We are expecting too much from our new equipment. (1 Viewer)

[Jed M]

I've always said that the amps in ANY receiver are no better than a 100x5 and 120x2 combo from pretty much any amp mfg

Ricky, I agree, blanket statements are misleading. I try to refrain myself.

 

[Ricky T]

Jed,

I started a very long thread last year (which is now deleted from the archives) entitled “What are the power amp equivalents of the biggest receivers?” Anyone remember?

In it, I challenged anybody that a 100x5 and 120x2 amp combo (usually 40+ and 20+ pounds each) was not at least as good as any receiver when you compare: impedances down to 4 ohms, 20 – 20k hz (not just 1k hz), all channels driven, transformer size, output devices per channel, etc. There were lots of posting, but in the end, no one even came close to challenging this statement. Aslam’s comparison between the denon 5803 (arguably the most powerful receiver) and the Outlaw 770 is so drastic that one can see a baby 770 with half the power rating, transformer size, output devices, etc is the equal of the 5803

 

[Jed M]

Ricky, I was not arguing your point. Forget it. I don't care to discuss what constitutes a good blanket statement and what constitutes a bad blanket statement. If that is sincerely your reason for having a problem with Outlaw then fine.

 

[NickSP]

WOW! So much hype for this product, even Outlaw could have not bought this kind of hype that is generated on this forum for this product. Is it even available for shipping yet?

 

[John Tompkins]

Jed,

Nobody has a problem with the 950. If a product is good for the price then thats great.

The issue is how other components are being compared to the 950.It will beat this, it will beat that, blah blah. Then when people ask with what and how they were evaluated to other components that this is some how unreasonable. Let me put it this way (and yes I havent heard the 950) The 950 is NOT the equal to some of the other pre's/receievers it has been compared to. No matter what the 950 is, it will never grow logic 7, ulta2 processing, thx, tweakability, bass enhance, vocal enhance, re-eq, music logic, video component video switching,built in eq, independent speaker adjustments,pronto remote,amps, tri-field, auto room calibration etc.

For those of you that choose the 950, congrats its a great deal!...For those that chose to pay 2x3 times more and get the lex, anthem, meridian, denon 5803,rotel, pioneer 47/49 tx, congrats you did get what you paid for. And for those that choose to use a mid level reciever hk, denon, marantz,sony,yamaha,rotel, congrats you got great bang for the buck as well and can always add an external amp down the road.

Some peoples gee-gaws are other peoples needed features.

 

[Mike Knapp]

The 950 is NOT the equal to some of the other pre's/receievers it has been compared to.

Please qualify "equal" if you wouldnt mind.

See my problem is that many feel the Outlaw is inferior (sound wise) simply because it lacks the gee-gaws. In reality it is just different, not inferior. Conversely the others are not inherently "better" simply because they have the gee-gaws.

A good case in point would be the Bottlehead pre-amp and Wave AV8 amp combo. It is cheaper than even the most budget minded receiver and has way, way, way, less features, in fact it has no features at all.(you even have to balance it out manually)...and yet it will steal the receivers lunch money, its seat on the bus and its girlfriend, give it a wedgie and then proceed to kick sand in its face before bitch slapping it to the curb when it comes to 2 channel audio quality.

Features do not alone a superior processor make. It really is that simple. They may make it more useful to some...but they dont necessarily make it better. That is the point many seem to miss, and the one I have been trying to make with little success.

In essence, just because it lacks some features does not make it inferior sound wise. If you buy your gear for reasons other than sound quality then you must consider all the options.

Mike

 

[Jed M]

No matter what the 950 it will never grow logic 7, ulta2 processing, thx, tweakability, bass enhance, vocal enhance, re-eq, music logic, video component video switching,built in eq, independent speaker adjustments,pronto remote,amps, tri-field, auto room calibration etc.

Thanks, I did not realize that.
I am done with this thread I guess we will have to agree to disagree about the Outlaw. You can have the last word.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

Will- My fear with the Outlaw's performance being so good, and the price so low, that *some* manufacturers might not put out a competing product because they wouldn't be able to compete on price and/or performance.
But I have a hope, that the market (that has always been there by the way! ) that the Outlaw is stimulating, becomes enticing to others.
Mike- Why get rid of the Marantz monoblocks? What are you going to use to power your pre/pro? (Sorry if I missed this referred to earlier.)

 

[John Tompkins]

Thanks for letting me have the last word Jed and I'm glad I could straighten you out on the 950's missing features
As far as the thread link that you have as an example, if you read it you would know that I was stating that I was tired of all the "official" threads that had been popping up and therefore injected a little of my unique brand of humor by making an "official" who cares thread..But again thanks for the last word.
Mike,
define equal ? hmmm, well how bout this, 5 gee-gaws and a partridge in a pear tree against.... 3 french hens and two turtle doves ?

