I currently run a Pioneer 811 with a Parasound HCA855a. I have been thinking of getting the 950. Will this be an improvement.
Also will this pair of with the Parasound nicely? or would it be better to get one of the Outlaw combos and sell the Parasound?

Also do any others use the 950 with any parasound amps ...if so do you like it?

Thanks,

Chad

I know that michaelstano runs his 950 through a couple of Parasound amps quite happily. I wouldn't see any need to replace the amp if you are currently happy with it. As for the effect of changing from the 811 to the 950, I'd expect it to be comparable to upgrading from 1050 (as pre/pro) to 950, which was a great upgrade for me.

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

As Gonk noted, I couple my 950 to 3 Parasound 1000A amps, Klipsch speakers, and an SVS sub. I have not used the 950 with any other amp, so I can't testify to an A-B comparison. However, I am quite pleased, and having recently had the opportunity to listen to several other mid-fi systems, I wouldn't trade.

Cburbs, trust me...it is a great combo.

Thanks for the info guys....

I ordered the 950 today....not sure if I will live as the other half doesn't know. I am going to compare it with my current setup. Pioneer 811/Parasound 855a.
I am also going to be comparing a Pioneer 53tx with the Parasound amp. as well as maybe a SHerbourn 5210(this is to mainly compare it to the Parasound amp)

later............

Good for you Chad! Sorry I can't make the demos, but my personal life is nuts right now. I am quite sure you will be happy with the 950. Now if only you get the Axioms....(just kidding!)

Oh yes, The Axioms are awesome !!!!!

Hi Will,
What Parasound amps are you running? I have become addicted to the older Parasound stuff and have acquired a small arsenal of their equipment. From memory you are also running the Axiom M80Ti speakers making our systems very similar. I was looking for additional opinions on the Outlaw/Parasound/Axiom combo.
Thanks,
Greg

Willscary has the Parasound HCA855a/Outlaw 950/Axiom 80/QS8's/VP150. I don't think he has his system up and running.
He was kind enough to bring the 950 and Axiom 80's over to my house for a listen...no complaints here.

I will have the Outlaw Thursday and will have it hooked up to my Parasound HCA855a also. I run Acoustic Research Hi Res speakers all the way around. I am going to test the 950 with a Sherbourn 5210 also and will compare it against the Pioneer 43tx/53tx not sure on which one I can get my hands on yet.

[This message has been edited by cburbs (edited March 23, 2004).]

Thanks cburbs,
I have had my 950 well over a year and it still brings a smile to my face when I sit and listen to it. I run the same speakers as Will (also a great value) and run a mix of Parasound amps, I have yet to find a noticeably better sounding system. I have listened to a lot of high end (usually over priced) HT systems that have excellent sound. In the realistic price range I have yet to find anything that comes close to the sound quality and value of the 950. I have also found plenty of systems that fall far short for a higher price tag. Thank You Outlaw!

Thanks for the reply and happy listening…
Greg

What parasound amps are you running?

My test will be as follows:

Pioneer 811 with Parasound amp.
Outlaw 950 with paraound amp
Pioneer 43/53 with parasound amp


Pioneer 811 w/ sherbourn amp
Pioneer 43/53 w/sherbourn amp
Outlaw 950 with sherbourn amp

Pioneer 811 alone
Pioneer 43/53 alone

Is I want I really want to know is how much a improvement a 200*5 amp will make over my 85*5 amp.....I will find out this weekend.


Well I received the 950 at work just now....will hopefully play with it a little tonight

[This message has been edited by cburbs (edited March 25, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by cburbs (edited March 25, 2004).]

