I've been considering the Outlaw 950/710 combo package.

One of the main things I'm interested in is the 950's ability to apply analog bass management to a DVD-A (or SACD although I don't have SACD) analog signal.

I was wondering if any owners out there could voice their oppinions/impressions of this feature.

Also, although this doesn't apply to my current speaker configuration, I was wondering WHY Outlaw chose to sum bass below 80Hz and send it to the sub, even when the analog bass management is set to OFF? It seems to me that if someone really had true full range speakers on all channels, and wanted no bass management for dvd-a/sacd, that this would be detrimental... you would get TOO much bass in this situation. Major bummer...

Any comments on that?

Also, there are lots of positive reviews to be found about the 950, but I was wondering if anyone out there could post some complaints they've had of the 950... what DON'T you like about it?

This is copied from a thread I started at HTF.

Thanks!

-Kieran

the only reason i can come up with is that if you do not want sub output, you can always turn off your sub. This would give you the same results as a pure pass-through. Some people do not care about double-bass and simply want their sub to be doing something regardless. So i guess having the output always summed to the sub gives you the choice.

that being said, i also wish they did not do it that way. It's especially odd for outlaw because using their ICBM along with the 950's multi-inputs is a useless configuration...there is no way to get proper bass management using these two devices (the multi-inputs only, the icbm works fine with all of the other features of the 950) together.

c3g- It is a kludge, but you can use the ICBM with the 950 to get full range, no double bass, performance.

All large, sub on in the player. To the ICBM. The ICBM has a feature whereby you effectively reroute the LFE to the mains. So now you are sending a 5.0 signal to the 950. LFE is mixed in with the mains. Now, just connect the 5.0 cables to the 950. No LFE connected. Turn your sub off. You get 5.0 out of the 950, no double bass.

Obviously, not ideal, but if someone really does have full range mains, they shouldn't care if the LFE is mixed in with the mains or not.

This is actually no different than saying all large, sub off in your player, but it's already been posted on HTF, that this doesn't work right on any Pioneer based player for DVD-A and maybe even SACD, I can't remember the details. (47a, 45a, 47ai, Onkyo 800, Integra something, Marantz 8300, and even presumably the new Lex RT-10.)

I'm confused. Are you saying something's wrong on the 47a, 45a, 47ai, Onkyo 800, an Integra, Marantz 8300, and presumably the new Lex RT-10 with regard to bass management for DVD-A's?

I understand the newer Pioneer Elites and maybe some of the other units have digital DVD-A interfaces. The Pioneer Elite DVD player has a digital interface to the Pioneer Elite receiver, so it doesn't need to use 6 analog cables. This lets the DVD-A bass management be done digitally, like Dolby and DTS bass management is done today (digitally) by just about everyone.

[This message has been edited by Will (edited April 01, 2003).]

If the ICBM is between the DVD-A/SACD and the 950, and you set the speaker crossovers to 80 or greater than there isn't any bass to sum. If you have the ICBM then don't think it matters how the bass mgmt switch on 950 is set.

I recently acquired the 950 & 7100 combo. I'm thrilled. It is a significant quality improvement over the ($1000 receiver I had). Am real intrigued that tuner is as good as it is.

Things that seem somewhat awkward:
- Waiting for the decoder to interpret the signal (especially changing channels on SAT tuner).
- Not being able to change tuner station with unit doing remote source output
- Be nice if could assign video inputs to different sources (i.e. jukebox on video4 to CD source)
- The component video switching is nice, but the value of doing it at the TV is being able to watch one thing while having the 950 do another.

This is not the case! An 80hz crossover does not mean all information below 80hz is removed. Crossovers are slopes, so a crossover at 80hz using the ICBM will still have significant output well below 80hz. This "left over" bass information is then going to be passed on to the 6.1 inputs and will be summed and sent to the sub.





[This message has been edited by chris3g (edited April 01, 2003).]

Will- Yes. *Any* of those Pioneer-based players have the following flaws with DVD-A:

1) With the mains as large, and the sub off, they do *not* reroute the LFE signal to the mains the way they are supposed to.

2) BM for 4.0 does not work at all. 2.0 does work correctly, and 5.1 is unknown because no one has tested conclusively for it. (Or, at least *posted* to that effect.)

Although that is a problem, I think usually for most HT systems, there is a sub.

But on a related note, as I recall, with DVD-A, the .1 channel may at times carry frequencies well above 80 Hz and there wasn't a concensus on where to route the high frequency .1 channel information, when there's a sub in the system.

However, my information may be dated. Can anyone confirm if the .1 channel sometimes has frequencies well above 80 Hz, in DVD-A?

