There is no question in my mind that HDMI will prevail. There are far to many big $ companys putting big $'s behind, and pushing for HDMI. Most have incorporated HDMI into there product lines already. These companys with all there influence, and power will not let HDMI fail even if something else was proving a better choice. History teaches this, just look at DTS, and Pro logic, DTS was clearly the better format, but with Dolby labs influence, and money, DTS was almost destroyed and sent into digital heaven. Also, as previously mentioned Beta and VHS, Beta was and still is clearly superior to VHS. Although the bigger question for me at this time is when will HDMI be a viable formate. I also see no way for the outlaws to be able to upgrade the 990 to HDMI. If you look at the rear panel there are no removable panels as is with the new Parasound 7100 and a few others. Also, on another note the ability to add room EQ after the fact is in question for me. I feel that room EQ is currently available at a very high level of quality, take the Audyssey labs multi EQ system for instances www.audyssey.com . The Sherwood piece that the 990 was designed after is soon to be upgraded and re-released with room EQ as well as many other advances, HDMI will not be included however, there will be an upgrade panel on the back of the unit for an HDMI upgrade in the future.The 990 appears to be dated before it has even hit the warehouse. I still want to give the 990 a test run in my system, but I am a little discouraged with the current features of the 990. I am currently waiting the arrival of the promising Parasound 7100 for review as well.

After reading through all of the links posted in the few messages above, I still think DVI was the right choice for this product. What I think most of those shouting for HDMI keep forgetting is that this is a video switch on the 990. All of those links say that the only real difference is the audio content included with HDMI. Since it has been pointed out repeatedly that the audio standards on HDMI are a moving target at best, it makes sense to disregard it and concentrate on video switching for this feature.

I would assume then, that the DVI interface was cheaper to implement. With the fact that you can switch between DVI and HDMI video with an adapter, as a video only switch I think they chose wisely. This allows anybody with either connection to connect and use the high quality video today, without worrying about obsolesence (sp?) tomorrow because the audio standard winds blew the wrong way.

I suspect that some of you may be getting weary of hearing my take on this, and for that I apologize, but there are a few thoughts that I think are of some value here.

DVI started appearing on displays a couple of years ago, and there is a continually growing installed user base of DVI display owners for whom digital video switching is very valuable in either form. (By the way, Runco will be using DVI on its upcoming models .) For those displays, the 990's DVI switching is of great value. And for HDMI displays, DVI switching still allows video switching.

HDMI's great benefit over DVI is the ability to carry audio. However, that ability has not been properly developed yet. Big corporations like JVC or Panasonic can tuck an HDMI 1.1 input into a receiver and leave consumers with a product that won't work with the final standard (SACD, high definition video discs), but a company like Outlaw would be crazy to do so.

When will HDMI audio be truly ready? That depends in large part on Blu-Ray and HD-DVD. If both formats roll out on schedule, HDMI will need to be pinned down in the next 12 months. If the two do merge, as is rumored, it could take longer - possibly 2 more years or more - to get all the details nailed down. By then, the 990 will be at least 2 years old. It's 7.1 analog input will provide an avenue for compatibility, and a future generation unit can have HDMI integrated.

GONK WROTE:

"I suspect that some of you may be getting weary of hearing my take on this, and for that I apologize"

MY RESPONSE: "You've got to be kidding"
Seriously: this equipment is expensive and we all want to make the right decisions. Input from gonk ereally helps. Certainly it helps me, so thanks, gonk.

So unless I missed the point I'll be switching video with DVI and if it is HDMI gear I'll only be switching the video. OK. So Mrs. nfaguys and I will have to switch audio another way. Not having ever seen even a 950, I imagine one can easily do this with outlaw pre/pro's.

if you use dvi for video, you'll still have the option of using a digital audio input (coaxial or toslink).

Wow...all this nonsense about the future. If it ain't here right now and working perfectly, it certainly can't be called the future.

I run the source directly to the monitor/FP. Switching, schmitching.

The 7.1 analog ins have digital BM. I'm interested in the details on that, not lamenting what feature the 990 doesn't have (which makes no sense). For anyone who already has an ICBM, for example, will the A/D>digital BM>D/A sound better than the ICBM, straight analog path?

Analog is still the best audio solution, IMO.

Auto-EQ on a $1,100 pre/pro? Those who are looking for this feature simply don't know much about the concept. It's like thinking that Lex could have offered their auto EQ upgrade for $100 instead of $4K.

DVI/analog was the right decision. Auto EQ is crap, unless you can afford Lex or Meridian, which are better than crap. Analog audio path is still superior to 'future speak'.

I'm with Gonk on this one.

Bosso

bossobass wrote:

Would you please be more specific as to why you call auto EQ "CRAP"?

I respectfully beg to differ with you, auto EQ is not crap by any means. Have you personally reviewed a unit with auto EQ? I have, and I can tell you that I was truly, very impressed. Auto EQ is perfect for surround encoded software, it makes every seat in the theater an excellent seat. It also dramatically improves the you are there effect, you will find yourself thinking that the bullet whizzing past your head just missed you, or the car comming around the corner is going to hit you. For two channel audio listening it has no use, but for surround encoded material it is well as my son said it's totally awesome. Also, there are units, not pre pro's,
but receivers many of them with this feature at and below the $1099. price point. Soon, very soon, there will be pre pro's as well.

I don't understand why anyone would want their pre-pro to switch audio via HDMI. Are their that many people using their video displays for audio too? My audio stops at teh pre-pro is sent to the amps and out to the speakers, I don't use the speakers in the displays...maybe I'm different. What I can see is the single cable concept from a DVD player to the pre-pro but those units are normally together in the rack, I don't mind too much ponying up a few extra dollars for a digital audio connection. Just my 2 cents.

Ed

Roland I think you are missing the point regarding HDMI audio. The big advantage to audio over HDMI is to get audio into the Pre/Pro not switch it. Many of us SACD/DVD-A users would like a digital interface into our Pre/Pros. This will become even more important (required) when the HD versions of DD and DTS show up.

For those complaining about lack of HDMI "video switching" the 990 has HDMI switching with a $10 adapter.

John which Auto-EQ system do you like? It almost sounds like you are talking about auto-setup. Why wouldn't Auto-EQ be beneficial to two channel if it makes such a big difference with surround sound?