I have had the 990/7125 for a week and have rented the Arcam AVR300 to do a shootout to see who wins. Intitial impression after setting up the two systems matched via RS Db meter...........the Outlaw WINS by a LARGE margin... greater dymanic range - less compression. Live recordings sound live vs sounding like a recording of a live recording. More to follow....................................

Cool - a shootout. I look forward to hearing more about it.

is the arcam 300 stand alone or used as a processor w/ the 7125 serving as its amp? this is great info to hear about as i'm trying to decide b/w these two currently.
thanks,
bill

The Arcam AVR300 is a receiver but also does have pre outs. BTW - shoot out is finished - I'll post revew shortly.

Outlaw vs. Arcam
Arcam AVR300 receiver - $1999.00
Outlaw 990 pre / 7125 power amp – separates $1898.00

After first spending a few days auditioning the Arcam AVR300 a few weeks ago, I ordered the Outlaw 990 Preamp Processor / 7125 7x125w Power Amp. Both the Outlaw and Arcam have been highly praised in reviews. For me, one of the most important issues was the audio quality for 2 channel listening.
Outlaws arrived a little over one week ago and I have been breaking them in since then with the intent of bringing the Arcam back to do the shoot out this past weekend.
After picking up the Arcam and setting the system up, I used an RS DB meter to set the output signals as close as possible.
BUILD QUALITY
AVR300: Very well built, compact unit. Simple functional front panel controls.
OUTLAW 990/7125 – both very well built. The 990 is HUGE – based on Sherwood’s P965 and is the same size but completely different in appearance and programming. The 7125 is more compact at 5.75” tall – but still wide/deep and VERY heavy for its size (51lbs). A massive 1.6kv toroidal transformer and 7 amp modules with massive heat sinks keep the amp running cool and quiet.
I refer you to the websites for all the specs for all units. Outlaw: www.outlaw.com. Arcam: http://www.arcam.co.uk/prod_diva_AVR300_intro.cfm
REMOTES: Both Arcam and Outlaw use the same Universal Electronics Catalyst 48 customized for each product. A simple but effective remote. Outlaw also supplies a 2nd smaller remote for a second Zone that you can feed from the 990 if desired.
OVERVIEW:
Arcam did some market research that indicated most people prefer an integrated receiver over separate components for Home Theater. Being an audio company first, Arcam set about designing a receiver that offered outstanding audio quality for 2 channel listening AND 7 channel Home Theater capabilities, well built with a target price under $2000.00.
Outlaw’s goal for the 990 ($1099.00) was to provide an outstanding Preamp processor with balanced and non balanced outputs and the latest Dolby, DTS, Pro Logic, etc processing, including DVI video – intentional chosen since HDMI is still a moving target. The 7125 was design to offer the best sounding 125 watt per channel amplifier for under a $1000.00. In addition they offer bundled pricing which reduces the price to 1898.00 for the 990/7125 combo.
TEST RESULTS:
ARCAM AVR300: Arcam engineering has done a great job of meeting the design objective. The receiver is lighter than I expected, but still has a good bit of heft to its weight. Setup is straight forward and the HT sound processing is outstanding. Again, I refer you to the website for details. The AVR300 offers an analog bypass for 2 channel that turns off all the video processing to minimize interference. Home Theater sound was outstanding. Details in Master and Commander were stunning. Same is true for the opera scene in the 5th Element.
2 channel audio: VERY detailed sound. Soundstage was quite good as was instrument placement. Bass was tight, mids were detailed and highs were accurate but never harsh unless the recording itself was harsh. This is a VERY “musical sounding” HT receiver and I think many people would find it provides a very satisfying music listening experience.
OUTLAW 990/7125: Outlaw has also done an outstanding job with the 990 features and performance offering a large number of features including being able to convert PCM to 192/24. The 990 also has a 7.1 pure direct analog input path that bypasses ALL video processing to provide the most direct signal path. The 7125 is a real steal offering 125x7 at 8ohms and 190x7 at 4ohms – ALL channels driven. The amp does what a great amp should do: it amplifies the signal and does it without coloring the sound in the process. I would describe it as quite neutral – not harsh. These 2 units come in at about 80lbs so a good rack is required.
Home Theater sound on the 990 was also excellent. Master and Commander had deck creaks and other small sounds that made one think you were below deck with others walking above you. Dynamic range was stunning. The 5th Element soundstage was also excellent. Bass remained tight never sloppy. The 990 more than met my needs for great sound processing for movies.
2 channel audio: VERY detailed sound. Soundstage was quite good as was instrument placement. Bass was tight, mids detailed and highs accurate not harsh. Instrument placement was focused creating a very wide and tall sound stage.
ARCAM vs. OUTLAW
On the OUTLAW 990/7125 - live recordings sounded like the band was in the room - the “system” just disappeared. Details such as finger noise as the guitarist slid up and down the neck of a Nylon string guitar made it sound like he was right there – just to the left of the singer and slightly behind – with the acoustic bass centered and behind the singer and slight further back than the guitarist.
On the Arcam AVR300 – detail was also quite good, but by contrast (and ONLY by contrast) to the 990, live recordings sounded less like a live band and more like a recording of a live band. I did the shootout with another friend present and we both noted that the Arcam sounded more compressed – a little less dynamic than the Outlaw combo. It was still one of the BEST sounding receivers we’ve ever heard – and clearly BETTER than his Denon 3802 receiver – but the Outlaw sounded better. The two companies products share a similar sonic quality, but the Outlaw seemed to have more – more detail, more refinement to the sound stage – better depth front to back and side to side. Echo decay was excellent on both - with the Outlaw sounding “faster” (God, I hate to use over blown audiophile terms – but in this case it’s the best I can do) as though the dynamic range from something loud to something soft was more lifelike in decay. Snare drums had a 3 dimensional quality – like it was a 5.5” deep snare vs. a 6.5”deep snare – you could hear the snare decay within the drum itself, just like a real drum.
I focused on two tracks that had a great mix and a variety of acoustic instruments with vocals. There were pronounced differences in the echo decay on an instrument, the position of the instrument within the mix, and the overall dynamic changes within the song.
Arcam - Nylon string guitar's echo was heard as a distinct echo in the right speaker - Outlaw had the echo eminating FROM the guitar to the right speaker as though the guitar was in a large room when recorded. It was more direct. Instruments that were back in the mix on the Arcam were more forward and distinct on the Outlaws - sounding like there was less smearing of the individual instrument parts - easier to hear each instrument within the mix.
Bottom line: Arcam is an outstanding receiver.....but - Outlaw's 990/7125 is better to MY ears. The Arcam goes back - Outlaws are here for the long haul.

