Obviously, different people will hear things differently, but I still feel that the upgrade from 1050 to 950 offered a definite sonic improvement. That comparison was with the 1050 acting as a pre/pro only; there was also a somewhat less obvious improvement when I added a Model 750 to the 1050. The two upgrades combined (external amplification and 950 in place of the 1050) seemed to me to offer a very clear improvement without even factoring in the extra features provided by the 950. Granted, that is my opinion only, but mrs. gonk (who would have happily done without the $850 expense of the Model 950) also noticed the improvement.

I guess what I'm saying is that I would not qualify the 1050 as sonically equal to the 950/7100. I still think that the 1050 sounds very good, but at the end of the day it is only a $500 receiver. The 950/7100 combo offers better sonic performance as well as more power and more features. Whether those extras are worth the extra $1200 is another matter -- for some people those extras will make it a better value, but other people will choose to forego those extras and hang onto the $1200, in which case the 1050 is likely a very good solution for them.

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

Folks,

I've only posted replies a few times because I don't have time to check the Forum more than once a week or so - and by then the keen amongst you have pretty much wrung the last drop of blood out of most topics.

However in this case the topic gets close to what's near and dear to me: cost versus return.

To cut to the chase, at almost every price point, except for those that only Mercedes owners will touch, a receiver will almost always give you much more bang for the buck - in my opinion. The problem with the debate (in general) is that people always choose unfair comparisons. "Do I buy the $1000 receiver or the $1700 separates?" Not fair - to either. Better to ask "if I have only $1000 to spend, should I buy separates or a receiver?" The answer is obvious - at least to me.

Or better yet, why not ask "if I have $3000 to spend, and want to upgrade my current system, including speakers, what should the relative split be between pre/pro/amps (or receiver) and speakers?" I would argue that buying better transducers (ie. speakers) is almost always the best way to get more bang for your buck. So to answer the question (and I know there no perfect answer) I might be inclined to spend $1000 on a receiver and $2000 on speakers, rather than $1700 on pre/pro/amps and $1300 on speakers. I think that would be the way to get the most value for your dollar spent.

Now before before the afficionados out there start tearing into me, I know, I know, I've oversimplified the discussion. I'm actually a separates guy myself. I also have the luxury of running two complete home theatres in my house: one for me, and one for the rest of the family.

Mine is full of separates (and then some) because I'm forever tweaking and replacing bits and pieces because it's a lifelong hobby and if I ever assemble the PERFECT system I'll be forever miserable because there would, by definition, be no more tweaking to do. (I sense a collective "AHHH" from the home theatre Collective out there.)

But the one for the family - that's another matter. It's got a good receiver (Yamaha) and good/ok speakers (Paradigm/Energy), and if I ever need to use it (because my son just has to demonstrate to his friends how awesome Metallica's S&M sounds in my theatre) I'm happy with it - and the value that it represents.

And by the by, I added a new model 950 to my main theatre, and it is, in my opinion, by far the greatest value in "separates" that I have ever come across - bar none! If the question were "$1700: Denon receiver or 950/7100 combo?" I'd have to take the combo. And THAT's why I said "almost always" in the third paragraph above. Outlaw has really thrown the wrench into the old value equation.

Regards.

Jeff Mackwood

ps. to Gonk: thank you very much for the terrific reviews on the 950 that you have posted. I've just printed a copy that's now attached to my 950's owner's manual. It's definitely required reading!

Jeff,

I have started to stack receivers (NAD and Sony in particular) which have failed to continue to be useful. I find it hard to believe that a 7-channel amplifier will be useless in the next decade. Whatever happens on the A/V side, in an era of rapid evolution of A/V standards, I think the amp/pre-amp divide is more useful than ever. As someone who bought his first amp/pre-amp combo, I think that receivers are a scarier and scarier investment, at least as one who just made the move from a straight reciever.

Replacing the 950 looked a lot easier than replacing an integrated Marantz product or equivalent.

Jeff Mackwood,

Thanks for that thoughtful post. Your final point about a $1700 950/7100 combo vs. a $1700 Denon is interesting... first of all it is hypothetical, because there is no Denon in that price point.

(side note: anyone know of a great receiver in the $1500~$1700 street price range to which we could better compare/match it against the 950/7100?)

