I have recently sold some of my old gear in order to purchase a new tv, receiver and speakers. One of my old pieces of gear that I sold was my old 1050 which I loved but that was lacking some features that I was looking for such as dplIIx Component inputs and a 7th channel. I had been so very anxious for the 1070 to come out but when it did at 899 It really was in a tough price range with some stiff competetion such as the hk 635, Denon 3805 Nad 753. The thing that was really disturbing to me were the post about the need to crank the volume to near its upper limits to get reasonable sound. One of the things I loved about my old 1050 was the fact that I never had to crank it past 45-50(out of 80) to get high levels of sound. Now I understand the whole - to + dbls range and that is to help calibrate to reference level but it seems crazy to have a volume control from range from -70 to + 10 and not get any sound until about the -20's. Why cant they make a volume range from 1-80 where 20 is a fourth of the total volume. I was just wondering if I was alone I this or if anybody else looked at this the same way I do.

There are a couple different ways to approach the design of a volume control. One is to use the decibel as your basis of measure and carry it from some negative value (such as -60dB) up to 0dB (generally considered "reference level" and the point typically used for calibration) and even a bit higher. This method may not be as intuitive initially (partially because you spend most of your time counting down as you turn it up), but it is often preferred by audiophiles and enthusiasts because it provides a clear baseline between different products (calibrate both to 75dB at 0dB volume with a test disc and you can get the same output when both are set to a volume of -15dB). A second approach to a volume scale is to start and zero and count up using arbitrary increments to a maximum limit (0 to 80 on the Model 1050, for example). This approach can appear more logical, but it lacks the "standard" baseline for comparison.

If you calibrate a receiver or processor at 0dB (as could be done with the 1070 using the internal test tones and a Radio Shack sound meter) and your amp can handle the speakers (a 65W receiver like the 1050 or 1070 can handle a lot, but some really inefficient speakers will demand more power), then -20dB should be pretty comparable to perhaps 40 or so on your 1050's dial (if my memory of my old 1050 is at all accurate).

Actually, I think the max. volume setting on the 1050 is 70(0-70). I usually top out at 55 for movies, as this is where the "Ref." level with test tones is and is plenty loud. For LOTR movies, I have to lower the volume to 40!

I do understand the basis of the calibration to 75db at 0 on the volume. I think that I am just looking at it and seeing that turning the volume up 60 units on its scale of mesurement yields very little as far as change in the volume that you hear. While calibrating two different receivers to the same reference point using test tones does give you a baseline for comparsions I personally would rather have a unit of measurement of the volume that is indicative of where you are on that units total scale of volume. I guess maybe this is just me being weird. What I really want to know I guess is do the folks that have a 1070 feel that it is underpowered and what are some of the typical listening levels that they use for movie listening.

the 1050's volume goes from 0-80 as gonk stated.being as i've got trim controls on my b&k amp,often when listening to sirius(dish) i will have it at 'max'(80)

Hmmmmm....now I gotta go home and check the volume scale to verify that....thanks a lot

Hey rdperry,

I hear you! I'm from the school where 9 o'clock on the volume knob is loud; 12 o'clock is the maximum you should use and 1 o'clock is...well, at a good party...where your turn the volume to at 1AM

I really don't like digital volume readouts ( I don't like digital spedometers either ). There's something "right" about analog dials.

Having said that, the past few receivers I've owned all exibit different behaviour as far as the volume scale goes. I've owned a 50wx5(T742) NAD and an 80wx5(T752) NAD. The volume went from -69 to +13. For the T742 anything below -30 was just about useless, -20 was loud, -10 was very loud, -5 was painful. I had to set the T742 to about +5 for 75dB calibration, even though I have relatively efficient speakers, and it hissed like mad! The T752 calibrated around 0 I believe and I could turn it up to about 0 before hitting my pain threshold. I now have a Cambridge Audio 540R, it's loud at -50, the 75dB calibrated at -15 and the pain threshold is around -10.

I haven't heard the 1070 (although I'm working may way there ) but if you find yourself typically listening to movies/music at or above the 0dB setting, I would guess you need a bit more power. I wouldn't worry too much about the volume setting for 75dB calibration itself, unless you're at +10 and still not reaching 75dB. Reference levels are "very very loud" and typically a good 10dB above what I would guess most people who want to preserve their hearing listen at.

I think it would do the Outlaw's some good to post dynamic power ratings (ala NAD) or maybe some current specifications (ala HK) for the 1070.

John thanks for the support. I too have an Nad 752 and it is loud at around -20to-25 with the three front channels trimmed to +8. In the past couple of years I have had an hk 525, the Nad 752 the pioneer 1014 the sony 2000 es and they all had different levels of volumes with my same speakers(polk Lti 100's). Due to my paranioa about volume levels I went with a Denon 3805 recently and really like it but I am now thinking that maybe I should have given the 1070 a shot.I just wanted so input from some owners on the 1070 volume levels to see if maybe I should return the 3805 an give the 1070 a try,

Okay....okay....I must've had one of those brain freeze moments!! I never go past the 60's with the 1050, even for music, so I guess I forgot I could go to 80 if I wanted :rolleyes:

I thought 105 db was reference level, and we therefore calibrated 75db output at -30? Or some test discs have us calibrate 85 db at -20, which should be a similar thing.

I sold my house and my new one's not finished yet, but .... I thought I remembered it that way.

My understanding is that we calibrate to 75dB at 0dB volume with a test tone - the result is reference level audio from a DVD (which I believe is up to 105dB at 0dB volume).

