I was doing my usual morning browsing before diving into the pile of work on my desk, and came across something interesting: a Model 1070 review by John E. Johnson at Secrets. It's a quite complementary review, and worth a read if you are considering the 1070.

Well, whether it's fair or not I suspect the 1070's power ratings may turn out to be it's Achilles heel, particulary statements like this one from the review:
"Two Channel Power Output: Max power output at 1 kHz measured 69 watts with two channels driven."

I really think they should have beefed up the amplifiers over the 1050, particularly with the price jump from $500 to $900.

I don't know, the 1050 never had trouble with power, and the 1070 actually has more when you look at all seven channels - it may "only" offer 69 watts with two channels driven, but you can drive the other five channels at the same time and still stay around 65W. Many receivers rated at 100+W drop to the same level when all channels are driven, which is a more realistic condition for a surround receiver.

Gonk, thanks for the link to the review. Now, can anyone explain "pre-out voltage" to me? The review mentions that for the 1070 it is only 0.76V RMS, whereas 1.0V is preferred and 2.0V is the "benchmark specification." My old Adcom tuner-preamp has a 2.0V rated output with a 10.0V peak output. What effect (if any) does pre-out voltage have on SPL, S/N ratio, dynamic range, amplifier performance, and most importantly, quality of the music? If I get a 1070, I will use it with an Adcom GFA 555-II amp for the front L&R channels. Is there any way to predict whether they would be a good match? Thanks.

I heartily agree with the Outlaws “Open Letter” response to the review.

I think that some of J.J.’s “pass/fail benchmarks” are either personal preferences or merely a reflection of what mass-market receivers have been doing, such as touting the inability to maintain full power across all channels as a feature, i.e. more watts for two channels in stereo mode - again a design choice, not a pass/fail. Where is the category that gives a 'green' to the 1070 and a 'red' to most other receivers over the ability to select different crossover points for fronts, center, side and back surrounds? By summing things up in pass/fail manner that ignores some criteria, J.J. fails to point out some of the positive aspects of some of the design choices made by the Outlaws.

The green-red review system fails in my way of thinking.

Once I got over the “shock” of the green-red approach, I was able to read past the colors. What is sad for Outlaw is that some questioning buyers may not.

Acutally, I think the previous 3 channels driven rating of the 1050 was probably more realistic for a surround sound receiver. However, that's not how everybody else rates their receivers.

More and more receivers, especially in the $900 range, are now meeting the ratings they claim. I'm just a little suprised that a recieiver weighing in at 40lbs. with a torriodal power supply measuring 60W x 7 doesn't do a bit better than 69W x 2. If you take a look at a few of the "honest" power-rated competitors such as H/K and NAD, the Outlaw's power output is near the level of their bottom(NAD T743) to middle (HK AVR435) of the line receivers.

SMitty:

Sorry, but I'm afraid that it is just the opposite of what you are saying. While some brands, particularly Harman Kardon, quote "honest" specs that testing will bear out, many brands have been quoting "100 WPC" for virtually every product in their line, an d the reviews aer indicating that many of them don't come anywhere NEAR the published specs in real life testing.

PodBoy,

What particular brands are you speaking of? From reviews I've read some of the more flagrant violators have cleaned up thier act:

Marantz 5400

Denon 3805

Yamaha is still not up to snuff though.

THere's lots of talk over on AVS about a Pioneer not meeting specs, and I've seen some Onkyo tests (though no new tests, admitedly) that missed the WPC boat.

The decibels difference between 70 and 100 watts isn't a big deal. The rest of the receiver is much more important to most people. Or should be.