1. Take a 990 and any other processor of any manufacturer at any price.
2. Set them up to operate the same amplifier and speakers in the same room.
3. Set levels between the two units to within .1db.
4. Set up all listening modes in both products to have the same parameters.
5. Listen to both for as long as you want to any musical material and source you want in any and all modes
6. The key factor is that you may NOT know to which processor you are listening. An ABX comparator or a willing, close-mouthed friend are two ways of accomplishing this.

Prediction: Not one of you will be able to tell which is the expensive brand and which is the Outlaw. If the test were done double-blind, you would not be able to discern if you were listening to the same or different processors much less opine on which is "better." For example, read the results of years of blind testing performed by Peter Aczel.

Outlaw, why don't you set up such a test?

It's a very interesting suggestion. The logistics of a true ABX test of this sort (especially at the level of complexity associated with surround sound systems) is said to be very challenging, and the results are many times disregarded (particularly by those it was intended to convince) because of that difficulty. That being said, it would be fun to see the results of such a test.

If that was the case, shouldn't we all just get $99 Sanyo receivers as our processor?

You think we should set our budget that high, Jed M?

lol, no I don't Gonk. That is a little steep for my blood.

I wasn't being sarcastic in my question. Why couldn't a $99 processor compete with the Outlaw if digital is digital? You mentioned "functionality, amplifier power, or build quality" would be the difference between a $99 receiver and the 990. First, if you are using them as a processor, the amplifier power is irrelevant. As far as build quality and functionality is concerned, neither should a make a difference for pure sound quality of a digital signal, right? So, according to your theory, why couldn't a $99 processor not compete with more expensive processor's on just a digital level?

And I wasn't sarcastic in my response. You said receiver, so I mentioned amplifier power.

There is a snobbish attitude among many audiophiles that high cost necessarily equates to high quality, an attitude hardly limited to audio. Yes, quality costs. The question is, how much? Some engineers overdesign to no purpose beyond satisying their egos. I heard a pair of Mark Levinson mono amps, each about the size of a small mid-range computer, too hot to touch, requiring a 220 AC line to operate, costing about $30,000 (I can't recall if that's for one or both, and rated at full power (300 watts) into .5 ohm. Who cares? (Professionals, maybe.) If you're into driving near short circuits, by it. Of course the MLs sounded good, but I doubt they would whoop a Bryston 4B-SST at @$2,500 driving any commercially available speaker system - assuming listeners weren't biased yourself by knowing to which amp they were listening and assuming levels were balanced as close to 0db as possible.

I reiterate that the Outlaw 990 should NOT be compared to other $1,000 units because of where and how it is manufactured and how it is marketed.

LOL, a group of audio enthusiasts recently did a comparison between a $4,000 Halo amp and a $250 Crown Pro audio XLS 402 amp. We posted our results in the "new amp is making me grin from ear to ear" thread in the AVS Forum. Nobody present could tell which sounded better. In fact, someone on that thread sold his Halo for multiple Crowns.

They are butt ugly but who cares!

A very good point, Jed. If the pre/pro were just a digital switcher, this test would result in exactly what tbng proposes - "not one of you will be able to tell which is the expensive brand and which is the Outlaw."

However, the perceived standard of quality for a pre/pro is in the quality of the components of, and design of, the analog signal path. If that were not the perception, we'd all be happily listening to our $99 Sanyos, oblivious to the Outlaw 990s of the world. I think we can all agree on that, yes?

Past that, what we hear as a result of the different D/As, circuit designs, potentiometers, etc., works within the boundaries of our perception to determine our particular sonic preferences, and therefore any further discussion goes down the same road as the premium cables vs. lamp cord debate. We can never truly know how much of what we hear is in the signal and hardware vs. what's in our ears and brains, only form an opinion based on the result.

I think that, just as everyone's tastes vary, were numerous people to attempt tbng's experiment, we would see an equally numerous diversity of opinion. (though I'm curious to see how a $99 sanyo would fare nonetheless )