quote:
Nobody says there aren't better sounding pre/pros out there,but you will encounter with the "diminishing returns" much sooner,then with speakers.For instance the difference between my soon to be "ex" mains Def Tech BP10 and say the Vienna Acoustics Beethovens

If I could only have one upgrade and not the other of course I would take the speakers.

Your point of diminishing return for a pre-pro may be the 950 (thats fine, no argument)..but it isnt MY point of diminishing return nor others...Everybodies diminishing return line is set differently and doesnt STOP at the 950 rest assured..Im glad you found your "point" as thats what this hobby is all about.

John:

Perhaps you would care to go into some detail of the circuity parts and implementation used on more expensive pre/pros verses the 950 that would justify the difference in cost? I really need an education on this - obviously the expensive brands are doing something with their NE5532 op amps that the 950 is not doing with it's NE5532 op amps.

Opinions are opinions, now would you please produce some engineering details that would make you believe that there is a large difference between the 950 and a more expensive one. And please don't use general terms like "its electronic design is better". Please back up any claims like "the power supply is better" with HOW it is better. "It just sounds better to me" is not a valid response to this question. And please don't cop out by simply giving me links to the "white papers" from the manufacturers of other pre/pros.

I am waiting.........


[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited April 09, 2003).]

ahhhhhhhh...i've been inching toward this subject. (see soundhound's post).

if the DSP is equal, the DACs are the same, the I/O is the same, the opamps are the same, BM is the same, distance settings can be remedied by placement, then, technically speaking, what justifies the $3K diff in admission price?

we can all agree the faceplate ain't makin' it sound 'better', eh?

maybe it comes with a boutique aluminum atom sheild power cord?

no...we're down to the power supply and analog gain stage.

eliminate the pretty brochures, retailer cut, room for the volume buyer and higher required gross profit of the higher overhead manufacturer and what's left?

i second SH's question (actually, he just beat me to the punch). a proper answer and follow up here, will do two things. it' will prove your opinions valid, and earn you the respect to espouse them any way you like.

SoundHound,

I have no idea why one product sounds better then the other and could care less WHY it sounds better (maybe an engineer type could answer your question better). If somebody made a pre-pro outta cheap radio-shack parts and sold it for 100.00 I wouldnt care. If it sounded better to me then I'd buy it. Thats the really the main factor I go by. I buy one piece of gear and compare it to another(a/b style if possible), if it sounds better then it has a new home.

Now yes, sound is subjective just like anything else.If the 950 sounds better to you then a 5000.00 pre-pro more power to ya, or if a 200.00 sony sounds better to you, thats ok too.

Does the 950 sound better to YOU then the aragon or theta or lexicon or meridian or anthem ?..I take it you have compared it to some of these units directly, correct ?..just curious

Did not read all the replies but I am sure Ricky "blind" tested his A/B comparisons of the 950 vs et al....that is, he was unaware which pre/pro he was listening to when he made his value judgements

bossobass,

Why do you assume that the analog stage has little effect on the sound quality (via digital and analog connections)? Are you saying that stereo preamps basically sound the same? Take the Aragon Soundstage, it has the same analog ciruitry as the Aragon Aurum preamp. So the Aurum would not sound any different from the 950 (used as a 2 channel preamp)?

My four rears varying between ~ 4ft and ~ 8ft. Do you think distance settings could matter in generating a more cohesive soundfield (for DVDs).

So let me get this straight. JT has to prove why his prepro sounds better to him by digging up part numbers but you don't have to justify why the 950 is THE point in diminishing returns over 3k processors? All of this after he was very clear that everyone has different needs/diminishing return points.

I am certain that Ricky's NHT 3.3's are GOOD ENOUGH to hear any differences between the Stage One and 950. It is not like he had Bose 301's for the demo.

Now I can understand you not wanting rocks thrown at your 950 in a Outlaw forum. I don't think that was done. After months of claims there was no need to spend 3k on a preamp once the 950 hit the scene, you didn't think that caused a few raised eyebrows?

