So, I finally did it. Ordered one. Despite everything posted on here about 'no audio', and blown tweeters/drivers, distortion, and input panel death. I even read EVERY SINGLE thread on this 970 forum (plus lots of google searching) so that I'd know what I was getting into.

Let's hope everything that's bad I've read doesn't happen. I know there's some recurring names here that feel it's going to no matter what though, just being a matter of time, etc. I'm an optimist though, (possibly to a fault in this case) so I'm hoping that it all works out.

Unlike some, I'm STUPID patient. Combine that with the fact that I'm anal retentive in general, if my unit decides to exhibit problems, and I keep it past the 30 day mark, I will document EVERYTHING in this thread. (and I mean EVERYTHING)

So if it happens to me, Outlaw support will get as much detail as possible from my setup.

The 970 will be hooked to an NAD T955. (5 X 100W; I haven't felt the need to go to 7.1 yet. Maybe someone else can convince me)

A Samsung TS160 DirecTV receiver (without the sat service) will be driving HD, digital and analog content. (OTA ASTC tuner portion, and terrestial analog cable) This will be done either over Coax, or fiber. (depends if the coax will reach; if it does not, I'll use fiber)

An NAD T533 DVD player will be driving a Coax Digital feed for all surround (movie) audio, and a bypass pair of analog feeds for L/R CD Audio. (probably through the CD input on the 970. I haven't decided for sure yet though; I may put them into the 7.1 direct bypass for the DVD... time will tell)

A Ninendo Wii will be an AUX device used for analog, DPLII input.

Power will be fed via an Adcom ACE-515 line conditioner.

All audio will be driven to a pair of B&W 601's as mains, and a Polk Audio RM6200 Center with accompanying surround satellites for HT.

If the desire/mood sets in, I'll hook a sub output wire to one channel of my spare Adcom GFA-5300 and drive a Cambridge Sonudworks Ensemble Sub. I have two of these passive sub modules, and if the mood REALLY strikes, I'll split the sub signal, and feed both into the amp and stack the subs. (not sure I want that monstrosity sitting in my living room though; it does have to pass the wife pleasing test after all...)

For Video, at this point, until I feel comfy knowing I'm not going to return it, I'm staying source direct to monitor (57" HD Toshiba CRT). If the future dictates, all three sources will be fed as component into the 970 to switch, and fed from there into the monitor.

So, the only question remaining in my mind is, when will it ship, and how long until it arrives? (I placed and paid for order this morning, and I live in North East Pennsylvania)

Cheers,
E.

Congratulations on the purchase, Elmosaurus! Since you're in the New England corner of the world, shipping should be fairly quick - I think they ship all their surround processors from the Massachusetts area.

Thanks, Gonk.

Do you recall which courier they use? I'd love if it was Fedex ground, and the thing showed up on Saturday. Highly unlikely though. (As I said, I'm stupidly optimistic)

E.

I've actually gotten some stuff from them via FedEx Home Delivery (I think my M200's came that way), so you might be in luck.

Then the only facet remaining is if they decide to gather up the wires and pre/pro, and slap labels on them today.

I praaaaaaaahbably shouldn't hold my breath on this one...

E.

- that Scott's sneaky like that, isn't he? Look forward to hearing what you think of your two new goodies (particularly the processor).

...And so, it arrived.

FINALLY.

Fedex took longer than normal for this Saturday Delivery; they're usually here before 1'ish. Perhaps it was the weather... it's been a little snowy here, but nothing like the midwest. Anyhow, I digress....

Unpacking:

The unit arrived in perfect shape. Outlaw's use of a box in a box ensured that the inner 'actual' box was in great shape. No dents, dings, or scratches. Great for the collector minded (aka, anal) types, like me.

The packs of wires however, a little bit of superfluous damage. They were packed in a bubble FedEx flat. The combined low temps possibly made the packaging bags a little brittle, so under the rigors of shipping, the side seam on one side, and the front material of the heavy duty Ziploc like bag burst. (there's a small hole in the top left corner of the clear front, and the right side heat seam blew out) I only mention it because it's the ONLY damage from shipping. Everything else was flawless. In reality, the bags are nice to have, but will probably not really get used for anything ever again anyhow.

About the wires; this is trivial, as trivial as the blown plastic ziploc above; but the colors don't quite make sense on the PCA cables. I ordered a 7x .5M set, and a 2x (pair) .5M set. One would think the 7 set would be geared towards someone driving a 7 channel amp, so you'd have matching L/R sets in red and white, (x 3) and another distinguishable color (say, grey) for the center channel. You'd also think the pair set would have a distinguishable L/R of red and white also.

Not so. I got a seemingly random mish mosh of colors. Three of the '7' pack was bundled, Red, Blue, Green. (Component video connection? ) The other four bundled also, consisted of a blue, dark brown, dark grey, and white. And then strangely, the 'pair' set was a Red, and a light grey color.

The colors of these barrels really means NOTHING at all of course. I'm just being stupid picky. But for me, part of why I chose these interconnects was for the aesthetics of it, and not having matched pairs does make it seem a little wierd. (this is the part where most people call me OCD. It's ok, I'm used to it. Feel free)

Anyhow, onto the real stuff:

An interesting point; the outer box had a label on the tape seam 'Opened for QC inspection'. The inner box's tape was also cut, but no label. (Both cuts were obviously re-sealed with a single layer of shipping tape before shipment) But yet, the inner material such as plastic bag and foam sheet wrap were all in perfect shape. Was the QC for parts count, or actual item functionality check? Just a point of curiousity...

The unit was unpacked with great care. (yes, I removed the tape from the plastic bag, and the inner foam sheet liner carefully so as not to tear it. =) Call me Capt. OCD)

I'll spare you the hookup details, and just say it's all hooked up as planned for the most part.

The few changes to my plan that I needed to make were:

- Component out to the TV, since I needed to see the menu.

- the Nintendo Wii is video switched via Component, since, the Pre/pro's component out took the input the Wii was using on the TV. The nice thing is this will give me a little test of the component switching I guess.

- Sound for the Samsung Sat Tuner is on Digital Coax; The wire did manage to reach, so no fiber needed. Input Video 2 to go along with the whole 'video 2 hardwired to DVI 2' thing, in case I want to switch via DVI or component with it at some point in the future.

- I decided the analog signal for the NAD T533 would in fact go to the CD input. In this way, I could leave CD in bypass mode all the time, and not have to worry about flipping in and out of the modes when I swapped back and forth from critical CD listening to movies.

As I fired it up, and starting spinning music and movies, I noticed the sonics were a little empty in the mid range, and perhaps a tad 'bright' up top even. I'm not going to be too harsh though, (yet) because I've always known brand new hardware to behave as such. The new interconnects as well. I've left the T533 playing on repeat with some very acoustic and dynamic CD material (Alison Krauss & Union Station, Forget about it, Rounder records) for the overnight, to get some more electrons flowing through the system. Yes, the Amp is off; the wife would kill me otherwise.

In the 5 or so hours I got to change things and get things set up (jumping input, changing channels on the Sat tuner, changing sound formats on different DVDs) everything performed properly.

