At last the user manual is posted, and we can get answers to our long-awaited questions, although some questions had been answered before this.

THE GOOD
1. All the available surround processing technology is there, every last mother's son of Dolby point-whatever.
2. Trust me, you won't tell any difference between the Outlaw 990 and a Lexicon, Meridian, Rotel, Bryston, etc. operating in the same mode with the same settings.
3. DVI is here! Although HDMI may take over in the industry, an adaptor will get you up to speed video-wise.
4. The 990 is a great value for movie watching.
5. It allows for expansion to 7.1 SACD when that day arrives, and it probably soon will.
6. Unlike the 950, speaker setup allows for separate parameters for surrounds and rears.
7. The 990 is a clear step up from the 950.

THE BAD
1. All the bad press here on DSP, I’m sorry to say, led Outlaw to cut corners on this vital aspect just as it did on the 950. No, I'm not talking about simulated "hall" modes, but I want the ability to adjust delay and high frequency contouring on the surrounds and back channels to get the best from two-channel, acoustically recorded sources. Surrounds in this case must NOT be full range, and adjusting delay and high frequency rolloff simulates hall size by utilizing the recording’s out-of-phase information. T’aint possible with the 990 any more than it was with the 950, blast it! Dolby IIx is great as far as it goes but fails on this aspect, too.
2. Related to 1 above, the 990’s tone controls appear to be the old-fashioned kind, not digital. A tone control bypass button on a digital processor is like putting a starter crank on a BMW.
3. It's big. In my case, that's no problem, but it might be for others.
4. The USB port is on the @#$(&^*@! back of the unit!
5. Distance parameters for speakers are still in 1 db increments. Precise channel balance is very important, and 1 db won’t quite cut it.
6. Room EQ is noticeable by its absence. Outlaw should, and probably will, rectify that omission.
7. Only two DVI inputs is a little sparse, adequate this year but probably not next.
8. Didn’t the 950’s remote have macro capability, or am I thinking of another product? I didn’t see it in the 990’s user manual.

THE WORTHLESS
1. Balanced outputs is a surprising inclusion at this price level, especially because they rarely, if ever, offer any audible improvement in a home environment. Unnecessary increase in the cost.
2. AM-FM tuner. In this age of satellite radio (and digital broadcasts as soon as music producers get over their paranoia), why bother? FM barely qualifies as a high-fidelity medium thanks to the broadcasting restraints forced upon it. Unnecessary increase in the cost.
3. Phono input. The ever-decreasing number of record lovers likely already have a separate phono preamp, and the 990 can't handle moving coil cartridges anyway. It's like putting a rumble seat in a Jaguar, i.e., another unnecessary increase in cost.
4. I can't tell from the user manual (and couldn't with the 950 either until I played with it), but that level trim control looks suspiciously unchanged. The circuit was pointless on the 950 because it did not add or detract from any channel's level but permanently changed original settings. Looks like more of the same, but, as Bill O’Reilly says, “I could be wrong.”

Well for me, these two are not anywhere near worthless. Certainly FM as high fidelity is suspect, but there are times when I'll be working (my workshop is near my HT and will be in a seperate zone) and I want to listen to a ballgame (go Nats!) or listen to an NPR show. Having the tuner is perfect for this. A tuner in my setup (going back to the 1970's) never replaced vinyl or CDs, but was an alternative for non-critical listening means.

As for the phono input - I have a high end phono pre-amp on my 2 channel system - love it. Having access to my vinyl w/out another device in my HT is a bonus - it certainly adds worth in my case.

Of course YMMV

The Good I am looking forward to trying out Dolby Headphones on my Senn HD-600's. Doesn't this somewhat contradict this statement? In any case, I believe it will be a step up. So I agree with 7, but disagree with 2.

The Bad This is my number one concern but I ordered and hopefully I can make it work. I agree, this is strange. Kind of like when you go through a gated area and the guard house is on the passenger side.

The Worthless I don't think a phono input is worthless. Maybe you won't use it, but I would imagine there is a good percentage that will. Also, unlike balanced inputs, I don't think a phono input added much to the cost.

