Outlaw....go for seperates or no ?

Sweet Spot · Aug 19, 2003

Hello again all. Thanks for your suggestions and help over at the speaker section (shall be returning there again shortly).  I have sort of made a decision..one that I would normally be reluctant to  make, but for the price, it seems like I'd be a fool to not investigate this further.  First, here's the link:

Outlaw 950 Processor and the 7100 Amp (combo)

I was originally thinking about getting the Marantz 8300 or 9300 intergrated amp/receiver because of all of the purty things it had including THX, even though I'm pretty sure that THX is a crock of crap..and only something that continues to line the pockets of George Lucas, but I digress.

Someone then pointed me in the direction of the Outlaw Audio people, and this great looking combo. Normally, I would be reluctant, but the price considering the power and the features of the processor seem really great.  So I'm wondering if anyone here has any input, or experience with these guys and their products. I've read about how they're revered by audiophiles etc but that tells me nothing since the articles were written by them so...

Anyway, I just bought my front speakers, the Energy C-3's, and have put money down on the rears (also the Energy's..the better ones $550, got for $450)  Essentially, what I'd like to do if possible, is get my rears, then the Outlaw combo so also, what I'm wondering is this:

Given that you guys think the Outlaw combo would be a wise purchase, I'm gonna hold off on the center channel for a bit because if it's possible, I'd like to use (even though it obviously wouldn't be tonally balanced) one of the crappy speakers that I'm using right now. They're those #### Optimus speakers from Rat Shack (supposedly 100 W.), but I don't see why I couldn't use one for the time being right ? Or no ?  

Thing is, I'm not sure of how much longer that combo sale will be valid for, and I"d like to start paying for it ASAP.  

So. To sum up...1)Yay or Nay on the Outlaw equipment
2)Ok to use Optimus speaker as center channel temporarily.

TIA !

Doug

Audioholics · Aug 20, 2003

If the temp center sucks - try matrixing the center channel. You may be surpised.

Sweet Spot · Aug 20, 2003

Alrighty there Hawke...will do. I don't mind it sucking so much, as long as it "works".

Now...anyone have any comments to make about the Outlaw equipment ? I'm very curious to know what people think of this company and it's stuff....

Doug

_audiouser_ · Aug 20, 2003

I'd like to see some more information on Outlaw stuff myself.  I saw a snappy spread sheet compared a bunch of units sound and vision reviewed. To the point > the output for the outlaw 1050 receiver (could not see the 950) was bang on at 5 channels driven.  However the SN ratio was quite low and the THD was not that great as well.  I don't know if that is the same for the 950 or not, they have simmilar specs.

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the 7100 will tear your house down no problems.   IMHO the 950 features are little too plain for my liking, I think it's a bit much for what you get.  You could get a mid-fi receiver with MACC or YAPO(soon) and newer processors for about the same money.  Pair that up with the 7100 and your off to the races.

Sweet Spot · Aug 20, 2003

As far as the signal to noise ratio being low..I'd like to think of it this way: Perhaps most other companies totally exaggerate what their S/N ratios are...they usually do, so in that, Outlaw may just be being honest and are giving true ratings ?  

What's too plain about the 950 for you, and what do you expect for your money in that range..just curious ?  And what the H.E. double L is MACC and YACO ?

Sounds like you have some good general ideas of what one should be paying for, so please give me some suggestions about other processors for "the same money" if you can. Also, it's not like I'm looking for THX stuff anymore, so if those are the types of bells and whistles we're talking about, I'm not too concerned with all that. I just want a very clean, airy piece to process my music and video.

_audiouser_ · Aug 20, 2003

MACC and YAPO are Pioneer and Yamaha acoustic calibration systems.  You stick a mic in your listening position and then plug it into your receiver.  The receiver has built program that plays test tones and calibrates the system for you.

This is cool stuff because it can save you a lot of time and gives excellent results.  I can only attest to seeing and hearing the Pioneer in action, the Yamaha units with YAPO haven't been released yet, but they are coming next month.

I gotta go right now but the 950 does not have many extra DSP's other than the big standards, and I like DSP's.

_audiouser_ · Aug 21, 2003

Opps,  sorry

It's actually Pioneer MCACC and Yamaha YPAO.  Sorry about that, I really know nothing about sound processing other than "that sounded cool", and some common knowledge floating around on the web.  