The Denon that comes closest in features to the 950/7100 combo is the 3803, which is available for MUCH less than the 950/7100 combo.

edit: BTW, could you post a link to the reviews by gonk that you said were "required reading?" Thanks...

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

[This message has been edited by Kieran (edited May 19, 2003).]

Kieran -- A link to my 950 review is in my sig below (after the Saloon Links and the pre/pro chart), or right here . Your question reminded me of a link I have in the pre/pro chart -- a receiver chart at HTF. You've got the Denon 3803 in there (at $1200), and several others units in the mid-$1000's. Marantz SR8200, Sherwood R-963, couple of Yamahas... For what it's worth...

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

Jeff's remarks are someting to consider however let's not forget the original question that started the thread. It isn't about an unfair comparison based on $$, it's about whether or not you actually acheive a sonic improvement by going with the 950/7100 over let's say the 1050.

Of course the cost associated with the 950/7100 will be greater. But the real question is, does the increased cost reflect the improvement in sound quality or is it SIMPLY the cost associated with producing separate units?? I've heard all about the flexibility and expandibility however, NO ONE has stated factually that in a side to side comparison, the 950/7100 sounds superior to the 1050.

In fact, based on what I've read thus far, I would be willing to bet that 90% of the people that responded to this topic, would NOT be able to hear a definite sonic improvement over the 1050 in a blind test?!

You could very well be correct. However, the 950 is a newer generation of pre/pro and reflects more recent thinking in surround formats and bass management options. The amplifier undoubtedly has a bit more output capability that is not reflected in the static wattage ratings, especially at lower impedances. Seperates simply give more flexibility, and that is something that is hard to put a number value on, as it varies with the individual purchaser.

I find this statement a bit puzzling. Rather than re-state my previous side-by-side comparison experience, I'll offer some quotes (all taken from earlier in this thread):



My initial post regarding your question, stating that I and my wife both found a sonic improvement (even though she could have cared less which box we used).



A clarification of my post -- I noticed a sonic improvement between 1050 as pre/pro and 950 as pre/pro. The upgrade from 1050 to 1050/750 the previous year had already provided some improvement in sound, meaning the superior sound I noted in the 950 would likely be even more pronounced for someone replacing a 1050 along with a 950/7100 or 950/770.



I don't mean to seem as if I'm beating the issue to death here, so I will step away from the cut-and-paste, but there are some other posts in this thread that also speak toward the question. Bossobass, for example, went through a number of receivers -- receivers that are all similar in price and performance to the 1050, and in fact even including the 1050 -- before settling on the 950. TANGO replaced a receiver (a Sony, not the 1050) and found enough improvement to amaze his wife.

As for a 1050 vs. 950/7100 blind test? Not having actually tried it, none of us can speak with certainty to the outcome, but I would expect that most people would be able to hear the difference. I know I heard a difference between my 1050 and my 950, for what that's worth.

I hope this big, rambling mess of a reply helps...

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

[This message has been edited by gonk (edited May 27, 2003).]

The 1050 is a good receiver for the money, but it is not a 950. I have had the 1050 as a pre pro, I have also used a Denon 3300 as a pre pro with the Outlaw 750. The Denon and Outlaw 1050 were really close. I would not have picked one over the other to use as a pre pro. When the 950 was put in line with the Outlaw 750 it was no contest. If you really can't hear the difference between the Outlaw 1050 and 950 when used as a pre pro than you dont want to spend your money on seperates. Move on and fine yourself another hobby.

I realize this thread is referencing 950+7100. But your comment about Denon not making a $1700 receiver made me think of the Denon 4802 and the 950+770, both of which cost almost the same and were both reviewed in a popular home theater magazine not long ago. So, I would like to relate information I received during correspondence with a reviewer/writer that reviewed both the 4802 and 950+770.

I asked him which he preferred with emphasis on musical performance and his reply was:

"The answer to your question is fairly simple: If space is a limitation and you want a tidy all-in-one package that sounds terrific then go for the Denon. If on the other hand you have the space and want even better performance, then the Outlaw separates will take you a step beyond, particularly with straight music listening. Hope this is helpful."

Again, I realize you're looking for feedback on the 7100 but the reference and comparison to receivers vs separates seems to hold true.