Got my 950 a few days ago. Didn't know about the hiss problem. Was studying and listening to a CD, when it ended I heard hiss from my speaker about 5 feet away. So, I just searched the forum and read all about it. I wasn't even on a "hiss hunt". With my old setup (NAD gear) I never heard a hiss from a seated position away from a speaker.

According to the posts this problem was improved. Yikes...

Anything new on this issue???
Are there actually different versions of this amplifier and how does one tell???

Any help is appreciated.
later, bp

Yes, there are a number of people who have an elevated level of hiss compared to previous gear, or in some cases, at the listening position. As far as I know, there is no update or cure. I have read on another forum that they are still working on it, but I've not heard anything else.

I'm afraid that the only possible cure for the hiss would be to wait for a comparable pre/pro to come out from Sherwood Newcastle and possibly others, try one of these out, and see if it cures your hiss problem. There _should_ be more of these competetively priced units to come on the market in the near future.

I have audible hiss from about 5 feet from my speakers in the 'analog DSP' mode, but it gets significantly quieter in all other modes such as optical or coax digital input. I have very efficient speakers (106db / 1 watt) so I actually consider myself pretty lucky that the hiss is not significantly louder. My 950 is however hissier than the Sony EP9ES it replaces, and hissier than my stereo vacuum tube preamp that is in-line with my front left and right speakers.

I talked to Scott today. He said they are still working on the hiss issue. Nothing specific and no dates. I have hiss from 10'-12' feet away. He assured me that Outlaw would take care of me once they have a solution. If not I will be able to return my unit if I so desire.

You can ask the Outlaws for a replacement 950. There are some subtle differences between different red dot 950's, as measured by Soundhound.

The Outlaws say hiss isn't a problem in 98% to 99% of the red dot 950's. (Believe it or not.)

[This message has been edited by Will (edited October 17, 2002).]

What exactly is a red dot unit???

I have hiss too. Scott and the boys have also told me they are continuing to work on the problem. I can wait.

In the meantime, I am still enjoying everything else the 950 has to offer that my last pre/pro didn't...

If a person jumps in and finds the unit 'hissy', then decides to wait for a hiss-fix, would the 30 day limit for a refund apply? I suspect the answer is yes, that one would be stuck with whatever is offered as a final solution without option of refund after 30 days, but you never know.

Has this been asked of the Outlaws already?

From what applejelly said, it sounded to me like you would be able to return it after the 30-day period if you spoke with them during that month with a hiss problem. I could be wrong, though, and I haven't heard anything making a policy like that official.

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

I don't think there is an official policy, but since I contacted Scott before my 30 days was up, I can still return my unit after that 30 day window.

Prior to calling, I too was unaware of any such arrangement. I was actually calling to get my return authorization since I am unhappy with the hiss. I figured if they fixed it for good in a few months, I could always rebuy. Now I get to keep my 950 to enjoy and still have return privileges if an acceptable solution does not come to fruition.

I have one of the new units that has the hiss problem. Scott would only extend the 30 day trial period for two weeks. Appears that Outlaw giving some people more time than others.

So, what exactly is a red dot unit???

"red dot" is the indicator used on the units provided as "hiss fix" replacements to people who received 950's before shipping stopped in May. The red dot indicated that the unit had the latest revisions included. I believe that subsequent production runs do not have the red dot, as they came off the assembly line with the revisions.

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

These would be the production runs from India as opposed to from Malasia.

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net

ouch....

My impression from talking with Peter, was that (hopefully) when (and not if) they fix the hiss issue, I would get a new one. No 30 day limit. Now, if I wanted to return it after 30 days for some other reason, I'd be out of luck.

But I also made sure that I talked with them *before* the 30 days was up, to let them know that I did have hiss, and that I could live with it for now as long as I knew that they would keep working on it, and that I would get a new unit when it was fixed. If that makes sense.

The 950 has been out for about six months. A few months ago, before many 950's were out, the Outlaws stopped production in order to fix the hiss problem. When they thought they licked the problem (which in my case, they did not), the Outlaws offered to replace every single hissy 950. But now, many more people own the 950. If they do find a solution to the hiss problem now, they'd probably have an incredibly large number of people wanting to get replacement 950's. I doubt the Outlaws have too much of an incentive to find a solution. Afterall the 950 is probably selling like hotcakes despite the hiss (and UI problems). Perhaps, the Outlaws (or rather, Eastech) will come out with a 951 or a 950 Mark 2 in six months, that updates some of the UI bugs in the 950, and has a few new features, and incidentally fixes the hiss problem. Just speculatin'...

[This message has been edited by Will (edited October 18, 2002).]

Remember that the 950 rev 0 version that had hiss, affected a lot more people than now. So there would still be a lot less people's units to replace.

Plus, I don't know what their policy would be for example, if Bob Smith buys a unit now, says nothing, but then complains about hiss in 2004.

That's why I made sure to "complain" before my 30 days was up.

I would hope that the incentive to continue working on a solution is simply good customer service. And the desire to have even the small percentage of people now affected with hiss, to continue to buy Outlaw products.

Me? I'm a waitin for 1 of 3 things:

1) Hiss-fixed 950
2) The 950's big brother
3) H/K 7200

I can wait maybe 3 to 6 months to see what happens. Even with #1, I might still be tempted with 2 or 3. (You see, I have this thing about wanting Logic 7 on 5.1 sources for a reasonable price... ) I have a hope that the 950's big brother will have THX Ultra2 and/or Logic 7. (Notice that the new H/K's have the "triple crossover"? I'm hoping Outlaw traded that to H/K for L7... )

I wonder if most of the people who noticed a hiss on Rev 0 950 and got a revised 950, think the hiss went away. In my case, the hiss changed slightly and the sonics of the 950 changed slightly. So, at least in my case, I could not say the hiss changed much at all. But that's my experience. Perhaps, others may have noticed big improvements.

My guess is we won't see a from-scratch designed big brother pre/pro in 3 to 6 months. But I wouldn't be surprised if Eastech puts out incremental updates to the 950, in six months to a year. In fact, they may have to, by then, to keep the unit fresh and competitive. Hopefully by then Sherwood Newcastle and Yamaha or Sony will have nicely priced, and newer, offerings.

bbpj - have to ask, what amp/speakers are you running with your 950. By reducing the gains on my Parasound 2205 (by 1/4), I greatly reduced the hiss. Does your amp have manual gains?

Also,"when it ended I heard hiss from my speaker about 5 feet away". So during playback you heard what, hiss or the music?
What CD? I think we all can agree the some cd's hiss (Some louder than others) between tracks. You should continue to experiment/play around with things to try and lower your noise.

Hiss from 5 feet is far, how loud where you listening(you were studying, hence assume low). Have you calibrated your system since adding the 950?

Was your NAD a receiver or seperates? My Denon 3200 receiver is probably less hissy than my 950/2205 combo, but at the same time hiss was still there. Thing was I never even thought about it until this cropped up on the 950.

Will- Somehow get me your email id...

kevin5brownremovethisportionfornonspam@yahoo.com

I've always noticed hiss in any system I've had. The difference is in the past I only heard it at high vol during quiet passages. I wasn't looking for hiss with the 950 it was looking for me. No way I should hear hiss at 5 feet with low volume. Not acceptable. Didn't know about it until I read the posts after I noticed the problem.

My amp is an ATI 1505 which clips more easily than I thought it would (has no gain control).
My mains are PSB silveri's. Surrounds old polks that impressed me the other day. They actually get louder than the PSB's before the amp starts clipping (god help my tweeters). The speakers stand about 18 inches tall and have a tweeter, driver and passive bass radiotor. I was actually shocked at their output.
My old NAD stuff is about 18 years old now and they are seperates. I don't actually remember ever making my NAD 2200PE clip. If it does it has soft clipping which I appreciate more now that I have an Amp with out this feature.