I understand the concerns of those who see the 65 WPC and associated sound levels being low. I enjoy listening to music and movies at levels most people think are hurtful. I have a 1070 mated with a Def Tech speaker set that has an average 92dB efficiency rating. The sound levels are very loud and become hurtful to most other people. This occurs around the 0dB level. Loud reference levels occur for me at around +10 which is where I prefer to listen. I have a family that will rebel at these levels, so unfortunately it's not often this happens.

I have high confidence in Outlaw products. There are mainly two reasons that substantiate this. I own a pair of M200s driving a separate stereo system and it can become too loud even for me while maintaing very clear response. I tried out four (Adcom, Sony, T&A, and Arcam)different amps on this system, before coming across Outlaw a couple of years ago. None of them matched the 200s' performance watt of watt and dollar for dollar. A hugh value for this type of equipment. Secondly, I have yet to see a minority of Outlaw customers who were not satisfied with their products.

If your concerned, my suggestion would be to try the 1070 out. If your not satisfied or even thrilled, return it for a full refund or stick it out and upgrade to more power later on.

Maybe the internal test tone was at -30? It's been a while, but the math and my memory suggests SOMETHING is at -30 .... maybe one test disc was at -20 and the other is at -30?

I have been reading some of the other post and I am wondering if some of the folks that are having problems reaching 75db with their internal test tones are unsatisfied with their overall volume levels with dvd's music etc. or are they just having a problem with the level of their test tones. As for Charlies post it seems to me (and I could be wrong) that if a receiver could be calibrated to 75db at -30 it would be one powerful receiver. I as stated earlier just bought a Denon 3805 that is very nice but i loved my old 1050 so much that I now wish that maybe I would have given the 1070 a chance. If some folks that already have the 1070 could give some input on its overall playback levels it would help me with my tough decision on rather of not to return the 3805 and give up a 20% restocking fee to give the 1070 a try. Thanks abunch

All of the test tones I've used generate pretty loud "white noise" when played individually, but I don't see any reason that they have to be directly reproducing "reference level" playback for a proper calibration process. Any test tone should include some instructions in recommended use - I have seen folks post that at least one calibration disc (possibly AVIA?) recommends calibrating to 85dB with their test tones, whereas the internal test tones in many receivers and processors (including the Outlaw gear I've used) are intended for use calibrating to 75dB. That way the designer can establish a tone that is "x" dB lower than reference level. It would certainly be much easier on the ears for the lengthy sustained full-spectrum tones to be scaled back from reference level (can you imagine trying to think coherently while listening to a 105dB test tone for the eight or more times required to work all the way through a 7.1 surround setup?), whereas DVD's or other source material tend to have shorter-duration moments that spike to reference level over a limited frequency range.

Well I took the 20% restocking fee hit and I am going to return the 3805 as soon as I get an RA number. Now I am pondering if I should give the 1070 a shot first or If I should just bite the bullet and buy the 7125 and use it with my Nad 752 as pre/pro. If some of you more experienced outlaws could give me some advice it would sure be appreciated. I live in a townhome with a 21x17 living room so I dont know if the 7125 would be a little too much. If the 1070 has the same kind of dynamics as the 1050 then that would suit my needs. If some of you could share your comparisions of the 1070 vs the 1050 that would help to. Much thanks.

Hey rdperry,

Ouch...too bad about that 20% fee. I really don't think the NAD 752 would have a better pre/pro section than the Outlaw 1070. I also doubt it would be less dynamic than the 1050. Of course, I'd like to see someone compare the 752 and 1070 as well So, I'd vote for giving the 1070 a shot.

John, I am pretty sure that the 1070 will sound better than the nad 752,I was just going to use the 752 as my preamp until I could buy a better one. I think that for my needs which are mostly dvd's and games, what I would enjoy more is a little more dynamics and the extra headroom that a seperate amp will provide. I would love to just buy the 990 and the 7125 but a new X-box 360 and new speakers ( I really need a better center channel)are in my buying future,besides I am a little unsure of the sheer size of the 990. I have pretty much talked myself into the 7125 route. Or maybe some 2200 ??????

I can't comment on the receiver issues, but I'd give long odds that the 7125 would not be too much for your room. I have a substantially smaller room for the 7100 and it fills the room very nicely. Since you've got something you're comfortable with using as a processor, why not take the next step and get a great amplifier?

So I looked around, apparently a THX reference level 0 db signal played at a systems 0 attenuation level is supposed to be 105 db .... but of course the folks producing the movie are free to record at whatever level they choose, and even more obviously we are free to adjust our systems overall gain as we see fit.

AVIA is recorded at -20 db referenced to THX reference level, so IF we use it to calibrate our systems output to 85db at 0 attenuation we will be reproducing 105 db if the signal is encoded at THX reference level .... whoooo.

Seems right. Comments?

That matches my understanding - and my fuzzy memory that AVIA recommends calibrating to 85dB (haven't actually used AVIA, so my memory is based on comments from others in various forums).

Thanks Charlie and gonk for the help in uderstanding the whole calibration of gear to reference levels. I think I kind of understood before but now it is a little more clear. I think this whole thread has helped me to become a little more clear on what I want to do as far as upgrading my system right now. I think that I am going to buy three 2200 and run them thru my Nad 752 for now and let the 752 run the rears. This will afford me the option to add a nice preamp and maybe two or three more 2200 in the future while greatly enhancing my current system now. Thanks again everyone for your helpfull comments.