Gonk,
I thought the 990 and 970 both used a cs-49400 crystal processor. If thats the case wouldn't the 970 sound just like the 990?

The 990 and 970 both use the 49400, but there are a lot of receivers and processors that use the 49400. That's just one piece of the puzzle. Other important factors are the DAC's (which will probably have even more impact on the sound than the DSP engine) and analog section design. The 990 uses an Analog Device AD1852 24-bit/192kHz DAC, which is a better (and more expensive) chip than the Cirrus CS42528 (also 24-bit/192kHz) DAC chip in the 970.

To the extent that I understand where the DACs sonic signature comes into play with surround sound playback for movies -- which is not at all , I recall that when I talked to Outlaw about the 970 vs. 990, I was told movie performance would be the same between the two units.

As to where I understood the 990 really differed from the 970 was:
- Better DAC and upsampling for digital/CD playback
- Balanced outputs
- Phono stage
- More functionality in terms of set up and switching.

Taking into account how I use my pre/pro, I assumed I would get little if any benefit by upgrading to the 990. My playback habits involve using digital processing for movies and analog bypass for everything else. I don't listen to SACD and do not like surround sound processing applied to stereo. I also do not have balanced inputs on my amps and have an outboard, tube phono stage. Lastly, the additional video switching, auto setup, etc. did not add any value for me, so I opted for the 970.

I may be wrong about my assumptions and subsequent choice, so if I'm missed the boat on how the 990 can or cannot outperform the 970 for my system needs, please chime in.

I feel the analogue section is the most important part because everything gets converted to analogue(all speakers are analogue). If you read you will notice that most of the best sounding processors have great analogue sections. Since my review I have watched a couple of movies. I have still said that the Meridian has a little smoother high end. That means it is not as in your face. Most people like the sound of the 990 better. Everyone is saying how much better they like the in your face presentation. I like it as well. Some movies get a little bright but others sound better like the matrix, I have never heard these movies sound this good before, and I have owned many expensive processors. Trust me, If the 990 was anything like the Emotiva(warm sounding) I would have returned it and tried something different. The 990 has all the detail of the meridian, actually you can hear more in the surrounds with the 990. BY the way, the auto calibration had my system 13-14 db's too high. It made my reference level -15 db's. I manually calibrated it but have not tried it at reference with my demos. I will use the auto again if I don't like the results as much. I just can't leave well enough alone. You guys have to hear this with the gemstone amp and the M&K speakers at reference levels. real

Don't get me wrong, Videodrome - the 970 is by all accounts a nice, solid performer. I don't know how the analog section compares to the 990's, but I suspect the differences would be subtle in analog bypass mode. I've also seen similar comments to those you've heard, suggesting that the differences between the 970 and 990 would be most noticeable with digital input and music playback (which is where I noticed the biggest difference when moving from a Model 950 to the 990) and that movie performance would be more comparable. I don't think that you made a bad choice going with the 970.

MRC (Meridian Room Correction) doesn't touch mid- and high-frequency information. All of the correction is done below 250Hz, where the wavelengths are large enough to benefit multiple listening seats.

Conventional wisdom would have you believe that maintaining signal purity through the playback hardware allows you to hear what's in the recording itself. Nothing could be further from the truth. When you listen to your system, more than 50% of what you're hearing is the room, not your speakers.

Your room is an audio processor, whether you like it or not. If you want to really hear what's on the recording and what your speakers actually sound like, then you have to minimize the room's unwanted contributions to the overall sound. Otherwise, the majority of what you're hearing is neither the recording nor your speakers. That's not my idea of "purity". How do you target a piece of rigid fiberglass to to address a room resonance at 41.5Hz specifically? How do you stop absorbers or diffusers from touching the mid and high frequencies that you want left alone?

Gotcha. I guess I'm trying a round about way of rationalizing: if the 990 is 95% of the Meridian 861, and my 970 -- at least on movies -- is 85% of the 990, then my 970 is 80% of the Meridian.

My bad on the extent of the 861's equalization. I am not that familar with the unit. That said, I think the better option is to buy a 990 and an SMS-1. Then put the $10,000 savings toward other equipment or a dedicated listening room.

It's an option, but it can't come close to what the Meridian does. The SMS-1 measures in the amplitude domain, looking for low frequencies that are louder or softer than average. Since bass levels vary at different seats, fixing a peak or dip in one seat can make that same sound worse in other seats.

MRC measures in the time domain, looking for low frequencies that take longer than average to decay. Since these frequencies are problematic because they bounce back and forth between the walls for too long, any listener seated between those walls will hear the ringing. Fixing this problem in one seat will yield beneficial results in other seats.

That a big difference.

Above roughly 300Hz, room resonances are too close together to do decent correction electronically. However, below that, wavelengths are large enough to be able to pick out probematic frequencies and address them individually. Since the SMS-1 only works on the sub, low frequency problems (below 300Hz) in the main channels will go unaddressed. Since MRC corrects all 7.1 channels, it catches low frequency ringing whether they're in the subwoofer or main channels.

That's another big difference.

Finally, if you look into psychoacoustics, you'll find that our human hearing tends to notice and prefer when time based problems are corrected rather than amplitude based problems (which our ear/brain mechanism is more tolerant of).

Also an important difference.

While the SMS-1 can be useful for trying to flatten out the frequency response of your sub, it shouldn't be confused with what Meridian does. Why do you even care about the Meridian? The 990 and 970 represent two of the best values being offered in home audio today. Can't you guys simply enjoy them for what they are instead of trying to pretend they're something that they clearly aren't? Is that so unreasonable?

Agreed. Attention to detail in getting the analog stage 'just right' is what separates a good DAC from a great one. Another important factor is immunity from jitter.