The new Yamaha will do component video conversion as well.  The Denon 3803 (which I hear you can beat some vendors down into the 870 dollar price range) will do the video conversion and also has the dual DAC thing going on that I'm sure Gene will be talking about in his 5803 review.

The 950 is good unit to be sure, but it's was built to be affordable, you'll notice all the processing components are sourced for Cirrus Logic/Crystal.  I'll bet they did that because they got good deal, not because it was the the best product.

However many people will point out Outlaws great customer service.  I can tell you from a personal customer experience I had with Pioneer, they are not great.  That's good reason to go with Outlaw period.

Anyway the here is the web page with stats.  You can see Outlaw is "more" honest then most vendors, but the SN is quite high (poor dacs is my guess).

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/3401/ratevsac.htm

Sweet Spot · Aug 21, 2003

Yeah see, for one...I"m not terribly into DSP's. I'm more concerned with having a solid unit that will do justice to my music more than with my video. I'm sure that for movies its features will do just fine anyway. It's the happy compramise that I"m after here. A system that will let my music live a full life, while showing some balls with movies as well. Tis why I'm going (or pretty much think I am) the component route.

Secondly, those figures state specs for a different Outlaw model from way back in like 2001...NOT the one being discussed here. (correct me if I'm mistaken)

I still haven't heard from anyone who owns or has owned some of their equipment, and I won't be satisfied till I do....Specs mean jack crap  to me unless they're backed up with performance notes.

Guest · Sep 13, 2003

Doug

I have had the Outlaw ICBM-1 "Basss Management" unit for over 1 year now and am completely satisfied.  I have a bi-amped system and my old active xover took a dumper.  I read that it(ICBM) could be used as a xover unit as well as its intended application- a Bass Management unit.  After talking to Scott at Outlaw about the ICBM unit i purchased it and am absolutely amazed at the increase in detail and spacial content that this unit has provided in my system.  The only unit that is comparable (which I have listened to in my system) is the Bryston unit at $1800.  The ICBM is $249.  I have had no problems with this unit at all.  Of course electronically this is a fairly simple unit compared to 950 you are looking at.

In regards to my system, inititially the ICBM unit would be used as a xover unit, then when my new speaker system would be built I would transfer it over to the main system for its intended use (BM). That was BEFORE the 950 was released and I knew of its capabilities.

Since the 950 has been out and after reading several reviews (mostly good and good reviews on service and reliability also) I also planned to purchase it.  But even having owned one of their pieces I had the same reservations as you do...

Enter the Home Theater Show in May of this year in SF, CA.   I listened to this unit and to several others (far more expensive) and am convinced, without a doubt, that this unit compares to units 2,3,4 and even 5 times the price.  The sound was clean, spacial and very well balanced.  I was VERY impressed.  I was originally thinking of buying the combo 950/770 but after hearing the show system using the 7 channel 100 Watt amp (7100?), i have since rethought things and don't think the extra 100 watts of power/channel is necessary.  the sound was very smooth and at no time did the system seem like it was 'running out of gas'.  Bass was extremely full with good definition and depth.  The high end was very clean, with good timber and with no measure of stridency evoked... at least not to my ears.  You can read about Stereophile Home Theater's impression in their Oct. issue (page 37).  The speaker system used was expensive  ($22K flagship line from Atlantic).  

I think I will be pleased with the purchase.  BTW if you don't think 100W is enough for the subs, you can always go with buying the old 5-channel 165W/CH - Model 750 (can buy on ebay and other auctions at a good price - it has great sound and good reliablity) and then purchase the 200W Monoblocks for the sub/s.  Your cost will be about the same as the 7100.

Good luck.

Guest · Sep 13, 2003

Doug

BTW you really need to scrap the center channel and get speakers of same as left/right/surrounds.  With a mismatched center channel you'll get a combing effect( kind of a high/low sputtering effect) as well as timberal abberations.  You'll never come close to realizing the 950's potential with an unmatched system.  You might even be
VERY disappointed at the the sound.

