folks: come on now, we are talking about a "simple" DVI switch. It doesn't do anything except switch the two inputs.

Right now, I can see no use for such an item in my HT, but that is my HT. I would have left it off, saved the money for something else that had more functional use.

In the review that Outlaw references, the reviewer cited the DVI instead of a HDMI as a negative. Small, but interesting point.

As for the price, I'm still at a loss to define exactly what you get for a $1000 - $10,000 pre processor that isn't in a $1000 - $6000 receiver. I brought up this question on another board and, I'm afraid, I didn't get any answers.

For example, what does the 990 do that a Denon 3805 won't do (DVI switching and balanced pre outputs excluded)?

Comments/ Thoughts?

What you presumably get is better quality of sound. People wold argue that a $20,000 Meridian system will sound much better than a $1,000 Denon system. People would argue that a Outlaw 990/Amp package will sound better than a Denon 3805 (the 3806 is being announced soon w/ HDMI). It is not about what it does differently, but how it does it.

You also supposedly get better quality hardware.

I have a friend that purchased the current generation Denon 3xxx AVR when I purchased my B&K equipment (about 8 years ago). He has had his repaired twice in that time. I have not had any repairs.

I say presumably and supposedly because different people hear different things. The honest truth is that the biggest determining factor is the actual room that you put it in. Any system can sound drastically different from room to room.


warning.. warning..
This will take us to a whole other philosophical debate about separates .vs. receivers! or Japanese Mass Market .vs. specialty brands... Lets just say that it has been hashed and rehashed.


Good Luck,

Charlie

Brubacca: yes, I could understand and agree that a more expensive unit could be made with much better components and quality control. NO DOUBT about that!! Since I tend to keep my gear a long time, that would be a positive selling point for me.

But, from a technical standpoint, why should the sound that you get from your mucical CD player or cable box sound any different UNLESS there is some "pre emphasis" or surround sound algorithmic differences in the pre processor/ receiver?

The signal going to your receiver or pre processor should be amplified in a linear form. With the specified amplifier frequency bandwidths and THDs, either the above sound modifications are being made in the unit or the listener is simply full of BS. Linear amplification means just that. The output is a linear representation of what the input was, just more power.

Multiple double blind receiver/ amplifier tests have shown that educated listeners can NOT tell one amplifier from another, IF THEY DON'T KNOW WHICH THEY ARE LISTENING TO BEFOREHAND!

So, I am leaning toward one of the newest receivers (with the features that I want) with 2 or 3 Outlaw monoblocks to drive the fronts and maybe the center from pre outputs.

Of course, I'm still open to the argument that convinces me that there really is some profound benefit for a separate pre processor.

Anyone else want to give a try?

O.K. I'll take a stab as far as a pre/pro goes over a receiver.

1. Build quality. Decent caps, well dressed chassis (as in how the internal wire connections are routed), external connectors (gold plated vs. not; chassis mounted vs. PCB mounted).

2. Features. Balanced outputs and possibly inputs (for the front channels). Higher-bandwidth component video switching.

3. Isolation. Without high-level amps in the chassis with the low-level preamp, you get far less cross-channel distortion.

4. Amplification. Receivers tend to have lousy amps for the surround channels, concentrating on left, centre, and right. It is recommended that the same headroom be available for all channels.

While I won't argue that one can't tell quality amps apart (though I have my favorites, and settle on $500 a chanel as tolerable, pricewise), double blind, just about any separate amp will be better than the amplification available in a receiver.

Your choice to go with a receiver and separate amps for the channels that matter is a wise one, though, if the receiver is really good, you might find it is the surround channels that are lacking, and not the front ones. BTW, I am not impressed with the M200's specs, esp. above 10 KHz.

Rene: thanks for the input!!!!!!!!!

I will have to take a closer look at the M200s frequency response. I was under the impression that it was pretty flat from 20Hz to 20,000Hz. Is there another brand of monoblocks that you recommend? 2 channel? 3 channel?

There was a significant double blind test (I'll see if I can find the reference and post it later) where listeners COULDN'T tell the difference between a $600 receiver and a $12,000 amplifier.

Amplifier quality: Agreed! From what I have seen, in a receiver the price point dictates what the power supply capability is. 1/8 and 1/3 of full capability seem to be current price points.

The was an article on a different thread discussing power supply design. The conclusion was that with very loud listening levels you needed 40% of the full RMS, all channel, capability. I haven't found any metrics that give the power distribution in either a 5.1 or 7.1 system. But, I believe that most of the power is in the front and center channels. My thesis is that if I can off load the power requirements of a reciever for the fronts and possibly the center channel, then the internal power supply should be sufficient for the surrounds. Maybe only the fronts need to be off loaded. I sure would like to see some metrics on the power distribution and I suspect that they exist, somewhere.

Rene: I went to the M200 spec page and looked at the spec window. I did not see a power spectrum that would show response above 10 KHz. All it said was 200 watts at 8 ohms, 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz, less than .05 THD.

Do you have a link for the power spectrum?

TIA.

Alais when to jump in HDMI 1.1 1.2, 1.3, 1.999??? Here is one answer if you want to spend 5 Grand. Onkyo's Future Proof Receiver! The TX-NR1000, 150 W X 7 into 8 ohms. 2 HDMI inputs, 1 output, 2 Firweire. That should be good for the Rat. Anyway it is good for the future cuz it has modules that you can pull out and replace, which you will need to do right away since when it was released the HDMI was only 1.1, the 1.2 is on the way!

kosman: yes, I have looked at that one. $5,000 is a little steep, but not out of the question.

At $5,000 the question that I would end up asking is would it be more cost effective to get something else now (somewhere between the price of the 990 and an Anthem AVM20) and replace it outright in a couple years time (once the format war has made some real progress)?

Although there is no way in that price range I would buy this over other similarly priced processors, I will commend Onkyo for being a stand up company for actually updating their products. That 989, or whatever it was, was updated for years (it still may be). I have never owned an Onkyo product but they gained my respect.