OK...

One thing I cannot help but notice is the great deal of confusion about the various modes and subtleties of the 990's bass management (i.e. S/PDIF / TOSLINK / 2-ch analog / 7 ch analog depending on large / small / sub etc).

So, just to take everyone's pulse on this, Here goes:

How many of you (sorry, us) think it would be a good idea for the Outlaws to do something as simple as a Microsoft Excel workbook, wherein each sheet describes what happens to what input as a consequence of setttings?

Granted, this seems like a lot of work, but my belief is that once done, a simple reference point would be available for us all, and we would know what to expect. It would also serve as a nice template to cross reference when the update (whenevr that arrives) comes out.

My guess is that much of the frustration and consternation expressed here is due to the 'unpleasant surprise' factor, and I suspect that the Outlaws would concede that they'd field less anxious complaints if users knew up front exactly how, and under all forseeable I/O configs (inupt mapping vs / in conjunction with size and sub settings as well as modes (bypass, stereo, upsample)), things were going to operate.

Again, maybe I'm nuts, but my take is that I would rather have a tabular summary (again, via something as simple as Excel sheets in a workbook) than pouring through thread after thread, trying to interpret what has been said / observe what has been corrected in wirtten form.

Who would like a complete tabular summary from The Outlaws for their 990? A quick show of hands please...

Mark

I've thought about this a bit, and the basic concept is valuable - but I'm starting to wonder if a table is the appropriate format. A series of Excel worksheets could probably work, but it loses the "at a glance" convenience of a single central presentation of data (meaning we run the risk of leaving folks just as confused as they are already). Putting everything in one table is something I've mulled over a bit this week (building on some past experience with other charts ), and it gets messier than I'd like in a hurry. I've got an Excel file on my desktop right now in which I started trying to develop the format, and I haven't been satisfied with what I've come up with so far. I haven't given up on finding a useful format yet, but I also wonder if a written form might work just as well or better.

I think it's a great idea. I would even go one further and create a second tabular form that could be updated (assuming confirmation) of how things are INCORRECTLY WORKING.

I don't desire anyone to tell me how it should work, but some might. After I was educated on the intent of the bass management in bypass, that question went from a "how" to a "why" for me. They simply pointed out that they had designed it that way. Ok, next question. There could be some benefit to other users as well to spell out the workings of the entire system of bass management.

My (and others) problem now is not "how", nor "why", but rather "does not". As in, the product does not work as as it should. A crossover is a crossover. Either it functions properly or it does not. I'll never figure out why they put a full range signal to the sub on analog bypass, but the bottom line is I really don't care. After they said it was designed that way, I now know it is properly functioning. The other modes, however, are not.

Guys, this whole BM issue has been blown WAY out of hand.

I ran a sweep tonight through the 7.1 inputs and there WAS BM. This answers your fears Capt of BM being applied to the 7.1 analog inputs. It is. There was no bass output above 150Hz with a xover setting of 80Hz.

BM is NOT applied using 2 ch analog input, however, Outlaw is working on this issue.

Now what is the big deal?

BM is a complex issue, and I think the Outlaws do us a disservice by not clearly documenting the intent of the BM features. For such a powerful facility, the few paragraphs in the manual do not shed a lot of light on the subject.

I think the majority of us would not be able to predict with any degree of confidence how the subwoofer output will function in any given scenario.

Whether in the manual, appendix to the manual or on the web site, a clearly written description, most likely in the form of a matrix or table, showing the intended influences (modes, settings, inputs, cross overs) and outcomes on the subwoofer output (BM, none, full range) would be a substantial improvement to the user manual which does not appear to have been written with a discerning user in mind.

A consequence of the lack of such a clear description are the questions, speculation, frustration, investigations and confusion that arise in this forum.

With a clear description in place we would be better placed to distinguish amongst:

• Features which are not working properly
• Features which were not well thought out
• Features which do not meet our needs

Amongst this confusion, there are also the issues of acknowledged problems and problems being addressed in the next or future patches.

Those of us who work with or deal with complex software or hardware products know that there are always issues and limitations. Typically known issues are documented along with a patch or release, and that likely would have been helpful in this case (ie known problems with release 1.0).

With all the issues raised in this forum and the support calls the Outlaws have received, there is an internal list of reported problems, and of those, a subset would form an internal list of problems the Outlaws are working on.

In this forum we see a filtered copy of those lists scattered throughout numerous posts by different individuals. I suggest that this probably adds more confusion than clarity because the SNR can be pretty low without extensive research through many posts.

I would support a call for Outlaw to clearly articulate which are the acknowledged problems and which problems they are working on.

Outlaw's most knowledgeable and vocal 990 advocates most likely hang out in this forum, and providing them with clear documentation, statements and facts would certainly reinforce the voice they provide in the HT community.

Well, the only "problem" I am aware of is no BM on 2ch analog and not being able to bypass the 990 BM using 7.1..

It has been confirmed that BM works as advertised on 7.1 analog and digital inputs.

I agree there are a few user gliches that need to be worked out.

Braidkid,

Thanks for clarifying the 7.1 input BM. I had not got around to testing that yet.

I don't believe this issue has gotten out of hand. What's the big deal? Well for starters, I purchased the unit to do bass management on two channel analog sources; and it should, but does not. Secondly, Outlaw has a 30 day return policy and I have a defective unit that they were telling me worked as designed. Lastly, prospective buyers as well as current customers deserve to know that this product is not doing what it was designed to do.

The "big deal" is getting the fix confirmed and started, which has apparently been accomplished. I value my money more than to "make do" with my purchases.

In another thread, Capt said that the 990's BM in digital PCM input also seemed not to work as intended. Then does this mean that the problem is with only Capt's unit? Which information should I consider to be correct? I'm talking about 2-CH PCM digital input, not the Dolby Digital / DTS 5.1 or 7.1.

As far as I know, I am the only one to ever mention the PCM issue. I stated in another post that I won't be going into it because other peoples units are apparently working. I think you should assume you are safe for 2 channel PCM inputs until someone else speaks out.

Actually there is a problem with BM on PCM inputs. Double bass depending upon how you switch thru the crossover modes. Read the long thread by netguy, I explained it well in that thread.