Will, you're correct, the ".1" channel in DVD-A can (and frequently does) have material over 80 Hz. The reason is that it's not necessarily a subwoofer channel, rather it's a sixth channel. The 950's BM strategy "converts" DVD-A for most home theater applications where the sixth channel is hooked to a subwoofer and the other speakers are not full range. The subwoofer channel gets the summed bass from the other five channels along with its own material and goes through a 120 Hz low pass filter. Anything in the sixth channel over 120 Hz is removed (I don't know what the slope is) and is lost.

In my setup, I'd rather lose the high frequency stuff than try to make my sub play full range. If you can listen to Fleetwood Mac: Rumors through a system without the filter and put a full range speaker in place of the sub, you'd hear early reflection vocals on a couple of songs.

On the Sony TA-E9000ES, the low pass freq of the LFE channel (*separate* from the low pass freq applied the mains info that is rerouted to the sub) was user selectable. You could go as high as 200 Hz. Something I hope the 950's big brother has when it eventually comes out. You could also boost or cut the LFE level separately from the crossed over info with an "LFE mix" setting.

BTW, that Chesky Ultimate DVD-A/V disc we sometimes talk about, has group of DVD-A tracks denoted 6.0, where all the channels are wide band.

Will- If there are some people out there with *true* full range speakers all about, they wouldn't need a sub. Although I personally agree with you, that I prefer one.

actually, with dvd-a/sacd, you're sending 6.0 through 5 cables.

LFE should have the option of NO filter in every player and every pre-pro. the fact that this is not the case shows that these products are made for dolby formats and ignore dvd-a/sacd formats. if you could select NO for LFE filter, your sub could set the LP and send the HP to a satellite, making dvd-a/sacd 6.1.

a step further...outlaw, please read:

1. the output config should have an lfe output (discrete LFE, nothing else, with LP points and slopes or NO filter selectable). this should feed sub # 1.
2. the output config should have an RB output with nothing but redirected bass (selectable LP point and slope or NO filter). this should feed sub #2.
3. a switch that sums the 2 signals into the RB output for those who like things the way they are now.
4. an adjustable HP filter 'Q' for matching filter-to-speaker (many people report a rise in response at crossover as a 'room mode', when, in fact, it is simply the HP filter's 'Q' causing the hump).
this would cost nearly nothing, would be true bass management and transform dvd-a/sacd from 5.1 into 6.1+1.
it will also allow for a 'musical' sub to coexist with a 'movie' sub in the same system, eliminate most of the intermod distortion incurred with summing LFE and RB into one sub, reduce the ridiculous demands the dolbly spec places on a single sub channel (allowing for many more subs to meet spec and be smaller), allow for total phase control, allow perfect reintegration of RB while not affecting the LFE signal and many more wonderful things.

...there...i said it.

i wish everyone who complained about the so-called double bass config would list their speakers for reference.

thousands of people have 2 or 3 subs and none of them complain about double bass. they simply calibrate the SW channel to their system. in the end, though, it's still the same old BM crap we're all stuck with.

if outlaw would implement the above described output config, they would have a pre-pro that separates them from every pre-pro in existence, at any price, for a cost to them of a few dollars per unit. and i, for one, would order it today.

This is from the Sound and Vision review of the 950: That comment makes it sound like it's an intentional FEATURE that the 950 always sends bass content below 80 Hz from the 5.1 analog inputs to its subwoofer output regardless of the position of the switch.

Okay, so they did it on purpose. Can anyone explain to me WHY they would design this "feature" into the 950? It just seems wrong, no matter how I look at it.

I have *heard* that the reason why both they and Rotel does this, is that they *aniticipated* that most people wouldn't have full range speakers. Hence the rerouting to the sub because the mains wouldn't be able to handle that bass anyway. But the funny thing now that I think about it is: then why have the 80 Hz switch at all?

But I agree. 5.1 passthrough should be just that.

With all the "discussion" concerning this feature in the 950 and 1066, I betcha it's long gone in the 1098 and the 950 Mk II and/or the 950's big brother.

i'll bet my lunch money you're absolutely right on this one!

That is exactly my point... why allow people to defeat only half the crossover? I can not think of a situation where one would WANT only the hpf defeated and not the lpf.

------------------
-Kieran

Here's the only case where it would work: if you had THX speakers all around. Bass roll off starts at 80 Hz at whatever the THX specified crossover slope is.

Here's a guess: the "double bass" feature was put in by Cirrus for a "generic" pre/pro design without any analog crossover. Then Outlaw decides to use the chip and adds the analog crossover.