Mark-
Great info--thanks for taking the time to do the write up. I've had a similar experience with a newly acquired 990/7500 combo.

The Outlaws nail a lot of things right that add up to a really accurate and musical presentation.

Nice write-up, Mark - thanks for taking the time to put it together.

Thanks Kahuna - I agree 100% - they nailed it on mant levels.

Gonk,
Thank you. Your reviews and contributions to the forum go a long way towards supporting all of us out here that have become Outlaws...

Hey MarkBK,
Nice write-up. Thanks for spending the time to turn it out.
I bet it was fun.
a thought: You should throw this copy over to the 7125 thread for guest and other Outlaw residence. This is good stuff to help fellow enthusiast make decisions to go separates or not.

Did you compare the 990 to the AVR300 using the pre/outs and the same amp? I'm not surprised that the separates combo would beat the receiver, given the limitations of a combined unit. If you don't have an amp already and you have a $2000 target, it would be very hard to find an option better than the Outlaw combo. If you have an amp, or a slightly higher budget, the Arcam AVP700 would be more of an apples-to-apples comparison (pre/pro to pre/pro).

I think the success of the Arcam AV8 and AVP700, and the release of the AV9 shows that they sure didn't abandon separates based on their market research. If anything, the recent development of lower priced separates options makes a reciever like the AVR300 harder to justify. If they are priced similarly, it's an uphill battle for any receiver to beat out quality separates.

Chris

I guess that depends on whether or not your apples are "separates" or money...
Bill

Very nice review.
I'm in the process of selling all my current audio gear (including a 950) to buy a 990/7125 combo.
Would get the 990/7700, but its 1K more.

I think for most people "apples to apples" is the price.

Well said. That's what I meant by saying the AVR300 would be losing some of its world beating status (remember the over-the-top gushing "The Answer" review from a magazine a while back?) if good quality separates come down to its price point. And while I'd still recommend an AVP700 first for those with a music-first priority, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend (and have recommended) the 990 for those with a tighter budget and/or an HT-first priority.

Chris

I'm sure the AVP700 is a fine sounding pre for both music and HT, but do think the Outlaw 990/7125 does offer music-first a good alternative too. My first priority was its music reproduction for those times when I choose to not use my tube gear. I was VERY pleasantly surprised at just how good the 990/7125 fits that need and does so at a reasonable cost. I may check out the AVP700 some time in the future and compare to the 990 - just for fun.

Please share some more details about how you conducted your review. Exactly how did you do the level matching? You said you used a RS meter, but did you use the same speakers, souce, cables, etc. and then switch back and forth?