I just hooked up my old preamp to the ATI to compare sound and hiss in 2 channel with the 950. My old preamp will put a huge hurt on my ATI and speakers if I crank the vol half way. Sound if fuller and hiss on same CD much worse. This is NOT MUSIC HISS it is unacceptable floor noise. NAD was doing it better 18 years ago and I wish outlaw would have made a $1100 prepro that doesn't have these problems and had better 2 channel sound.

I LOVE THE 950 FOR MOVIES!!!! IT ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!However, I like music better and I don't know if I can take the hiss. Also, maybe it is just my imagination??? but my old preamp just sounds richer. 950 is a little thin???






[This message has been edited by bbpj (edited October 19, 2002).]

bbpj:
You might consider the solution I used to get the best of movies and CDs, since my 950 hisses also. Break out that old preamp and put it in line with your left and right front channels. Plug the left and right outputs of the 950 into an aux input of the preamp and your CD player into another input. Then plug the output of this preamp into your power amps for the front left and right channels. Now, you can switch between the 950 for movies and your CD player for playing CDs. Just make a mark on the volume control of the preamp where the volume knob is,so you can return easily to the 'calibrated' level when playing movies. This system works extremely well for me, and sounds better than running my CD player through my 950, and the hiss is gone.

****Warning - Rant follows****

This whole hiss thing is really a stupid issue in a device that supposedly has "24 bit" ADCs and DACs. Do you know how quiet _true_ 24 bit resolution is? Well, it is 144db quiet. That is so quiet that practically no electronic device on the planet Earth can actually be that quiet, barring perhaps liquid nitrogen cooling to near absolute zero degrees. It is so quiet that if you made a recording and set the input level meters to _peak_ at minus 48db, you would _still_ have the entire dynamic range of CD left over. No microphone even comes close to being that quiet. No recording studio could ever be that quiet. And certainly no musicians would be that quiet. If you took a single, low noise transistor and fashoned a simple emmiter follower, it would already be above the noise floor of real 24 bit. The 950 would be dead quiet, even if it had an honest 18 bits of _real_ noise performance. Clearly, it is worse, much worse. In truth, I measured the actual noise of two 950s to be around the level of _12 bit_ performance. There is a major dis-connect here. As marketing departments tout "24 bit performance", they only mislead the consumer - as that claim is just plain false, and unethical. I have noticed a general "dumbing down" of audio starting about the time Home Theatre came to be. Speaker response curves look more like outdoor patio speakers of 20 years ago. And yes, digital electronics that are advertised as holding the promise of being dead quiet, are about as hissy as a half-decent cassette recorder of 20 years ago. Manufacturers used to be much more honest about their specs - products routinely _exceeded_ their specs when tested in reviews. The 950 flunked the noise measurement tests in Sound & Vision Magazine a few months ago. Something is very wrong here....

*****End of Rant****

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited October 19, 2002).]

I remember it starting about the time CD came along and all the 'old timers' who understood analog pretty well started trying to 'prove' that digital couldn't really work. From the triangle wave vs. sine wave to the 'jitter' arguments, the effect has been a trend away from sound engineering principles.

Try explaining to a vinyl-phyle that their beloved has approximately 12 bit performance and you'll probably have a fight on your hands.

One saving grace is that as technology advances our ears don't, so it's easier and easier to get things 'quiet enough' and 'clear enough', but it REALLY ticks me off to see a modern device not meet it's specs by such a large margin.

Are there any other comparable units to the 950 on the market now for under $2000.

Does anthem sell their products over the internet??? Anyone know of a place that offers competetive pricing???

The Rotel 1066 pre/pro is the obvious competitor. It streets for around $1300, has less hiss and is less harsh and has a much better UI than the 950. But the 1066 does not have a tuner built in. Also its variable frequency crossovers are global for all channels.

... And you cannot get around the double bass problem on the 5.1 inputs on the Rotel unless you buy an ICBM ...

With the Outlaw you can, by engaging and using the 80 Hz analog crossover.

I put together a pre/pro chart several months ago. It's probably due for a little update, but it gives a pretty good idea of some of the most talked-about pre/pros. The Rotel that Will pointed out is probably the closest competitor at the moment.

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

bbpj,

I am running Silver i's too. I am using a Bryston 9B-ST to power them. I have hiss from 10'-12', which is worse than you. It is loudest from my C6i center.

As far as clipping, I have only clipped my amp during depth charges on U-571 at cranking levels. I also believe the PSB's 4 ohm impedance is a huge factor, since the speakers are quite efficient. I borrowed a friend's top-of-the-line Yamaha Integrated (last of the Pro-Logic models) and it sounded thin - no bass. Then I hooked up a bottom-of-the-line older B&K 2 channel amp and was sold on separates. It takes current to run the PSB's.

Also, I like the 2-channel of the 950, but I run a warmish DAC through the 950 with analog bypass. Not quite a dedicated 2-channel preamp as soundhog suggests, but very acceptable. A 2-channel preamp is one of my planned upgrades.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by bbpj:
[B]Are there any other comparable units to the 950 on the market now for under $2000.
___________________________________

THIS, gentlemen, is the bottom line of every issue. we all know the answer to bbpj's question.

from the rapidly changing formats to the license fees and agreement paperwork, to lack of standards in speaker setup, bass 'management', battles over which information should go where, at what word length and sampling rate, piracy battles, the complexity of trafficking every conceivable device in every conceivable way, it is a mammoth undertaking to design, manufacture, market, hell, even to write the manual for, distribute, troubleshoot, repair, replace and otherwise bring a modern prepro into enough satisfied hands, before the thing is hopelessly outdated, AND, make enough profit to justify the whole effort.
much less, for $899 plus shipping.

i use the piss out of this little gray box...every day. it never ceases to make me smile. i almost wish i had a problem with my 950, hiss or otherwise, so that i could sympathize with some of you, but i truly don't, and the option to return it remained for 30 days after purchase.

i think outlaw audio knocked the damn cover off the ball with this prepro. they are listening to every word said here. they'll do it again with the next generation prepro.

i'm so glad i didn't have to pay $3k for a bit better sound, a bit more options and a bit quieter unit. the difference allowed me to buy a very good dvd/sacd player, another pair of full range floor standers, an astoundingly good sub and take my lovely wife out for a nice meal. the movie was free and sounded better than any movie house i've been to.

Excellent perspective. I suspect spending more will fall into the 'diminishing returns' category, but every has a different tolerance for diminished returns I suppose. If I could get the AT clone for about what the Rotel streets for I'd rather just for the cosmetic appeal.

OTOH I have issues with something that isn't equipped with flashable firmware. That, to me, was a huge mistake.

How about this perspective... Make a prepro that doesn't hiss and avoid bad press. It is your first prepro and you don't get a second chance to make a first impression.

If you stop production and delay delivery of your product... fix the problem before you start shipping again... Seems so simple doesn't it.

I'm sure a significant mumber of people are returning units just because of hiss. This is to say nothing of poor 2 channel sound. Even if units cost 1-2 hundred dollars more, they would sell just as many.

Bottom line... how much will people pay for a unit with better 2 channel sound and no hiss with all of these features. Personally, I would pay $1500 without blinking. Considering the rotel unit is $1500 and has no tuner and fewer features.

This is exactly what the folks at Bryston, Krell, Levison, Rotel ect... want. They don't want some internet hifi company to do well. All over the country at stereo stores salesman are raising their noses at Outlaw products and claiming they are inferior. Sad thing is Outlaw just gave them a reason to do so.

bbpj- I 100% agree. In fact, I was really leaning towards returning my 950, and getting the B&K Ref 50 (for low $2k's, I'd do it, but not for high $2k's for the Anthem), until I found out that the B&K (at least now) just has a global crossover. So Outlaw still edges out some of the competition for now at least in my mind.