I did NOT attempt to use the radio tuner. (I don't really listen to the radio; I don't think I'll even unpack the included FM or AM antennas) If I get bored, and find NOTHING wrong with the unit, I'll give it a whirl to just see if it all works... just so I can sleep at night knowing that in 3 years, if I decide to hook up the radio, and it turns out that it's dead, I knew that it at least worked when it was new. (and not DOA, where I could have done something about it, but didn't)

For now, as previously stated, I am only running 5 channel sound. I will update in the future if the .1 sub comes online, or I decide the rear back channels are REALLY worth the effort. (to me, so far, they're NOT)

Some random thoughts:

If you've read as many threads here as I did, there's a few things I wanted to note:

If you're familiar with the 'dot' days of the 950, then this might interest you; there was a SILVER dot on my box, right near the serial number. I didn't recall seeing it on the back panel of the unit though. I'm curious to know what that means. Anyone know? (Only actual firsthand knowledge please, no guesses)

The volume knob is NOT wobbly. Or at least, mine is not. It turns with defined 'medium soft' detents, and does not feel loose. The system does NOT recognize it instantly ON THE DISPLAY though; (it does adjust the actual attentuation) it seems as though the processor waits a half a second before computing the change in volume and displaying the change on the front panel. Perhaps this is where some got the impression that the unit was 'slow. It's not a huge deal, since how often do we really use the front panel volume knob? (I personally think a medium size -20db mute button on the front would be adequate, since the only time I've ever reached for a front panel knob was when I was preparing to change a disc or something, and someone started talking to me, so I knocked the volume all the way down just to hear them, then turned it back up to the level I was at previously)

Along the lines of speed, the Processor DOES take 1-2.5 seconds to lock onto a digital audio stream and changes modes. This doesn't bother me much, or at least, I don't expect it to. Time will tell, and if my mind changes, I'll be sure to note that here in this thread.

The rest of the physical build quality is excellent. I for one enjoy the NAD minimalistic look, and curved corners of the front panel. I do think the silver accents are too bright; I'd have prefered the buttons and knobs in a slightly more subdued medium gray or a straight pitch black. The bright silver makes it seem like the device can't decide if it wants to be a flashy 'modern' unit, or a classic NAD minimalist.

The screen IS indeed 'somewhat' hard to read at 15 foot typical viewing distances. But that's a subjective gripe, since my eyesight isn't as good in low light. (the lighting level typical to these unit's operation) I think the blue electro flouresence is what makes it hard, since blue has one of the worst contrast ratios against a black background. Bright green may be common, but its for a few reasons, and legibility is high on that list.

The remote... well, it's included. LOL. I don't expect a lot from a remote nowadays, so, if it works, I won't usually complain. But I also won't glowingly praise it either. This one works. The problem is, it's the 'punch in the code' type. This was probably for cost savings. I can accept that. My problem (and possibly yours) is, it feels like Outlaw took a premade 'punch in the code' type remote, and added their base codes for the Pre/Pro to it. This would seem ideal, except that for the target audience, we audiophiles don't usually have the more mainstream manufacturers' DVD players. Or Satellite receivers. Or cable converters. Etc. In my case, I'm on the low side. It knew a code for my TV. That's it. Nothing else. No DVD player. No Satellite tuner. (despite an entry for Samsung, there was no response from the unit when the remote sent commands out) If you have other high end gear, download the manual and you'll see what I mean if you have an audiophile level DVD player, CD transport, etc. Luckily, I still have my trusty NAD HTR-2 remote from my previous A/V receiver. (which died right on the edge of the warranty. NAD is being kind with the customer service though; the problem is I don't trust their units anymore, so I'll probably trade the replacement in for something else) This NAD remote unit fulfills the duty with aplomb! (I love this thing. I Swear. ) I taught all the commands from the Outlaw remote for the Pre/Pro into it in under 5 minutes, and now, they ALL work, perfectly. No hunting for codes, and no missing command functionality. I'm back to a single remote on the coffee table. (yay! )

And now, the bad...

There were TWO things I found that were not what I expected.

1 - this may be normal; I'll call tech support Monday AM, or hopefully get an answer here during the weekend from someone that knows FOR SURE. (no guesses, please) I checked the firmware just 'to know', and the number does NOT match the number offered on the FAQ/Support page on the OutlawAudio.com site. Worse yet, it is lead off by a 1070..., which, I've read at least one other in this forum had discovered on their unit. (I think his was a B stock though, so he thought perhaps it was flashed improperly by a previous owner)

Since mine was a New stock, (or better have been, since that's what I ordered) I'm curious why this displays this. Since the 1070 and 970 share lineage, if Outlaw support says that's normal, then I'd not worry too much. If I flash the new firmware, and it changes though, something will definitely not add up. I would personally think that the number should lead with a 970; I may flash the firmware, or do a reset at the least, because of number two....

2 - The IR passthrough doesn't work. ARGH. I NEED this functionality, because my rack will not hold the Sat tuner anymore. (the unit is an inch too tall; but that's fine, since I'd rather have the extra 3" breathing room for the main audio gear, and to get that noisy, always on, heat generating tuner away from my main 'stack') I tried two different like new IR emitter's that I confirmed to work using the passthrough output of another device in another room. It's NOT the emitters. I will be calling support first thing Monday morning about this. I REALLY hope it does not require a unit swap. That will peeve me off. Big time.


If anyone has any thoughts, or has any questions, feel free to fire away. I'll check this regularly throughout the day tomorrow.

E.

ACtually, that sounds pretty close to the THX standard for 7.1 analog connections. The THX standard is red for the right channel, white for left, green for center, purple for subwoofer, silver for right surround, blue for left surround, yellow for right surround back, and brown for left surround back.
That is exactly what happened, and short of doing it with a learning-capable remote (such as the Model 950's SL-9000) it's about all that a company the size of Outlaw can do - designing their own remote would be pricey. On the bright side, they went to UEI for the remote, and UEI's remote code database is one of the biggest around. No remote code database is perfect, of course, but there are some codes that will with with the remote that aren't in the manual - check out HiFi Remote for more codes. I can't guarantee that you'll find codes that work for you, but it's worth a try.

It's entirely possible (in fact quite likely) that your 970 was shipped from the factory with older firmware - 990's were shipping this way for some time, and may still be. It could even simply be a different firmware number for some other reason (I've seen that some with OPPO's DVD players, for example). They may also have not installed a beta firmware. If you call them Monday about the IR, they can give you the scoop on that as well.

This very well may be; I've never bought THX dedicated wiring, so this may be an issue of ignorance on my part. If this was the goal though, given you described the more traditional colors that are used for THX, it would have been nice for them to line up that way, then. Either way, this is really REALLY trivial (even I'm willing to admit it) so it's nothing of concern that requires correction; it's just something I wanted others to be aware of so they weren't surprised like I was.

Thanks, Gonk. I'll have to give that a whirl and see what I come up with. At this point, I have the functionality I need from the HTR-2, so it's not a huge loss to me. And in point, I really don't hold Outlaw at fault; it's like you describe, for the size of their organization, and the price point targeted, it'd be impossible to do a true learning remote. As I said, it 'works'. I don't hold it to any fault. I just can't praise it either.

That's what I'd like to know for sure. If the need arises, I'll go buy a serial cable and dust off and hook up my ancient Thinkpad to the unit to flash the firmware. I just want to know for sure before I go and do it, since a few people have exhibited 'worse AFTER the flash' experiences according to thread posts here in the forum.

After the all night spinning, and a few hours of near reference level play (-13db or so), I'm pleased to say the sonics are beginning to shape out. I'm getting midrange transitions and miniscule details back. I'm still missing some mid-low transitions, making it seem like piano and string bass notes 'appear' and then consequently 'disappear' without much reverb fade. (not pronounced synthetic reverb, but that which naturally resonates off a vibrating string/cable that you'd hear) I expect it to round out shortly as well, so I'll post when that happens. (or if it does not)

Still perplexed why IR passthrough is dead. It seems like such a simple thing to implement.

Still welcoming anyone's thoughts.

E.

...So, the journey continues.

I got a chance to speak with Steve, and Scott at Outlaw this morning. Great guys.