Also, you described the sound of both for HT and two channel audio. How did you listen to each? Via Analog and digital or digital for movies and analog for music, etc.

More details please.

Thanks for the review.

i have to agree with cpd on there is not fair to compare receiver to seperate. That is why most hi end receiver has out put for amp.
last friday before I order my 990/7125 i went to my local audio to listen to acram 300 and rotel RSX-1067 both of them around 2k. But i saw used B&K ref 50 s2 and amp 5 X 200w for 2k. So i decied to go with it because i have 7 days to return on it. Right the mintue i turned it on i know i made right choice. Even my wife had to impress with my new system. i will keep my B&K.
with the seperate you can hear the clarity and fell the power even with low volume( i don't have a sub) but with the receiver you have to turn kind of louder in order to feel the power or clarit

sorry guys i can't be join outlaw fan.
but i have to say seperate is the way to go. any one out there hope to send 1k or even 2k on receiver and hope it will beat your 10 years old receiver then please don't because it not worth the money.

- No hard feelings, bui. Glad to hear you've got a new toy that you like in the equipment rack.

人们讲英语在明尼苏达?

8-)

Not sure if we're allowed to link threads in other forums, but there's a guy named Russdawg on AVS that owned a 990 and sold it as soon as he heard the AVR300.

"If I hadn't bought an Anthem MCA 50 only weeks earlier I would have bought this receiver on the spot and called it a day. Instead I ditched my Outlaw 990 as I stated in my above post and bought the Arcam 700 pre/pro."

That's the first direct comparison that I have seen. I'll encourage him to post more detailed observations here.

Chris

well that's why they make Ford AND Chevy...some like the sound of one and some like something else...over on another forum, A guy wrote me when I was looking to buy my 950/7100/LFM-1 combo...told me how terrible Outlaw was (only one to say how bad Outlaw was...and I got LOTS of replies)...well after I bought my outlaw gear and espoused its virtues (elsewhere) and how much I liked it, he felt it necessary EVERYTIME I posted to also offer his view (hey that's his right) but he was always in the minority...I see that he even tried the 990 (he says)...interesting...if I HATED a product as he claimed, I wouldn't try anything else from them...of course we all know there are those who just keep trying out gear after gear (perhaps never really buying any)...I STILL enjoy my Outlaw gear and I have helped to bring others here because of that enjoyment and the want to help other people looking for a superior product.
I think MarkBK did a VERY extensive test of the gear he tried out...I read his reviews of the Arcam BEFORE he tried the Outlaw...I really didn't think he would like the Outlaw after the glowing reports of the Arcam...he has some pretty nice McIntosh tube stuff too...(2 channel)...so I think the McIntosh was the benchmark...if he thinks the Outlaw stuff met that mark or came close I concur...we all have differing wants, likes dislikes etc...that's why they make different stuff...I would be VERY interested to read alternative (other products) reviews to see how that stacks up to my own experience...I WON'T be changing my Outlaw gear anytime soon.
Bill

Interesting that Russdawg's reaction to comparing the 990 and AVR300 differed so much from MarkBK's reactions (posted earlier in this thread). That's why there's more than one choice out there, though - different people like different things.

To keep things in perspective....
From what I've read of Russdawg's posts, he thought the AVR300 was comprable to the 990 with very little difference. In another post, he stated he ordered the AVP700 without hearing it.

I'll let you draw your own conclusions...

I save you guys the trouble...I am sitting on the fence, 990 vs. avp700...I grilled the AVP700 owners in PM messages. They claimed AVR300 is closer to the 990 but still better. They claim the $2200 Arcam AVP700 is in a different league than the 990 for 2-channel music and slightly better for DVD's with bullets flying and crash scenes...Surround music in DVD's AVP700 different league from the 990.

Mark's comment that he's keeping the 990 over an arcam unit caused trauma............The AVP700 freezes on those guys every other week now. Static issues etc who knows? Unaccepetable for $2200!

Each guy must decide for himself I guess,
Vince

Jack,Sorry - quite busy lately.
I matched output levels using the DB meter and test CDs. I used Outlaw PCAs and my RF5s,RC7 and RS7 Klipsch Reference speakers, Denon 2900 and then a modified Philips 963A for playing the music and videos. I listened to music mainly using 7.1 direct and did a few selections using the CD inputs with DSP for testing some of the options on both Arcam and Outlaw.
Movies were done with Outlaw PSC cables. Tried DTS,NEO6,Dolby and PL IIx movie modes.

In the end, that's what it's all about. A lot of the previous equipment that I've owned never gave me THAT feeling. You know: that you can't pry this out of my hands no matter what. Even when I owned the more expensive Anthem AVM30, I thought something was missing. For me, the Arcam is it (not that my wife would believe me), and the 990 is "it" for a lot of people too.