Interesting [url=Linkhttp://www.audioholics.com/productreviews/avhardware/clone_prepros.php][url=Linkhttp://www.audioholics.com/productreviews/avhardware/clone_prepros.php][url=Linkhttp://www.audioholics.com/productreviews/avhardware/clone_prepros.php]Linkhttp://www.audioholics.com/productreviews/avhardware/clone_prepros.php[/url][/url][/url]

Anyone using one of these clones???

You probably heard the PSB speaker distort because it couldn't handle that much power, rather than hearing the Bryston amp clip. Usually an amplifier when it clips makes a different sound at the speaker, than the sound a speaker makes when it distorts because it's getting more power from the amp than it can handle...

See http://ubb.outlawaudio.com/ubb/Forum15/HTML/000583.html

Here is how I have set up my system, for now. http://www.kgjack.com/interconnects.jpg
Complicated, but satisfying, and no hiss at all.

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

Wow! I hope you're not going to test me on the layout of your system! Quite impressive.

It appears you have the Sony TA-P9000 preamp in a similar arrangement to me. I kept my Sony EP9ES 5.0 DD preamp and have a relay switcher where I can select the output of the 950 or the Sony to go to my power amps and speakers. I then loop my mixing console through the relay-operated-no-bass-management 5.0 bypass inputs of the Sony. The Sony has a Smart CircleSurround EX adapter on it's surround outputs, and I have the option of using the 950 to decode Dolby EX or the Sony. They decode it slightly differently, with the Sony getting the nod most of the time. The Sony also has a couple "theatre" settings that simulate the sound of a big movie palace pretty well. I use this setting sometimes for listening to old black and white movies from the 40s and 50s.

In any of your previous setups with the 950, did you ever hear a hiss more than a few inches away from your speakers?

Will

In the earlier comparisons of the two:

Forgot to mention that as I understand it, the Rotel decodes HDCD, the Outlaw cannot.

Good Post Bossobass, Ego me bene habeo .
I’ve said the same several times in variation. I had noticed how guys with 5K+ prepro’s really get rather touchy on the forums when another ‘guy’ (who would never ‘chose’ or choose to ‘budget’ that much for this area of his life) attacks it for not having X or Y feature or spec at its price. Magno cum periculo custoditur, quod multis placet. These points usually take the form of declaring over and over when you pay that much (and more) it should really perform better and/or have this ONE feature (that the majority of cheaper/older units have included for years).

I don’t think there is an electronic product out there without tradeoffs at any price.
For my tastes the tradeoffs with the 950 are EXTREMELY palatable at its price. And In virtute sunt multi ascensus

I’m sorry for those who have had hiss issues, that have not effected me. Well I worded that incorrectly. I have and DO have hiss. But an entirely different subject (yet in like manner, where something pleasing comes from a problematic source) while distortion is often a dirty word, - there are all kind of applications sold to induce a pleasing or effects geared amounts of distortion in electronic instruments (guitars etc).

For me, in real time usage there is no ‘bite’ to the 950’s non-venomous hiss, when hiss or no, it continues to ‘sound’ better than counterparts. To borrow a phrase, “For that which acts is always superior to that which is affected.” Surely Outlaw could have continued on to improve this or that … but Imponit finem sapiens et rebus honestis

I’m happy to have chosen Outlaw, I prefer traveling towards high-end sound ope exceptionis to the theory that increasing price equates to an equal rise in quality output. (I’ve found in my own purchases this theory to be PR driven with startling frequency). I feel what Outlaw is producing will definitely tend to force other manufactures to offer more for the dollar particularly if the market softens. The sound reverberating around my house is of very high quality, I hope Outlaw continues growth eventually having the firepower of an immense customer base enabling them to launch an ever-broader product range. "Cum catapultae proscriptae erunt tum soli proscripti catapultas habebunt"

It’s the weekend, this is my version of an interactive post. See if you can place the translations in their proper spots…your choices are:
The wise man puts a limit on even honorable undertakings
When catapults are outlawed, only outlaws will have catapults
With me all is well
Lock and Key will scarce keep that secure, which pleases everybody
by way of exception
There are many degrees in excellence

the wise man puts a limit...imponit finem sapiens...

when catapults...cum catapultae...

with me all...ego me bene...

lock and key will...magno cum periculo..

there are many degrees...in virtute multi..

but, then again...it's all greek to me.

Lena:

Do you remember the "wattage wars" where the Federal Trade Commission had to step in and legislate a standard method whereby all manufacturers had to adhere to a standard measurement of power output? I do.

It really is getting back to the point where manufacturers like Outlaw are venturing _far_ off the honest side of stating specifications on things like noise, _actual_ resolution and yes, wattage.

Are we really that stupid?

I'm glad to know you are happy with your 950, I wish I were too. I know enough _not_ to buy things like the 950 on specs alone, but does 'Joe and Jane Average"?

Mine hisses. It doesn't meet it's published specs on noise by a WIDE margin. I have had to 'demote' the 950 to non-critical things like VCR an DSS switching.

If I were Outlaw, I would have monitored Eastech much more closely during the design and prototype phase. I would have put the 'first article' through TOUGH tests and measurements and listening. If they had done this (or possibly not looked the other way), none of us would be writing about hiss today, and we would be singing the praises of the 950 like you.

If another option were available now, I would jump on it. Expect to see a lot of 950s on Ebay in 6 months to a year.

If the equipment I use for my movie work performed like the 950, the manufacturer wouldn't be able to _give away_ it's goods - it's trust would have been broken, in an industry where downtime and less than perfect performance is not an option.

Outlaw dropped the ball - big time.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited October 20, 2002).]

Also very true. This is why it's very unlikely I'll be buying a 950, unless it matures into a revision that is much improved and less expensive. After reading the latest S&V I personally am leaning toward either a AT P9/Sony P9K combo, 1066/Sony P9K combo, the Anthem or the new B&K. But as they say, YMMV and what's important to me probably is not to others.

the facts always sway me more than the few loudest detractors.

in following this forum for a long while, i'd approximate 45 happy 950 owners and 9 unhappy (of whom only 3 or 4 have said they returned the 950 and purchased a competitor's prepro).

my dad always told me: 'if you do a good job, they'll tell 3 people, but, if you do a bad job, they'll tell 33 people'.

using that adage, and considering this forum would be the place to voice dissatisfaction, and also considering approx. 1,000 950s shipped, i don't think the ball has been dropped.

i also followed loosely, the 1066 and avm20 threads 'over there' and saw similar numbers of gripes about various issues, from failed upgrades to repeated blown fuses.

what if you paid $3,000 and then had to pay $300 more to upgrade, then waited weeks to find the upgrade was faulty. and then read that the newer same model was including the upgrade at the price you paid with no upgrade?

i would demand my money back, buy something else and then go tell 33 other people. i don't think, though, that that would derail an otherwise good product.

i think, if outlaw truly dropped the ball, the loaded question, 'is anyone happy with their 950?', would have yielded an avalanche of resounding 'NO' answers.

i do agree with the gist of soundhound's comments: they should change the published s/n specs. i do however, wonder how many other electronics products also have bulls__t s/n specs.

soundhound: i need a big. could you please bring me up to speed on the +4dbu vs. -10dbv thing? in particular, will a -10dbv component realize enough gain, or too much gain, through a +4dbu preamp? and, can you go from unbalanced to balanced without a line converter?

