What's new

Outlaw 950 Pre/Pro Reviewed!!!!! (1 Viewer)

J

John Morris

With the 950 being the pinnacle of audio perfection that it is,
Brian: Well hot damn! Thanks for the review Brian. I never would have rated the 950 as the pinnacle of ...err... what you said. Still, glad you like it! Enjoy, Enjoy!
Now what else did you want to say? ;) Guess I just gotta go back and re-read your post when I have the time. In the meantime...
 

Dzung Pham

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 10, 2001
Messages
271
The 950 does not have everything anyone could want. If you've read the past threads a few of the major complaints have been the inability to set separate distance values for each speaker, the inability to save different settings for different sound modes and sources, and the arguably unattractive exterior. On top of that, I can think of many other features that might be desirable (converting between s-video/component, scaling, Logic 7, etc). The relative value of these features depends on each individual.
 
J

John Morris

And based on your above statement, merc, would you be willing to say now that if outlaw does release a high end processor in the future that sonically it wouldn't be worth it to pay for it over the 950 or to upgrade to it from the 950?
Brian: Okay, had a chance to read the rest of your post. In answer to your suppositive question, I guess I could answer it the same way that someone did when they first bought the Lexicon DC-2 before they ever even listened or imagined that what the MC-1 would sound like.

Hope that helped you with your decision...
 
J

John Morris

Hey Guys! Why not actually read my post? I said that the 5.1 and analog bypass modes were so clean as to make me wonder if the 950 was not the beginning of diminishing returns with regard to this.

I said nothing about any other feature or missing feature. Why would anyone make that jump? DOH!!!!?

READ the posts before posting responses, please!
 

Dzung Pham

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 10, 2001
Messages
271
John, I wasn't responding to your post, I was responding to Brian's question:

If the 950 has everything anyone could want (it sounds like it does), why make a more expensive unit?

 
J

John Morris

Although I have never thought to ask this question... maybe once Outlaw heard what they created, they realized that it would be very hard to release and sell a high end preamp/processor that could improve on the SOUND of the 950. Therefore, they realized that they needed to wait till some type of "must have DPL2/Logic 7 format" could be offered as well as EVERY single type of speaker, input and output customization. So, maybe Outlaw is not gonna offer an upgrade to the 950 for quite some time...? IMO, if you want a preamp/pro which offers better customization than the Outlaw 950, then you already have it in the Anthem AVM-20.
 
J

John Morris

I read your post to say that 5.1 processing
No problem Brian: Although I never said anything about any processing, I added the words "direct input" to my previous post so that you could better understand my words. Thanks for conveying your confusion with my post so I could fix it to your satisfaction.

Just in case you still don't understand... here it is again in other words that you may better understand.

The SACD/DVD-A analog input and analog bypass input modes are soooooo clean, as to be merely transparent. Being that the Outlaw 950 already sounds as invisible as I've ever heard, any future preamp/processors can only improve on the other features and factors which define a truly great preamp processor. Once you mix in the fact that this unit only costs $900 plus shipping, it is a no brainer for ANYONE needing or wanting a new HT preamp processor... IMO.

Brian, Hopefully, that cleared up any confusion you may have had over my opinion on the Outlaw 950. Please, LMK, if you have any more questions or concerns.
 
W

Will

Hey Guys,

This perhaps is not an analog versus digital issue. Both CD's and DVD-A's are digital. Both are converted somewhere along the line, to analog.

This is perhaps a DVD-A versus CD issue.

DVD-A's are supposed to be far cleaner than CD's but not because one is analog and the other is digital. DVD-A's are significantly cleaner sounding than CD's, even CD's that have had DPL II applied because as you guys probably all know, DVD-A's have multiple discrete channels and also each channel has more digital bits (after they're decoded using reverse Meridian Lossless Encoding).
 
J

John Morris

5.1 direct input, and analog bypass modes of this unit
and not to anything else. These signals are passed as natively as only the effect of the volume control.

Is there still anyone who who still may not understand good old American English? I'd be glad to translate further for you? Just LMK.
 

Kevin C Brown

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2000
Messages
5,723
Michael- Not sure I understand your question. :)
I would only want the all speakers high passed, and the sub low passed. Just like any "normal" input, but with the 2 channel stereo bypass mode, with an analog crossover.
No "full range" anywhere. No overlap anywhere. No void anywhere. *All* of my speakers are flat to "close enough" to 40 Hz that an 80 Hz crossover would work for me.
BTW, with an 80 Hz crossover, your mains should be equal to or better than -3dB at 40 Hz. 40 Hz is one octave below 80 Hz. You have to account for the *slope* of the high pass filter applied to the mains.
 
W

Will

When you hear music from a CD or a DVD-A, the digital on the CD or on the DVD-A was converted to an analog signal, somewhere or other, I guarantee it.
 

John Tompkins

Supporting Actor
Joined
Aug 30, 2000
Messages
658
There are lots of things outlaw could do for a second (higher ended) version. How bout 2 sets of 5.1 inputs, thx, more tweakable settings, automatic room calibration, dual dac pure direct mode etc...
 

Dzung Pham

Second Unit
Joined
Mar 10, 2001
Messages
271
Will, Merc is not comparing digital vs. analog sources, he's just talking about the analog stage of the 950 and saying that it is as good or better than what he's heard from other pre/pros. In this respect, it might be interesting to compare it to the Sony TA-P9000ES, which is analog only and is also apparently quite transparent.
 
J

John Morris

Pham: You are absolutely correct in translating what I am trying to say. Thank you.

As for comparing it to the Sony P9K, my bias would be that the Sony unit might be cleaner since it is analog only and does not have any other processing or FM tuning going on in the same box. Still, it might just depend on which unit is using the cleaner volume pot.?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,814
Messages
5,123,707
Members
144,184
Latest member
H-508
Recent bookmarks
0
Top