The firmware number:

The specifics on this are basically that because the 1070 and 970 share architecture, their firmware is 'mostly' identical. According to Scott, if I understood him correctly, the only difference in the current PRODUCTION version of the firmware (that which is shipped with all current units for sale) is that the string of text during power up differs. The 1070 firmware welcomes you, and displays 'Model 1070'. The 970 welcomes you, and displays 'Model 970'. (NB: mine does display the 970 message)

Functionally, they are written to perform the same. So the reported firmware revision number during a 'Menu+Mute' from the front panel query displays the same revision number, even though they are apparently actually different files loaded into the firmware. The only difference, as mentioned above, is the welcome string.

In the future, Scott mentioned this would be changed to be even more specific, so that revision numbers reflect the unit the welcome message was designed for. (logical)

So, the long story short, all new units have the latest PRODUCTION firmware. From what I gathered then, this is not the 'beta' that is listed on the site, as Scott mentioned that was a specific version really only meant for those that have had 'drop out' issues. It's been a short 48 hours, but I've experienced nothing like that yet, so I'm not going to concern myself for now.

It was also told to me that being that some owners still have issues, Outlaw support is STILL working on the firmware apparently. I can't give specifics, but I can make it clear that the posted 'beta' on the site is NOT the end of the refinement trail on this issue; it's still actively being pursued. I think that should help put some owners at ease.


The IR passthrough issue:

Once it was explained to me, I understood, but I can't say I like it. This is not to say that anyone is at fault; I just misunderstood what I had gotten.

The manual is VERY sparse about the IR passthrough functionality. It devotes a whole PARAGRAPH to it. Based on this, I assumed it operated like my previous electronic components that had IR passthrough. I plugged the IR emitter (1/8" mono plug) into the output port, placed the other end in front of the (now hidden) Satellite tuner's IR receiver, and presumed I was good to go. When it didn't work, I made a note of it, and was bewildered. Trying a different IR emitter didn't help. Both of these emitters were confirmed to function from my HD monitor; but that required some funny arm positioning to get the remote to be 'seen', hence the search for a better solution.

The lowdown? The unit only does what is called a 'passive' IR signal. I'd never delved that deep into IR relocation, so it was partly my ignorance on this that confounds me. In larger home theater installs, an IR processor ('brain') is used to collect and relay IR commands. This is for installs that are located in closets or the such. These systems take a small passive signal (such as that which comes out of the 970 (and 950, and 990 accoring to Steve) and adds power to it, before outputting it to the emitters. I'm GROSSLY oversimplifying what it's doing, but that's the nuts and bolts of it.

So, anyone that thinks that an emitter plugged straight into the output port will work will be disappointed like I was. You need to configure one of these IR brains in order to do a true passthrough. (it's actually a 'relay' in this case; to me, the term passthrough means 'no other signal modification is needed')

Given I need to relay/passthrough to only ONE component, I'm not sure I want to get into the whole ordeal of setting up a brain and emitter. I just plugged the emitter back into my Toshiba HD monitor, and will live with having to raise the remote above my head when changing channels. (because my display is elevated 26" off the floor, the normal IR passthrough sensor that is inside the cabinet does not get a signal through the front lens unless I elevate the source also. If the display were on the floor like it was originally designed for, this would not be an issue. And yes, a 57" 300+ lb Rear projection HD monitor is a PITA to lift onto a pedestal. LOL.)

At 48 hours, I think I can safely say I'm now into the 'out of the box' phase. (I don't count the first 48 for sonics because there's settling in the circuits, discharge of polarities in the interconnects, etc)

The sound has evened out nicely, and I've got smooth transitions throughout the entire range. Details are still a tiny tiny smidge off. I don't know if those will come through in the next few days, or if they're just lost in the system's circuits.

All in all, it's been a pleasant experience thusfar. My only real gripes have been things I've documented in this thread:

The wording in the manual should really be more descriptive of the IR passthrough specifications. Had it even mentioned the word 'passive', I'd have gone and done the research to learn about it, and not wondered for the entire weekend if I was senile, or had a defective unit on my hands.

Also, the firmware revision display should really have displayed the correct label on it. As a computer programmer/systems analyst, version control and documentation (embedded file tags in this case) is pounded into our heads from day one. It's the only thing that can save ones' butt when files get jumbled badly during releases sometimes. I really think the firmware should have been more aligned with the lineage each version was created for, from the beginning.

These two things are really minor gripes though; they do not affect the performance of the unit sonically, or fundamentally (switching, decoding, etc)

The other silly stuff like the remote not being as powerful, (keeps costs down) the display being a little hard to read (it does the job, and my slight astigmatism doesn't help) and lastly, the 'lock on' speed of the processor (not something that gets in the way of performance since typical situations will have a steady audio stream accompanying it) is REALLY REALLY nothing to be concerned with; not given what you really DO get for the excellent value of this $700 unit.

Given that, I'd rate this pre-'out of box' phase at a 4.5 out of 5.

Off to go watch Talladega Nights....

E.

It sounds like you're getting settled in pretty nicely with the 970, Elmosaurus. Thanks for the update.

*ahem*

Being the relentless fool that I am, (I told you I was stupid patient) I kept digging for lower and lower cost solutions for my IR passthrough issue.

The more I learn, the more I understand what is needed.

Enter a possible solution:

http://www.hometech.com/infrared/blocks.html#XA-CB20

(I'm in no way endorsing this company or it's products)

This looks like a nice, $14 solution (+$13 for a power supply) for passthrough as I'm trying to achieve. It's not nearly as involved as I originally thought it'd have to be.

It will take the signals that the 970 'sees' and rebroadcast them on up to two emitters.

I already have an emitter and a stereo 1/8" M-M cable, so I think this will do the trick. For $35 or so after power supply and shipping, it's worth a shot.

I'm going to check with Outlaw support on whether the power voltage is of any concern for the safety of the 970; I wouldn't want to feed power to this thing and have a bleed through that does bad things to the 970 through the IR output jack.

E.

Crap.

Well, that didn't take long.

I just started the unit, from a cold cold start, and there was nothing.

Prior to operation (attempted) just now, the unit was last used last night. The T533 played a CD (Enigma, MCMXC a.D.) last night, through the CD input (always on Analog, using Bypass) on the 970, with sleep set to 60 minutes. Both units played to end, and the 970 powered down on it's own.

Ambient temperatures for the units sat around 65 deg F all day today, with no operation at all, all day long.

I began tonight by powering up the NAD. After opening the tray, and inserting the CD, then closing it, the CD (Maroon5, Acoustic) had already started spinning up and playing track one as the 970 came online.

Once I saw the welcome message disappear, I powered on the amp.

I went to adjust the volume (I have it default to power on volume of -50db) and the knob did NOTHING. I thought, that's strange. I clicked the menu button on the front panel, to see if the front panel had died on me. The menu came up, and I clicked it again to make it go away. The CD Analog Bypass display returned, but the indicated volume had now changed. (higher, since I had turned it up a bit)

I thought this was even stranger. I then attempted to adjust the volume again via the front panel knob, but the display did not change. Pressing the volume up or down on the remote did nothing either. I then pressed the mute button on the front panel. The display changed to MUTE. I pressed again to release it, and the new indicated volume appeared.

I powered the unit off from the front panel, and then back on after a second. The situation was the same. (front panel knob adjustments did nothing to indicated display)

I powered it off again (2nd time) and back on with the remote. Because I programmed Video 1 (arbitrarily) into the remote as the power on button, it switched over to that source, and enabled Dolby Digital. With no actual input source, I just switched it back to CD, which defaults as analog bypass. STILL no sound!

I switched to DVD, which was set to Dolby Digital, (fed via digital coax from the T533 into coax 1) but there was no sound. I then pressed the Dolby mode button, but it didn't seem to respond. (trying to get it to just digital stereo mode)

I decided to power off the unit AGAIN (front panel), but waited a few seconds before powering on again. (front panel)

At this time, the DVD input which was last selected began processing audio. The mode had changed apparently due to my dolby mode button pressing, and was finally now in digital stereo. The volume (front panel) became active, and adjustments were acknowledged within a half second or so as before this incident.

