice the real power of the 1072, while the new digitals often have a bit flatter frequency response and both ends of the bands - which means more detailed high and punchier low freqs. Or, the other way around warmer and less "in the face".

What does the last part of the last sentence describe (Or, the other way around warmer and less "in the face".) is it the RB 1072 or RB 1080?

If it is the RB 1072 it describes it is good news.I had a RB 1080 at one time but I fund it a bit to bright and not enough bass,so I got an RB 1090 much better but it is a big sucker and it uses a lot of current.

And I would buy a 200 watt class D on the spot if Rotel makes one.

[Bananaman]

I had a RB 1080 at one time but I fund it a bit to bright and not enough bass

Which preamp was it connected to? Rotel's?

[Ferres]

I have both a 1077 and a 1092. The 1092 really out shine the 1077. Exceptional performance.

I understand the 1072 is a 2 channel version of the 1077.

[Mikael]

It was connected to my RSP 1098.

[cug]

Or, the other way around warmer and less "in the face".

What does the last part of the last sentence describe (Or, the other way around warmer and less "in the face".) is it the RB 1072 or RB 1080?

That's probably the RB-1080. From the frequency response it falls a little bit back in the higher frequencies (from what I can see on that crappy graphs). Normally that means, it sounds warmer. If you still like it warmer - you'd need jacket ...

But that is actually guessing from the measurements I have seen where the 1080 was hard to read (too small) and it was not an RB-1072 I have referred to for the class D side, it was a RMB-1077

And I would buy a 200 watt class D on the spot if Rotel makes one.

As would probably others.

[cug]

I have both a 1077 and a 1092. The 1092 really out shine the 1077. Exceptional performance.

I understand the 1072 is a 2 channel version of the 1077.

Others see it the other way around. Like RebelMan wrote in a review, that he was totally disappointed.

But that's all just taste. As I said: nothing that can't be fixed with a good EQ (not that I want that, I prefer to find one I like without changing its sound).

[Ferres]

Others see it the other way around. Like RebelMan wrote in a review, that he was totally disappointed.

But that's all just taste. As I said: nothing that can't be fixed with a good EQ (not that I want that, I prefer to find one I like without changing its sound).

I've had the 1077 for a year before the 1092 came in. The 1092 produced layering of sound that allowed better distinction of individual instruments as well as better spacing between them. But I did notice that some CDs showed little benefit.

The more instruments in a recording the better you can tell the differences between the amps. Also the speaker itself should be more revealing.

[atchudy]

Could the RB-1072 power B&W Nautilus 803?

[miner]

Yes, but won't do them justice. At least 200w/ch minimum I would suggest.