I figured as much, but just wanted to hear how he did his comparison. The type of cable used is not that big of a deal, I just want to verify how he tested.

I'm not trying to bust this guys chops, but when comparisons are made that don't favor the Oulaw equipment people readily question testing methods. However, during this comparison which came down in favor of the Outlaw, not a word?

Just trying to keep things fair and unbiased.

Jack,
It might interest you to know that I went into my test expecting the Arcam to be the clear winner based upon a few weekends prior experience with the AVR300. I was pleasantly surprised when the Outlaw edged the Arcam out. Seeing that you are an Arcam AVP700 owner, I'm sure you are enjoying its sonic qualties. I am confident that it sounds better than the AVR300 which is the most musical HT receiver I have ever heard. Knowing that Arcam upgrades components in the AVR700, I would expect nothing less than excellent sound and at twice the price of the 990, it should be from my persepective. However, for MY needs the Outlaw is an outstanding processor that I proudly use in addition to my McIntosh C22/MC240 tube 2 channel rig.

QB][/QUOTE]Jack,
It might interest you to know that I went into my test expecting the Arcam to be the clear winner based upon a few weekends prior experience with the AVR300. I was pleasantly surprised when the Outlaw edged the Arcam out. Seeing that you are an Arcam AVP700 owner, I'm sure you are enjoying its sonic qualties. I am confident that it sounds better than the AVR300 which is the most musical HT receiver I have ever heard. Knowing that Arcam upgrades components in the AVR700, I would expect nothing less than excellent sound and at twice the price of the 990, it should be from my persepective. However, for MY needs the Outlaw is an outstanding processor that I proudly use in addition to my McIntosh C22/MC240 tube 2 channel rig. [/QB][/QUOTE]

I think your last line says it all. The Outlaw fits your needs and that's wonderful and a good thing. But, I still want to point out that you never really tested the two units against one another. You said the majority of your testing was done via the analog inputs and this does not test the DAC's, etc. of the two machines. Analog inputs can and do sound different, but you still were essentially listening to the sound of the source. Should have sounded pretty darned close if not exact.

If you like the Outlaw for it's features, looks, price, sound, etc., that's cool. But, to be fair to the AVR-300 you must utilize the digital inputs of each unit and use the same type of digital connection. When listening to music if one is set-up in full range stereo by-pass then the other must be set up this way as well. Listen to the same thing using the same settings, i.e. DPL-IIx, DD, DTS, stereo, PCM, etc.

If you level matched and tested this way then you would have a reasonably fair test to make your observations from.

You like the Outlaw, no problem, many do. But, when the Outlaw doesn't fair so well many will jump on the methods used for testing. When you posted your comparison everyone thanked you and was happy with the result. I didn't see a single person question your testing methods.

Look at your original post and read the responses. Then surf around a bit and look at some of the other comparisons and you will see what I mean.

BTW, I've never heard the 990 so I have no idea, but I've yet to hear a bad report so I certainly am not trying to bash what is obviously a very good piece of equipment. Afterall, I had the 950 in my system for two years and was very happy with it, and am still a loyal Outlaw fan using their cables and outstanding Model-755 amp.

If you still have the AVR-300 around I sure would like to hear the results when testing as I recommended.

Jack_Dotson

IMHO you are trying to bust his chops! If you want things tested as you want (recommended) why not test them yourself, and you will be assured that the test were performed correctly.

It's obvious to the most casual observer that this was not a fair evaluation. Not even close.

I'm not the one who made a post comparing the two units to start with. And, once again, look at the responses when someone post that another product sounds better then the Outlaw. They draw fire immediately pertaining to their testing methods. So why am I busting his chops for questioning his? One of the most flawed test I've seen posted thus far and not a single word from anyone other than me. Hmmm?

You choose to believe the 990 sounds better based on this, then so be it. I'll reserve judgement.

BTW, as a retired ATT engineer I'd think you would be one of the first to question this. Fair is fair.

Does someone need a hug?

I agree Jack...if the comparison was made using analog inputs, there was no comparison to begin with.

Exactly! Thank you.

I'd actually say that the test is still valid for MarkBK with the way he has his system set up.

True, if you want to know how the DACs in each unit affect their performance, then his test leaves you wanting, but I have no doubt that he heard differences worth reporting between the Arcam and the Outlaw as he heard them.

This is why I love this forum - a bunch of different opinions, yet amazingly (it is the internet, after all) everyone stays pretty focused and everyone stays gentlemanly about things.

Thanks to everyone for the good discussion and the level heads!