I switched back to CD, and audio was coming through the analog bypass no problems.

All functionality had seemed to return at this point.

Thoughts:

This is definitely a processor boot related incident this time. I'd not think it an 'audio lock on' issue, since, the prior input that it powered up to was CD, in analog bypass mode no less, (switch on back panel is set to bypass also for bass management) so there should have been ZERO processor logic analysis at that point.

Did the lower than typical ambient temperature have anything to do with it? I don't know. It's been known that some transistor circuits don't operate when not in the right temperature range. But that's usually EXTREME ranges, like -60deg F or something insane. 'Chilled' room temperature should not be a reason for transistor processing error.

For the record, the Satellite tuner was 'off'. (but as some have noted, this unit outputs a digital audio 'dead' signal even when it's in standby mode; or at least it does on the fiber (glowing) channel; since I'm running coax, I can't be sure if it is) This coax was fed into coax 2. (but was never selected as a source during this event)

The HD Monitor was also off, but I don't see how that would influence anything since the only connection between that and the 970 is the component output wires on the 970's monitor out.

All inputs have 'auto poll' turned OFF, since I either am using a digital input only for a device, or the analog for the CD bypass input. I do not 'mix' input types on any input.

So, there you have it. My first wonderful 'no audio'.

Now that I'm unable to be foolishly optimistic that my unit is flawless, I will keep a notepad near the machine and document each and every step and it's results meticulously if this happens again.

Looks like it was a good thing I played devil's advocate and ordered that serial cable early this week 'just in case'.

It should be here later this week; if this occurs again, I'll most certainly be seeking a flash the firmware' session this coming weekend.

E.

This looks like a pretty reasonable solution, and is similar to the IR stuff that I've used with my system for several years now.

Thanks, Gonk.

I want to ask though, as I've not heard back from Outlaw support yet; did you ever connect the receiver IR output port directly to the 'receiver in' port on the Xantech unit?

From what I understand, the Xantech expects a stereo minijack (1/8"), one conductor for signal, one for ground, and one for 12V+.

What I'm trying to find out for sure, since there seems to be no specifics or details about the IR output port on the Outlaw units, is if that port is setup the same way for a stereo minijack as the Xantech, using the same conductor assignments and the incoming 12V+ charge not affecting any of the circuitry inside the Outlaw unit. (I hope that makes sense)

[eta - I just realized you posted a link to your review, and I read through it, but still didn't see for sure if you actually used the Xantech receiver, or hooked the IR Output from the Outlaw directly into the 'Receiver In' port on the Xantech. Your paragraph near the bottom seems to imply it though, since you mention, 'The Model 950 [...] has an IR receiver that you almost have to leave the room to miss...' Does this mean you did hook the IR out directly to the Xantech? If so, what type of hook-up did you use?]

E.

The only IR receiver I've used is the separate one that I have sitting on top of the TV (I set it up because the entertainment center we had just purchased at the time has doors that block many of the IR receivers on the equipment), but my Model 950 (and the Model 1070 and 970 are this way as well) worked fine with accepting signals from the Xantech distribution block (no detrimental effect on other circuitry inside the Outlaw) so I'd expect the opposite (IR out from the Outlaw to IR on on a Xantech block) to work as well.

Ok. It's good to know that the output of the Xantech talks to the IR input properly at least.

I imagine this connection was done with a 1/8" MONO minijack, correct? (same type of connector as on a typical emitter)

I just forwarded the details of what I'm trying to accomplish to Steve in Outlaw support, so hopefully we'll have an answer for the masses shortly.

E.

You are correct that the connection was done with an 1/8" mono minijack - identical to the jack on a typical emitter, and the exact same cable that can be used as a trigger cable with the 970.

I used this Xantech IR Kit kit in my sytem (boy, those prices have gone up...) and the IR out from the Outlaw pre/pro to trigger an Outlaw 7125 amp (see edit comment).
I even replaced some of the LED emitters that came with the kit with male-to-male mono minijack cables from Radio Shack for direct-wire links with my Outlaw pre/pro and satellite box. Worked flawlessly and none of my gear behaved in any way erratically.

-----
Edit: Instead of modifying my post, I will leave my error for all to see. I just realized that I am not using the IR out but the 12v trigger. Hmmm. So I can only attest for the IR input working flawlessly...

Ok, so it's confirmed that a MONO minijack is used for feeding IR signal from the connecting block to the IR INPUT port.

But we're (or at least, I'm) all still wondering about what the IR OUTPUT port needs for connection, and if it's a direct hook-up to the Xantech connecting block's 'Receiver IN' port.

...bit by bit... =)

E.

If I remember correctly (and feel free to set me straight anyone), based on what I read when I was planning my IR distribution system, the processor's IR output simply repeats all commands passed from the IR-in. In other words, it is doing the same thing that a Xantech connecting block would do. So you could connect the IR out from your 970 to, say, your DVD player's IR-in which (if it has its own IR-out) could be daisy-chained to another unit's IR-in, and so on...

That's not how I chose to do mine, since sometimes we use the DVD player and TV without turning on the rest of the HT. In my case, I have a Xantech connecting block with 4 IR-outs, although I am only using 3 (Processor, DVD, and Satellite).

If you're right, garcianc2003, then Elmosaurus really needs an IR receiver similar to the one that you and I are using.

I don't think that's right either, unfortunately. Sorry guys.

The Outlaw unit does not do the same thing as a Xantech connecting block; I know this for sure because Steve said it sends a PASSIVE signal, which will NOT drive an emitter on the IR output port on it's own.

I cannot confirm that sending a passive no voltage signal from the IR output port to a device's input port will work, but my STRONG hunch is that this will NOT work. Simply because if Gonk's use of a MONO cable from the POWERED output port of the Xantech block, direct to his peripheral devices' input ports, does indeed work, a PASSIVE signal will not be heard by the peripheral devices.

Being that the Outlaw is SUPPOSED to perform AS a receiver, it SHOULD output on the IR OUTPUT port the SAME type of signal that a retail Xantech receiver would normally put out. (namely, that stereo minijack 3 conductor connection)

THIS is precisely what I'm trying to get final confirmation on; If Steve doesn't get to reply to my PM by this afternoon before I leave work, I'll give him a call and try to get the fast answer that way so I can order up this gear.

(if you can't tell, I'm trying to keep this as low cost as possible, and paying $45 for a Xantech receiver who's capability is already theoretically present on the plainly visible Outlaw is a kibosh on the deal for me)

E.

Now I am curious... I might experiment with this when I get home, since I have been thinking about daisy-chaining instead of the LED emitters (if only for aesthetic reasons).
I would like to know what you find out on this, so let us know what response you get.

In order to truly, 'daisy-chain', you'd have to have devices who's output ports were truly POWERED output ports. (the kind that can drive an emitter)

I only say this because from my analysis thusfar, it takes a POWERED output port to drive an input port.

Is it possible that a passive signal will drive an input port? I don't know. Gonk can try it if he feels daring. Move that output plug from the Xantech connecting block's output, to the IR OUTPUT of the Outlaw device.

In theory, if a PASSIVE output port (on the Outlaw) can drive an IR input that normally expects a POWERED signal, then the peripheral will work when Gonk aims his remote at his 990, and sends commands pertinent to the device that is strung onto that output port.

Gonk, care to try? Since I've been told NO power comes from the OUTPUT port of the Outlaw, (since it's PASSIVE) there should be no risk to your peripheral device.

E.

This is what led me to believe the behavior I described earlier. From page 8 of the 970 user's manual:
"IR output Feeds an infrared flasher attached to another piece of audio/video gear. Any infrared remote signal received by the Model 970’s front-panel sensor or by an external sensor connected to the Model 970 will be relayed through this jack, so concealed audio/video devices can be controlled by remote."