And he usually is.

Bill "Can't tell a loofa from a falafel" O'Reilly may be "right" but he is usually wrong!

But that aside, a Phono Input is now almost more important than before, since one of the "Iggletts" discovered all those "big round black things in the back closet with cool music on them".

A tuner? There are some great programs from NPR and APR that are worth listenging to on a quality system. Put politics aside and listen to "This American Life" and totally immerse yourself in the story thanks to great music in the background.

As to all the stuff in your #1, and the other product at this price that has those features is? Isn't the proper balance of sonic performance and features what it's all about here? I'll give those fine tuning adjustments up for a more affordable price.

USB jack on the back? Two words come to mind: EXETENSION CABLE. Get over it. Besides, you are complaining about a tuner yet think that the USB jack will get use?

At the end of the day, I think that you have mis-cast "Things I (you) don't like and/or need" as "Bad". They ain't bad, they are just stuff that on the one hand you say "take out and save money because I don't use it" then on the other hand say "gee, even though putting something in that I (you) want but others don't need or even understand at all is OK, even if it raises the price for everyone else so that I have what I (you) want".

Hmmm. THe trurth will come when enough people get their hands (ears) on these things and tell us how they SOUND. THAT is the true measure of good or bad, as opposed to "glad it has this" and "too bad it doesn't have this".

Great to hear - young ones need to appreciate the black gold from a different era.

It will be interesting to get a take on what the "young 'uns" think of what WE thought was great music in --- uhhh --- well, let's just say "some number of years ago". Now I have to find a decent turntable without digging too far into the budget for kibble.

I would suggest that having the USB on the back seems like a very logical choice. It seems to me that it will really only ever get used in two instances:

1. To upgrade in the future. How often is this likely to be done? My money is on "not very" so once in a great while getting to the back of the unit shouldn't be a big deal for a cleaner front.

2. As an audio slave device to a PC. If you're using it in this fashion, most likely you'll have a permanent connection hooked up to that USB port. Do you really want a USB cable forever hanging off the front of your unit? I wouldn't.

If there is some other application I'm overlooking that would require you frequently plug in and remove a cable which would demand front panel access, please share. I can't think of any but would be curious to learn about something new. But as Iggy points out, USB extension cables are cheap and easy to come by. Run one around the side of your unit and now you have front access.

I'm hesitant to recommend another online retailer in this forum (is there a rule against this?) but you can find a bunch of worthwhile turntables in the 300-1000 dollar range (they also have some that are far more expensive, great big rube goldberg-esque looking contraptions) at www.amusicdirect.com - kind of a high-end tweak-happy site but some pretty good deals overall - they also carry just about every available dvd-a, sacd, hdcd, heavyweight vinyl, etc. that you can think of...

Lou:

Thanks, we'll take a walk over there, though I think I've seen their catalogs around the dog house somewhere. Ah, if they only didn't put that old Thorens in the last garage sale! Such is a dog's life!

Curious that you can make some of your statements without actually hearing a 990 (one presumes that, like the rest of us, you haven't -- and from the tone of your posts it seems reasonable to presume that you won't be buying one).

For example: "Not unless the circuit has changed on the 990". Well, since everything we've been told indictes that the 950 and 990 are totally different products from totally different manufacturers based on totally different platforms, it seems safe to say that the circuits HAVE changed.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't. Some say tomatoe -- ok, you get the picture. One has to think that the Outlaws thought that the features, such as a tuner and phono section, would appeal to a broad audience or they would have omitted them. If it ain't right for you, then why not buy one of the many other quality processor/preamp/tuners that list at or under $1099 with all of the 990's features and presumably good sonics. That long list includes...

Opps. None come to mind. You can spend more and get what you want, you can spend the same and get a used unit that still might not have the DVI switch, lip sync correction and USB, or you can realize that no one unit can please everyone. What doesn't fit your needs seems to be just what many people here need. That's what makes it a ball game.

