From what I've read of the R-972 and from how Outlaw treated it, I still don't think it was a good demonstration of Trinnov implemented on consumer gear. Put simply, the R-972 appears to have been a flop that was plagued with bugs and concerns about whether Trinnov was really doing what it was meant to do. I suspect that the Model 998 will arrive when Outlaw and Trinnov both believe it is working as Trinnov intended.

I wonder if the R-876 will actually arrive next month. The R-972 was first announced at a CES one January for release that following September. That was almost two years before we heard the first whisper of the Model 997. The R-972 was delivered years behind schedule, with painful side effects for Outlaw as well as Sherwood. The R-965 that preceded it was victim of similar delays. There are a few posts online suggesting that the R-876 was actually cancelled back in April, too, and at present the Sherwood Newcastle site lists the R-972 and R-774 but no mention of any R-**6 models. That doesn't bode well.

Here's hopping that the Outlaws can produce a couple of home runs, Don't need any more strike outs. If the 998 comes true, then we will have something to crow about. Keeping fingers crossed.

Good point. No need to construct a grand conspiracy when it can be explained by simple incompetence.



At the risk of sounding like a broken record ....

Some of those other "factors" are only factors if the small companies continue to engage in the feature war with the big boys. Outlaw, Emotiva, etc. should give up that fight and give up those consumers who care about such things. IMO, small companies like Outlaw need a different value proposition that - yes - will likely not woo a lot of mainstream consumers but will net them some niche customers.

Personally, I agree entirely with you, and have been sounding like a broken record about it for some time now. I still prefer to have a number of these features kept separate from the processor entirely. You can't separate it all, though. Video processing, for example, is rapidly becoming a "basic feature" of receivers and processors. Separate video processing options are less widely used now. Fortunately, there are more reasonably packaged chipset options available that can be integrated with video switching (something that became a "basic feature" a while back). And room correction really belongs in the processor, since it is best applied in the digital domain.

Agree that room correction belongs in the pre/pro. As does all the Dolby/DTS format decoding.

I never understood the desire for video processing to be in the pre/pro though. I mean, I understand it as a nice to have feature, but don't understand why anyone would pick a pre/pro based on it's video processing quality when you've got video processing in your source (blu-ray/DVD players, cable box, etc.) and TV.

My TV and "cable box" are horrible at video processing. I can't wait for a pre/pre that has some solid video processing built in. Would I pick one pre/pro over another simply based on how well it does on that front? All other features being equal, of course I would. Chances are the 978 and any competitors to the 978 all do a better job at video processing than your TV and cable box too.

Quality primarily, although convenience is a factor as well.

Video processing in cable boxes is typically dreadful, and sometimes not even that good. Video processing in players varies greatly, and processing in TV's varies even more widely. Having a central component with really good processing means you can output a signal at the display's native resolution (eliminating or minimizing the need for additional processing in the display) and disable processing wherever possible or practical in source components. The Model 978, for example, will use an Anchor Bay video processing chip (probably either 2010 or 2015, I forget if we've heard a specific chipset or not). The OPPO Digital DV-983H and BDP-83 both use the ABT2010 (although early 983H units used a pair of chips to achieve the equivalent of this one-chip implementation) and were considered reference-quality sources in part because of the capabilities of that chipset (aided by OPPO's implementation of the ABT).

There are standalone video processors that offer similar abilities along with video switching. The DVDO Edge, for example, uses the ABT2010. It sells for $800, and it is one of the more affordable video processor options available. Partly because of the proliferation of video processing in surround receivers and processors (and some higher-quality sources and displays), the market for standalone video processors has stayed small.

Aside from a few exotic surround processors, nobody is taking the risk of developing surround processors without video switching anymore. Market pressure is too great to fight against, particularly since we've got to feed our HDMI video signals through the processor. Once video switching is included, it is now necessary for that switching to include transcoding between input formats so that a single video output can be used for composite/s-video, component, and HDMI sources. Doing that requires some rudimentary form of video processing, especially when you're making the jump from analog to digital. (HDMI doesn't support 480i, thus requiring deinterlacing of 480i analog sources to the minimum HDMI resolution of 480p.) At that point, it starts to make sense to go ahead and do some reasonably capable video processing at the receiver or processor - after all, you've already included most of the features of a standalone video processor.

It's rare that I find myself disagreeing with you, but this time I'll have to, at least partially. HDMI fully supports digitally-sourced 480i, as exploited by many of OPPO's recent disc players. With most, if not all, of broadcast SDTV also now in digital format (certainly in the U.S., anyway) the ability to process analog-based 480i has become somewhat moot.

I can guarantee you that the 978 does not do a better job at video processing than my TV. Not because my TV is so great, but because the 978 doesn't exist. And that's kinda the point. All these features sound great in the abstract. But if they combine to create a platform that only the big manufacturers can hope to successfully implement in a timely fashion, then our demands for these features will squeeze the Outlaws and others like them out of the pre/pro market. And I do not want that.

That said, I doubt video processing is the sticking point. But if it is, I say cut it.

+1 here! Pre/pros from the beginning have been almost exclusively for AUDIO pre-amping/processing. With modern DVD players - OPPO, for instance, video processing is best left to them.