Perhaps I wasn't clear enough about my Technicolor dream although I did mention in terms of sound quality (SQ). The Oppo BDP-95 obviously has a better video processor in the Marvell Qdeo over the 978's Anchor Bay processor (similar to the Oppo BDP-83). That aspect doesn't bother me as I have an Oppo BDP-83 and I'll eventually upgrade to a BDP-93 or higher when the need arises and I intend on bypassing the 978's video processing in favor of the Oppo's. When you're playing Blu-ray material, video processing becomes much less of a factor as it's a format that essentially plays the same on all BD players, unlike DVD with all its video processing requirements (de-interlacing, DNR, upconverting to 1080P, etc.).

As for the DACs, Outlaw hasn't explicitly mentioned which model number from the ESS Sabre DAC family they're using. I hope it's the ES9018 from ESS' Reference line (the Oppo BDP-95 uses two of those - one for stereo and a second for multi-channel), otherwise as you said, I'll be disappointed.



Good point. One other thing one must consider is that the Oppos have a relatively high cost part, which is the Mediatek universal optical disc transport that you won't have in the 978. The BDP-95 also uses a high quality linear power supply with a nice toroid transformer made by Rotel, those are quite a bit more expensive than a switching power supply like the one that the 978 uses. I wish Outlaw had specified a liner power supply, at least for the analog audio section. Of course the 978 has 7 more balanced outputs along with a multitude more of connectors and a bigger case.

Actually both of the Oppo's have the same Marvell Qdeo video processor which I have read was picked because it does a better job of processing streamed video. I am also not clear that the Outlaw is using the same Anchor Bay processor (of which there are/were several) as the 83. As you pointed out the issue so much isn't Blu-Ray as it is all of the other video sources (e.g. cable, satellite, streaming) where it appears that the Outlaw will be relatively lacking.



My desire was always to have the best DACs and video processing possible in the prepro so that corners could be cut elsewhere.

My desire also. I wish we could have somehow replace the BD-95 in the 978 but that doesn't look like it is meant to be. I'm thinking that such a move would drive the price up more than Outlaw would want. Using a toroid would also drive the price up a bit. Outlaw needs to come out with an affordable unit so some compromises will have to be met.

S.Sharkey wrote:
My experience with my early 950 was ZERO bugs and no problems until last year.

jam: yes, WE are North America - I have friends in Canada and Mexico - some day WE will take back our manufacturing (but that's another topic

I find myself on the opposite side of this view. I would prefer my heavy processing done at the source, in this case the OPPO-95 (which seems like it will do a better job in all accounts). This pretty much takes the burden away from the 978 and allows it to focus on SQ and switching duties and future proofs it from future changes in DAC and video chip technology. There is certainly no point in having high end chips in every component. You could go the route of a cheap source feeding the 978 but I belive the theory of "junk in-junk out" might apply here and why feed the 978 junk? Any upgrades to an OPPO-95 type product would likely still be less expensive and another pre-pro.

I don't understand your desire to pair a BDP-95 with an Outlaw pre-pro, other than as a cheaper alternative to something like a Parasound P-7. With a device "designed from the ground up with components optimized for enhanced analog audio performance" the Outlaw's room correction and other audio and video processing capabilities are essentially moot (except for cable or satellite TV).

I agree with AusTexRocker's theory - I don't want a receiver or a pre/pro to have highest end video processing. Put those chips in the OPPO or other brand player and connect it directly to the display (TV or projector). Best video and best audio chipsets in a receiver or pre/pro serve to make them most expensive. In my opinion, the main function of the pre/pro in the case of the 978 is:
#1: audio SQ - put the best audio chipset in the 978
#2: signal management - switching amongst various front end components with no signal degradation
#2: room correction (if that's high on your list)

If you have a DVD player that contains the very best video AND audio chipsets, then you're buying a pre/pro for preamping signals from components other than your OPPO, switching between components and what else? - room correction? Seems expensive for just those functions.

YMMV

This discussion highlights why the 990 is still an awesome device. Used with a great machine like the Oppo makes it very relevant in todays market. Makes you wonder why the zoutlaws just didn't update it sooner instead of a complete redesign.

You are right that for me, the matching to a 978 is not ideal. My preference would be a device more like the Parasound P7. I am holding on to perhaps a futile wish that one of those new items Scott teased us with is something more in line with a traditional multi-channel preamp doing just the functions that Hank and I describe. It would likely be the last preamp I would ever need and as tech changes, a new source device will handle that. However, as you pointed out, the 978 may cost less than the P7 and certainly does so much more. Even if I would never use many of those functions, that keeps my interest alive for now.

Although I never owned a 990, XenonMan nailed it. With just a few updated that would be a killer.

Throw me in on the source doing the best decoding and the preamp performing signal control and room correction. If you should get an Oppo BD-95 it would be quite difficult to process or decode better sound. One question is that what is the future of Bluray in order to spend $1000 on a player.