Like I said, I am very curious now...

And that's why I knocked a quarter point off my out-of-box review score; that paragraph is the only one in the manual about the IR, and it's VERY ambiguous as to what the functionality is.

Reading it LITERALLY, I should be able to plug the emitter STRAIGHT into the port. (ie, it should be a POWERED port)

But we know that's not the case now, obviously, since I was told it only outputs a PASSIVE signal. This seem to be an industry standard, so I have no issues with it, but I want to confirm that one can plug one end of a STEREO wire into that IR OUTPUT port, and the other end into the RECEIVER IN port on the Xantech, and the 9x0 Outlaw will behave just like the Xantech receiver module that sells for $45.

.. aren't we having such fun here?! =D

E.

I got the name wrong earlier; sorry for the confusion.

Garcianc2003, you'd be the one that can try if you'd like.

Take the MONO wire you have going directly from the Xantech OUTPUT port, that leads to the Satellite Tuner, and plug it into the OUTPUT port of the 970. (ie, 970 OUT <-> Satellite IN)

This will tell you (and us) if a PASSIVE output can drive an input that normally expects a POWERED signal.

E.

Elmosaurus, I am thinking about taking a LED emitter (I have some spares) and plugging into my processor's IR-out as a test. I figure that doesn't involve any other gear and I am pretty sure it doesn't pose a threat to the processor. If it works like the manual describes, I should see the emitter light up every time I use the remote.
Am I understanding this all wrong or would that test tell us what we want to know?

... it wouldn't be a hobby if it wasn't fun...

Nope, you're understanding it perfectly.

Just perfectly flawed. LOL.

Your premise is sound; it's just not electrically accurate; I know this because I plugged an IR emitter (same as LED) into the OUTPUT port, and directed it right at the device. NO SIGNAL was sent at all. Basically, a MONO minijack does not seem to work with the OUTPUT port.

This is why I'm trying to get Steve to confirm what type of connection the OUTPUT port is.

The test we're trying to confirm is whether the very low/no voltage 'PASSIVE' signal is enough to drive a device via a wire. That's why you'd need to hook the mono minijack wire from the 970's OUTPUT port into the device's INPUT port.

E.

You lost me at "electrically"... LOL

I am a "software guy" and very often make the mistake (especially when a "signal" is involved) of thinking of things in digital terms and forgetting about electrical principles.

I think I'll wait to hear what Steve has to say.

LOL

Well, these signals ARE supposed to be 'digital' in a sense; they would show as a waveform (standard current) on a scope but the amplification level will vary based on the amount of power that is applied. (voltage) Nevermind any of that though, as it's not pertinent. :p

What I'm trying to discern is if a low voltage (what we're calling 'passive', since it's not enough voltage to drive an IR emitter at about 1.5V) signal from the Outlaw IR Output is enough to be read by a peripheral device's (like your satellite tuner) INPUT port.

Typically, the input port is expecting a full voltage (powered) signal from the Xantech connecting block. (as demonstrated by it working ok in your setup)

Since there is LESS voltage being applied to the IR OUTPUT from the Outlaw than what the Xantech POWERED OUTPUT gives off, there's no danger to any components hooked into that port.

Hope that makes sense.

E.

I just got off the phone with Steve.

At this point, he's still looking into it, but the initial thoughts are that he recalls the 990 having a 3 pin (stereo) minijack socket for the IR OUTPUT. I would tend to think the 970 is built the same way.

In this case, it would most likely be IMPOSSIBLE for the IR OUTPUT to put a passive signal out that a peripheral device would be able to use on it's own IR INPUT port. (given the misaligned stereo/mono connectors/ports and all)

Steve is going to call me back with more info after he finishes checking into what port is specifically on the 970 circuit board, and how it directly interfaces with the Xantech connecting block.

From what I can tell, he understands my goal (using the 970, it's IR output port and some kind of connection cable in place of a dedicated $45 Xantech IR Receiver) and my safety concerns (the 12V+ that the Xantech applies to it's Receiver IN port that might go up the line, into the 970's IR OUTPUT port and circuit board, thus letting the magic smoke out of the Pre/pro.



E.

I've missed a bunch while being in my latest hours-long meeting of the week...

First, the 990 and 970/1070 have very different IR support - as I mention in my 990 review, the 990 requires a special interface module to operate with equipment like the Xantech connector blocks we're discussing here, whereas the 950 and the 970/1070 do not. I would not expect anything from the 990 to carry over to the 970 as far as behavior. If I get a chance, I may try to run the 990's output to the input of my connecting block (although the meeting notes and meeting agenda that are demanding my attention tonight and the chiller room layout that has kicked them out of the work day make that test unlikely), but I don't think the results would be of use for the 970. The best bet at this point is probably to see what Steve comes back with.

Thanks gonk. I recommend that, if the manual is ever revised, the IR section be updated. Page 9 of the 990's manual has an identical description to what's in the 970's manual:
"IR output (see page 22) Use this output to feed an infrared flasher attached to another piece of audio/video gear. Any infrared remote signal received by the Model 990’s front-panel sensor or by an external sensor connected to the Model 990 will be relayed through this jack, so concealed audio/video devices can be controlled by remote."

Someone who has owned both preamps would likely be expecting identical behavior based on the manual.

I guess I should thank Elmosaurus for being so detailed oriented and helping (at least me) understand our gear better. I would have never thought to ask.

I got a PM back from Steve, after talking with him about it this afternoon.

He seemed to reiterate that there was no 12VDC power supplied by the IR In or Out ports of the Outlaw units. :rolleyes:

I don't think he understands what I'm asking. I thought I made it very very clear what I was trying to accomplish while talking with him on the phone.

(ie, replace the Xantech IR receiver module entirely using the 970, it's IR OUT port, and some kind of connecting cable.)

I also thought I made it clear my MAIN concern (and the reason I won't just plug it in and 'try it' like I normally would) is because I KNOW the port on the Xantech connecting block is powered. My concern being that that powered port could deliver voltage to the IR OUT port of the 970 that the 970 is not designed to handle. (thus letting magic smoke out of the unit)

Steve said he's still going to look into it, so hopefully my reply to him will help to get him to understand exactly what I'm asking. If not, he mentioned that Scott apparently had to go out of town, but when he returns, we could defer this question to him and get his perspective on it.

Garcianc, not a problem at all. We paid alot of hard earned dollars for these units. We should know every nook and cranny of them; not just because we paid alot, but because we're supposed to be enthusiasts, too.... :p

(...and yes, my vote was in for a full re-write of that paragraph the moment I read it. It seems like it was written as a HUGE afterthought... )

E.

Since I'm also not a proponent of letting the smoke out of electronics, let's take a step back and look at what we know.

1) An IR emitter connected to the 970's IR OUT does not deliver IR commands from the 970's sensor to another device's sensor.

2) The 970's IR IN works fine with Xantech IR distribution systems like these connecting blocks.

Based on those two items alone (and reinforced by the information from Steve identifying the 970's IR input/output as a passive design), it seems that the IR ports on the back are effectively independent of the IR sensor on the front. That means that it may be possible to feed a signal into the 970's IR IN and get a copy of that signal back out at the 970's IR OUT, but it appears to not be possible to use the 970's IR sensor as a shared sensor for the entire system. The fact that Elmosaurus's test using an IR emitter connected to the 970's IR OUT failed to provide a copy of the signals received by the 970's sensor is the biggest clue.

I may have just re-stated the obvious, in which case I blame the late hour.

Your stated cases does describe most of what we've empirically seen, but it doesn't then address WTH the point of the IR output port is. One would logically think it's meant to 'relay' the signals received by the Outlaw's IR sensor on the front panel.

As we stated, it clearly doesn't do it on it's own, straight to an emitter.