Bosso:

Whenever you see something that has a "dbV" after it, they are referencing 1 volt. Whenever they have a 'dbu' after it, they are referencing .775v _unloaded_. If it says "dbm", it is referencing .775v into 600 ohms, or 1 milliwatt. It is possible to go from banalnced to umbalanced without a converter. To go from balanced to umbalanced, take your output from pins 2&3 of an XLR, and ignore the ground wire on pin 1. To go from unbalanced to balanced, ground one pin (usually pin 3) and inject the signal into pin 2 (hot) and pin 1(ground). There is a 6db level difference in the balanced to unbalanced translation, but this may or may not be an issue, gain wise. If it is, then you will need a balanced to unbalanced and vice versa translator. -10dbv is about 320 millivolts. +4dbu is 1.23 volts. The difference between these two is 11.8db.

I _Still_ think Outlaw dropped the ball - it just sticks in my craw when marketing types play fast and loose with the truth. Controlled lieing. Yes, most people are happy. Great! _BUT_ I think they should take into account _all_ their customers, not just "98-99%".

Saul Marantz did. Frank McIntosh did. Avery Fisher did. Rudy Bozak did. David Hafler did.....

Pass the Marguaritas.........


[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited October 21, 2002).]

As far as dropping the ball, the Outlaws, in my opinion, have not. I am one of those people who like simplicity. I wanted DTS, DD, 7.1 capability, and PLII. I wanted a fairly sensitive tuner, Outlaw's triple crossover, and an easy to use remote. Heck, a very good Pronto remote by itself can cost 1/3 to 1/2 the price of the 950. My 950 remote controls 7 components easily enough that my 3-1/2 yr old daughter can use it to turn on the system, the digital cable, the TV, the DVD, and pop in Monsters, Inc.

I have the hiss. By turning down the gains on my amp I have eliminated it. The sound is vastly better than anything else I have owned.

To go back to dropping the ball...Does Buick drop the ball when they don't produce a Mercedes? How about when auto manufacturers claim 14 city/20 hwy gas mileage and owners report average fuel mileage closer to 14MPG overall?

I know it is apples to oranges. Yes, published specs should be able to be duplicated. On the other hand...the 950 is a great product at a fantastic price. Yes, others will come along with a like product and price eventually. At this time, however, the 950 is the best product at this price point, and its nearest competition is about 50% more.

"think, if outlaw truly dropped the ball, the loaded question, 'is anyone happy with their 950?', would have yielded an avalanche of resounding 'NO' answers".

Shhese, I used this logic last week and basically was told to f&^% off/stay out of it. Sad thing, this was in my own post. Anyway, totally agree with this statement, and believe it says alot. 1) people tend to complain way too much, and 2) the 950's hiss problem, althogh real and worse for some than others, has been blown way out!

I do, - seen the history, have to shamefacedly admit I don’t have the math ability down on voltage etc, to decipher for myself which scale a manufacture is using which can weight S/N or Sensitivity specs etc. - one direction or the other. I am aware that specs can be selectively leaned using different baselines, and rely on snitching all of your translations on these topics at the moment.

I have no patience for math, if I ever got into physics and came up with a theory like ‘Relativity’ I’d have to do as Einstein, and toddle over to a fellow mathematician to have it converted into algebraic language.

Since the Outlaw is often described by users familiar with many systems as transparent. Is it possible (as there has been some theorizing in the forum) that certain 950’s might be sensitive to system structure that it could follow that Outlaw when measuring their own factory setups did register those specs? Just a thought?

I’m sure Outlaw contracted with Eastech to get it perfect, wanting it so does not make it so. What do you do when your Eastech sales rep calls you and says…our engineers’ state we have certain minor problems, which will slow our estimated schedule, but we reassure you we are working on resolutions round the clock. They can monitor Eastech all they like….it still won’t stop problems from arising, and at that stage of working with an OEM, you just deal with the issues, not throw the baby with the bathwater.
I also would imagine (just a guess) that there were moments Outlaw would have happily shot Eastech down in front of the proverbial saloon. I know several front sales/account managers myself who tend towards rosy colored projections, but to borrow a phrase I laughed at from Lonesome Dove..."A plank wall won't stop a bullet but a *dentist will”. (insert sale rep/engineers here *) I bet Outlaw would have loved retiring to drown their troubles in great quantities of margaritas (if said saloon was in Texas).
One of the two most popular myths surrounding the history of ‘margarita’ attributes it to a Texas socialite who served it first at a party she threw in Acapulco on vacation, the concoction quickly gained popularity in her home state. …gee…it can be nice sometimes to live in Texas.

If I'm not able to control the hiss, I will most likely buy a surround reciever to use until a more palatable alternative is available. I need a surround reciever for another room I plan to do in 6-12 mos. I'm thinking of the NAD T752. It can be had for $750 on the net. Choices choices...

Bosso:

Probably quite a bit of them, and that is my point. It really does seem that HT (and comsumer electronics in general, and probably many more industries) are folowing the computer marketing model. Integrity gives way to 'spin'. I buy the products, but I hold my nose.

I _really_ want to love what Outlaw is doing. I was, and am a fan of products like Adcom, Nad etc. Products that gave real bang for the buck and performed as promised. I know, I've owned many of them. For all I know, some of Outlaw's principals were involved with these companies. I was prepared to love the 950 - honestly. I am saddened that this turned out not to be the case.

So why am I saying all this? What good will it do? Well, I would just hope that people be a bit more discriminating in what is "good enough". I know that is falling on a lot of deaf ears, and in many instances there is perceived to be no other choice, but it is a good ideal to strive for. Yes, the few dissenting voices are usually the loudest, but in more than a few instances throughout history, they have been _right_. I am not trying to blow this whole thing up to biblical proportions, but would hope that "good enough" (take the CD standard - yecch) gets a bit more upward consideration by the powers that be in the future.



[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited October 21, 2002).]

Will, no I've never had any real problems with hiss but mentioned it because this thread is titled "I'm hissing". I use the other preamps because I am not totally satisfied with the BM issues, in my system, on the analog bypasses. I am getting increasingly picky with regard to analog music playback as time goes on, and now, in fact, have decided to sell my Parasound preamps and get a Musical Fidelity CD/DAC/Pre24 unit. This will handle all 2 channel playback. The Outlaw 950 will continue to handle all movie and TV audio playback as it always has...

I have seriously mixed emotions about the 950. Basically it seems to be not as good as the higher priced competition, and so rather than being a fantastic value it's more like it's worth what it costs. Nothing wrong with that, but that's not how it was expected to be, at least by me.

And in that case, I'm strongly leaning towards either the Rotel 1066 with an optional Sony P9K (as Merc has with his 950) or maybe waiting a bit and looking at the next B&K Ref.

Anytime I've bought 'good enough' instead of what I want I've either upgraded to what I wanted soon after or, if the 'good enough' was costly, I've put up with it but not enjoyed it much. For me, I'd rather stick with the 1050 as preamp (cheap as possible) and get what I want later rather than blow money 'all the way up' to where I want to end up.

It's OK - I have lots of other issues to iron out on this HT setup anyway, so I'm taking a wait and see stance on this. If the 950 shakes out to be a real bargain as I originally expected I'll jump in, or maybe get a clone. But if things keep spiralling for the 950 I'll be glad I'm not the pioneer.

IMO, if you aren't going to the Anthem, I'd get the Outlaw. In my A/B with the Rotel and the Ref30, I preferred the 950 sonically and, of course, cost effectively. Since in my system the 950s and 1066s hiss was identical, it was a non-issue. As far as analog BM was concerned during analog bypass playback, the 950 and 1066 has identical problems(or benefits depending on your speaker setup). The Ref30 had NO BM in analog passthrough. Tonally, I thought the Ref 30 was warm to the point of veiled, and the Rotel was somewhere between the 950 and the Ref 30 in the analytical to veiled, harsh to warm continuum.