Hi cburbs,
I currently am running the HCA3500 (350 watts RMS x 2, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 8 ohms. 120 amperes peak per channel) for the front 2 channels, HCA 2003A (220 watts RMS x 3, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 8 ohms. 60 amperes peak, per channel) for the center and rear surrounds. I have 2more QS8’s for the side surrounds that I have not installed due to a remodeling project that I have been putting off. When I get the additional speakers installed they will be powered by the HCA2003 and I will use the HCA1206 in bridged mode (350 watts RMS, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 8 ohms, each bridged channel. 30 amperes peak, per channel) to power the rear surrounds. The 2 spare channels on the 1206 will be used for the second zone in the kitchen (135 watts RMS x 6, 20 Hz - 20 kHz, 8 ohms, all channels driven. 30 amperes peak, per channel). I also plan on adding a pair of massive subs and using the HCA2200 bridged (1000 watts RMS, 20 Hz-20 kHz, 4 ohms. 50 amperes continuous 90 amperes peak) to power them. I have played with all of the above-mentioned amps in a few different locations using many different speaker configurations, most was 2 channel stereo. In short the only noticeable difference (other than volume) was the lack of bass from the HCA1206 in non bridged mode. It is not that it was missing but compared to the other three amps it was not as abundant. As soon as I bridged the HCA1206 it sound very similar to all of the other Parasound amps that I use. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were an issue with the power supply in my HCA1206 that is contributing to the sound difference. I have noticed some 60 cycle hum coming from the speakers after long periods of play, 4+ hours. Since I plan on using it in bridged mode for the home theater surrounds and the other 2 channels only for background music for the kitchen I am not planning on getting it looked at. Of course that may change if it gets worse or it lets the smoke out.

I can’t speak for the HCA855 since I never have seen one but have been told that it is a good sounding amp especially for the money. Even if this amp does not supply massive bottom end you may not notice it in home theater mode because you can send all of the low-end bass to the sub.
I think that you are on the right track planning on testing a few amps and systems. I have been surprised more than once by taking the time to do live head to head testing. If you are not happy with the sound that you get from your current amp selection try looking at the older high-end 2 channel amps. A stack of the OnkyoM-501, M-502, M-503, M-504 or the Denon POA2400’s would make a great amplifier section for the Outlaw 950. The outlaw amps have been rated very highly for sound and build quality. They should represent a great value in a new amp purchase. My original intent was to go all Outlaw but I purchased the Parasound HCA2003a for my office and got hooked on their products.
I am not sure where you live but I am in Rhode Island and if you are close by and want to hear the Outlaw/Parasound/Axiom system I am running please let me know and we will make arrangements to shake the house.
Sorry for the long post, I was on a roll.

Thanks,
Greg

Greg,
Thanks for the info. I am in Wisconsin.....a tad far away from you.
The reason I want to test the Sherbourn is I have heard nothing but great things and If I like it I can add it to my wish list.....
WOW, you have some of the bigger parasound amps....
So how do you like those QS8's?

I have heard nothing but great things about them.

I myself am looking at Rocket/Dali/Axiom speaker wise ..don't want to spend more than $2,000 on a 5.0 system. The SVS stays.

I am going to demo the rockets sometime in April hopefully.
Hopefully Bill will have his Axiom setup soon so I can go listen to that. I did enjoy the Axiom 80's but still want to listen to others.
If I had money growing out of my pocket I would buy the Dali helicon or Euphonia series line...but that won't happen.
Too many things to do............later.

While you are looking at the Sherbourn's, compare their specs to a comparable Outlaw amp. Then, look at the price difference. And, if you have an interest, get an Outlaw for a 30 day test to see how it stands up sonically to your ears. If you don't think it is the same sonically, at a better value, send it back.

Because I can get the sherbourn as a loaner for no cost and I can get it now.
I have the 950 hooked up but have not ran DVE yet. So far so good.



[This message has been edited by cburbs (edited March 26, 2004).]

CBURBS - I have the 950 with two Parasounds. The HCA-2205A and HCA-1500A, both look good in the rack with the 950 and the sound is super, a good match for my Monitor Audio Gold 60 series. I purchased the 1500 used for the rears when I had the Outlaw 750. I liked the 1500 so much that I went loking for it big brother the 2500A. I have owned the Outlaw 750 and it performed as advertised. The Parasounds were just a better match for me. I think you are doing the right thing by trying out all systems you can in your own home.

I am still doing some comparisons between the PIoneer/Parasound and Outlaw/Parasound.
Does it take a while before the Outlaw opens up?
I have mostly done 2 channel comparison and as of right now I don't know if I hear that much of a difference.
I even had everything hooked up so I was running the Pioneer on the Lspeaker and the Outlaw on the Rspeaker. Set them at the same levels and they sounded the same to my ears.
I need to test some movies next....any ideas?

If you are running SACD equipment try Keb Mo Just Like You. This has become one of my favorite MC SACD's. I like the sound a lot and the SACD is very clean so you can look for any coloration in the music.