But anybody's guess is as good as that one.

I spoke with the Outlaws about this, and this is what I understood the situation to be regarding the 5.1 bypass BM.

There are generally three classes of users who would be typically using this input, and these are:

Those people who have "small" speakers and a subwoofer - For these people, the 80Hz switch should be "on", as their mains cannot reproduce the low bass that is present in most music, and therefore a sub is needed to reproduce this range. All bass below 80Hz is routed to the subwoofer. The LFE is generally not used on multi-channel music discs, but in those instances when it is, it would be routed to the sub also. This matches the setup that would be used in normal DVD movie playback.

Those people who have truly "large" speakers all around, and no subwoofer - In this instance, the 80Hz crossover switch would be "off". Since there is no subwoofer attached, what is coming from the subwoofer output does not get used. In those infrequent discs that do have an LFE channel, this generally contains redundant information, so there is nothing lost: the low bass is also coming from the other speakers.

Those people who have speakers that are too large to be considered "small", yet too small to be considered truly large, i.e. they are able to reproduce down to 40-50Hz or so, and they are also using a subwoofer. This category encompasses a large segment home theater speakers, such as floor standing units and mid-size bookshelf models. While the mains can reproduce bass, their ability to reproduce low bass is limited. The lowest ranges of the string and electric bass fall into this category, as does the low ranges possible in music that uses synthesizer or sampling.

It is for these people that it was decided to provide "summed" bass below 80Hz on the subwoofer output regardless of the position of the crossover switch. This allows the subwoofer output to augment the bass that is already in the main speakers, yet is not being reproduced by the mains with enough weight to the lowest octaves. In other words, it is "filling" in at the low end, where speakers in this class are starting to diminish in bass response.

Outlaw mis-calculated the number of people who fall into this last category who don't find this feature useful, or more likely don't understand the usefullness of it. I can see that it would be useful if I had speakers that fell into this class to have the ability to fill in the bass region where my mains were beginning to roll off. There is technically no "double bass" in this situation because of the natural rolloff of the bass from the mains.

Anyway, I've been told that they have taken our feedback into consideration, and in the future will expand the available options.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited April 11, 2003).]

Soundhound,

Thanks for the info from the Outlaws. It always helps to know the reasoning behind a design decision. I still don't like it but it helps to know. It's also encouraging to know they are listening. Now when did they say that new pre/pro was coming, hmm?

------------------
Tekdredger

I heard a tidbit (unconfirmed because I don't follow the issue that closely), that on the 1066, the "double bass" was only produced for the front L & R channels. But then the obvious question was, isn't that the opposite of what it should be? I.e., it is a lot more likely that people will have "more" full range speakers for the front L & R, and "less" full range elsewhere. But I didn't follow the thread after that...

I think they missed on this one as well. The "LFE" channel is being used on DVD-A discs and it's not being used strictly as an LFE or subwoofer channel. Many discs have full range signals on this channel. 950 users won't notice this because there is a 120 hz LPF on this channel.

Really? Many? Can you point out which ones you are refering to?

Which, IMO, is the way it should be. LFE-- Low Frequency Effects-- channel.

a lot of players have the same global LFE LP, too. my sony dvp ns900v has this fixed, 120 hz filter. it's not defeatable. then think of all of the sub manufacturers who say, 'if your pre or receiver has BM, turn your sub's filter all the way up, to avoid cascading filters'. if 'all the way up' is 120 hz... what a mess. to avoid cascading filters, you have to limit the LFE to 80 hz or less, externally. this is impossible to do successfully when the redirected bass is affected by an 80 hz LP filter in the pre or receiver (since LFE and RB are summed). when i mentioned this to a certain sub manufacturer, one of the owners basically said i was an idiot and that i should start my own company (pretty cool sales pitch).

i have roughly a dozen multi-channel discs. they all have LFE content. the discs have no label information concerning what is mixed into the LFE channel. this also is stupid.

the only reason it took so long to discover the 950's 'no LFE in dts-es bug', is because LFE and RB are summed.

there should be a separate RB output and a separate, discrete LFE output. there should be a switch that sums the 2 signals for those who prefer this flawed type of config. all internal LP filters should be bypassable.

There is a trend in multi-channel music mixing to mix in 5.0. Several recording industry magazines have recommended doing this.

After all, the whole concept of a mono LFE channel is a movie thing. When it was created, absolutely no thought was given to it's use in a purely music mixing context.

The prevailing thinking is that the low bass be put into the 5 channels as needed, and those with 5 full range speakers will get nice spatial information all the way down into the low bass region. Those with small speakers and a sub will be using bass management, and the bass from the various speakers will get routed to the sub.