There are alot of very good and reasonably price (an some even caparatively cheap) DIY systems if you interested in building/assembling a system youself.  There are even several kits available by well known designers such as D'Appolito (one that I am basing my new system on) and Vance Dikason.  The assembling one's are not very hard as some come with 'need to assemble' cabinets while others are already assembled.  You just have to install driver/xovers/wiring.  If you are interested let me know and I'll send some URL's to get you started.

music4jeff · Sep 13, 2003

I am registered now - music4jeff@yahoo.com

3db · Sep 14, 2003

Outlaw vs current Yamaha or Denon Flagships

No Brainer,..Outlaw hands down.

I've seen S/N ratio specs thrown around  for this currnet debate but in reality, these ratios are so good for both that noise is unperceptable. Toss that spec out the window. Lets talk about the power to deliver demanding loads with all channels loaded..  I think you will see Outlaw leap way out in front of the crowd in that comparison. As a matter of fact, the Outlaw soundstage and sound quailty has been compared to Krell and the other highend seperates by many reviewers such as Sound And Vision, Home Theater etc, and the consensus was that it came very close to high end performance, much closer than flagship receivers good muster.   Better contol of the bass,  wide soundstage, neutral, vocals defined and present.. were the description   So I really don't understand how people can think that flagship receivers would be a better entry than entry level seperates.

I think Denon and Yamaha are solid qualtiy products but I think its totally unfair to pit flagship receivers against  entry level seperates. As far as soundstage and muscialty goes, Outlaw beats them both hands dowm.

Audioholics · Sep 14, 2003

3db,

While I won't try to dissuade you from your opinion, I encourage you to take a look at the Denon 5803 review Gene wrote and stay tuned for the upcoming Yamaha review on the Z9. The new line of flagship receivers share little with the "flagship" receivers of the past. In the past your statements would probably be uncontested, but now we suggest you re-evaluate and take another look. We were honestly surprised ourselves.

3db · Sep 14, 2003

Hawke

How am I supposed to hold down  my daytime job and keep up with  audio reviews?  

OK.. Reading now..

PaulF · Sep 14, 2003

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So I really don't understand how people can think that flagship receivers would be a better entry than entry level seperates.
</td></tr></table>

Why?

I'm astounded by how many times I see comments like this in these forums. Sorry but I think this is way too big of a generalization to be accurate. I have been following audio & video technology for over 20 years and am very impressed with the progress made by many manufacturers in the receiver category.

The motives for making separates in the past were fairly simple; power, noise and funcionality.

On the power front, receivers can have every bit as sophisticated and hefty a power supply as their separate counterparts, and on modern flag ships they do. The power requirements of the preamp/processor section is negligible compared to the amp sections, and many reviews (including Gene's 5803 review) shows that the power available to the amplifier sections of receivers to be more than adequate.

Noise was a concern in the early days, but these were the days when layout was not a big consideration, lots of loose hard wiring, long signal paths and poor shielding to keep costs down. Look inside any modern reciever and you will see a marvel of modern layout. Multi-layer PCBs now contain embedded shielding, power supply shiedding is greatly improved (usually by massive heatsinks) and differential circuit paths are often the norm in higher end receivers. Cabling is kept to a minimum and most connections between boards are connectorized. Factor into this also that you have most front end signal processing done in the digital domain and an extremely short signal path between preamp/processor and amp section (no additional connectors and cabling) and you can see why noise is no longer the dominant issue it was years ago.

Functionality was also a concern in the days before high scale integration. With moderm DSPs and DACs capable of things boxes of equipment couldn't achieve years ago, this is also no longer a major issue. In fact the power supply still remains the dominant factor in the size of most amps/receivers.

Now factor in that with receivers you don't need to build two chassis and two power supplies (two of the most expensive parts of any product) and you can put the cost of these components back into the electronics inside the box, then it seems quite logical that when comparing receivers and separates of similar price, that the receivers hold their ground.

Paul

Yamahaluver · Sep 14, 2003

Very nicely put Paul F. couldnt agree with you more on the issue of receivers versus seperates.

Today's flagship receivers from Yamaha, Denon, Pioneer, SONY, Marantz to name a few are exceptionaly well designed components which usually weigh more than some so called high end seperate amps and feature better quality design of the amp section as well as the parts used are of superlative quality. For instance most like Yamaha, Denon use Elna caps and high quality MOSFET transistors and manage to sound equaly good in 2 channel and HT mode.

