Hey gents,

I've been lurking around the OUtlaw web site for a while now. I'm a HT enthusiast, with strong audiophile tendencies. Over the past year I've been upgrading my ht from a technics/garage sale system to a serious setup. Right now I"m trying to get some general information on the 950 compared to say the Rotel RSP-1066, or the Nad s-100, or the b&k ref 30 (those are the three choices I have from my dealers in the blustery west of ND). I was first considering a straight a-v reciever, untill I heard a pre-amp/amp compo (the NAD Silver Series 100-250 combo), and I was sold on seperates. (I was literally knocked on my butt when I heard the differance in clarity, sound stage, and pure holo-sonic imaging. Blew the Denon 5803 out of the water...but I digress.

Anyone heard these combos, and can coment on the quality of sound? I'm sold on seperates, and I'm realy impressed by what I'm hearing about outlaw. I just need to get some opinions.

-Jason

Welcome aboard!

The 950 vs. 1066 thread below covers the comparison between those two pretty well. I don't think I've seen a direct comparison between the other. Maybe you can do one and post your thoughts??? We always welcome more info.


brianca

Thanks,

I found the thread about 5 minutes after posting. I guess my real question is compairing the NAD S series to the Outlaw. My local dealer is waving a pretty good deal in front of my face. (It's street is 7K, he's quoted me 4K for the set). I liked the Rotel, but felt that the Silver was a little more detailed..at least to me. Then again I was looking at a price jump of $1,500. I've basicly coming from the standpoint of "Yes, it may cost me a grand more, but I dont EVER want to buy another piece of audio equipment for the next ten years."

That's why I'm trying to get a taste of what other people who have tried these combos. I liked the fact that the OUtlaw and Rotel were basically interchangeable sonicaly. That does help alot. The big question is will the Outlaw hold the same ground with the silver, which was a little more...relaxed...to me.

I also listened to a few Mac systems...but

A. they were to expensive, and I cant justify THAT MUCH MONEY on my system
B. The sound, while detailed and seperate, felt a little to...thick to me. The sound and tones were just to "close" to one another.

fmcorps, here is another comparison on another board that also says the about the same thing.

http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htforum/showthread.php?postid=747118#post747118

Since you posted on the Outlaw Forum, here is just a flattering review of the outlaw that is not on this board either.
http://www.hometheaterforum.com/htforum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=69490

I think most will tell you that the outlaw suffers more from not being tweak-able than not sounding good.

Don't know if you knew this or not, but some of the Outlaws are former NAD-ers.

And now, my personal opinion only, I have followed NAD over the years. Great sounding gear, not a lot of features or frills (sound family so far?), but... In terms of recent technology, DD EX, DTS-ES, DPL II, they are behind.

I personally think at this point, Outlaw is the better buy.

B&K Ref 30? I also looked at this one. You'll pay close to $2g for it (although I haven't checked lately), but the reviews that I've seen, say it isn't as "musical" as the latest crop of pre/pros. (Anthem, Rotel, Outlaw, etc.) Also, important for me, don't know for you: The B&K does *not* have DSP modes to "expand" 2.0 through 5.1 sources to 6.1 or 7.1 speaker system.

But in general, I personally do like B&K gear. They make great amps. I would wait and see what the successor to the Ref 30 is.

Yep,

I was aware that some nad heads were onboard. Which was why I was wondering how the two compared sonically. To me the NAD was just a little more preferable to the Rotel combo. But then again, after listening to what I was thinking of picking up (an integra 6.3) and then listening to the seperates of the NAD...it was an eye opener. I went from A-B compairing the NAD and the Rotel. I'm also pleased to hear that sonically the Outlaw holds up with the Anthem (the fourth choice I have here in the great north lands). Unfornatly I cant do a head to head between the Rotel, Anthem, B&K, and NAD, since the they are split between two dealers in town.

What does the 950-770 combo cost after S+H. (I know I wont be getting one for a while...but I like to know the ball park figures when balancing a decision like this.)

It will cost around 2550-2600 if you use regular shipping and about 75 more for overnight if memory serves me correctly.

[This message has been edited by Jed M (edited June 06, 2002).]

Thanks, thats about 500-1500 cheaper then the other combos I'm looking at. Which is quite a few dvd's now that I think about it.