I tend to agree with BobbyC on this one. No unit is going to be perfect. For me the 990 has the right balance of features & price so I ordered one. If the sound is good, I'll keep it.

To each his own I guess. I like having a tuner for listening to FM for when I am doing stuff in the house and for zone 2 to channel it to the patio when I am BBQ'ing.

I crossed the Halo off my list early on because it did not have a tuner...

Yep. you can't please everyone

So if the circuit has been changed you admit they would sound different. Using your same logic the 990 must sound different compared to the "Lexicon, Meridian, Rotel, Bryston, etc." since I doubt they all share the same circuits as the 990.

I'm with the dog on this one.

But, tbng, the only part that is specified by Dolby is the decoding - the rest of the signal path (bass management, time delay, D/A conversion, volume control, analog path, etc.) will be different for each piece - that's what Jed M is pointing at, I believe. Besides, if Dolby's specs are anything like the specs we produce in my business, there are plenty of ways (some better than others, some bordering on unacceptable) to build something based on that spec. It's not an absolute. Look at computer video cards as an example - ATI or NVidia develops a chip and designs a card to use it, and then five (or more) manufacturers build their own cards based on that design to use that chip - all of them meet the specs, but all will exhibit differences in behavior. The differences may be very subtle, but they will exist.

You guys need to cut tbng a break. Obviously his list of good and bad points will be different than anyone elses.

Do what I do and pretend eveyones post is a fortune cookie, but instead of adding "in bed" to the end add "in my opinion".

You guys have a short memory. Remember the thread where everyone made a list of the new Outlaw pre-pros features? The concensus was that there was not a lot of concensus on what the most important features were "in my opinion" :rolleyes:

Thank you, morphsci. I am somewhat disappointed in the design of the 990 and will not be purchasing it. There is too much in there that has nothing to do with a surround processor and some key features missing. I still wish Outlaw well and will recommend them to anyone. To those of you making testy arguments about differences in sound quality, I say you need to prove those "differences" exist. You won't and neither will the so-called "golden ear" experts.

Your position that "those who make testy arguments about differences is sound quality" will "need to prove those 'differences' exist" is only one side of this coin.

Since you have not compared the 990 to any other units out there, I have to say that those who make testy arguments about NO differences in sound quality will need to prove that they do not exist, by the same token.

You may not find the 990 well suited to your personal needs, but why belabor the point?

Absence of Proof is not Proof of Absence. Nor is it proof of existence.
Collecting evidence for either side in this case amounts to the same thing... listening to the box compared to other boxes, over a very large sample of listeners...

Bottom line, I am not sure why we are trying to "prove" anything. Its not like the Outlaws are showing up at people's houses and forcing them to buy a 990 at gunpoint. I am sure the Outlaws would love to sell a unit to everyone.. they took their best guess at what people would buy at price point X, with feature list Y, with costs that allow X > Y to a point where they can pay people's salaries, their suppliers, the landlord and hopefully have a little left over for investors. Given the multitude of variables and real world constraints I am not surprised that everyone does not find the 990 perfect, or even desirable.

And here is the real underlying truth behind any discussion of what features are essential, desirable, or useless. It may seem obvious, but sometimes we forget that a product that may suit our needs perfectly provides no benefit to someone else. Even a product that offers most of the features needed by a majority of the interested consumers will simply not fit at all for others.

Are you sure? After all they are Outlaws.

Yet, you admit if the "circuits" are changed between the 950 and 990 they will sound different, but the 990 will sound identical to $5000 processors regardless of the circuits. Sounds like a testy argument. :rolleyes: Good luck on your processor hunt.

Well so far they haven't been to my house. Which at this point is still somewhat frustrating for me...

I'm with tbng on this one. For my situation (and apparently for his), he's dead-on with his list.

What I really care about is how it sounds. If it sounds better than my 950, at that price, I will be all over it.

One feature I do really like is the sub offset for two channel sources. I don't know why, as I've calibrated my speaker levels, but I always have to turn down the sub for two channel CD listening vs DD & DTS with movies.

Cary