I just recently purchased a 990 so I have been following most of the posts for it. I am new to the pre/pro set up and would not know a DAC from a duck. It seems the more I read about the HDMI 1.3 the more I get confused. Especially because of the info from the following link: http://www.dts.com/dts-hd/dtshd-master-audio-with-existing-receiver.php
This shows a Blue ray or HD player being connected to a non HDMI receiver via analog cables. So why the concern about not having a 1.3 connection? What am I missing here? Patience please, Santa reads all these posts. LOL

People want that one cable connection to do it all.

Also, if you buy a good pre-pro, typically the DACs in the pre-pro will be a bit better than the DACs in the source (Blu-Ray or HD-DVD player) and you can only use the DACs in the prepro if it has an HDMI 1.3 compliant input.

Lastly, I do think that multichannel analog just takes too many cables and it's better to keep the signal digital until you get to the pre-pro, but that's just my opinion.

At the end of the day, HDMI 1.3 is all about lossless multichannel, and whether you think it's important or not relies heavily on how good you think audio is currently in DVDs or the hi-def sources.

Personally, I think that Dolby Digital and DTS are already pretty darn good and don't really see the lossless multichannel offerings adding much to that.

As BloggingITGuy points out, HDMI appeals to many people because it can replace six or eight analog audio cables and because you can have more than one such device without extra switching (almost no receivers or processors offer more than one multichannel analog input). Which version of HDMI is a different matter. IF you haven't already, check out the HDMI FAQ in my sig - it digs into the myriad HDMI version issues.

DTS-HD is a particular mess, in my opinion. First, there are multiple flavors of DTS-HD, with DTS-HD Master Audio being the top of the heap (a lossless compression scheme, functionally equivalent to TrueHD from Dolby and the old MLP used on DVD-Audio discs). Unfortunately, there are no source components currently available that will decode DTS-HD MA internally, and very few that will decode the lower forms of DTS-HD. As such, the only way to listen to DTS-HD MA tracks is with an HDMI v1.3 source that can output a bitstream of that signal (which does not include all HDMI v1.3 sources, as early HDMI v1.3 transmitter chips can't do it - the PS3 falls into this category) and an HDMI v1.3 processor that can decode DTS-HD MA.

Well, I got my hands on the Onkyo Pro 885 (virtually the same as the Integra). Now my veteran Outlaw 950 can go upstairs into my music only system to do 5.1 analog duty with my SACD player,

Anyway, the Onkyo and Integra are both still nearly impossible to obtain, so if Outlaw can get a comparable priced/performing unit out by early spring, I think they will be in good shape..

Gonk, the PS3 chip's bitstream output capability (or lack therefo) has never been officially confirmed. It was an early version of the chip made specially for Sony, and the mfr has not stated definiteively whether it can bitstream or not. Evidence points to no, but there's still a faint hope it can.

I will say, the PS3 is now a really stunningly good CD player and SACD player. They have added a 3rd bit shaping algorithm to its upsampling and it makes stuff sound just amazing.

One point where Outlaw could outshine the Onkyo/Integra IMO is the internal video processing. They chose to not allow it vary by input, which makes it somewhat unusable in a high end system I feel. I have 3 video sources in my system, A dish Network SD tuner/DVR, the PS3 and an Oppo 971. The Reon is unneeded on the latter two, but even still I may have left it engaged most of the time to clean up the crappy satellite picture, but if I set it to scale for my TV (720p), it stretches a 4:3 image to 16:9, and my TV's HDMI input does not have "squish" aspect ratio controls, only zoom and crop. So I am left with only being able to use it as a deinterlacer.

Also they hobbled the options on the thing until customer clamor got a firmware upgrade. But it still only has one set of settings and is an all or nothing deal..

So if Outlaw gave a good solid set of controls over the Reon or one of the competing chips and let you configure it per input, they would probably be in good shape to compete with the Onkyo eevn at a similar price.

BB

They still have the Reon crippled on the 885? I thought they were trying to fix that via firmware updates. I would agree that as popular as the Reon chip is, it is only useful in a surround processor if there are some decent user controls offered - and some of the other quite respectable solutions could prove more useful simply by providing proper user control over them.

Not crippled, control is available for the adjustments, but it is global. I cannot have it process my Dish NTSC input, but leave my Oppo and PS3 video alone, without going into setup each time.

Since I generally don't even watch Dish, it is my wife who would have to do this, and our TV does an adequate enough job of cleaning up the picture so it isn't worth it.

BB

What does the Reon chip do when an incoming signal (such as from the OPPO or the PS3) is at the same resolution as it is configured to output? In other words, if the 885 is configured to output 1080i and the OPPO is inputting 1080i, is the signal effectively "passed through" or does some additional processing take place?

It applies processing according to the settings in place, sharpness, brightness, etc. These are applied to all signals, and any incoming signal which is at a different aspect ratio than the selected output resolution is also scaled (and deinterlaced if needed) before output. I have the processing set to off, which is the only way for signals to pass through unaltered. It also converts everything between analog video and HDMI. It does not convert protected HDMI streams to analog output other than at 480i though.

BB

With that setup, I could see definite problems for a source that didn't use a standard resolution (an HTPC at 1366x768, for example), but I'm curious what might be happening for the typical 720p, 1080i, and 1080p resolutions when input via HDMI and then sent back out the same way. Based on what you mention, if you want a 16:9 1080i output and you get a 16:9 1080i input, the image adjustment settings (sharpness, brightness, contrast, and such) are applied. If those are all set to zero, I'm wondering what else it would do, if anything.

Has anyone noticed the NAD T175? It does have HDMI 1.3 and also Audessey MultEQ. In my book Audessey counts for much more than any other feature. I am still waiting for NAD to post the manual on the T175, and have even asked them about it. I am looking to replace my 990 because in stereo or stereo direct it veils the sound slightly. I did a comparision using the 7125 amp and another stereo preamp against the 990 in stereo and the 990 just did not hold up. Hands down the 990 had a veiled sound to it. The T175 is already in dealer hands, as i saw one this week, unfortunately it was not yet set-up. I wonder if Outlaw will be incorporating Audessey into their new pre/pro?

Tim