-Jason

Just to set the record straight, the Anthem sounds very different from the Outlaw. I auditioned the Anthem for 4 days before the Outlaw came, I've auditioned the Outlaw for a month, and I've gone back to the Anthem.
I'm not saying the Outlaw is bad, they just sound different. I sold my Outlaw to a family member, it will be an awesome stater piece as we upgrade him from a receiver but the Anthem moves you into a higher class of electronics and sound. You pay more, but you get more (not meaning features as the DPL II and extended DTS formats have not been released yet).
I found the Outlaw to be too revealing and somewhat bright/harsh to my ear. I have used both Maggies (1.6 and 3.3's) and Thiel 3.6's as a basis for evaluation. I found the Anthem to be more relaxed and natural with a slightly larger soundstage. Both units are detailed and do an excellent job of bringing out every little nuance of the music. But I prederred the presentation of the Anthem more. I found that I don't care for the DSP modes of either unit when listening to music, but Outlaws 5/7 channel surround stereo modes are quite respectable. Both units will do equally well for movies, especially when Anthem can match the Outlaws Dolby and DTS functions. I do like Anthems remote better and I do not miss the sound delay DSP issues with Outlaw. Also, I can use my ICBM unit again, the Outlaw 950 and ICBM do not play well together, the sound becomes muddled when you try and run the units together.
Outlaw did a great job delivering an excellent processor for $900. If you want better it's going to cost you considerably more (3K-5K range). To me it was worth the additional money to get the sound I was looking for and less aggravation due to my expectations. And from a sound standpoint, well that is strictly subjective.
Please note: I did not return the Outlaw unit, I kept it in the family where it will be more appreciated for it's capabilities vs. price.

Room 1:

Anthem AVM-20 Pre-Pro
Pioneer Elite DV-47A DVD/SACD/DVD Audio
Sunfire Signature Stereo AMP (2 ch.)
Sunfire Theater Grand Signature AMP (5 ch.)
Outlaw ICBM Unit (Magnepan Edition)
Magnepan 1.6's Mains
Magnepan Center and Rears
Energy Microstar 1500 Watt Sub

Room 2:

Audilble Illusion L1 Preamp (Tube)
Counterpoint SA220 AMP (hybrid Tube)
Magnum Dynalab FT 101A Tuner
Toshiba SD-5109 DVD Player
Theil 3.6 Speakers

Pretty much everyone who has done the head to head on the 950 and 1066 has made the bright vs warm comment about them. I wouldn't say that they are sonically equal. They do sound different, it's just a matter of which sound you prefer.

brianca.

Of course, how they sound is also greatly affected by their other gear, especially speakers. You really have to try any pre/pro out in your system in order to fully judge how one will sound...
As for JJ, he has some very nice systems, and based on his use of Maggies(very revealing) and his preference for the tubed sound, I am not suprised that he preferred the Anthem, or maybe even would have liked a Ref 30 in comparison to the Outlaw. The Anthem looks like a very nice match for the rest of his gear and his tastes.

------------------
Take Care,
merc

Right. That's why I'm trying to base my comments mostly on what people who have tried both in their own theater have said. I'm also trying to be clear that I think that the 950 will be bright and the 1066 warm relative to each other no matter what other equipment you have.


brianca.

[This message has been edited by brianca (edited June 06, 2002).]

When the word "Bright" is used, does it mean that the sound is reproducing the HiNote's more pronounced (like turning up the treble)?

As for "Warm" does it mean more bass?

LQQK

Bright means more detail or harsh, warm means smoother or muddled. It depends what side of the coin you are on. Brianca, it appears to me the consensus would say that in a blind test the sound would be indistinguishable, but when people know which one they are listening to they can detect a small difference.

[This message has been edited by Jed M (edited June 06, 2002).]

Which comparisons are you refering to?


brianca..

Brianca, all of them except yours. Why are we talking about them? I figure these people can read and interpret for themselves.

[This message has been edited by Jed M (edited June 06, 2002).]

According to Stereophile, here are some audio descriptor definitions:
dark - A warm, mellow, excessively rich quality in reproduced sound. The audible effect of a frequency response which is clockwise-tilted across the entire range, so that output diminishes with increasing frequency.

warm - The same as dark, but less tilted. A certain amount of warmth is a normal part of musical sound.

bright, brilliant - The most often misused terms in audio, these describe the degree to which reproduced sound has a hard, crisp edge to it. Brightness relates to the energy content in the 4kHz-8kHz band. It is not related to output in the extreme-high-frequency range. All live sound has brightness; it is a problem only when it is excessive.

harsh - Gratingly unpleasant to the ear.

detail - The subtlest, most delicate parts of the original sound, which are usually the first things lost by imperfect components. See "low-level detail." Compare "haze," "smearing," "veiling."

Hope that helps!

------------------
Take Care,
merc

We're talking about them because I can't find a single review of a person who has had them both in their theater for a demo who has said that they are indistinguishable. I was one of those people and I didn't say that, so I don't think you can say all of them.

