finally upgraded

miner

Well, I finally upgraded the 2 ch system. Upgraded my Rotel RC-1070 pre to the RC-1090 pre and the RB-1070 amp to the new digital RB-1092. I thought my system was good before - it is unbelievable now. Rotel did their homework on their new digital amps. My B&W 804 Nautilus are singing happily now. I suppose my 'old' system will get relegated to the BR now.

Ferres

Cool!

I'm thinking about this amp myself. I like it's size/power ratio. A lot easier to place compared to the heavy 'Toroidal' types. Plus the lower power consumption doesn't hurt a bit.

Btw; is the RB-1092 bi-wired?

miner

The RB-1092 does have dual binding posts. It does not have balance connections though for pre but does for CD.

Joey_V

Wonder how the 1092 compares to the analog king - the 1090....

Ferres

miner wrote:

The RB-1092 does have dual binding posts. It does not have balance connections though for pre but does for CD.

Miner, Cool! I wanted to keep my bi-wire set-up and 500 watts would be plenty for the job.:D

Joey, there are some varied opinions on the 1092. Some still prefer the 1090 and feel the 1092 sounstage is too far forward for their liking and require some 'tow-in'. But part of the consideration should also include the size/power/heat/weight of the 1092 compared to the 1090.

Note that some of the nay sayers are Nautilus owners but since your using 'Martin logans' this type of amp my benefit you more. Electrostatics do like a lot of power. :P

Joey_V

Ferres wrote:

Miner, Cool! I wanted to keep my bi-wire set-up and 500 watts would be plenty for the job.:D

Joey, there are some varied opinions on the 1092. Some still prefer the 1090 and feel the 1092 sounstage is too far forward for their liking and require some 'tow-in'. But part of the consideration should also include the size/power/heat/weight of the 1092 compared to the 1090.

Note that some of the nay sayers are Nautilus owners but since your using 'Martin logans' this type of amp my benefit you more. Electrostatics do like a lot of power. :P

Thanks for the input...

I wonder what this "forward" sound is, do you mean the stage is deeper and the singer is more upfront or is it that the vocals are more prominant and more "pierce-y ala Klipsch"?

If the 1092 beats the 1090 in soundstage (which is my favorite aspect of music reproduction), then I guess that's where my pennies go.

Ferres

More the former, Joey. But there is still the required burn in time to tone it down, 72 hrs I believe.

According to some reviewers, the soundstage is more upfront. Like the singer is on your lap, so they say. Not sure if that's a bad thing though.

This could be more an issue of 'power' rather than 'fault'. I noticed that as you put more watts on a speaker the sound pushes further out of the box. Not too many have experience with 500watt/channel amps. :P

Always better to give 'em a side by side demo with electrostat speakers. :P

Link to related forum;
http://www.htguide.com/forum/forumdisplay.php4?f=20