 

[Mike Knapp]

Kevin,
I am using the Outlaw 770 amp. I use 4 ohm speakers and it will give me 300X7 into 4 ohms. I loved the Marantz amps but I would have needed two more of them and still only gotten 180 watts per. Plus the "feature" of fitting all 7 channels of amplification into one shelf was appealing.
Mike

 

[Mike Knapp]

A brief word about the hiss people are hearing. I switched my input to DVD, left the DVD player off, boosted the volume to full reference (0 db) and I couldnt hear squat as close as 4 inches from my speakers. It just isnt there in my system.

Mike

 

[Tung Enkhych]

How many people do you know that will have a multitude of 1-3K processors and receivers lying around to do a head to head A/B? What you seek is positively un-reasonable.
---------------------------------------------------
How about retailers?...Ooops ,used that ugly word again!

two questions:
1.) don't almost all Japenese rcvrs use current limiting amps?
2.) aren't most rcvrs REAAAALY skimping on their pre-out sections components and quality?
c.) aren't most seperate amps non-current limiting ?

 

[Steve K.H.]

Steve,
Why is a top receiver's processing automatically inferior?

I don't know, cuz I didn't write that, did I? (read the post again)
---
With apologies to all, the obvious was overlooked in my previous post...
...expect EVERYONE to have an opinion (as evidenced by this thread.)

 

[Aslam Imran]

aren't most seperate amps non-current limiting ?

YESSS!!!

 

[John Tompkins]

Features do not alone a superior processor make. It really is that simple. They may make it more useful to some...but they dont necessarily make it better. That is the point many seem to miss, and the one I have been trying to make with little success.

Mike,

I agree with you on two channel setups and the bottlehead, it really does bitch slap some high dollar processors around. The only features that some may find important here are a remote control and HT bypass loop, both very handy. Thats why I sold the bottlehead and bought a anthem 2lpre, but the bottlehead matches the anthems sonics, no doubt.

Having said that I must totally disagree about ht processors. First of all it gets much more complicated. As many as 10 different speakers for starters(auto-room calibration very handy here). Plus most everybody doesnt have a perfect setup and needs some room correction(maybe eq, tilt controls, independent speaker settings), maybe you have a bright setup(re-eq) handy here, maybe you need a little vocal boost for whatever reason(vocal enhance) handy, maybe you want stereo bass(bass enhance) handy..

If I brought my lex to your house and took ten minutes to set the basics up and then compared to the 950 then most likely the two will sound fairly equal. On the other hand if you brought your 950 to my house and did your complete setup(wouldnt take long as there are hardly no adjustable parameters) and compared it to my totally tweaked in lex(can take months to get to know all its tweaks and adjustments) I would bet that the 950 couldnt keep up(only stands to reason)not to mention turning on logic 7...This is just my opinion and not meant to denegrat the 950 in anyway..

 

[Mike Knapp]

John,

I agree with you mostly. You see, I have the same speakers (exact same drivers) all around, each channel is placed the same distance from the seating position (in other words my mains are the same distance from the seat as the center 11', and the side surrounds are the same distance, both 13', and the rear surrounds are equally spaced as well both at 16') so a per channel (not per speaker) delay works great for me.

I have a 5 channel EQ to balance my frequency responses and take care of room problems. I have a parametric EQ on my sub.

In essence I have taken the time and care to get the rest of the system right BEFORE expecting the processor to apply first aid to an ailing system. I truly dont need all the features everyone else does and I for one, am glad there is a product that doesnt have them on the chassis (for my own sonic beliefs) and so I dont have to pay for gee-gaws that I have really have no need for.

Mike

 

[John Tompkins]

Fair enough, a close to perfet setup, your a lucky man
Sounds like the perfect environment for logic 7 to thrive

 

[Gerard Martin]

Mike
I think you may have lost sight in what
the forum is all about. Its fellow members (not a peanut gallery)
asking others more knowledgeable for assistance. There is no
such thing as a stupid question only
stupid answers. If in your opinion those
you consider a (peanut galley) have a
question they don,t know that you consider below your expertise
would suggest you ignore it
not criticize them. Not everyone was born a genius or at least think they are. Best regards.

 

[Eric Sevigny]

I would like to know how many considers "upgradability" worth the price the Pre/Pros who have it demands. When I first began looking at separates, upgradability seemed the first and foremost thing I should look for (even before sound quality). But now I am truly wondering WHY... I don't plan on adding any other speakers to my current 5.1 setup, it doesn't seem like DD and DTS 5.1 will dissapear for good anytime soon and I could very well do without fancy processing (THX and all). Is 6.1, 7.1 THX or more really that important for the future? Is there more to upgradability then adding fancy surround processing modes?

PS: Haven't bought any Pre/Pros yet, still using my Yamaha receiver.

EDIT : Just mentionning it since some have holded non-upgradability against the Outlaw.

 

[Mike Knapp]

Jerry,
The "peanut gallery" I referred to was not those asking questions. It really should read "peanut gallery questioning the features...."
Sorry for that confusion

Its fellow members (not a peanut gallery) asking others more knowledgeable for assistance.

When it comes to this Outlaw processor, that is most decidedly NOT what is happening.
I see you are in Florida. Close to Tampa? Wanna hear the Outlaw in person? Send me an E-mail.
Mike "genius" Knapp