I feel like you are misrepresenting what I said in my review, so I want to correct that. That's why I'm talking about it.

brianca..

[This message has been edited by brianca (edited June 06, 2002).]

Thanks Brianca.

Hey guys,

Once again, thanks for the information. Has anyone tried (or can point me int the right direction) of a 950-B&K Ref 30 discussion.

Oh, and I personaly prefer my set up to be a little bright. Like I've said before, I'ld rather hear what's on the recording, as opposed to hearing a piece of equipment's interpretation of a recording.

NOt to say there's anything wrong with that. It's just a personal preferance.

-Jason

I thought one of the beta testers had some experience with the B&K but I may be wrong. I don't know of anyone who has directly compared these two units though. Anyone else?

I think merc had been demo-ing a Ref30 when he first got his beta unit.

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

fmcorps,

I have no experience with the 950, but I have owned the ref 30 for about 9 months now. I use Martin Logan speakers and the Outlaw 750 amp. Sound is subjective, but I will just say that this set up sounds incredible, at least to my ears.

Something I don't hear much discussion about is the ref 30's system A/V presets. It's so much more than something in the features list. While the ref 30 doesn't have any DSP modes, it has the following listening modes: surround, stereo, THX, and mono. You can then configure that particular mode with any number of speakers, 1 to 7. A nice way around DSP modes, this allows for 28 configurations, and you can do what you want with them.

Here is where the presets come in - you get 40 of them (actually, 40 for each of its two zones)! You can configure source (video can be different if desired), sound mode, number of speakers, EQ, sub level, center level, and rear level. For example, you can have a preset called MOVIE - SURROUND, 6 speakers, a bright EQ, rears flat, center -1, sub +2. Because it also allows for a direct mode, to bypass any processing, I have a MUSIC preset. But, for times I want to use my sub for music, I have a preset called SUB. For watching movies at night, I have a NIGHT preset so I don't bother my neighbors (as much). Very flexible, and very simple. With my MX-500, instant recall of system configurations requires only one button press. How easy is that?

I hope you do get a chance to audition both and compare them head to head. I didn't see too many comments on the ref 30 here, so I just wanted to help. Yes, it costs more than the 950; you should be able to find them now for under $2K. Good luck

------------------

Hi Guys,
While I impatiently waited for the 950, I bought a Ref 90 for my HT. I ended up keeping it for 29 days, the maximum, part of which also included my initial ownership of the my initial beta1 950 unit. Compared on that A/B in house ownership, I returned the Ref 30 and kept the no-tuner, beta1, Outlaw 950 unit. The primary reason was due to only the sound of each unit when playing back both movies and music and included the internal DAC system in the sound. In ALL cases I preferred the 950. Then I tried the analog inputted music sources and REALLY favored the 950 to the Ref 30. IMHO, the Ref 30 just sounded more veiled, and less detailed than the 950....YMMV!

------------------
Take Care,
merc

[This message has been edited by merc (edited June 07, 2002).]

Thanks, that's kind of what I wanted to know.

I"m using Paradigm Monitors for my HT setup
Mains: M9
Center: M370
Surrounds: M3
Rears: No room

I've chosen the 9's because the sounded the best to me. I liked the sound, because to me it was a very clear, very true reproduction of the source material. I specificaly chose them over B&W/Boston/PSB/ and a few others that escape my memor right now, because they felt to muddy to me. As I stated before, I was poised to plunk down some cash for the Integra 6.3, however I had that "unfortunate" run in with the NAD seperates and saw the light.

What I prefered in the Integra (as opposed to the compairable models from Onkyo/Denon/ and HK) was that the other recievers were missing a lot of midtone. I felt that they were a lot more colored then the others. However I also auditioned the B&K 307, and something just felt to "thick" to me with the sound reproduction. (Same thing with the MacIntosh seperates I listened to). So long story short, it sounds like the OUtlaw would be the best bet, given the general view is that the Outlaw is a more "revealing" pre, which sounds more like It's up my alley.

Yet, as it has been said time and time again, the ultimate test will be taking the piece (or pieces-as I"m still working out which should be include in the final bout of the NAD/B&K/Outlaw/Rotel shootout) home and listening to them in person-a title bout to be sure.

Whew, that's a mouthfull. But thanks for the help in making up my mind to give this piece a shot in the title round. Now it's just a matter of saving up my sheckles for the big fight.

[This message has been edited by fmcorps (edited June 07, 2002).]

Hey Merc,

I've got an extra license for UBB if you need it to get off the ground. Looks like I need a new home as well as of tonight.

brianca...