In the way that I am using the 950, I would need to get an Anthem to come close to the performance for both music and movies. For me, I see no benefit on spending any more than $900 for a preamp processor unless I decide to spend the money for the Anthem. YMMV!

I'm more thinking of the new B&K (ref 50?), which I would hope would be better than the 30, and is rumored to street at just over $2K.

The Anthem is nifty too, but might be overkill. Those are basically at the top of my short list, with other options following.

Charlie: B&K told me that they designed and expect the Ref 50 to sound tonally identical to the Ref 30. They also said that the Ref50s S/N ratio will be identical to the Ref30s. That said, in my mind, without actually hearing the Ref50, it appears to be a simple feature upgrade to the Ref 30. I guess we'll find out when it is actually readily available.
Whatever you choose to buy, good luck!

Is there a better reciever than the HK AVR520 for $540. It is onsale at onecall for two days. I may just have to hop on this one...

According to the Harman Kardon and Dealznet sites, the HK AVR 520 has 5 channels of 75 watts, but it doesn't list the wattage output for 7 channels, even though it has 5.1 logic 7.

Were you planning to use this receiver as your pre/pro?

[This message has been edited by Will (edited October 22, 2002).]

Well, my 950 is hissing terribly and I may have to return it. I need a reciever for another room I plan to do down the road. I figure I will use it as a pre/pro until a non hissing outlaw or another better alternative comes along. Seems like a good price.

Anyone used HK products before???

Will:

My master advises that the reason the HK AVR 520 is only rated for 5 channels is (now sit down for this one) because it only has five channels of amplification. One can only presume that they figured people might want to provide for expansion later to 7.1 without having to pay the freight for the extra two amp channels up front. Depending on how you configure it, it has either the 5.1 OR 7.1 version of Logic 7 in three variations.

As a matter of fact, my master has one and it's quite a nice piece. It's no 950, but then again what is?

But what do I know, I'm only a dog?

ARF ARF, says Iggy.

[This message has been edited by Iggy The Dog (edited October 22, 2002).]

Has anyone compared the 950 to the other manufacturers who are reselling the same
base unit to see if they have the same
'problems/characteristics'.
(ie. AtlanticTechnology.Com etc.)

------------------
Scott Burns
Scott.Burns@Netcontech.Com

Scott-- See http://ubb.outlawaudio.com/ubb/Forum15/HTML/000531-3.html

[This message has been edited by steves (edited October 23, 2002).]

All I would like to say is my 950 is dead silent. Sounds great.

Compared to my old ACT3, well its no comparison. 950 all the way.

I've made several posts without any replies. Presumably this is because either my comments are not worth a reply, or "several posts" alone is not enough (I note that, despite the impressive total volume, the forum seems to be dominated by a relatively small number of individuals). Nonetheless I shall press on in the perhaps vain hope of contributing.

Facts: my 950 (received about 3 weeks ago after a comparatively short wait-list period) has, to my ears, the infamous "hissy-fit", yet I am still VERY satisfied with it. (On the negative side, I WILL say that based on this forum, the company seemingly has failed to solve the problem and seemingly went back into production anyway after a much-publicized halt). [digression: Could it be that the real fix is too expensive? Or that their Pac-Rim suppliers are too incapable??]

To answer those who may think I was "looking" for the hissy-fit: (1) OUTLAW FOLKS PLEASE READ! this forum, with its warts-and-all approach was key to my decision to try a mail-order unit that I could not audition - had I listened to the unit straight out of the box without warning, I without doubt would have returned it; (2) the hiss, compared with my other equipment, is very noticeable and rather objetionable for music-only but rarely noticeable within the signals from the typical digital movie track (low-fi compared with well-recorded music, higher average sound pressure levels, and less fequent isntances of "silence").

Why am I still satisfied? Frankly, low expectations to begin with. My background is music, not home theater. I and my family have only become interested in "home theater" with the shift from VCR to DVD. Being a business consultant by trade, and a technical analyst by avocation, I have spent about 18 months of fitfullly available free time researching my options. It became painfully clear to me, at an early stage of my investigation, that standards (IMHO both objective and subjective) in the home theater side of the home audio business lag woefully behind standards in the music-reproduction side. To my ears (and may I say here that I am a music lover, not an equipment lover), the highly rated home theater speakers systems such as Axiom, Paradigm and lower-rated systems such as Definitive Tech, are absolute junk when it comes to reproducing stereo music.

Given this opinion, when I decided to add the digital multi-speaker capability to our system for the purpose of watching movies, I knew that I would keep my actual music system (comprising the so-called "main" left and right front speakers, and a sub-woofer) intact and would only utilize the added movie-system capability for movie-watching. When we listen to music, the 950 is not even on; the path depends completely on my Crown-brand stereo pre-amp and bi-amplicification.

Just for curiosity, I tested the 950 on stereo music reproduction and found it (as expected) very lacking - but I'm not disappointed because this isn't the purpose for which I purchased it.

In terms of a home-theater multi-channel pre-amp, hissy-fit or not I still think the 950 is currently the best price/performance ratio on the market. Based on actual listening sessions at stores (and we all know those limitations) the Adcom is IMHO absolute junk (among other deficiencies, especially lack of component video) and still more expensive, the Rotel is competitive but no better and +$400, the Anthem and equivalent are mega-bucks and do not audibly out-perform on the fundamental home theater stuff. If cost is truly no object, buy MacIntosh and you might actually get a unit that performs well in both worlds, but I'm not in that league.

norman:
i enjoyed reading your post. one thing that is becoming a pet peeve of mine is this: you say your primary interest is music, yet i see no reference to sacd/dvd-a in your post.

i know of no stereo cd system that approaches sacd multichannel in sound. of course, like cds, you have differing mix quality and, being the new music format, there are a lot less choices in software. but...to own the 950 and not utilize the format, is a mistake, imo. i don't think outlaw set out to build the ultimate stereo cd preamp. i would just like to suggest trying sacd multichannel music through the 950. it's a music lover's paradise and, to me, the 950's strongest point.

i wouldn't mind hearing back from you on the subject. and, this forum is for anyone who has a thought....i wish more lurkers would jump in as i'm sure there are many who hesitate...that's everyone's loss.

I've made several posts without any replies. Presumably this is because either my comments are not worth a reply, or "several posts" alone is not enough Norman I’ve noticed in the forum a tendency for the regulars to get caught up in some issues. When they are I save questions and comments for another time, when they are not eating up their available posting time on one or two currently hot topics. Many times I surf and see and read insightful interesting posts but never comment as (most often) I’m not qualified or have no impute on that topic. Different reasons sometimes create that ‘can’t see the forest for the tree’ effect.. I’m sorry if that’s occurred on a regular basis. One reason I like this forum is the frequent ‘good tone’ where everyone is treated politely and as equals by other members, Outlaw seems calibrated towards a baseline attitude that whatever our backgrounds we are all here for the love of music in its many forms, even such as me, and I’m definitely not worthy.

I still think the 950 is currently the best price/performance ratio on the market I like that statement as I have always felt that Multi-channel home theater is where the 950 excels. I would also agree with Bossobass’s statement regarding the 950's strongest point bypass capabilities. This was a feature that excited me with my 950 purchase, and if you haven’t implemented it with SACD or DVD-A, I think you are not realizing the full potential of the 950. It’s performance for me in this area, has sparked a whole new personal interest in 2-channel which I had been lacking motivation in (speaker upgrade etc). Although I have to say I am leaning more and more to multi-channel for all my music. I would just wish that greater variety in the recordings were on market to feed this ‘new taste’ of mine.