For what it's worth, I've never had any static or freezing issues in the seven months that I've owned it. There is some speculation about a bad batch.

Chris

Thanks for the excellent report. If you still have the Arcam and have speakers that are bi-wireable I suggest trying the AVR300 with channnels 6 & 7 set to biamp in the Basic menu. This will make the Arcan sound even better.

I did an Outlaw 1070 - Arcam AVR300 shootout and kept the Arcam. With a $1100 cost difference that is not a fair compairson.

So you used the 5.1 analog inputs? Then there should be very little, if any, difference between the two units as you were using the transport, DAC's, etc. of the source equipment.

Same thing for CD's, especially using DSP modes.

The only way to compare the two is using the digital inputs for music and movies so your are listening to the processors DAC's, etc. Comparisons should be made in a pure bypass mode with no tone controls, DSP effects, etc.

For movies you said you use the Outlaw PSC cables. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this a video cable? This certainly would be fine to compare the video between the two units, but how about the audio? I assume you were using the digital inputs, correct?

Just trying to make sure there is a good comparison here. Many were happy to hear your results, but I'm surprised they didn't question the testing methods a bit more to ensure they were valid.

BTW, I sold my Model-750 pre-processor which I still consider to be the best bang for the buck on the market. And, I expect nothing less from Outlaws new offerings.

The PSC cable is equally at home as a video cable and as a coaxial digital audio cable.

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!

Wow, I thought this thread would've died a long time ago.....
Jack,
Your conclusions are based on limited knowledge and consequently flawed. While I intentionally did NOT include ALL the test details due to my own decision to edit - I will share this with you to give you a more complete picture without writing it all on this forum. Go to IAR-80.com -read the extensive ARV300 review - which, BTW, was also published in Widescreen Review magazine.
J. Peter is someone I am quite familiar with from his many years of audio observations...I used his extensive review as my guide to test and DID test DACS,etc using EVERY suggested setting on BOTH units that J. Peter used during his test of the AVR300. I took notice when he praised the Arcam AVR300 as this is something he normally would NOT do for a "receiver". I first tested his recommended settings with the AVR300 alone and then did the AVR300 vs the 990 3 weeks later. I chose to NOT include these details because the usage of these settings were ultimately LESS important to ME. The Wolfson DACs are no slouches, but the Outlaws choice are also quite good. The analog outputs are ONE of the tests J Peter used for Audio - which is MY primary concern. Since this was my primary concern - and I mentioned this in my review - I chose to ONLY include this part of the results. Honestly, I don't care if you or anyone else agrees or disagrees as I am the one who has to be satisfied. I stopped worrying what others think a long time ago. I understand why you drew you conclusions based on my choice of detail posted, but don't assume what you read is all there is to the tests. I only spend a limited amount of time on a few forums, preferring to listen to music more than writing about the gear used - which is what it is all about for ME. When I no longer think of the gear and only hear the music, I have achieved my goal and that is exactly what I have accomplished using Outlaw's 990/7125.
BTW - the review itself, has been well received on a few forums - even from owners of Arcam gear - you seem to be one of the few exceptions. More importantly, hopefully your gear brings as much enjoyment to you as mine does for me - no matter what you choose to use - that's really all that matters.

Mark, I am a very satisfied 990 owner myself. I think the point Jack was trying to make is, there is very little difference between processors when using analog inputs as all the processing is bypassed in the processor and handled by the player. If you were to compare a Lexicon MC12 to the 990 using analog inputs, you would hear very little difference.

Most of us use digital inputs for movies, thus utilizing the processor's DACs and not the player. This is what would seperate the 990 from a MC12 or AVP700 perhaps and why Jack suggests doing the comparison with digital input.

I am quite clear on what Jack has been stating. Apparently, what I posted isn't clear or is being skimmed when read - I DID also compare digital input but chose to downplay that detail of my testing as a found no significant differences for my intended use.

Mark's point is that his post described the portions of his testing that were of greatest priority to him, but that he also conducted additional tests that he didn't talk about - and that those additional tests did look at the digital performance.

Ok, I think we're all on the same page now.

MarkBK posted some of this on another forum...I feel he did a very good test and as an "enabler" (I tried to help bring him to the Outlaw side) I thought he was tilting to the Arcam side...as MarkBK's other equipment is quite good, I would side with his at the very least knowing what sounded better to him without outside influence...and to be more fair, which was the better sounding unit at the price point...thanks MarkBK for taking the time and sharing your results of testing these components.
Bill

Gonk,
Nicely summed - thank you.
Bill,
Thanks for watching my back - as always - and thanks for enabling!

...anytime...Bill