It's said to do it 'passively' by Outlaw support; but what does that really mean?

I feel like calling Xantech and seeing what they have to say, but I know they'll just say, 'refer to the manufacturer of the device'. At which point, we're back at square one.

I'm beginning to wonder how and why a company that designed this unit from the ground up doesn't really KNOW how the port is supposed to be used. :p Doesn't that strike anyone else as odd? LOL.

Oh well. I'll keep digging and see what I can find...

E.

If my suspicion is correct (that the IR in/out is independent from the IR sensor), then the IR input is there to support a pass-through and potentially eliminate the need for a small connector block - an IR receiver could be connected to the 970's IR in and then an IR emitter or a simple cable could then be connected to an additional device.

Not possible. How could your last sentence hold true if plugging an emitter into the IR OUT port of the 970 does nothing? I can't speak on terms of a 'simple cable' to another device, because I have no device to test it with though. (that would assume a device could operate on the 'passive' signal that Steve claimed is coming out of the 970)

Keep in mind our concern here is the IR OUTPUT port. We already know that the INPUT PORT listens to powered, mono emitter capable signals just fine. (as both you an GarcianC have setup)

I'm half a step shy of taking my entire shelf apart just so I can shine a flashlight inside the 970 top vents and see what kind of connector that IR out is. (2 prong MONO or 3 prong STEREO)

From there, I'm inclined to hack the appropriate type of connector wire, use my multi-meter, and determine which pinouts drive what signal.

From there, I'll just feed IR signal,(1 wire) and ground (another wire) directly into a Xantech block and be done with this insanity.

(I already said to hell with waiting and ordered the block. But because I don't know if the Outlaw is directly pin out compatible with the Xantech, I had to go to a 4 out block that has a screw down terminal zone input. ARGH. $45! )

I'm NOT enjoying this part of the adventure if you couldn't tell.

E.

My point is that the IR OUT appears to only serve to pass data that is provided at the IR IN - thus making it a "pass-through." The IR IN jack would send its data to the same place that data from the IR sensor goes, but it would also connect to the IR OUT to pass that data back on down the line. If that were the case, the IR sensor would lack any connection to the IR OUT (since it is simply a copy of the data from the IR IN jack). That scheme matches all of our first-hand experience.

For those that are following along and care...

Rumor has it the pin out wiring assignments for the stereo 1/8" minijack RECEIVER IN port on the Xantech units is:

I HAVE NOT CONFIRMED THIS THOUGH. Use this information at your own risk. It was obtained through a third party, NOT directly from Xantech.

{ETA - UPDATE. I have confirmed the pinouts, and they are as indicated above. I confirmed them on a Xantech installation document}


E.

Agreed.

If it's a 'copy', and the IR OUT port is a MONO jack, then I could see it 'relaying' the signal to other devices with IN ports, IF AND ONLY IF those devices can function on the 'passive' signal.

If I had a device with an IR in port, I'd try it as soon as I got home. Unfortunately, other than the pre/pro itself, I do not. If anyone else is willing to try, post your results. There should be no risk of harm since the passive signal carries no voltage.

E.

I have been busy with other stuff, so I am catching up to this topic.
When I got home, it turned out I only had one mono cable, so I couldn't try my daisy-chain theory.
For the record, I used to own a 970 but now have a 990, so this may not translate.
I connected a 1/8" mono from an "emitter" port form my Xantech distribution block to the IR-in on the 990. Then I connected a LED flasher to the IR-out on the 990. When I used the remote, the flasher blinked (as I expected). I then disconnected the cable going to the 990's IR-in and this time the flasher did not blink when using the remote via the IR sensor (as gonk suggested but not what I was wishing for).
It was a quick and dirty test, so take it for what it's worth.

That's a VERY VERY interesting development.

Thanks so much for taking the time to try it.

So it sounds like the port on the back of the 990 is a mono port. And it is indeed not linked to the front panel sensor.

Makes me wonder how similar the 970 is to this then. We've been told it's different, but how different?

E.

A couple of major developments...

I'll break them down into seperate thread replies for organizational purposes.

First, I finally got a chance to call Scott back yesterday. He was on the phone, but returned my call later in the afternoon. We discussed the IR issue.

As we've deduced, the IR out is NOT linked to the IR sensor. So there's no using the front panel sensor to 'passthrough' signals to the IR Output port. Can't happen.

What DOES happen, is what we also deduced.

Powered signals fed into the IR Input port are routed rightback out the IR Output port. It is a MONO minijack. This 'relays' the signal to another unit that has an IR input, OR, as GarcianC proved, an IR emitter. The power from the IR emitter originates from the device FEEDING the IR input on the Outlaw.

This is how the term 'passthrough' basically applies to the IR IN/OUT of the Outlaw.

To analogize, think of the IR IN/OUT ports as a 'revolving door' for IR signals on the back side of the unit. Signals can come in, instruct the unit, or leave and pass on to other units. But the Outlaw cannot add signals to the revolving door sequence.

So, to truely do an IR relay, you need a dedicated IR receiver, a connecting block of some sort, a power supply for said connecting block, and either an emitter or a direct mono minijack connection cable to get the signal from the connecting block to the device.

At this point, I had already ordered and received the Xantech block w/ power supply, and if I RMA it and go for a refund, I'm losing $19 in shipping as is. (I'd only be getting $52 back on the actual unit refund) I'll have to suck it up and throw another $60 or so at it and buy a dedicated IR receiver (probbaly a generic one for $35 actually) and complete the IR relay system autonomously from the Outlaw.

Hopefully the efforts of this thread will prevent any confusion for others hoping to understand the IR issues for the 970 and the Outlaw series.

Thanks again, Gonk and GarcianC.

E.

Development #2.

No sound on power up. Again.

It happened last night. The unit sat idle all day long, was played with enthusiasm the night before (Monday night). Around 7PM last night (Tuesday) I turned the NAD on to remove the prior night's CD. (Soundtrack to the Lion King, Disney Studios) I also powered on the 970, which went through it's power on welcome message, and flipped on the amp as well.

As the 970 was going through it's welcome message, the CD starting playing, before I then hit stop, and then eject. The prior input on the 970 was CD, set to Analog Bypass as always. I placed the dvd (Shrek, Dreamworks Inc.) into the player, and close the tray and pushed play. I switched sources to DVD, (Dolby Dig; Coax 1) using the front panel. (input, cursor downs)

Same results as before; the front panel buttons worked (menu, mute, etc) but the volume knob did not APPEAR to work. (but it does, as the volume display changes if you hit menu, and then menu again to return to the main display; the altered volume level then displays)

Controls from the Remote were similar; menu, cursor, mute type functions all worked. Volume commands did nothing. (and actually did nothing; hitting menu twice to 'refresh' the main display still showed the same unchanged volume)

Changing inputs with the remote did not bring out any audio. I was able to switch to DVD, all Videos, etc. and no sound. I confirmed that the Samsung Satellite tuner was off. (keep in mind this thing sends some sort of audio stream through the fiber channel even when 'off' though. I don't know if that's true about the digital coax line)

I then powered off the unit with the remote, and then back on after 3 seconds, and all was normal in the world.

:rolleyes:

For those wondering, I remember reading that 'as long as you started your source after the 970 was waiting for it, it tended to work OK'. I've been deliberately powering on the DVD player before the 970 just to test this theory.

There are plenty of instances where the unit has been on, then turned off for a few minutes, of few hours, and then turned back on without any problem.

There have even been instances where it sat an entire day and powered up fine for that first cold cold start.

I was going to continue testing, by switching and always powering on the 970 first and not powering on the T533 until the welcome message on the 970 was gone, but I decided against it because of development three....

Development #3...

(blip... bloop... blink)

Whoa. What was that?