[This message has been edited by Smart Little Lena (edited October 26, 2002).]

Bosso

I think I'm with Norman. My primary interest is music and I also don't have sacd/dvd-a either. Someday, I will. But I haven't even bought the extra cables yet... part of me is still hoping for that elusive sacd/dvd-a digitial interface standard to arrive. And I don't want to replace my good CD's yet, which give me so much pleasure, with higher higher sound quality sacd/dvd-a's (costing more than the CD's), when the new mixing standards are still so new. I understand there are some pretty awful microphone placements and frequency crossover arrangements in SOME sacd/dvd-a's where, for example, some even have full bandwith on the LFE channel. I hope my concerns make sense. Don't get me wrong. I appreciate the early adopters out there. And someday I'll get with the sacd/dvd-a program too. But... not just yet.

Will

[This message has been edited by Will (edited October 26, 2002).]

As one of the small number of individuals, I'll chime in...



I thought that before I apologized for any rudeness on the part of the saloon, I'd see what posts of yours we had overlooked. Inevitably, some posts do not get replied to -- happens to everybody. Sometimes there is a larger debate in progress that overshadows it. Sometimes no one knows a good answer, and chooses to simply not reply rather than wasting bandwidth by saying "I don't know." I found only three posts by your user name -- this post, a long post here from June (which was only partially answered in a good post by Jed M and may have otherwise been overlooked as the debate in that thread looks to have been fairly active and fast-paced at the time) and a post from September in this thread that didn't really ask for a reply but got two anyway (Matthew Hill and I both responded to that one). I am sorry that you feel that your posts did not get any replies, but I don't think it's an entirely valid complaint.

Having gotten that out of my system, I will also say that your post is an interesting and very well-stated description of the experiences of a number of 950 owners. (Not all of course, as no two people will ever have exactly the same experience -- too many variables.) There are a number of users who have not experienced the hiss problem at all (I can say that with certainty because I'm one of them, and because if there weren't others like me then this forum would have been overwhelmed by complaints by now). There are also some users such as yourself who have validly encountered a hiss problem. Outlaw has worked hard on the issue already, and I doubt that they are ignoring it now after coming so far already.

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

Thanks for all the feedback. In re-reading my own post, I didn't strike quite the intended tone with the opening comments on not having received responses to earlier posts, and certainly did not mean to infer disrespect or the like.

I continue to work on learning the features of the 950; its a big step up in terms of complexity compared with my stereo-only pre-amp. With that set-up, I used a simple method from North Creek Music for filtering out low frequencies (at about 80 hertz) and sending them to a sub-woofer. Local Radio Shack is out of stock of their SPL meter, so I am currently setting levels strictly by ear and look forward to setting them objectively (it will also be interesting to see how close I was or wasn't, by ear alone).

The points on SACD are very interesting. In fact, I wonder if there should be a dedicated thread. Probably like many of you, I drop by one of the several high-end audiophile stores around here (Northern Virginia) periodically just to see what's new and to listen to the difference that a $100,000 sound system can make. I've heard a couple of marvelous SACDs and some truly awful ones. There obviously is a learning curve for the recording studios to go through, as with CDs in the early years. I haven't jumped into SACD yet for the following reasons:

(1) Am I correct in understanding that SACD is currently still mired in one of those stupid corporate battles over format (will they ever learn?)?
(2) Seems to be very little available that has been SACD-recorded - and seems to me that, unlike the CD, there is little or no ability to bring prior masters up to SACD by re-recording.
(3) And therefore, based on (1) and (2), I'm going to wait (a year? maybe 2?) for formats to be more nearly resolved, for the library to grow, and for prices to come down (cheapest unit I know of now is a Sony that is still about $900 - does anybody know differently?).

Regarding my preferences in music playback format, I truly believe that people (such as my son) who more or less grow up with the surround sound will come to prefer or even expect it for their music. For myself, I am an old fogey. Nearly all of the live performances I attend have the music coming strictly from the general area of the sound stage and for me, a traditional stereo set-up best re-creates this experience. I remain open to, but not yet convinced by, the SACD format.

Readers should bear in mind that much of my music listening is still on vinyl. I have always taken immaculate care of my vinyl, had a high-quality record player when due to economics it was the only quality component in my system. My better vinyl recordings, especially my small stock of treasured direct-to-disc, have a much more "live" sound than my best CDs because (in my opinion) the physics of the needle-based reproduction mean that the harmonics are fully captured. Although always tighter and more "accurate", the CDs still sound lifeless against a quality vinyl version of the same recording.

Pioneer has a unit out now that I've seen for under $500. I think it's the DV45A?? I could be wrong about that model number.

It plays anything, including DVD-a and SACD

fly guy

It is a format that has competition in the form of DVD-A.

I believe there are nearly 500 or so releases now available. Most of these ARE reissues. Popular examples are Miles Davis "Kind of Blue" on Columbia/Sony Music label(originally recorded in 1959) and the recent Rolling Stones reissues in Hybrid Multichannel (meaning they can be played on any CD or DVD player).

Waiting is always an option. Me, I'm an early adapter! The library is growing weekly. Do a search on the subject and you will find SACD players available for as little as $200.00. You mention you have a preference for vinyl. SACD gets really close to that sound with the quietness of a CD. You might want to go and spend some time with SACD at one of your local dealers (both in stereo and multichannel). It might make it hard for you to stay away!

I know this is a little off the topic from the original thread....

What are everybody's opinions in regards to DVD-A and SACD??

I needed to replace my old Sony DVD player and debated on what to purchase. Part of the debate was deciding between DVD-A and SACD. I'm kind of anti-Sony, and at the time it seemed that there were more DVD-A titles available, so I went with a DVD-A compatible player...the Denon DVM 4800.

This is my first changer, and I'm not sure I like it.

From lurking around here a bit, it seems that SACD is a little more popular with the members here. Maybe I should go ahead and get rid of the Denon and go with one of the new Pioneer's???

What are some of your opinions between these two formats??

fly guy

Personally, I think SACD and DVD-A are not worth the expenditure for the upgrade. I've read many reviews from audiophiles, and many think that currently, there is little to be gained by these formats. This is an interesting link on the subject.

http://www.audioholics.com/techtips/specsformats/dvd_sacd1a.php

Others believe the wheel has been reinvented. The best sound I've heard to date has come from very expensive 2 channel speakers driven with a quality amplifier and a quality CD player. Namely, Thiel or wilson speakers driven with a Levison amp at a local store.

bp

You might want to wait for awhile for a 2nd generation combination DVD/DVD-A/SACD player. Pioneer makes one now, but personally, I'm waiting.

In my own opinion (Bosso, please step out of the room for a bit...thanks) is that the main draw to either of these formats is the ability to play multichannel material. This can be either awsome or so-so of an experience depending on the mix of the material you are listening to - it varies. For classical, jazz, and some other acoustic music, in all honesty, I can get pretty much the same effect by feeding my surrounds with a studio reverb fed off the stereo fronts. Believe it or not, this is exactly how it is done on some movies with the music track: surround channels are sometimes left up to the mixing engineers because they can integrate it better with the other sounds in the track. With other types of music, you are at the mercy of the taste of the person mixing the tracks. Personally, I don't like guitars coming from behind me - but sometimes it gets done extremely well.

As far as the supposed increased resolution of 24 bit and 96K, well, I don't think you would be able to really tell if it were well done in 16 bit and 44.1k. The differences are _extremely_ small, to inaudible. There is no such thing as a 'real 24 bit' analog to digital converter; 144db of dynamic range is just beyond the capability of any practical electronic circuit in use today. The most that can be reliably captured is about 18-20 bits - the lower bits are just recording electronic noise. Also, to put a digital to analog converter in a consumer product with _actual_ resolution of 24 bits would cost, well, more than you could imagine, if it could be done at all.