Have fun and be happy,
Greg

No SACD/DVD-A here.
Didnt' get in any new testing yet. I have been using it mainly music but no A/B testing yet this week.

Also would I be better to test the Pioneer vs the Outlaw by connecting the DVD player thru analog vs. the digital connection?



[This message has been edited by cburbs (edited March 31, 2004).]

I would try both. You may like the DAC in the Outlaw better than the DAC in your player.

Happy Listening,
Greg

A q for the knowledgeable..

I've heard the term "break-in" bandied about now and again where it concerns new electronics. Is this just something the "high-end" folk like to throw around or is there something to it ?

The reason I ask is because if this wasn't something that the EE took into consideration during the design stage then what guarantee is there that after the "break-in" period the unit wouldn't sound worse instead of better ?

Thanks,
Mike

Break-in of modern solid state electronics is BS.

Soundhound,
Does this imply that you don’t have directional interconnects and speaker wire? How about some hi fidelity snake oil to improve the diagonal breadth of your sound stage…

SH, I find you knowledgable and have always agreed with your posts. Here, however, we differ. I never believed in "break-in" of electronics. I could never tell the difference between a Sansui and a Sony, a Pioneer or a Yamaha. As long as they were not driven to clipping, they all sounded the same. Then I bought an NAD (a loooong time ago) and realized that some electronics sounded better than others.

I still did not believe in "break-in" until the 950 came along. I did not measure response when I got it. When it first arrived, however, I was a bit concerned that it was brighter than the NAD. I could absolutely hear a difference, and I did not like it. I listened for a few days (and just so you know...I am one of those guys who never turns off equipment. Most of my equipment was well over 15 years old and still worked great, so the idea that electronics should be left on so as not to heat up and cool down as much seems to work for me). As I listened, the sound did change. It got smoother and sweeter, while staying very articulate. Could the change be measured? Probably not. Did I hear it? yes. Was it just me getting used to the sound? I highly doubt it as when I got it it seemed bright compared to the NAD. Now it just sounds cleaner, but not shrill or bright like it did at first.

I have been an audio nut for really over 30 years, as before I was 10 years old I used to sit in the basement and listen to everything from Edgar Winter to UFO to Dylan to Fleetwood Mac and Journey on my older brother's separates system. By the time I was 12 I had earned enough to buy my first stereo, a Sony/Technics/Akai system with EPI speakers. In only a few years I had moved to NAD, Nakamichi and Klipsch. I had never experienced "break-in" until the 950. I am sure that it did improve during the fisrt few days.

I guess what I am saying is that I respectfully disagree. By the way...12ga Carol in'wall speaker wire for $.19/ft works as well as any expensive cable, as does Rat Shack Gold interconnects. At least I have never heard a difference.

The whole point of good electronics design is to produce a finished product whose parameters do not change over time (and that includes their "sound"). If there are changes, this is a defect in the design. Electronics design is all about stable circuit conditions - designers use all available means to insure that the design will not change over time. In addition, unlike a mechanical object where things like wear can be accounted for and taken into consideration, component tolerance change in electronics is by it's nature unpredictible - that is why designers (at least the good ones) go to great lengths to implement design practices that will result in a stable circuit.

In solid state gear, and especially very recent designs, the compoents that have any potential of change (like discrete resistors, and capacitors) are in the minority - if you look inside something like the 950, the vast majority of circuitry is composed of integrated circuits, and these do not "change" over time unless subjected to stresses beyond their limits.

In the days of tubes, there were an abundance of components, starting with the tubes themselves, that did change over time - they wore out as the emissive material on the cathode of the tube was used. In early solid state designs that used discrete transistors, there were still components like resistors and capacitors that had DC voltages across them - and this could cause small circuit parameter changes. However, in the good designs, design techniques like negative feedback assured that the circuit remained stable over time.

When I designed equipment for testing audio circuits and assemblies for Altec Lansing, I sure as heck made sure that my designs were stable!!

