This subject seems to be looking a little like a dead horse at the moment and we may want to set down our clubs soon, but I had a thought or two that may be worth adding.



Yeah, it'd be cool, but I doubt we mere mortals will ever know. Mainly because it is certain to be highly variable. How much does it cost (to draw a parallel to my business) to design a house, or an office building? Aside from the fact that THX most certainly does not have a price list for licensing of different components (subwoofer for $50,000; dipole surround speakers for $75,000; monoblock amp for $90,000; THX Ultra2 receiver for $200,000; ...) because it is too dependent on the circumstances of each product being tested, they also probably do not allow people to disclose prices or the average time required to run a product through the licensing process.

As for the idea of a "third party" verification of performance, I think it's actually a great idea, but I don't think a company like THX is the one to do it. THX got started as a way to dictate design methods to provide as consistent and predictable an environment as possible in movie theaters, and that's still their purpose in all of the numerous areas they have ventured into. If we want to be able to look at any piece of gear's rated specs (amplifier output, signal to noise ratios, speaker ratings and anechoic -3dB points, etc...) and know we can trust them, it would be best for the manufacturers to do what other industries have done and push for the establishment of a testing standard. Something similar to the way AMCA (Air Movement and Control Association) rates fans, or ASHRAE and ARI rate your house's air conditioning equipment, something that would provide a way to "bench test" electronics and speakers to verify that they meet the published specs. Call it the GET (Gunslinger Equipment Testing) seal of approval, if you like. It would include standards for testing different components (Standard 7 for amplifier power output testing, Standard 9 for preamp S/N testing, Standard VS1 for video switching circuit testing, Standard 0 for speaker testing). Then you could put a little "GET" stamp below the UL circle on the back and list the applicable standards tested to. It would need to be an independent organization, probably under the oversight of an organization or organizations similar to ASME (the guys who, among other things, verify that pressure vessels won't go "boom") or IEEE. (In fact, IEEE might be a pretty good candidate for overseeing at least some of these standards -- not really for speakers, but for the electronic side, and I suspect that a lot of the electrical and electronic engineers involved in designing this stuff are already members.) The testing would be based on publicly available guidelines and could be carried out much like UL certification takes place today. It would add some time and cost to the design process, but likely not as much as THX -- especially since it would be so much more widespread, allowing manufacturers to streamline the testing process.

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

[This message has been edited by gonk (edited December 09, 2003).]

gonk that is an ingenius idea. i would certainly go for that more than for thx, alas only if the world were perfect and all my wishes would come true...

It is not that I remain ignorant about information but I wish to know what the DIFFERENCE is between components. THX certification tells me what is similar for different brands of components not how they differ. So if ignoring what to me is a useless standard is ignorant, then color me blissful

P.S. Great idea Gonk but alas I have been waiting for such a standardization since at least the mid-70's and it does not appear any closer now then it did then.


[This message has been edited by morphsci (edited December 10, 2003).]

This morning's question about a second zone reminded me of a feature I've wondered about a time or two. In place of the standard record loops used on the 1050 and 950, what about an independently switched analog-only audio/video record loop on a successor to the 950? I'm thinking of something to allow you to direct the input from VIDEO1 to the VCR record outs while watching the DVD source, for example. I wouldn't expect it on a receiver (expect perhaps the big "flagship" receivers), and it might not even fit with the overall plans for a higher-end pre/pro, but it would come in handy under certain circumstances.

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

a thought, but id prefer to keep my video out of my audio equipment unless theres no other choice. as cheap as everyone seems to be, no one is going to drop more cash to have that feature. it would suit me fine to not have any video built into the next processor at all (except osd for setup only), and yes i realize this flies in the face of thx certification (or at least i think thx has to have video switching...). on the topic of displaying, id like to see no display on the processor at all except for the power light (which could be turned off). if they could integrate anything that needs to be displayed (including osd) into a remote, that would be wonderful. a lot of people cant see their unit anyway, and if you can you dont want to during a movie. im sure performance would increase a little by removing all the stuff that goes into having a display, plus you dont have to worry about anything going wrong with it, just the remote that you would die without :-).

It's funny (re: Gonk above) the same discussion got me thinking about LAN enabling a processor. Sure would be nice, and it can't cost much - One can get a router with a web interface for $30 or so, after all, and those folks have to be making money. Heck, a basic router has to have 2 ports, at least.

A tiny, cheap embedded CPU running Linux (one of the embeddable ones) on a simple SBC, hooked to the DSP control bus via an internal serial bus or something like that (I bet most if not all DSP chipsets support something like this) shouldn't cost much at all, and sure would be useful, particularly in a higher end processor.

• Automation would be simple
• Setup would be easy
• Updating the firmware
• Control for the second zone

Just for a few applications. Opening up a device for 3rd parties has seldom been a marketing error.

I'm woefully ignorant about this stuff. What would the networking stuff you just described be useful for in an a/v processor? Would all that LAN stuff be used just to set up the system? Or does it serve some other purpose?



[This message has been edited by Ellen (edited January 04, 2004).]

I'd like to see xlr balanced outs for the speakers. How 'bout a dvi out, too?

Jay

My dream next-gen 950.


I’m not very active on this forum, but I am a very happy 950 owner.

IMHO the 950 is a very good product so I would only add to it. If I had my way, I’d only make a few changes. They would be to…

- Improving the S/N ratio of the analog inputs

- Make a pure analog bypass mode (No A/D and D/A conversions)

- Add balanced outputs

- Use very high quality DACs and circuitry

- Make it super responsive (No delay when switching sources)

- Sell it for less than $2000

I think that, if done properly, a next-gen Outlaw pre/pro with these additions would sound frighteningly close to pre/pros costing about 5 figures. And, at less than 2 grand, it would be a fraction of their price.

Forget breaking the rules – if a pre/pro like that became popular, it would completely rewrite the book about what is considered a fair price for truly high-end audio.

Just a thought.

Well the ideal pre for me would allow keeping the signal in the digital mode right through to the output- to feed a digital amp(s). Maybe build in a digital crossover for the front speakers so that you could biamp (or even triamp) the front speakers. Support the new digital dvd-a and SACD I think goes without saying. As far as a device that puts through analog signals it is just about perfect, we don't need another Anthem or Lexicon- they're already out there, we need the sane priced competition.