The increased sample rate? well, that too, in my opinion is pretty much wasted. I sure as hell can't hear as high as 46,000 hZ, can you? Can you speakers reproduce that high? Can your power amps pass that high a frequency?

In a mastering situation, it can certainly make sense to use 24 bit resolution, but only because most of the internal math done by the DSPs is done at that bit depth, and multiple DSP operations would pile up rounding errors if the word length were reduced for every operation.

Personally, I think they should have used the 50,000hZ sampling rate used by the original Soundstream digital recorder as a standard, and called it a day; 44.1 is cutting it a bit close to the audible band.

Bosso - you can come back into the room now

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited October 27, 2002).]

i chose sacd because i believe sony will win this one. at issue in the format war is the choice between sony/phillips' dsd (i believe it stands for digital stream data) and hi-res pcm (pulse code modulation).

dsd is a 1 bit system. the most glaring advantage is that dsd can be converted to ANY digital format. indeed, current sacd players convert to pcm @ 24/96 multichannel and 24/192 stereo, making the 2 formats identical.

currently, there are studios around the world with priceless master analog tapes that are deteriorating to the point of absolute ruin. they are being and will all be converted to a digital format if only to save them from extinction.

now...if you own a master and you want to archive it digitally, if you choose pcm at the current highest res available, once you do that, it cannot ever be re-converted to a higher res when that option comes along in the future.

if you choose the dsd 1 bit system to archive, it can be re-converted to any digital scheme at any time in the future. sony's engineers (and these are the guys who have been on the cutting edge of recording hardware for more than 30 years) are so convinced that this is the smart way to proceed (and time is of the essence do to the 'once the tape is gone, it's gone' situation), they have convinced sony/phillips to donate the expensive equipment (with strings attached i'm sure) to studios for archiving purposes.

dsd is actually an incredibly simple format. i like that. less manipulation=better sound. always has, always will. i understand also, that all that is needed to convert dsd is a high quality, high pass (like about 70khz) filter.

as far as what a human can hear (more like perceive), sony/phillips conducted extensive double blind tests. short story...you'll know the difference.

on the subject of what resolution ends up at your ear, currently, soundhound is correct. i love multichannel for this obvious and much overlooked reason: (though the soundstage and effects options being endless as a palate is also appealing to any artist from a purely artistic standpoint).

for many years you have had only 2 channels into which to 'place' all of the information contained in your musical piece. saturation of those two channels available headroom caused the invention of compressors, limiters and the like. they work, but they do as their names imply. they compress and they limit.

you now have 6 discrete channels into which to 'place' your information. each channel now has much less to handle, with more headroom than ever before. the simple bottom line is astoundingly better clarity and, with proper speaker placement, a soundstage you have to be 'surrounded' by to appreciate.

btw, the audioholics articles sited above never call into question anything i've just said. they only point out the problems of lack of standardization and limits due to greed and piracy issues. i choose to ignore the downside and look for the few mixes by producers who get it and artists who work with them.

borrow a player, pay $20 bucks for spyro gyra's 'in modern times' multichannel sacd, tweak your system's levels, placement and eq and LISTEN. if you don't hear a quantum leap forward in quality over stereo cd, let me know. short of doing that...it's all just academic discussion.

soundhound...you should never have brought that soapbox out...it's addictive. sorry all for the long-winded rant.

"tweak your system's levels, placement and eq and LISTEN."

And for me, therein lies the problem. My surrounds are fixed regards to distance. All this tweaking should be done in the digital domain, IMO. Until that's available SACD and DVD Audio are non starters for me.

As an aside, we already had multi-channel delivery systems (DD 5.1 and DTS). Why didn't these take off as audio only media, dispensing with the need for more formats?

Yeah, me too. But I'm also enjoying some DVD-V compatible tracks on DVD-Audio disks.



That's pretty much my experience too. My opinion, based on observation and some technical knowledge, is that implementing a D->A->D playback system that has minimal distortion below 20kHz and a 22kHz Nyquist frequency is a tough job. I would have rather seen a 50-60 kHz sample rate, not because it would be a better system, but simply because it would be easier to implement the system to uniformly high quality levels.

I firmly believe that CD got off to a bad start simply due to poor implementations [which may still be happening] and in reality can be a perfectly fine sounding format.

Indeed - the first CD players made by Philips, and maybe some others OEMd by them actually played back in _14 bit_ because a good 16 bit converter couldn't be made at a realistic price point. And the 'truncation' wasn't done gracefully on these players, to put it mildly! The 'brick wall filter' at 20khZ was implemented by a big, honking, ugly _analog_ low pass filter that had god-knows-how-much phase shift. Record companies just grabbed the "EQ master" which was equalized for LP cutting and transferred them to CD. Of course these sounded like crap. Microphones had a big peak of around 5-10 db at around 6-10khZ, again to make the sound register on LPs. Mix enough of these into stereo, and you get some pretty 'glarey', 'hard' and 'brittle' sound. This was covered up by LPs, but came through all too well on CD. Techniques now are much more natural.

You guys never cease to amaze me. I can come here and read your posts and learn more than I can spending hours combing the web or reading other forums. Your posts are not regurgitations of magazine articles, they are thoughts and insights from those "in the industry". Please continue to post here. I benefit greatly from your knowledge and intelligent opinions.

Bill Polley

Bosso: I know of no reason why PCM cannot be converted to other encoding formats as DSD can. Could you elaborate on that point?

Additionally, if you can mathematically convert DSD to PCM without a loss of fidelity, then what does that say about the claimed superiority of DSD over PCM?

I'm not claiming that PCM is "better" than DSD, I'm simply looking for some more information about the relative differences of the two. My personal gut feeling would be that at the end of the day, it doesn't really make much difference which encoding format was used.

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net

In general, I think it's always better to minimize *any* amount of conversions to an audio/video signal. There's always the chance that signal quality will degrade. (I still even have my doubts as to how well upsampling say, 16/44.1 LPCM to 24/192 can be done. "Upsampling" isn't the problem, it's the "re-sampling" from 44.1 to 48 or from 177.6 to 192 kHz where the problem comes in, for example.)

And especially when any type of PCM format is involved, where jitter *does* come into play.

posted by soundhound:

"For classical, jazz, and some other acoustic music, in all honesty, I can get pretty much the same effect by feeding my surrounds with a studio reverb fed off the stereo fronts."

I really agree with your preferences on surround and wondered is there a way for us mortals to get a "studio reverb" off the stereo fronts?

[This message has been edited by randyb (edited October 28, 2002).]

Some data conversions will be lossless and some not, of course.

kevin is right. every conversion = loss of some kind.

follow the signal in archiving an analog master to dsd vs pcm:

PCM: analog signal---> 1 bit ADC (note, all pcm begins life as 1 bit dsd) ---> decimator filter ---> PCM recorder ---> dlta/sigma modulator ---> digital interpolation filter ---> analog HF, low pass filter.