I am one of the biggest diminishing returns guys you will find but my point of DR may only be considered low-fi by some.

I am not a Ricky cheerleader but I did buy his Soundstage (replace Sony TA-E9000es and TA-P9000es). I only have NHT VT2's (fronts), VT1.2's (rears) and Sherbourn's 5/1500a amp. Ricky almost had to pry the Sony combo from my hands to even try the Soundstage but he knew my setup (NHT's and music preference in a 5.1 setup) and was sure I would like the preamp. He even sent the Soundstage before payment so I could A/B the setup and sell the loser. Different strokes for different folks I guess.

Umm...just for the curious here...were you at this test? I'm totally unfamiliar with Ricky's affliation with other forums and companies but, wow, did he come to this forum with a small army.

I'll restate something from my previous post. You are really posting all this information on the wrong forum. Your opinions and views are great to hear and in some ways can be helpful. But, you're on Outlaw's forum here. The large majority of people here are satisfied Outlaw customers who are willing to recommend their product to people looking for equipment in the same range.

John:

Actually no, I have not directly compared the 950 to the Aragon or the others. What I have done however is done strict (and I do mean strict) direct blind A/B comparisons via relay switching of the direct feed from a variety of sources (up to 24 bit feeds from my digital audio workstation, playing master recordings) into my custom vacuum tube preamp and that of the feed through the 950. The results? There is no audible difference, and with the latest incarnation of the 950, no increase in noise. No difference on such subjective factors as "soundstaging", "warmth", "focus" - you name it. If it does not alter the signal in any way, just how much "better" would you suggest it might be? And yes, I know a thing or two about critical listening - I do it for a living. In the real world, not for some audiophile publication. I have an electronics lab in my house (I am an electronics engineer too) and have had the 950 on my bench and taken critical measurements. I actually worked to some extent with Outlaw on improvements in the 950 from earlier versions of the unit. Again, I ask you - if there is absolutely no degradation or change in the sound as it passes through the 950, just how much more "perfect" would you suggest it needs to be?

From your statements, you are obviously going on sheer faith and non controlled comparisons of these preamps. You know of course how fallable the human ear is don't you? I'll remind you that processes like Dolby Digital and DTS rely on the weaknesses of our ears so that they can throw away up to 90% of the audio signal. Our "audio memory" is very short, and extremely vulnerable to the influences of our other senses, such as the perceived "value" of a component. If you think that you can reliably perform an unbiased comparison while knowing the identities of the components, you are either fooling yourself, or are simply being arrogant.

I'm afraid it DOES come down to pure science and engineering when it comes to designing an audio component. If the laws of physics are valid for the Space Shuttle, then there is no reason to believe that something like audio would be exempt. Perhaps you know something we don't know?

If, as you say, it does not matter to you why a component sounds better, I'm afraid you have just summed up the situation for those who are vulnerable to "snake oil" sales pitches. I would hope you are a bit more discriminating than you make yourself out to be.

Purchasing an article that is technology based would seem to demand a certain amount of inquiry as to "why" is somebody charging 3 times the price for "item A" verses "item B". Doesn't this matter to you? Are you so rich that it doesn't matter? Do you like to waste money? If these inquiries are not made, then that leaves you wide open for the excesses of the marketing machine of those manufacturers who would be more than happy to relieve you of your money.

The reason people like me are users of Outlaw equipment is that by and large we have bothered to educate ourselves about the real differences between components. We demand quality, but we are not stupid enough to pay for hype. The owners of Outlaw equipment know that this company is concerned with cutting through the hype and misleading claims and delivering a top quality product at a price that is fair. If this bothers you, well I frankly don't care.

Purchasing high priced components based solely on faith may make you feel good, but I would suggest you stay away from people selling you beachfront land in Arizona.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited April 09, 2003).]

I am not an ally of R or of anyone....yet. I am sure R noticed the sarcasm of my remark.