Well, maybe I'm a naysayer in the group, but I have found the Zone 2 capability to be sufficient for my needs.

When we remodeled the house 9 years ago, I installed in-wall or in-ceiling speakers in 4 rooms; kitchen, dining room, living room and front 'study'. Since then, I also installed two sets of Bose 151 outdoor speakers (yes...I know....BOSE!?) on the deck and patio.

Each room, even outdoors, had it's own Niles volume control, and all cables terminated at an Adcom 6-speaker connector, which was in turn connected to the "B" button on my NAD 2400THX amp. So...if we wanted the sound that was playing from the two channel preamp (that the Outlaw replaced), you mashed the "B" button and listened in the rest of the house.

With the 950, I connected the Zone 2 outs to two channels (30W each) in my second NAD 906 amp, and that output to the Adcom speaker selector. Bammo...instant Zone 2, with "master" volume at the 950, but individual volume in each room and outdoors.

It was nice the other day; kids watching TV in the family room; me listening to CDs outside.

The operation is a bit funky, but I found that you 'remember' that the first punch of "multi" on the remote allows you to turn on/off the zone, and the second punch of "multi" allows you to step through sources. Just press 'next' (or whatever it's labeled on the remote) until you get out of Zone 2 what you want.

I agree; it would have been nice to engineer a bit more intuitive Zone 2 remote control, but for my purposes, it is adequate.

Hello Outlaws,

Thanks to another post I realized I neglected to get back and confirm the results of my testing. I apologize.

As Ed has stated, operating the multi-zone feature involves pressing the "multi" button 1,2,3, or 4 times depending on which part of the menu you wish to operate. The left and right arrows will then allow you to adjust the settings be it source, volume, etc.

It was also mentioned in this thread that you thought there were no bass and treble controls in the second zone. This is in fact correct.

Once again, I do apologize for the delayed response.

Scott

Well, that does it for me. I'd pretty much decided the Outlaw 950 wasn't for me anyway - too many problems with the units and too long to bring the product to market. Throw in the complete lack of forethought on the zone 2 control features, and that's definitely the icing on the cake for me.

Again, re-read my original post. Why even have a zone 2 feature if you've got to do tricks to control it from the second room? And as Matthew pointed out, it would cost next to nothing to have incorporated 12 - 15 more discrete codes for zone 2 operation. Plenty of other companies have found a way to do it on receivers that cost the same or are less than this unit.

Since it's obvious that Outlaw put very little thought into this feature, I wonder what other features of the unit they put very little thought into. Composite to S-vid conversion? Bass management? Noise floor? Kind of makes me wonder. An isolated incident or single problem is one thing, but the 950 seems to have more bugs than Win 98 first edition.

-Cliff

I think that the zone 2 works GREAT for my application. Why would I want to control the treble and base for zone 2?

Zone 2 goes to another power source, in my case I have an 0ld reciever that powers the downstairs and another receiver that controls the rooms upstairs.

I really only use the 2nd zone for CD music so on the Outlaw it is always set to that.

I really like the fact that the Outlaw does not need to be on to run zone two. On my Yamaha receiver, the Yamaha had to be on and the receiver upstairs had to on for zone 2 to work. So, good job Outlaw.

Jeff

Cliff, I normally don't get into the negative threads, but you seem to be an intelligent, educated guy who got off on a tangent. It would seem a lot of people have an overly demanding set of ideals for this preamp. It was designed to be a HT processor, and does that well. I love mine; the 2nd zone thing won't be a blip on most folk's radar. Maybe for a few $ more and more delays, that could have been more thoroughly designed, along with some other features, but then we might have an Anthem or the like for >$2K. I'm not sure what you expect for this price. This isn't really intended as a flame, just trying to put things in perspective.
Mike

If anyone have the problem that I have? When I use the zone2 with a different input (cd) than zone 1 ,and If I lower the volume in zone 1 ,I can listen the zone 2 audio in zone 1

Mike,

I didn't take your post as a flame, and please don't take this one as a flame, either. However, I feel compelled to respond.



I don't think thoroughly researching, probing, discussing, and ultimately pointing out the shortcomings of the zone 2 feature of the Outlaw 950 is a tangent. That said, I do realize that I place a higher than average importance on this feature set due to my own whole house audio set-up and those that I install for other people.



I definetly understand the importance of perspective. But as some of my earlier posts in this thread discuss, I'm not comparing the 950's feature set with the 2k+ pre/pros out there, but rather with $900 - $1,500 receivers (including my own 3 year old one). There is a bevy of receivers out there in this price range now that do a much better job with zone 2 than the Outlaw 950. How did these companies manage to do it? And these comapies' products are actually availabe now. Didn't cause them any delays. Didn't make their price go up. We're not talking about a new technology, nor a complicated one.

In today's home theater and audio environment, the importance of mult-zone/room functionality is growing more important, not less. I've heard it said that in 10 years, trying to sell a home without structured wiring will be like trying to sell a home without plumbing. While I think this is an exageration (especially for those of us here in Miss.), it does highlight the increasing importance of distributed a/v. The pre/pro or receiver is, of course, the centerpiece of any a/v system.

So to have what I think everyone would agree is a lower end product (Yamaha RX-V2095) than the 950 include a better feature set on zone 2 three years ago is really inexusable IMO.

Take care,
Cliff

Ok, I see where you are coming from. Why does the (insert Japanese receiver here) have more features than the 950? IMHO, and speaking from experience, since I have had several Japanese recs. over the years, they can't hold a candle to the 950 for sound. OUtlaw has chosen to put in the latest and greatest DACs and digital processors in this unit, rather than cheap "features". You may as well ask why the Tojo unit doesn't sound as good as the 950? I kept the last one in my system for a week, wanting to like it as it would have simplified my system. It went back. Just different priorities. By the way, zero on the hiss/noise. And my speakers use Raven tweeters, not known for hiding anything. Just FYI.
Cheers,
Mike

I read on one of these forums that one of these Tojo units will even tell you that your pizza is ready in the oven. Now THAT'S what I call a FEATURE!

Sorry to jump in with my two cents here, but it appears to me to be something like an
argument about which is better, A pick up truck or a sports car. The obvious answer is
that "It depends"

If one intends (and presumably needs) the functionality which allows for multi room use and recording, etc. then a device with a different feature set is indicated. If one is setting up a dedicated home theater with the objective of the best he can afford in state of the art sound reproduction, then that becomes the guiding feature set which dictates the purchase.

I agree that the multi feature in the 950 is a bit lame. But, since it is not a relevant feature in my case, I have a serious case of the "so whats". Apparently If one wants both the sound and an adequate MULTI functionality, another $$thousand or so will be required. Best of luck in your search for the sportscar/pickup of your dreams!

Eddyboy