Model 978 - 988 differences

What is the real difference between the two? I realize that the 998 has not been finalized yet. I really need support for HDMI as my primary concern and hope that the Outlaws are not getting caught in that “got to have the latest chip” never ending cycle. I just need a replacement for the 990 and HDMI support. Yes, internet access would be nice, having the latest chips would be nice, but we are all Outlaws and the most important thing is acquiring our “Precious” at a cost which would make us feel as if we stole it (see definition of Outlaw). I really hope that the shipping of the 998 is not delayed to the Trinnov – XT 32 controversy. I can’t believe that no one but me, after using the latest room correction, simply tweaks it to their own EAR after the fact, really, come on, how important is that!

We don't know the specs on the Model 998, but we do know that the Model 978 is basically derived from the hardware development work that went into the Model 998. The principle difference is room correction. The Model 998 was intended from the outset to use Trinnov, which has proven difficult to implement on consumer hardware. The Model 978 switched to Audyssey (initially MultEQ XT, but finally MultEQ XT32 instead). Beyond that, the differences are likely to be minimal at best - especially since the Model 978 already has some "extras" like ESS DAC chips and a phono pre-amp.

More than ever, I doubt that we'll see network functions integrated into an Outlaw surround processor for at least a generation or three. A year or two ago, Netflix was the killer app that drove a lot of this interest. Today, there are dozens of separate services that must be integrated separately and Netflix seems determined to drive away every customer they have through price changes, poor communication, and splitting off the disc service. If they get bought by Google (who already has YouTube) or Amazon (who already has their own VOD service that is free to Amazon Prime subscribers), the landscape could change significantly. For that matter, if they simply fail to remain competitive, the landscape could still shift a great deal. It is a very difficult landscape for a small developer to get any traction in, both because of development costs and because the services all want to focus on getting integrated into components that reach the most customers (game consoles, full product lines for large manufacturers, etc.). Better to leave those functions for a separate product like a Roku box or an AppleTV or a WD box. At that point, network connectivity would be mainly for home automation (in place of RS232), but once it is added people will expect a lot more. Maybe for the next generation of hardware, it will become practical to incorporate network connectivity for the sake of a web-based control interface or smart phone remote control app.

I just want to clarify some of the history here on the 997 vs 978/998. It seems that there may be some confusion on how we got here with the 978/998 and this thread seems to be the most appropriate place for this note:

There was a 997 that was canceled and there will be a 978 and a 998 (according to Outlaw). The 997 was going to have Trinnov and was based off the Sherwood R-972, but Outlaw canceled that model due to numerous implementation issues and opted to design their own model from the ground up. That was the model 998, which was still going to include Trinnov. As it became evident that implementation of Trinnov in the 998 was creating further delays in releasing a pre/pro, Outlaw announced the 978 with Audyssey, with the intent that Trinnov would eventually be implemented in the 998. However, Peter recently revealed that the 998 may also not include Trinnov given its ever ellusive implementation in a consumer product.

Feel free to add to my brief history. There certainly were many steps along the way that I left out.

That's a good overview.

If a Model 998 is to appear anytime soon, it says here that it will likely be based on the 978 (with Audyssey MultEQ XT32, not Trinnov) and include the few missing features that might be of interest to a significant number of purchasers. IMO, those features are 9.2 outputs, network connectivity (especially for bi-directional IP control by your iPad, etc., less so for streaming), full implementation of Audyssey DSX, DTS Neo:X and possibly a more current video processor with the option of 4K upscaling. Such a product might even have a chance of seeing the light of day before it also becomes yesterday's news, as is already happening with the 978, despite my continued interest in it.

Based on what Outlaw has said about these two products in the past, that is correct. I think it goes without saying that a Model 998 delivered any time soon (within say 9-12 months of the Model 978) will have the same basic feature set - and the same notable feature set omissions - as the Model 978.

In case I wasn't clear, I meant that the 998 needs to include the features I listed - missing from the 978 - to be relevant in today's and especially next year's market. IMO, there really is no point in introducing a product which is supposed to be a "higher-end" model than the 978 unless it includes those features at the very least.

I don't think the 998 can be significantly different from the 978 if it doesn't include Trinnov. It would probably be too much work to change the video processor or make other large changes.

If that becomes their goal, the Model 998 will be a ground-up new design and will be years away from shipping.

