Somewhere recently, maybe in the Home Theater Mag or S&V eqp directories, it was specifically mentioned that the Fosgate was using CES modes for 6.1/7.1. So at the very least, does look like it has the Crystal/Cirrus DSP engine. Kind of confusing a little, in that somewhere else, I thought I saw that the Fosgate was going to have all analog sound field processing.



Well, except for the hiss that some of us experience.

Gonk: agreed. For the moment, I'm going to take this "clone" business, at least in regard to the Adcom and Fosgate units, with a grain of salt. Like I said, the Cirrus/Crystal chip is very popular with A/V manufacturers. The fact that Fosgate does and Adcom may use that chip doesn't automatically make them clones.
Zakman: probably the only reason that the 950 isn't software upgradeable is because it's a design choice; i.e., allowing this feature would have pushed the 950's price point above Outlaw's target. It's like when people wonder if the 950's rear channels could have been stereo? While they're used as a mono pair, you'll notice that they can be set for individual volume levels and (in 7-Channel Stereo mode) they're capable of reproducing individual signals. But paying for surround processing that generates stereo rears (which is not available off the shelf, like PL II or CES or Neo:6 are) would again have made the 950 more expensive.
Hi Will: I got the info about the Rotel from speaking to someone at Rotel re which processor chip they're using for their pre-pro; turns out to be the same as the one in the 950 (same features, same problems). I don't know if you remember, but you brought up Rotel's XS processing a long time ago in a thread at AVS forums. That discussion got me curious enough to investigate.

As for the Fosgate unit using CES, it already came up here at the Saloon in this thread about SMR's CEDIA report. Take a look at this page from the report (the relevant info is in second half of the first paragraph).
Lena: I don't know about PL II originally being 7 channels. When Dolby first announced PL II, they called it a 6:2:6 matrix (up to 6 channels can be folded into a stereo track and then decoded back up to 6 channels). I think they ditched the surround back channel because, at the time, they didn't want to confuse consumers by going beyond 5.1 channels (same reason that DD-EX movies were purposely not labeled as such on their DVD packaging).

Jim Fosgate has said that he has given Dolby enough info to take PL II up to 7 channels as and when Dolby wishes to do so. This isn't at all unusual with matrix decoders; they really can be designed to decode as many channels as the designer wishes. In this AVS thread , Fosgate says some interesting things about PL II, including the following two items:

"How many channels? It is possible to bring out as many channels with this technology as with any other matrix technology. Dolby and I agree that 5 channels is the best place to start. It’s been hard enough to talk some consumers into 5 channels, let alone 7 to 10. Dolby does not want to confuse the market by bringing this out with more channels now because consumers would think the extra channels were the “big thing” instead of the improved performance. I have worked with more channels on the breadboard but find that 5 channels are all I need in my listening room."

"It is possible to bring out a separate center surround channel (as on my breadboard) but that will have to come later."

Kevin: I think this is the Fosgate Audionics pre-pro that you heard about.

Best,
Sanjay



[This message has been edited by sdurani (edited November 11, 2002).]

My thought exactly -- the impression I got from the original announcement of CES's inclusion in the 950 was that it was a newly developed product that was being included in the 950 before it appeared anywhere else (production delays made that "before" a little less so than they'd originally hoped, but that's a separate issue that we've all beaten thoroughly to death). The use of Cirrus processing does not a clone make. The use of Cirrus's triple crossover does not a clone make, for that matter. I think the only ones that can reasonably be labeled "clones" are the ones that differ only in faceplate color and "tweaks" to the specifications. If the Adcom or Fosgate use some design components from the 950 (such as some version of the analog bass management on the 5.1 analog input), it doesn't feel like enough of a parallel to call it a clone. It would be an interesting re-use of design components, though, if it turned out to be true.

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

Just to clarify... I never claimed them to be clones (the subject line was intended to show a connection to the original), just that they were built on the same platform.

FWIW - I got the info when I called Sherbourn this afternoon. I spoke with a very nice guy with an accent (British?) who said his name was Ron Phone and is one of the owners.

He was very complimentary of Outlaw and said they have a very good working relationship. He listed the differences between the Sherbourn and Outlaw and said those differences along with their level of service (said the distributor would come out and install the unit) was justification for the price difference.

When I mentioned that I had heard the platform was going to be used by other manufacturers he offered up Adcom and Fosgate. He did not mention models but did say the Fosgate would have a 5" LCD screen.