DSD: analog signal ---> 1 bit ADC ---> DSD recorder ---> analog low pass filter

dsd is the least conversion of a conversion. it divides evenly into any format. sony rigged the hardware so that you could compare a modded studer 2" open reel machine to the dsd copy of the master tape in real time, on the fly, with a switch. every industry pro they offered the test to said the loss in transfer was so minute that it was more than offset by the plus of digital convenience. the same test was offered comparing the best vinyl setup with the same results. that's enough for me.

once you are IN pcm, you cannot get OUT. you are stuck there. pcm will not reconvert to 1 bit. it can't even down convert to 44.1 without a toss-out of info (44.1 doesn't divide evenly into 96, etc., as kevin pointed out)

the evidence is in the sacd hybrid disc. it contains the redbook stereo cd version AND stereo or multichannel sacd (a real value @ $19, if you ask me). it's backward compatible. in fact, from 1 bit it will convert to any digital format with extremely little loss.

also, the sdif (sony digital interface) cable has 3 wires...clock, dr and dl, vs the coax cable that has all 3 into 1 wire (jitter).

sony is only behind in recording hardware, but catching up fast. sony/phillips is huge. and, they clearly have the better system.

look up anything you can find on ed meitner, emm labs. he designs all of the dsd hardware and is, i think, THE guy in recording hardware quality. if he says dsd is the clearly superior method, i don't tend to doubt it.

Any pro music store should have a selection of good digital reverbs. You can pay anywhere from a couple hundred dollars up to multi-thousands, but one that would be good enough for creating reverb to feed your surrounds can be had for about $250.00 or so. Digitech makes some good ones, but of course there are others. You just want to make sure that the reverb has _stereo_ inputs and outputs. Set the output 'mix' control of the reverb to 100% 'wet' or only reverb, and send this to your surrounds. Use a "Y" adapter to send your preamp's front signals to both the input of the reverb and your front speakers. Then, just select a 'program' on the reverb that sounds best to you, and for the music, adjust the level, and enjoy.



[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited October 28, 2002).]

Have to disagree soundhound. SACD was introduced as a 2 channel format and that is still how many SACD listeners prefer to hear their music.

That may work fine for you,and I'm glad you have access to what is probably a fairly sophisticated system, but that's using technology that was prevelent in the 70's and 80's isn't it?. Surely one can do better for a lot less money these days by using_ say_ Dolby ProLogic II-M? It's even included in the 950!

Huh? You obviously didn't read the part in the same paragraph that says that this procedure is being done TODAY, using _digital_ reverbs. This isn't technology from the 70's or 80's. Do you actually believe that all that beautiful reverb 'ambience' on your CDs/SACDs or whatever is all _natural_? Have you actually tried using reverb to create surround ambience yourself? I wouldn't dismiss something unless you have some first hand exposure, and can speak with some authority on the subject. I would bet that there are some DVDs of feature films in your collection right now where I used _exactly_ this technique to create the surrounds.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited October 28, 2002).]

I don't know much, but I do know using some form of studio reverb, digital or not, is not how _most_ movies or music are recorded and/or mixed.

Are you kidding?!?!? How do you 'know' this??

That is *very* incorrect.

some of them are mixed in a blender.

Not strictly true for all cases.

Just as a point of interest, my digital audio workstation (ProTools) has facilities to change the sample rate and create a new file. If I set it to the highest quality setting (they call it "tweak-head"!), it takes several HOURS of number crunching to convert about 45 minutes of stereo music from say 48k to 44.1k. And this is on a fast computer. Kind of makes me wonder about the performance of sample rate converters that do it 'on the fly'....

ProTools... is that the Mac audio editing software?

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net

Bosso: you've said again, that PCM is an IN only format... in my earlier post I was asking why you believe this to be so.

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net

Yes. It comes in various configurations, with and without external hardware. My system has a couple racks of external I/Os and sync units, but you can download a software only version of the editing program for FREE (!) at www.digidesign.com. It's called "ProTools Free" and provides 8 tracks, and outputs in stereo through the Mac's internal sound facilities. It's under 'downloads' and is available for Macs and PCs. ProTools is the de facto standard in the music recording and motion picture industries.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited October 29, 2002).]

I was thinking more of the conversions that don't inherently discard or truncate information, like converting to a deeper bit depth.

Most non trivial conversions of course have the potential to degrade information, but good engineering can help a lot in most cases. Shuffling bits around IS what I do, and it is possible to do a lot without discarding info, and it's possible to implement most operations poorly too.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Matthew Hill:
[B]Bosso: you've said again, that PCM is an IN only format... in my earlier post I was asking why you believe this to be so.
________________________

matthew: if you're looking for some sort of technical paper from me...sorry...i'm the wrong guy to ask that.

i only looked at the available evidence and common sense. you can upconvert or downconvert a pcm format to another pcm format. it isn't changed to a new scheme, only higher or lower bit and/or sampling rates of pcm format. at some point, as you go up in resolution, you gain less and less as you trade loss by processing...this is according to the people who invented it.

that aside, suppose you archive in pcm and another format comes along. how would you convert pcm to whatever the new format is?

more importantly, as evidence, the sony engineers say once in pcm, stuck in pcm and the dvd-a camp doesn't deny it when they do. in fact, i find zero info on the subject of pcm archiving/ conversion to a future format except this telling statement in a dvd-a promo paper under 'archiving':

"with so many professional digital formats, there's no knowing for sure which ones will be around and playable in 10 or 15 years. it may be safest to prepare, mix and copy to tried and true analog tape with dolby sr for long term archiving and storage regardless of which digital format was used in the original recording."

on the other side, sony says that dsd rivals 30 ips 1/2" tape and is the preferred archiving method as it can be converted later to any digital format.

i believe, short of better dacs being the rule rather than the exception, we are hearing pcm at it's best in it's current 24/192 state. we haven't heard dsd yet at all and won't until the receivers/prepros come out that can process it. the industry engineers, producers and musicians who have heard it are unanimous, that i've read/talked to.

also, sacd is backward compatable. the cd layer of a hybrid disc will play on a boombox. this is important to retailers who won't have to double stock.

i'm not an engineer and...well, let's just say i have a vested interest in predicting the winner. i ask, i read, i reason. any dvd-a proponents are welcome to chime in.

Well I don't think it's at all that cut and dried. Here is an interesting quote:


http://www.digital-recordings.com/publ/pubrec.html

There are lots of great articles on this site BTW.

EDIT:

Keep in mind, Sony and Sony Marketing have a lot of reasons to boost this technology, not all based on merit. Memory Stick, Beta, and other Sony technologies are examples of Sony's very strong NIH attitude. Sometimes they are better, sometimes just different to be different.

[This message has been edited by charlie (edited October 30, 2002).]

I think Sony produces some great products, but one of the things that irks me most about the company is that NIH attitude you're talking about. I almost hope that Memory Stick, Mini Disk, SACD, etc. fails miserably just so that they start to learn a lesson from all of it. Apparently Beta wasn't enough lesson for them.

Of course, I don't REALLY hope that SACD fails just because it's from Sony. Or Mink Disk & friends. Some of the Sony technologies are actually kind of nice. But others (Memory Stick, in particular) just seem pointless as they don't add anything to the industry.

I think that DVD/A is "neater" technologically, and of course, being a PCM based format will make things easier to integrate with the rest of the system, when we finally get digital interconnects.

I also don't see any reason why it should be harder to convert from PCM to DSD than from DSD to PCM. It all just seems like math to me.

DSD just seems to me to be... needlessly "different" from what's already working well in the market. Now, SACD, as a format is a useful evolution beyond CD, but I think they could have done just as well with PCM in that format.

Also, remember that SACD *can* be backwards compatible with ordinary CD players, but is not necessarily so (the extra layer need not be there). Additionally, DVD-A *can* be backwards compatible with DVD-V players, but is not necessarily so.

I don't see any large technical advantages to one format over the other in this "war", although I think DVD-A's use of PCM and its use of the DVD encoding at the data layer (SACD is an all-new format at the data layer) provide advantages in cost and system integration.

Of course, in the end, I think that it's going to come down to software. I also think that both will probably live on side-by-side for quite some time. This isn't going to be decided soon because, unlike Beta/VHS, it doesn't have to be.

------------------
Matthew J. Hill
matt@idsi.net