After watching Shrek, I flipped over to Video 2, (Dig Coax 2) and turned the Samsung Satellite tuner on.

Flipped from channel to channel, and all was fine until...

Moments before NCIS came on there was a jumble of tv commercials. Sort of what you seen when a local station has 'filler' ads at the national level, but a local ad trumps it, so the stream changes within half a second from the advertisement that ran, then the very tail end of the 'filler' that ran underneath the local ad appears suddenly. (along with the audio stream that came with it)

Well, in this bizzare case, the audio streams must have been of widely varying format.

Combined with the new format incoming from the NCIS broadcast (DD 5.1) The 970 officially wigged out.

My guess is that it literally got so confused it outright shut down. Yes, shut down. Not protection mode or anything, just powered off. I thought I had sat on the remote and sent a power off signal or something. (until I looked down and saw the remote on the coffee table by my feet)

After experiencing this, I made the decision not to wait any longer, and grabbed the serial cable I had bought, intent on flashing the unit right then and there, instead of after the super bowl had passed. (I didn't want to chance bricking the unit before a big party)

So, just for clarity's sake, next I'll describe the strangeness of my firmware flashing process...

Ok. So, I said to heck with it.

I had planned on waiting to firmware flash the unit a bit, at least waiting until next week after the super bowl. I wanted to see how many wierd performance issues really popped up.

But when the unit spontaneously shut down when it got confused by an audio stream, I decided not to wait another moment.

I grabbed my serial cable, and downloaded the file.

For those wondering, the file linked by Scott's post at the top of the 970 forum is still considered a beta. It replaces a previous beta that had been in development throughout the past year from what I understand. That beta, was created after the formal release which is posted on the main support page.

My firmware revision number ( Display with Menu + Mute on the front panel) before the upgrade was:

mcp-ot10700602091312

Keep in mind the leading values are not important; as the 1070 and 970 share firmware as we discussed earlier in this thread. The only key difference between the files is the welcome message during startup.

I powered off the 970 from the master power switch on the back.

I plugged the serial cable into the 970, and also into the PC. (IBM Thinkpad, one serial port, COM 1)

I booted the PC, and turned the master power switch for the 970 on.

I then used the bent paper clip to press the reset switch on the back of the 970. I held it in for about 1.5 seconds.

I then ran the Outlaw.exe software. Directed it to the COM port, and the appropriate Hex file.

The flashing process began without any incident. I heard a tiny 'bleeip' from the 970 when the PC connected to it, right before it began erasing the firmware.

It erased, wrote, and verified the firmware in about 3-4 minutes. This is MUCH shorter than the instructions claimed 10 - 15 minutes. So much so that I was worried something didn't go right.

Nonetheless, I figured I'd give it a whirl, and just reflash if necessary.

I unplugged the serial port cable, and grabbed the paperclip to press the reset switch on the back of the unit again. I held it in again for about 1.5 seconds.

I tried to power the unit on with the front panel.

Nothing. I thought, 'that's strange'.

I then powered the master switch off, waited 2 seconds, then back on. Front panel power now worked.

All my old values were still stored in the EEPROM apparently. It defaulted to a power on volume of -50dB.

I pressed menu and mute, and hit '1' on the remote to reset to all defaults.

I then made note of the new firmware revision number during Menu + Mute:

mcp-ot10700701121419

I proceeded to configure the rest of the menus, turning off auto-polling on all inputs again, setting defaults, configuring the speakers, etc. (I won't bore you with those details)

I watched another movie (Cars, Pixar/Disney) and all seemed to perform well.

I will post any further developments if they occur...

E.

In case you are wondering, we are reading.
I am curious about this latest firmware fix, since I have high hopes that these bugs will go away and no longer tarnish this great product line. Keep posting.

Elmosaurus, I hope you don't mind me piggybacking on your thread...

I upgraded the firmware in my 970 yesterday as well. So far none of the three issues I saw have recurred.

(No Audio, non-responsive front panel, distorted sound from a DD 5.1 DVD)

I've been using multiple sources and formats:

Oppo 981 DVD playing DD 5.1 and DD EX material.
SD and HD programming with both 2 channel and Dolby Digital audio over my HD TiVo.

If you don't mind I'll post here again after I've logged more significant hours and report on my experience.

Cheers,

Post away, my friend. I'm sure readers will be smart enough to distinguish your posts from mine, so performance history should not get too confusing.


I do need to add something tonight though. The new firmware did NOT help with the cold start/no audio/unresponsive volume knob issue.

It did it again when I powered up tonight. I won't get into too many details as the configuration is exactly the same as usual. The CD I removed from the unit was Enya, Watermark, Reprise Recording. I made sure to stop it BEFORE playback began. It wasn't playing an audio stream, so it shouldn't have been a factor.... ("shouldn't")

From now on, I'm going to power the 970 on first, then the T533, and see if the situation reccurs.

Also, I may have found a programming error in the new firmware. (may have been in the old also, I only noticed it now though)

On playback of DD EX material, or DTS ES material, my 5.1 setup (speakers set to NONE for the surround back channels) locks on to the EX or ES signal, but does not drop back down to standard DD or DTS.

This means I am potentially losing sixth channel information during playback; that information is supposed to be matrixed back into the two surround channels.

I will contact Scott tomorrow morning and attempt to have him recreate this; it's very repeatable, despite whatever source DVD I use. (Finding Nemo, Cars, Pixar/Disney for DD-EX; Gladiator, Dreamworks Video for DTS-ES)

If any of you fancy a go at it, turn your surround back channels off in the menu by designating their speaker size as NONE, then playback any EX or ES encoded material, and tell me if the processor locks on, or downsteps automatically to DD/DTS respectively. Please also post which version of the firmware you have so that we know if older versions were matrixing properly.


E.

This is not a bug, I don't believe. Flagged Dolby EX soundtracks must be decoded in Dolby EX (Dolby requires it), but in cases where no rear surrounds are present the receiver's EX mode knows not to steer any data there. Similarly, DTS ES Discrete tracks such as Gladiator actually contain a discrete rear surround channel, so ES must be used with 5.1 systems to decode the channel and mix it into the side surrounds.

Honestly, I don't know. That's why I said, 'may'. :p

All the other processors I've owned in the past (integrated A/V and the like) would step back down to DD or DTS when it recognized an EX or ES flag, since I never set up the 6th and 7th channels. (I understand that it's actually only one channel though)

I'll just call Scott later today and see what his take on it is.

[eta:

I wanted to add, from what you've posted, it seems that you're implying that the rear surround channel in DD is just an extension of the surround channels? So far as I've always read, even according to the Dolby website, it is an extra channel of audio (meaning distinct) just the same as DTS's 6th channel being discrete.

I also don't quite get what you mean when you say, "...so ES must be used with 5.1 systems to decode the channel and mix it into the side surrounds." Can you elaborate/reword this?

:end edit]

E.

My suspicion is that the 970 is not throwing anything away, but Scott can confirm that for certain.

That is my hope; that it's just redirecting the 6th channel information into the surrounds equally. It's just a little wierd since other units I've had step down to the non 6.1 standard when the rear surrounds are configured to not exist. (both a Yamaha and an NAD processor exhibited this behavior)

I just thought up a quick test; I'm going to hook an interconnect to the pre out of the surround left, and slide the other end into an extra amp channel I have (Adcom GFA-5300) and a spare speaker.

Without changing any menu settings (surround back speakers still set to NONE) I'm going to leave the main NAD T955 amp off, and see if any data comes piping through when I play EX or ES encoded material. =) If the Adcom plays, it's NOT redirecting.... :p

(yeah, I'm such a geek. I know.)

E.

