My post about computing the price of the 978 using the Marantz as a standard was meant tounge-in-cheek ― mostly. To the degree it's inaccurate, it is so because my sampling was small, i.e., one. If you plotted weight vs price for, say, 10 comparable units, you could make some fairly valid assumptions.

Because product pricing usually has a large arbitrary component, weight comparisons are more valid in predicting product quality rather predicting price. To the degree this is true, it's because materials cost money, and no builder is going to spend money just to add weight.

I fail to see any "danger" in this exercise. I was comparing comparable products: Two, rather contemporary high-end pre-amps. So there is no need to talk of receivers, legacy junk, or animal protein, or boat anchors you may have lying around. After comparing the specs, which are similar enough (not withstanding additional features of the Marantz) that I know I couldn't tell the difference in sound, an inquiring mind might wonder just what does contribute to the weight difference. And yes, power supply might be a good answer, at least for some of the weight.

The point is, I can't think of any disadvantages to a heavier unit (shipping charges excepted.) So for comparably sized units with comparable features, I at least want a reasonable explanation for the weight differences, say in excess of 10 percent.

Is it a coincidence that the Marantz doesn't gold plate any of the rear connectors? That's not specked. Is it important? I'd say at least as much so as using oxygen free copper for speaker connects. Did they also cut some corners inside which resulted in a weight reduction? Fair and balanced, You decide.

Entertaining thread fork

I agree that at times, an electronics heft may have some bearing on quality. But while the 990 was a little light, it had great sound quality. But I am suprised that the Marantz 7005 preamp is only a tad heavier than the 990. My Onkyo PR-SC886 is prettty heavy considering its only a pre.

If the 978 comes out at $1500, it is going to have to be a pretty awesome machine for me to pay that much.

Well, since the 978 won't have a large torroidal transformer, gold plated connections or O2 Free copper I guess we might as well stop anticipating such a poor piece of equipment. It will likely be outweighed by many much cheaper designs. Maybe Outlaw will go the B.A.S.S cheaters route and plunk down a nice piece of lead to make it much heavier and then it can be considered high enough quality to compete with other "legacy junk". A nice brushed lead faceplate would make it so much better. How much does a good pre-pro go for per pound these days.

^^^

I was thinking yesterday, that to appease the "higher weight must be better quality" crowd, they could put a sheet of lead in the bottom of it ... and call it "proprietary technologically advanced EMI/RFI shielding".



All this talk about weight for a pre/pro is just silly IMO. And I would be the first person to say that I **do** think weight is an important determinant for an amplifier or a turntable, for example. But that would also just be my opinion too.

Coming soon to a high-end installer near you...

The new Lexicon premium receiver line. It'll be an Outlaw 978 installed in a slightly larger box with a brushed aluminum face plate and a 5mm lead lining on the bottom. It will retail for $5500.

I kid...I kid!!!

Wasn't going to post This Link but it seems oddly relevent.

The comments at the bottom are just as funny...

Yeah, I believe Oppo has some experience in this area.

EEman excellent link!!! Absolutely agree with everythi.g in the post.

This is actually wrong though:



Just ask anyone who's tried to use a cheap HDMI cable on a long run. I mean, Monoprice is fine. I'm talkin' "white van" cable, for context.