They are reasoning that the content of the sub in these systems with small satellites can be determined by the user as they set up their bass management, for their particular room. This is preferrable to a "one size fits all" crossover into the LFE channel below a certain frequency done by the person who mixes the music. In other words, this transfers control of the content of the sub to the user, verses the mixing engineer.

When I have mixed music soundtracks in multi-channel, I always use 5.0. Determining just what to put into a dedicated LFE channel is very messy, as you never know where the sub will be relative to the mains, what the low pass will be and what the polarity will be relative to the other speakers. If I low pass the bass from a particular instrument and put it into the LFE track, my low pass might not coincide with the low pass in the end user's system. There will either be a bass hole or more likely a bass hump because of an overlap from the user's bass management. I can see why the LFE is an "odd man out" in a music context.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited April 11, 2003).]

Exactly.
IF your MC player has this capability (some do- using 120Hz as the cutoff point). And this is why I like the MC analog bass management feature on the 950-- the 80 Hz cut point is much better than 120Hz- for me anyway. IMO, bottom line is-- as long as we have to do this in the analog domain we will not see the perfect solution.

Hopefully more players will incorporate a good implementation of bass management. If the industry ever gets around settling the copyright issues and allows a digital interconnect to the pre/pro, our problems will will be solved - hopefully.......

SH:
1. Mickey Hart has done the 5.1 mixes of the Grateful Dead albums 'American Beauty' and 'Workingman's Dead'. Have you seen his video clip on the production (on the disk) of these albums, and if so, what do you think? He is a confessed 5.1 junkie.

2. Do you think this is a strong argument for buying low cost, quality pre-pros, while the technology and the legislation are in such a dynamic condition? And do you think this will stabilize in the not too distant future?

3. And to all... if my tone towards someone in another thread offended you, please accept my apology. Although it does not reflect well on me, I have to admit that this certain someone's comments and actions were really getting to me. ARGGG.


[This message has been edited by AGAssarsson (edited April 11, 2003).]

I haven't heard these mixes....

I have no idea when the copyright mess will be sorted out. I'm certainly going to hold on to my pocketbook until at least they come up with something workable. The record companies would want to completely stamp out copying if they could get away with it.

I know that Fleetwood Mac: Rumors and Toy Matinee have high frequencies in the subwoofer channel. I'm pretty sure that other DVD-As I have are similar but I obtained them after I got the 950.
The Barenboim collection of Beethoven Symphonies is 5.0.

If you want to chase this, plug the subwoofer output of your DVD player directly into your subwoofer. For the full effect, your sub needs a switch to disengage any crossover in the sub itself and a volume control. If you have the crossover switch, just turn it on and off and you'll hear that there's more material than a subwoofer should be asked to handle. I took it a step further and plugged my DVD player's output into an amp driving a full range bass guitar cabinet. On Rumors (Don't Stop, I think), you can clearly hear early reflections of the vocals and snare drum. On Toy Matinee's first "cut" (Can we use that term anymore? ), you'll hear the bass guitar in full range.

Now, the 950's BM for the 6-channel direct works perfectly for me. The loss of the high frequency stuff in the sub channel is hardly noticeable and the other 5 speakers aren't trying to play bass. Still, the mixing engineers need to come up with a standard or, at least, a labeling system, as Bossbass suggests, so the user knows what he or she is dealing with.

this is a simple way to allow for correct playback. 1 step further would be to include a reference calibration number and recommended LP point for the dedicated LFE channel, among other important info, under a 'producer's notes' section on the disc's 'sleeve' notes. if i were a multi-channel audio producer, you bet i would insist that my notes were included with all the other credits, etc., to insure that my labors were not in vain.

BTW, DB...you need to get the 'celebrating the music of weather report' multi sacd disc when you get a player. check it out:
bass players, partial list...john patitucci, will lee, victor baily, marcus miller...smokin' great bass playing.

Yes, some sort of standard is desperately needed in the labelling of the LFE. Putting full range information there is in my opinion just plain silly. Do they expect people to tear into their speaker setup to accommodate their mixing whims for a single disc?

I sincerely hope that the recommendations are heeded that music producers and mixers simply ignore the LFE track, and let the user's bass management take care of things. Like I said before, the whole reason for the being of an LFE track was from the movie industry, not the music one. Using it for music is just a can of worms in my opinion.

Thanks! It's already on the way! I have the new Denon 2900 on order and I'm starting to pick up some SACD titles. I have DSOTM and Boston already.



Here, Here!