Dolby Digital EX is actually a descendent of Pro Logic - there is a mono rear surround signal specifically mixed for the track, but it is not a discrete channel in the Dolby Digital bitstream (there wasn't room in the AC-3 spec for a sixth full-range channel). Instead, it is matrixed into the side surround channels in very much the same manner as Pro Logic encoded stereo signals from the days of VHS carried center and surround signals mixed into the left and right channels.

Just to toss in a bit of history, there were many early Dolby EX discs (Phantom Menace comes to mind, but there were numerous others) released without any mention of EX on the packaging or the disc. They also contained no "flag" identifying them as EX tracks, but if the user manually enabled EX decoding they'd get the extra channel. Discs eventually began using the EX flag, and Dolby also began modifying the spec for that flag and how it was supposed to force a receiver or processor to behave. Today, if the disc is mastered with the EX flag engaged (and it is still not always done - the latest Star Wars DVD's still don't include the flag on their EX-encoded tracks), the receiver is supposed to force Dolby EX decoding no matter what. It is intended to override everything else, including user preference (many of us prefer to use Pro Logic IIx to get separate left and right rear surround signals using IIx's superior matrix decoding scheme) and quantity of speakers in the system.
I wrote that last night thinking one thing, and need to dig back into DTS to be sure that I had it right. First, we have to remember that "true" DTS ES (sometimes called "DTS ES Discrete") contains a sixth full-range audio channel in the digital bitstream, unlike the way that Dolby EX works. Thinking about it after a little more rest (although not as much as I'd have liked), there exists some mechanism in the DTS standard to allow for retrieval of the sixth discrete channel when using systems that only off DTS decoding (such as receivers made prior to the introduction of the DTS ES extension). My suspicion in this case, though, is that the 970 is using the ES decoding to retrieve that data directly and them allowing the DSP engine to steer that data to the side surrounds.

There was once also a "DTS ES Matrix" mode offered on many receivers and processors that produced a mono surround back signal from regular DTS 5.1 sources (basically, a direct parallel of Dolby EX used with regular Dolby 5.1 sources). A couple years ago, DTS changed the way they identify that mode - it always used the NEO:6 matrix decoding scheme even though it was called "ES Matrix," but now they are referring to it as "DTS+NEO:6" and ES is only used with Discrete ES tracks. I don't know that all manufacturers have done this, but Outlaw's current offerings handle it this way.

Interesting!

That all makes lots of sense.

I think that's what is really the bugger; you come to understand what a standard is supposed to be, and what it's doing and is capable of, and then they go and relabel it or change it slightly so it behaves differently! LOL.

I guess it's just a little unsettling until one KNOWS for SURE what the unit is doing; to see it show EX or ES on the display, when you KNOW you've told it that you don't have those speakers wired or designated. One instantly wonders, 'is the audio really being processed properly for those channels?' (ie, intentionally not 'pulled out' of the surrounds in EX, or intentionally matrixed back into the surrounds in ES, if I'm understanding what you're saying)

I also just realized, my test may not be wholy authoritative, because if the processor shuts down output to the pre outs for the surround back (since I designated them as NONE) it's still feasible that it's not processing the stream properly. (opposite of described above, in that it, 'intentionally pulls out the extra audio from the surrounds in EX mode' or 'intentionally does not matrix the 6th channel back into the surrounds in ES mode') I.E., the data could just be 'lost'. I guess I'd need a test disc with discrete test tones on ONLY those channels to see where the audio all 'went'.

E.

Things took a turn for the worse tonight.

After the game (thankfully) when my guests were dispersing, I was flipping through channels with the one remaining guest to see what else was on.

At some point, the audio dropped out. (I was on Video 2, Dig Coax input 2, Satellite tuner)

The unit seemed to go into that 'locked' mode. No volume commands from the remote would be accepted. I could change sources, but no audio came back on. I did not have time to try more things, like scrolling through the audio modes.

The front panel power switch was unresponsive.

I had to shut the power down from the rear master switch.

For this to happen after the latest firmware update, I'm a little disappointed...

Will update when I notice anything else. (I'd write if, but I'm not very optimistic anymore... )

E.

As mentioned in this post , I'd recommend e-mailing your findings to swtest@outlawaudio.com so Outlaw can include it in their firmware testing.

I powered it on again this morning, just to test it real quick before I left for work.

I deliberately powered the Sat Tuner on first, so that there was an audio stream being sent to the 970 during it's power up.

As predicted, it went through the welcome message, but came to no audio, and a seemingly locked volume. Changing inputs did nothing, and I could not scroll through audio modes via the remote. (it ignored those commands)

I had to power it off (used the remote) and then power it back on.

And, as usual, all was well after that... =\

:rolleyes:

There's about 14 days left in my 30 day window...

(the fact that I'm conscious of that and actually counting them down does not bode well for this unit...)

As for emailing, Gonk. I'd be happy to. But I want to have something substantial to email them. A rather nondescript email of, 'I powered it on and there was no audio' isn't going to help much. Having been a tech before, I know they need criteria to narrow the search. Something more like, 'when some audio stream is being fed to the unit, while cold, the unit tends to get confused during power up.' Or something like that. (I'm close to that point, so we'll see what they have to say after I do a little troubleshooting tonight. Over the earlier part of the weekend, I always turned the 970 on FIRST, waited until the welcome message was gone before powering on any other devices, and I had zero issues...


E.

So, it's with a sad heart I post that I've decided and requested a refund RMA and label.

After the Sunday night incident with my first true dropped audio, and the recurring 'seemingly locked no audio' on power up almost every evening, my fiancee is quietly exhibiting a looming exasperation, since she knows that the refund/return window is drawing to a close.

Given the exceptional audio quality of this design, I'd love to hang on to this piece, but with the latest firmware update not seeming to help my situations, I can't argue with the logic she brought forth that for the price, it should work each and every time it gets turned on.

I can't afford to just hang on to it and wait until the next firmware like a few of you guys have, especially since I need my complete system to function all the time, every time. (lest it become very hard for me to justify to her the high expense of these toys of mine)

I'd upgrade to a 990, but that's not possible because it A) will not fit into my rack, and B) breaks my promised budget for this 'forced' upgrade. (my A/V receiver was unrepairable and instead of going with a replacement integrated, I went to seperates, via an even trade up to the new NAD T955, while the 970 was to be the 'new addition' pre/pro portion of it)

What makes all of this worse is that for $300-400 bucks, my fiancee knows that I can get a unit from a B&M store that will function until the cows come home. (arguably by me at a much lower acoustic quality, but with a wedding to pay for later this year, it's a hard sell... LOL :p )

I'm happy to help with troubleshooting by answering any questions about what configuration I had, what I experienced (for as long as I can recall the events) and the like...

For those following along, Outlaw support has been top notch the entire time. Steve and Scott have demonstrated to me that they are indeed committed to getting this resolved. I only wish I could stick around for the ride. If I were single, I could justify leaving the investment in the 970 alone and just 'deal' with the quirks. But with the other half needing the overly complex (to her) system to respond predictably so she can use it, I can't comfortably hold onto the unit at this point when the funds would be better served elsewhere in our lives. In 8-12 months, I will revisit this issue, and see if another new firmware has been released, making the unit rock solid. If so, I'd be happy to plunk down the cash and try again at that point.

I can say that without reservation, only because I have NOT seen/heard the kind of acoustic performance that comes out of this unit at anywhere near this price in any other comparitive piece for under $3,000-4,000! (and for pre/pro's in that bracket, it's niggling hairs as to which is truly sonically better) This is not to say most of the units I've auditioned were dramatically 'worse', just that they had ever so slightly different characters/sonic footprints, and a variance of included features. And higher price points. With emphasis on the last part.

In the mean time, I will probably go cruise the used racks at my local dealers and see what trade-ins I can find for a few hundred bucks that will at least let me have a functioning system. (or settle and buy a moderately priced Denon or something with pre outs and just drive my T955 that way)

Happy Trails,

E.