I know this issue has been discussed extensively in the past, but I thought I'd solicit some new feedback -- particularly since a lot of work has been done addressing the various issues of these two processors.

So, any votes for which of these two delivers the best features and performance?

Let's see if I can remember *my* list"

1) Outlaw has BM on the analog inputs, the Rotel doesn't.

2) Both have the double bass problem on the 5.1 inputs, but if you do use the 80 Hz analog crossover on the 950, no double bass. There is a way to get around the double bass on the Rotel: buy a $249 Outlaw ICBM.

3) You must have the Rotel connected to a display (TV) to access the menus. You can use the 950's own screen for this.

4) The 1066 has 24/96 DACs. The Outlaw has 24/192's.

5) The Outlaw has a tuner, the Rotel doesn't.

6) I know that the 950 has mono rears for any of it's 7.1 modes. I have been told by users of the 1066 that it has stereo rears. But this seems suspicious in that both use the same Cirrus DSP engine. But it could be true. (An ad I saw recently said, "... the enhanced discrete stereo surround of 7.1," FWIW.)

7) You can upgrade the software on the 1066. Can't on the 950.

8) I think both of them could look better. The 950 needs to get rid of the green power button (I've alread put black electrical tape on mine ), and the rubber volume knob feels cheap. My opinion. The 1066 looks a lot better, but to me, put the volume knob on the right, and re-center everything else. To much "empty space" on the left side of the unit.

A nice looking pre/pro? The B&K Ref 50. I think the new Sunfire looks terrible, as well as the Anthem. To many buttons and graphics on the front.

9) A 5 year warranty that is transferable on the 950. I know that the 1066 warranty is not, but I don't know how long it is. (2 years?)

10) The 1066 lists for $1500 or so. The 950 is $899. My local dealer wasn't discounting the 1066 at all when I asked Sept/Oct. The lowest I've seen people pay is maybe $1250. That's still more than 1/3 the price of the 950.


Performance? I haven't seen a direct comparison between the latest (blue dot/equivalent), or even the red dot (or equivalent) version of the 950 and the 1066.

Early comments were that the Rotel was "warmer" and the 950 was "brighter". IMO, behind those words is this: if I want warmth, I'd buy tubed gear. Along with all the harmonic distortion you get too. "Bright" is generally taken to be more accurate and revealing. "Warm" is more forgiving of the source." "Bright" isn't. Me? I want accuracy, no double bass, and BM on the 5.1 analog inputs. But everyone has to decide what they each want...



[This message has been edited by Kevin C Brown (edited January 13, 2003).]

It seems possible that at least some of the perceived difference in sound might have been due to the previously elevated noise floor of the 950 or other design choices that are now altered in order to lower the noise. Is it possible they sound more similar now?

Kevin:

You're welcome to stop by any time and bask in all that Harmonic Distortion

SH- I thought y'all might say something about that... I got no problem with tubed gear being used to *create* sound. (Heck, tube guitar amps *are* the best sounding amps IMO.) But to *recreate* sound? I'll go for the emotionlessness and sterileness of solid state every time for the most accurate reproduction of a signal that already exists...

Kevin:

My My, I don't think you fully understand the myriad of issues involved in 'distortion' in vacuum tube design. It is not as simple as as it seems by a long shot, and it certainly can't be put in a convenient box lablled 'harmonic distorion'. Do you have any _direct_ experience in vacuum tube verses solid state design other than once owning a tubed guitar amp? I don't mean to be harsh about it, but you seem to be reguritating the same mis-informed opinions that are very common among people who have never actually done extended research and listening into the subject. There are good and bad examples of _every_ technology, tube or solid state, and to gloss them over by pointing a finger at one single parameter without any regard to specifics of the design in it's entireity is not good form.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited January 13, 2003).]

SH: When I see measurements of a component with 2 - 3% of harmonic distortion under any circumstances that was not present in the original signal, I'll pass. I recognize that some people prefer that under some conditons. Not me.


[This message has been edited by Kevin C Brown (edited January 13, 2003).]

Kevin:

And what amplifier might that be?? A guitar amp? Did you measure it yourself, at what power, what frequency? Please do not generalize about this kind of stuff, BE SPECIFIC. I get about .03% from all of my amps _measured_.

Old measurements in Audio, Stereo Review, and even current generation equipment being measured in Stereophile.

Neither of you are from Arizona are you?
Not to wonder off topic but, SH is there a good place to start with tubes that is not to expensive. Perhaps a amp or pre-amp you could recommend! I would like to add some tubes to my HT!




------------------
m-mmeyer
GO TWINS
My DVD's