Unless you do some controlled experiments with new verses "broken-in" units, going by memory of what something sounded like is completely unreliable. Do you base your impressions of the sound of "broken in" equipment with identical speakers before and after break in? Did you use the speakers at all between the time the equipment was new and "broken in"? Speakers, being electro-mechanical objects certainly do break-in, especially from the time they are new until they have many hours of use on them. The suspensions (outer and the "spider") change their characteristics with use and the resonant frequency usually lowers over time. The magnets in speakers gradually loose their charge over time, and this causes both output and frequency response changes with use. Unless you take a brand new specimen of a component and one that is heavily used - "broken in" - and directly compare them at the same time using identical outboard equipment, there is no way to tell whether any changes have taken place with regards to sound quality (BTW, I have done this experiment with new verses used examples of the same component while working for equipment manufacturers). Unless you do objective measurements to confirm the existance or non existance of circuit parameter changes there is no way to accurately say that there are any changes that have taken place.

Audio equipment is not voodoo. Designing electronics gear is not like making wine where there are subjective and "mystical" elements to take into consideration. There are no mysterious parameters of the circuit that can cause magical changes in the sound - if there are sound changes, there is something in the circuit that has changed, and this can be quantified.

Of course, if you think you hear differences, then nothing I say will convince you otherwise.

One final thought - why should "breaking in" equipment always result in "better" sound - unless that result is expected before hand? If there was such a thing as "break in", don't you think that over time it would result in a degredation in sound quality, like mechanical and electro mechanical objects degrade over time? Why should electronic audio equipment be so special that it "improves" over time, like a grand piano or violin?

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited April 03, 2004).]

I didn't "expect" to hear a break-in. It just happened. While some will say I was getting used to the new sound, I will disagree. I have never noticed a "break-in" on anything else I have ever owned.

As I am writing this, I am thinking about TV calibration experts telling people in forums to warm up their display devices for at least a half hour before calibration. And now I am thinking about the "degauss" button on my computer display. Are these electronics unstable, or is this all hogwash? I have never thought along the lines of video before, but it suddenly strikes me that video, like audio, is based on electronics. Therefore, similarities must exist.

You make very good points SH, but I must wonder if the stability you write about is based on a "warmed up" unit. As I said, I don't turn my equipment off, so it is always somewhat "warmed-up", as opposed to someone with a system in a cool damp basement who may shut their system down when not in use.

I can't explain why I heard a difference. I know I was not looking to hear one, and that I went from a little disappointed to extremely satisfied after owning the 950 for just a few days. I also know that it was at first brighter than the NAD it replaced, but is now just smooth and articulate, but not really any brighter tonally than the NAD (which I still have and use).

Finally, about the "degauss" thing. I understand it has to do with built up magnetic energy, but the point is that that built up energy is capable of creating a change in the way our electronics perform. I am not saying that my 950 needed degaussing or anything along those lines. I am only saying that electronics can be and are affected by everything from magnetics to dirty power to temperature, so why is it not possible that over a period of the first few hours of use, the flow of electricity through them and the heat involved could slightly alter their performance?

[This message has been edited by willscary (edited April 03, 2004).]

[This message has been edited by willscary (edited April 03, 2004).]

Chad, sorry...I did not mean to hijack your thread.

Analog CRT video displays are based on the same principles as vacuum tubes - the cathode ray tube is a vacuum tube. Of course it will behave the same way, wear out and eventually need replacement the same way, need a warm up period the same way, change it's characterisitcs over time the same way, need calibration, and be influenced by external magnetic fields effecting it's electron guns - hence the need for degaussing. LCD and DLP displays work on completely different principles. If they wear, the mechanism is completely different than anything based on vacuum tube technologies.

Just because different objects are "electronic" in nature, this dose not mean that they will behave the same way and have the same needs for things like calbration. A video display (especially a CRT based one) is not the same thing as a preamplifier like the 950 by a long shot. They work on completely different principles. In addition, you cannot directly compare two different objects in regards to the same parameter - it's like comparing the wear charactistics of your car with the space shuttle. When was the last time you had your cell phone "calibrated"? Has you computer shown any signs of improvement by "breaking in"?

All electronics things cannot be lumped into a single category any more than all mechanical things can. The needs, operating principles, and wear characteristics of each device within a category can be completely different.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited April 03, 2004).]

Wow, great responses.

I guess from what I'm hearing you may both be right, except that I'd guess the "break-in" period would actually be only mircoseconds after power-up until all the circuits are functioning as designed.

Oh yeah, and I apologize as well for hijacking the thread.

Mike

Anyone else care to Hijack the thread...JK

Need to do some more testing hopefully tomorrow sometime.