meridian 561 WAY better than outlaw 950!! (1 Viewer)

[ling_w]

I guess I just mistakenly thought that the Meridian Trifield mode was somewhat like the Logic 7 mode which also has been touted as merely "extracting ambience" when generating those last two channels.

Trifield's claim to fame is not from putting those out of phase stuff into the rear or side channels. It is a algorithm that add a center channel signal passed through a pinnae modifier, re-synthesize the LCR signal so that it works in conjunction with each other to simulate a wavefront reproduction system.

Break down outlaw's price down, the 2ch analog section in a $900 piece of unit that has 8 ADC, 8 DAC, a bunch of DSP processing capability, tons of video switching and 8ch of analog preamp. You end up with probably $30 worth of 2ch analog preamp. You can't even get a Nobel potentiometer for that price.

 

[John Morris]

John, good to see you got your hands on a tube component. I'm rolling Mullards, Telefunken, and Radioteque 12AX7's, 5751, and 12AU7's at the moment. Where did you get your hands on the 5751 Sylvania's?

Frank: Actually, I also have a non goldbrand Sylvania 5751 too but it is the very specific NOS Gold, triple blackplate mica that shines. And, my MG Head OTL amp only takes one of these, so I bought one used from a guy who just bought the last bunch of these from a guy on Ebay. My second favorite tube is a NOS GE JG5751 and my third by a hair is an old NOS RCA Blackplate Command Tube. Someone else mentioned Triode Electonics and I also should give them some props. They are absolutely fantastic to deal with and have given me credit for a tube that was faulty(occasionally due to user error) way before I even mailed it back to them. This last time, I finally found that the microphonics that I heard from a new tube from them disappeared when I wiggled the tube more securely into it's socket. I've since decided to keep it... well beyond the day when they credited me for that tube and they still have not re-charged me for it... gotta call them tomorrow again.
Anyway, I am once again learning to re-appreciate tubed components after souring on them with the emergence of the digital music age. I've started to learn that tubed gear can be musical, AND sometimes extend flatly into both freq extremes.

 

[Saurav]

It's not being marketed as an alternative to SS; it's being marketed as higher end than SS.

OK, that makes more sense. I apologize if any of my statements give off such an impression. IMO, at their best, both tube and SS can sound excellent, and it comes down to a matter of taste.

Traditionally, I could understand "tube amp = high end" in the sense that since only a very few enthusiasts bought tube products, the manufacturers only built stuff for that niche market. However, that certainly does not make them "higher end" than SS gear. And some recent tube gear manufacturers are changing the snobbishness that tubes are often associated with.

As for digital - I prefer the sound of vinyl on my TT to the sound of CDs on my CD player. Of course, my TT + cartridge costs more than my CD player, so that's not a fair comparision. Also, I have a few LPs that were cut from digital masters, and I think they sound great. So, digital technology by itself isn't 'bad', IMO, I just happen to not like the redbook CD implementation, at the level of gear that I can afford. The little I've heard of SACD has been very impressive. I still preferred vinyl on that system, but only because of my tastes - there were many areas in which the SACD version was better than the LP.

 

[John Morris]

I happened into something tonight by chance actually that solves this problem. I was comparing dacs in the lex via ta-p9000es bypass and the cambridge 500se dacs via input one on the ta-p. Well first of all I volumed matched and was able at the push of the ta-p button to a/b them, Guess what..absolutely no difference!

JT: Please give me some more detail on what you have done. What is the source unit in these tests and how are you feeding the outboard DAC and the Lex? I understand that you are using the 5.1 bypass input of the P9K for the Lex, but are you saying that you are using the "A" 5.1 input of the P9K for the 5.1 Cambridge DAC output, or instead are using the P9K 2 channel bypass input? Sorry, but I am not familiar with the Cambridge DAC unit, so I am confused as to what you are comparing, or trying to accomplish. Sorry.

 

[John Morris]

Trifield's claim to fame is not from putting those out of phase stuff into the rear or side channels. It is a algorithm that add a center channel signal passed through a pinnae modifier, re-synthesize the LCR signal so that it works in conjunction with each other to simulate a wavefront reproduction system.

Ling: So, to translate... are you saying that the Meridian uses a really cool software algorithm which uses sound processing chips or chipsets to produce a really good sounding front soundfield from ordinary 2 channel CDs?

 

[John Morris]

Hey, don't get me wrong. I had an Audible Illusion Modulus tube preamp. After hearing Meridian's music modes, the preamp was put to retirement.

Ling: Do you still have this preamp and was it a Mod 3? If so, does it have the onboard phono preamp and finally, do you want to sell it? Just wondering.... as I look for a better yet much more affordable phono preamp...

