Flagship Receiver vs the Outlaw 950??? (1 Viewer)

[Chip E]

I've had a 5803 for almost three weeks now and it sounds pretty damn good too me with the amps that are in it. Quite happy.. it's a monster of a receiver!

 

[AntonS]

i used the 5800 as a pre/pro (with the outlaw 750) and as a sole receiver. as a pre/pro, it's not bad but definitely NOT a 950 processor.

True, it does not make any sense comparing a receiver with a pre/pro+external amp. What would make sense is to compare a mid-grade receiver (which would in many cases be cheaper than the 950) + amp with the 950 + amp.

Well... you know what makes me really skeptical? You mentioning that single Cirrus DSP chip can really outperform dual Denon's SHARKs. It's just seems physically hardly possible. So to me, there must be something else that biased your opinion. Is it possible that you during your [mere, only, just] 2 hour test did not set the Denon up properly?

 

[Tony Lai]

It could well be that you just prefer the Cirrus presentation of a surround field more than the A/D SHARC.

If you're talking about pure analog pass or the Cirrus vs. Burr Brown DAC (I'm pretty sure the 5800 has BB), that's something else.

T.

 

[JaleelK]

I plan on doing some sound comparisons in the next couple of weeks to see for myself how they compare sound wise.

When you take the time out to do these comparisons, please make sure that they are at least blind and level matched, as to eliminate any type of bias influencing the comparison test results.

 

[Aslam Imran]

It could well be that you just prefer the Cirrus presentation of a surround field more than the A/D SHARC.

Who cares cirrus presentation or sharc presentation, they should both be implementing the surround fields as specified by Dolby or DTS algorithms, right?

If it was all about DACs and DSPs then why does the Ref 30 sound superior to the 5800 preamp (connected to the same amp) when it has motorola 24 bit processing compared to the dual 32 bit sharc processing in the 5800? I think we should stop paying attention to how much processing a given preamp does and instead be concerned only with the sound coming out of it. After all the processors are one of the cheapest parts of a preamp and yet we fret about them the most....dual differential...tri-mode...hammerhead sharcs..wow sounds high tech but the simplest things effect the sound more than the high-tech marketing terms will ever do. They however do affect peoples buying decisions as we all here know. Maybe thats why the Bose systems with their 'dual bandpass' and 'multiple waveguide' designs sell like hot cakes.

 

[AntonS]

Aslam,

I kind of agree with you. All modern DSPs are very similar in terms of processing. I was replying to this:

the processing from the outlaw's cirrus logic (latest) chip is far superior vs. denon's SHARC chips.

Which made me wonder what exactly the test was comparing and how it was done.