The need for seperates are ending unless snob appeal, ear wax and megalomania is in your forte'.

gene · Sep 14, 2003

3dB;

Sorry to burst your bubble but the separates solutions from Outlaw and many other entry level companies separates solutions priced at the same or sometimes higher than todays flagship receivers are really no match. Signal to Noise ratio is very relevent, especially when dealing with higher resolution formats such as DVD-A and SACD. The Outlaw processor, (similar to the Sherbourn PT-7000) is a very piece piece for around $800, but it isn't even remotely as sophisticated as the processors internal to todays flagship receivers. I am sure the Outlaw amp is of good quality, but I would personally sacrifice 30-40wpc in favor of a totally integrated solution, especially one that is lower in noise and mainatains Class A/AB biasing through its rated output power. However, my preference in audio is finesses and accuracy. I rarely listen at levels beyond 90dB. If you are after shear power to cater to parties, or sound reinforcement applications, than the entry level separates route is probably the way to go.

After my experience with the Denon AVR-5803 and even the Yamaha RX-Z1, it has become apparent to me that separates are not always the better option. I don't give into snob appeal, as evident by my articles on cables, so I feel quite comfortable recommending flagship receivers for high end audio applications.

3db · Sep 16, 2003

Hi Gene

You didn't burst my bubble at all.  I know good S/N specs re important but you
missed my point entirely.  What I said (or tired to say

&nbsp

was that teh S/N
ratios for the Outlaw and the flaghip receivers are so good that you would not
be able to distinguish which was noiser in a listening test.

I'm also not dumping on flagship receivers.  They are quailty units producing
phenomenal sound.  What I am saying is that the price that these receivers
command are in the same leagues as entry/mid level seperates which will have
better performance and more flexability.  The Oultaw pre-amp may not have all
the bells' whsitles when it comes to DSPs but it has proper bass management,
(flagship receivers just bringing that in now) a selectable LFE filter as well
as the total gammit of Dolby and DTS processing features.  The only thing I
lament is the absence of a phono stage.  *Shrugs*

But if the Outlaw pre-amp is too limiting, I would suggest teh Anthem AVM20
combined with the Outlaw 770 power amp.  This combination may be within 500 -700
dollars of the flagship receivers but will totally out perform flagship
receivers.  The Anthem is probablly overkill for teh Outlaw but it does
demonstrate what is possible with mixing and matching pre/pros and power amps.
I'm using MSP for this comparison

So summing this all up, the prices of ther flaship receivers are dangerously
close to seperates.  I guess it will depend on individual whether he wants one
or two boxes in their audio/HT rack.

Rob Babcock · Sep 16, 2003

Just to throw a little gasoline on this fire, in the one head to head professional review I've read comparing the Anthem to 2 flagship recievers, it wasn't cut and dried.  The results were very close with one reviewer feeling the Denon bested the Anthem sonically for 2 Ch music...

Audioholics · Sep 16, 2003

What I find interesting is that I can definitely take 3db's viewpoint and agree that certain flagship receivers are climbing in price and are therefore becoming rivals with entry-level separates.

For instance, Yamaha's flagships prior to the Z9 were the V1 and the Z1. These receivers don't quite rival separates priced at $4500 combined. But now, with the Z9 the competition is all there.

So now the neat thing is that since the receivers have gotten better, presumably, the separates have to keep up as well.

I think it's good for the consumers. The fact that we can have this conversation proves it.

Outlaw....go for seperates or no ?

Sweet Spot

Enthusiast

Audioholics

Guest

Sweet Spot

Enthusiast

_audiouser_

Audioholic Intern

Sweet Spot

Enthusiast

_audiouser_

Audioholic Intern

_audiouser_

Audioholic Intern

Sweet Spot

Enthusiast

Guest

Guest

Guest

Guest

music4jeff

Audiophyte

3db

Audioholic Slumlord

Audioholics

Guest

3db

Audioholic Slumlord

PaulF

Audioholic

Yamahaluver

Audioholic General

gene

Audioholics Master Chief

3db

Audioholic Slumlord

Rob Babcock

Moderator

Audioholics

Guest

Latest posts

Sitemap

Sitemap

Site Information

Site Information

HTML