 

[ling_w]

Ling: So, to translate... are you saying that the Meridian uses a really cool software algorithm which uses sound processing chips or chipsets to produce a really good sounding front soundfield from ordinary 2 channel CDs?

Yes, as in my earlier post, Stereophile and Secret's use the Trifield mode almost exlcusively on 2ch sources.
But to go into more detail, Trifield, developed by Bob Stuart and Michael Gerzon, who is the inventor of Ambisonic.
Ambisonic (available on the Meridian processor) is a recording/playback process that
1. Records the sound in WXYZ vectors instead of discrete channels. It records periphonic information (3-dimensions)
2. Playback is based on the human auditory model of time arrival difference between the ear on sound source that is off centered in addition to the usual loudness differnece between the ear.
3. Does not dictate number of playback channels, but have carrier channels.
4. Playback channels are re-synthesized based on the original WXYZ information and placement of the speakers.
5. Number of playback channels are determined based on processor. Some allows as much as 32 ch playback, including multiple height speakers.
Trifield, on the other hand, is a playback only algorithm that utilize bullet point 2 from above.
Since the human hearing model relies on time arrival differences (ITD) in addition to loudness difference (ILD) between the ear (in additon to head modifier of sound.) But pretty much all multi-track recording only utilize loudness difference between the 2 speakers to simulate a soundstage, tricking our ear to thing there is a L-R soundfield. Some purist recording tries to preserve the ITD in a recording, some exaggerate (spaced-omnis.) But during playback, there is no way for the recording engineer to know how your speakers are place, so frequently playback are compromised.
Trifield takes a recording that tricks us using only half the methods the way we perceive sound and add another the other one. So what we hear more represents how we really hear.
Here is what SMR has to say:
http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/ces2.../page_06.shtml
"Most disappointing was the demo's omission of Trifield processing, which creates a rock-solid frontal soundstage and very natural surround enhancement from any two-channel source—Trifield may not be new technology, but it remains one of Meridian's strongest assets, given the vast amount of music recordings that can benefit from it, and there are still plenty of people who have never heard it."
Or if you want to examine the patent, it is PN/5,594,800 and could be viewed here:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...S=PN/5,594,800
Basically if you don't want or need trifield, don't get Meridian.
John,
It is a Modulus 2D. I am probably going to deploy it in a 2ch system somewhere, although my wife always hated the 1 min warmup time and the individual volume control.

 

[Larry B]

Frank:

I would have to say that after listening to a few pre/pro's with "Analog Bypass" and also 2 channel preamps that there can be definite noticable differences between their line stages so all pre/pro's with Analog Bypass do not sound the same, IMO.

I can't speak for others, but that certainly doesn't come as a surprise to me.

Larry

 

[Larry B]

Ling:

Break down outlaw's price down, the 2ch analog section in a $900 piece of unit that has 8 ADC, 8 DAC, a bunch of DSP processing capability, tons of video switching and 8ch of analog preamp. You end up with probably $30 worth of 2ch analog preamp. You can't even get a Nobel potentiometer for that price.

We may be in a minority here, but I'm with you 100%.
Larry

 

[Scott Oliver]

ling and Larry B,

I have got to chime in here and give you my support as well. The Outlaw is a great bang for your buck piece, but try and compare it to processors by the likes of Meridian, Theta, and a few others it is just not close.

If my budget was $2000, then the Outlaw would certainly be near the top of the list, heck even up to $3000 it would warrant a good listen. But if you are looking for the very best, the Outlaw just cannot do that at its price level.

As ling stated you can only fit so much into a box for only $900. Yes you do pay dealer and distributor costs with non direct mail order companies products, but it is not like if the Meridian 561 were a sold directly that it would retail for $900.

 

[Patrick R. Sklenar]

Scott,
errr ... Ling was the one to make the comparison. The others spoke to say, as you just have, that that wasn't really a fair, nor equal comparison. I've not read any posts suggesting that the Outlaw 950 is the equal or superior of the Meridian. And then the "discussion" progressed into one that, as I understand it, seems to be about the difference in technology decisions (e.g.; all digitial vs analog bypass, etc).

 

[Mike Nep]

Sorry to say this but you pretty much torched yourself on this one. Apples to apples, oranges to oranges.

 

[Gifford L]

This is curious to me.
On the one hand we have people saying that the 950 sounds better than a Ref 30 and DC2 and as good as an MC1 which though dated is no slouch and sold for 6K. I've even seen reports that in sonics it is right up there with the MC12 that sells for 9K.
On the other hand when someone says the 5k entry level Meridian sounds way better everyone is like duh look at the price difference.
So what do we learn about how it stacks up against the best pres in the upper classes? I don't know yet maybe that the
outlaw 950=MC1, and 950 < Meridian 561, therefore, Meridian > Lexicon?
I'm just kidding of course. Try telling that to a lexicon fan
I do hope this pre amp is compared to more high end pieces and compared to the above pieces by more people as well.