It seems to be harder and harder for smaller companies to do their own AVRs and SSPs. Re: Parasound, B&K, etc.

If you are correct that the feature set would be the same, then you what you seem to be describing is an Outlaw prepro comparable to the 978 as the Oppo BDP-83SE was to the BDP-83. Basically the same box with minor changes (e.g. somewhat better DACs, perhaps a slightly better video processor from the same chip company and a quieter power supply, etc).

I think the differences may be less pronounced than the BDP-83/BDP-83SE or BDP-93/BDP-95 examples. The Model 978's already going to have an excellent analog section (ESS-based) and solid video processing with the ABT. We won't know for certain, but since the origin of the Model 978 was the Model 998 itself it seems reasonable to expect the room correction software to be the biggest single differentiating factor between the two. The OPPO players shared the same software, with only power supply and analog sections being altered.

You said it...

With the industry constantly adding new codecs and channels and configurations it is impossible to keep up as a consumer much less trying to figure out what will be the next great thing that everyone has to have, two years beforehand. The only constants are audio and video quality. Like the man said, "If you build it they will come". If a manufacturer is able to build high quality into a value laden package, they just have to hope that people recognize that combination and are willing to forego all the peripheral bells and whistles that don't matter. Even years after 5.1 and 7.1 systems were considered "normal" most content still relies on the codecs to make up the extra two channels. Creating channels out of thin air does not mean the system is better but that is what people think. Its the great American way of progress through misconception.

Not necessarily, especially if Outlaw foregoes upgrading the video processor which would not be a huge loss. I still think the other features I mentioned are necessities for a new flagship pre/pro to be introduced in 2012. I suspect the only one of those which might prove difficult would be the network connectivity, although I have no firsthand knowledge regarding such issues and stand to be corrected.

From your other posts, you appear to still favor a Model 998 essentially similar to the 978 but with a different room EQ solution, which could really only mean Trinnov. I think I've made my opinion clear on the likelihood of that ever happening.

I don't know that I favor it, I just don't see a different scenario being practical. Certainly the original design intent was for the Model 998 and Model 978 to be the same basic platform. Changing that now means more time, which means a delayed launch.

Outlaw should just build the 1078 receiver and scrap the 998.

You may be on the right track. The more I look at Trinnov (which I truly would love to have) the more I think that the technology does not exist to deliver this capability at a modest price point.

Now if someone would develop an application specific Trinnov processing chip... However you'd need some serious volume sales to justify the NRE costs of the silicon development.

I can honestly see Outlaw making the 978 capable of Audyssey dsx into 9.2 or 7.2 channels especially because they now state that it will support pro logic llz. I think one of the benefits of waiting for the 998 if developed is the implementation of 11.2 channels. I just have a feeling that jumping from a projected 7 channel system to an 11 channel system is not going to happen for the 978 but would be possible for the 998. I myself already have the 11 speakers necessary to implement the full benefits of dsx so I will definitely hold out till I find out the deal with the 998 or find that a new marantz pre/pro will have similar sound processing and 11 channels. Some people knock the benefit of adding these channels but I personally like the ability to turn it on or off depending on what source material I'm listening to. It is really exciting thinking of the potential sound quality that would be achieved with a 998 11 channel reciever with the saber DAC's. Of course this is all speculation and wishful thinking. I also think that Trinnov may be necessary for some, but those of us with correct speaker placement really don't need the benefit of 3d remapping as no one should with any type of dedicated or purpose built home theater room. I believe Audyssey has a much greater benefit to me than Trinnov. Perhaps they will introduce Trinnov into there 1198. I for one however would not like to pay for this feature in any pre/pro. Does anyone disagree? Maybe I don't really understand the full benefits of Trinnov.

If you like the uniqueness of Outlaw's products and respect what they are doing so well, I suggest that you show your appreciation and enjoyment by making it a point to purchase their products.

The next Outlaw-branded big dollar item that I buy will contain Trinnov. I was happy to give them plenty of my money in the past, but now the market is saturated with great products and great values from a huge number of competitors (many of them which are sold through the Outlaw web site). Trinnov could be the great differentiator that Outlaw [as a product developer] will need in order to compete for awhile longer. If they abandon their pursuit of this technology, my interest in this company will evaporate.