The funny thing was that just two hours earlier I had gone up to a local AV dealer during lunch and that's when I first heard about the Adcom model which should list at $1500.

The other funny thing was that an old neighbor of mine who owns the online high end A/V business http://www.unitedhomeproducts.com/ emailed to tell me about the Fosgate while I was at lunch finding out about the Adcom. It was quite a shock when Ron mentioned them during our call.

So... those are the beans I have to spill. I was only kidding when I said that I could not reveal my source. I had no idea there were people who watched the industry so closely on this list or I would have been more direct in my original post.

Sayer

[This message has been edited by SayersWeb (edited November 12, 2002).]

Thanks for the info, SayersWeb -- I suspect that once the Adcom and Fosgate start shipping (the Adcom GTP-860 doesn't even appear on Adcom's site yet as far as I can tell), we'll likely find out more about how much of the "950 platform" each model is using.

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

Chipset makers often have a 'reference design' that is often used as a jumping off point for engineering teams wishing to implement hardware using the device(s). This will also often include sample code for any devices that are programmable or require device driver or firmware support.

So any similarity in the two could be a case of similar bloodlines rather than actual cloning.

Sayer, Got it; thanks for clarifying. If you want to put a face to that name, here's a pic or two , as well as some info about the Sherbourn clone. 'Clone' may be too strict a word, but I understand what you mean by 'same platform'. And while there are significant differences, they two units do share a helluva lot of awfully similar features: built-in tuner, analog bass management on the 5.1 inputs, two triggers, external remote jacks on back panel, same s-video jack-pack (five inputs, one record out, one zone out), same digital audio jack-pack (four optical in, one optical out, two coax in, one coax out), same crossover settings, etc. No problemo. A lot of us do keep up with the latest industry happenings, but no more than any other hobby.

Best,
Sanjay

Hi Sanjay,

In the SMR Cedia Expo reference link you pointed me to above, it says

In November, Fosgate’s own company, Fosgate Audionics, will introduce the FAP-T1, another pre/pro sporting a miniature monitor on its faceplate. A large complement of fully-programmable surround modes, including Dolby Digital 5.1 and EX, DTS ES and Neo:6, and of course PL II – all extended to 7 channels via a Cirrus Logic chip

Do we know if the extension to 7 channels mentioned above, is with the same Cirrus Logic chipset as is in the Rotel and the Outlaw? I'm asking if maybe Cirrus Logic has newer decoding chips now than what must have been available to the Rotel and Outlaw (excuse me, Eastech) designers late last year.

I'm still intrigued if perhaps Fosgate might have 7.1 discrete channels decoded, as opposed to the 6.1 channels decoded by Cirrus Logic chipset on the Rotel and the Outlaw.


Why yes, I do remember asking the question. I'm so pleased that you were able to verify that CES and XS are as you suspected at the time, the same.

Thanks!

Will

[This message has been edited by Will (edited November 12, 2002).]

Will, Ah, good point. For example: some surround pre-pros use SHARC processing engines as opposed the Crystal/Cirrus ones, and I remember that somewhere along the way the SHARC chips went from being (roughly) 155 mHz processors to 605 mHz speeds (source: TAG McLaren Audio). So yes, there is a possibility that the Fosgate may be using a newer Cirrus chipset, if in fact a newer one is out.

Anyone know whether Anthem's recent upgrade (hardware, not software) for their AVM-20 involved a newer Cirrus processor? The second half of the sentence that you quoted above seems to indicate that it is similar to the PL II + CES modes of the 950 and that it doesn't decode seven distinct channels of sound:

"A large complement of fully-programmable surround modes, including Dolby Digital 5.1 and EX, DTS ES and Neo:6, and of course PL II – all extended to 7 channels via a Cirrus Logic chip (a true 7-channel implementation of PL II is not yet on the horizon, but if it ever appears it’s a good bet Fosgate’s FAP-T1 should be first in line for the upgrade)."

Fosgate is doing the usual marketing thing of referring to their back channel extraction as "7.1 Extended Surround"; same as Rotel did in their marketing, though these two companies are hardly the only culprits. Personally, unless I hear specifically about some new processing on a newer Cirrus/Crystal chipset, I'm going to consider the Fosgate as having 6 distinct channels for a 7 speaker layout.

BTW, posting a little late into the night aren't we? ;-) Milk and cookies, Sebastian?

Best,
Sanjay

I thought the AVM-20 was based on Motorola's latest chipsets.