 

[John Morris]

On the one hand we have people saying that the 950 sounds better than a Ref 30 and DC2 and as good as an MC1 which though dated is no slouch and sold for 6K. I've even seen reports that in sonics it is right up there with the MC12 that sells for 9K. On the other hand when someone says the 5k entry level Meridian sounds way better everyone is like duh look at the price difference.

NO ONE would expect that any $900 unit should or could compete sonically with a $12K, $6K, $5K, or even a $2K processor. That's why it is so suprisingly nice to hear from folks who say that in their test, it did. Still, only YOU can make that decision for yourself... no one else can do it for you. It might be fun to speculate or ponder how you think it might compare based on other's experiences, still, it all is really just that, speculation.

Why not check it out for yourself and then Let us know what YOU heard.

 

[John Tompkins]

: Please give me some more detail on what you have done. What is the source unit in these tests and how are you feeding the outboard DAC and the Lex? I

John,

The cambridge via analog out(using cambridge dac) to the tap two channel bypass and the cambridge out via the digital to the lex(using lexs dac)then connected to the tap 5.1 bypass. Theres no apreciable difference when volume matched(I mean none!). Able to hit button on tap remote for instant comparision.

Second point, You can use another source(bottlehead-cambridge dac) hooked up to the tap 2 channel bypass. At the same time you still have your source(cambridge) hooked up digitally to the lex. You still get sub bass from the lex digitally and at the same time are using alternate source(cambridge-bottlehead)via two channel bypass mode on tap..All you have to do is use the lexs remote to adjust the sub bass(and crossover on sub) coming from the lex.

 

[John Tompkins]

On the one hand we have people saying that the 950 sounds better than a Ref 30 and DC2 and as good as an MC1 which though dated is no slouch and sold for 6K. I've even seen reports that in sonics it is right up there with the MC12 that sells for 9K

I will say this one more time. It doesnt surprise me that the outalw 950 is sonically equall to the lex mc-1( maybe, maybe not), hell the denon 4802 was sonically equall!
The lex has SO MUCH MORE to offer then the 950. Adjustable parameters, bass enhance, logic 7, music logic, tilt control,Eq, thx, panarama, angle settings, independent speaker adjustment...well you get the point I hope. If I hear the 950 equal thing again I think I will explode
Buy what you want. But with the lex you are paying for the above options which are in my opinion not even close to being equaled by the 950 but maybe it is for some people, to each his own.

 

[Gifford L]

John your right and I'm not saying the 950 is equal only musing at the comments people have made.

I feel the same thing about other processors that have been compared to the 950 as well not just the MC1.

Guys I'm not interested in the 950 as of now or an MC1 so I'm not trying to say or speculate one way or another on this. I was merely making an observation on the contradictory nature of comments made here.

I am positive the 950 is a great piece of gear and is defining bang for the buck but... I'm a little annoyed that when one person says it is as good as an MC1 or better than X that it some people seem to take that as the absolute without qualification.

It isn't just the Outlaw I'm talking about. I'm talking about all kinds of stuff. I saw a comparison of some speakers where the owner did an a/b without level matching and then declared the more sensitive speaker the better and people took that to the bank and disparaged the other brand. Without level matching a speaker the more sensitive speaker does sound more dynamic and "clearer" 99 percent of the time. You can do this with almost and brand.

I guess I'm just saying that some of these preamps have so much tweakability that it makes me wonder if they have been fully tweaked to sound like they can or are supposed to when these comparisons are made.

 

[John Tompkins]

I guess I'm just saying that some of these preamps have so much tweakability that it makes me wonder if they have been fully tweaked to sound like they can or are supposed to when these comparisons are made.

I agree 100 percent. You cant have the lex mc-1 for a few days or a week and do it any justice. It takes months of getting to know this piece before you know what it does. Just like some people having one unit and then trying to compare it something they had weeks earlier or months earlier to compare units. You must do an a/b to truly know the differences.

 

[KeithR]

Of course, the Lex MC1 display sprays rf interference throughout the unit that is audible in 2 ch....according to Stereophile review. I hope that is now fixed.

Steve Zimmerman,

Why don't you go audition a tube amp? Then you might see what all us "crazy" tube guys are saying...even if you don't like it, it would be nice to hear your thoughts.

 

[Richard Burzynski]

John T.,

I couldn't agree more!

Rich B.