The Infamous Volume Control

I'm a perspective buyer. I've read through all of the posts in this forum regarding the 2150's volume control, and I don't feel completely comfortable with what I've learned so far.

For me, the decision is between the 2150 and the NAD C720BEE. I've seen and listened to the NAD in person, so I know what to expect there. (I owned the original 3020 in days of yore.)

The slippery input selector knob, I can deal with since I will rarely depart from the CD setting.

However, I use the volume control a lot, and mostly via remote. I think it will get old fast tapping the UP and DOWN buttons again and again trying to get the right low- to middle-level setting. Frankly, I don't buy Outlaw's explanation for the mechanical play in the volume control being due to it not being recessed. Lots of amps and receivers have motor-driven pots and I've never seen one with play. Maybe they just need to explain that better -- in mechanical terms.

For me, the pluses for the 2150 over the NAD include:
- Bass management (I already own an LFM-2)
- Phono section
- More power ... maybe
- Metal face plate

...but the volume control is a sticky point.

Lastly, I'm a little concerned that the advertised SN ratio is quite a bit high than what was actually measured by John Atkinson in Stereophile.

I agree with you about the play in the volume control, I tried various brands(at least 5) with motor driven volume controls and none were like this. Maybe we're missing some kind of cosmic explanation or something ...... but I still don't get why is has play in it either. I can live with it because I adjust mostly by hand, but if I relied on the remote ...... it may bug me .... but really ...... I don't adjust the volume all that frequently. Everyone's different though ..... one's passion is another's poison. Since you like to adjust it alot, it may be aproblem, but it may not. Unfortunately, it really has to be experienced to know how it will be for you. I'd recommend calling Outlaw with your concerns, be precise and persistent in your questions.

I'd prefer a linear volume control on the RR2150, these give easy, precise adjustments. For that matter, I'd prefer a adjustment knob for the tuner also(keep the digital display), push button tuning is not exactly retro, and I've never liked it. I thought it was stupid when it was introduced and frankly, it still is!

I don't know about the SN ratio, but I don't use the phono. Everything else is very quiet. Powerwise ..... other than the one person on this forum, it's not an issue. It plays loud enough for me, and clean.

Comparing it with the NAD, you'll have to do that. I owned a C372 and found a distinct difference between the Outlaw and NAD sound. The NAD to me is emphasized more toward the low end, at the expense of the high end. It sounded as if there was a veil over the music, dampening the resolution of the music. If NAD ever put a headphone jack on their CD players, it would be easily apparent there's something missing from the tuning of the preamp section..... at least to me. My modest Sony CD player showed the difference easliy. Overall I found the NAD experience not to my liking, but that's me. Many people love the NAD sound ..... again, one passion is another's rotten egg:)

The Outlaw is not quite as punchy as the NAD, but overall it is well balanced, no over or under emphasis anywhere. The sound of it was my number one factor in keeping it, and it is the best I've tried so far in this price range.


Good luck with whatever you decide.... and welcome to the forum

Volume control with the remote can be a little annoying as it increases/decreases per press a little more than I would like. Years ago I lost the remote to my previous receiver so I guess I just got used to using the volume control knob, which on the 2150 I don't have an issue with.

I'm not very technical, yet at least, when it comes to crunching receiver statistics but I do know when something sounds good. The 2150, to me anyway, sounds amazing and is noticeably better than the Pioneer VSX9700S I was using for years.

The bad thing about the 2150 I have noticed is that I can no longer listen to music over my computer speakers without thinking how terrible the sound is. I have never heard any NAD products so I really don't have an opinion on that. Bottom line is that I really enjoy the sound and the only problems I have encountered have been placed in the annoyance category. Outlaw does have a 30 return policy I believe, maybe it would be worth your time to get both and compare. I would certainly be interested in hearing what you find out.

I may order. What's holding me back is that although an annoying volume control would be a serious issue for me, it seems like a frivolous reason to return something, leaving Outlaw holding the bag for an "open box" item.

At any rate, I doubt that this issue will get "fixed." The party line from Outlaw seems to be that the volume control is supposed to be that way. For them to "fix" the issue would imply that it was broken in the first place, and then everyone would want theirs fixed, too.

Maybe I'm stating the obvious here, but Outlaw has a return policy for a reason. Returns are all apart of their business equation, and as consumers it's not our responsibility to concern ourselves with what they may do with a return,or what they think of us for doing so. They want you to be satisfied, but everyone has their own definition for it. I do not consider the volume control frivolous at all, it's something we use on a daily basis for years. The only way you'll know is to try it. Weigh the risk(cost of shipping) vs. the reward(a great sounding receiver) .

This all said however, Outlaw is far from alone in complaints about adjusting the volume with the remote. I've read complaints about most brands that use this type of control. That's why I like linear controls so much, but few stereo amps(Music Hall A25.2 is one) and receivers use them, mostly home theater ones.

If you're willing to retrain your brain though, the remote control can be fine to use. I played around with mine last night, and found I had to learn to use sharp taps for small adjustments, not the soft taps like when choosing the source or tuning the tuner. Sometimes you have to use a combo of soft and sharp taps .... like typing morse code. Sometimes you have to raise the volume a little to lower it where you want it, using various taps. It is quite usable.

I have had my 2150 up and running for about a week now and don't see a reason for all this fuss about the volume control; a very light tap on the remote yields a minimal change in the percieved volume level. Go ahead and order the 2150 and give it a try.

I've tested the remote volume with an SPL meter and here's what I've found. Pressing volume up or volume down once yields a change of about 2.5 dB.

I tested using 80 and 125Hz warble tones calibrated to 70 dB with my meter. A press on the volume up or down ALWAYS yielded the same approximate 2.5dB differential for me.

As Dave and others have mentioned, this is a minimally perceptible change.

Obviously, pressing the button for a longer period results in greater movement of the volume control and greater changes in volume, but this is dependent on how long you hold the button down.

I've had my 2150 for about three weeks in a bedroom system and I am extremely happy with its performance. I replaced an Audio Analogue Primo integrated amp which had a motorized volume control and the AA remote volume moved in much wider increments than the Outlaw. I have a much easier time getting the volume I want with the 2150's remote.

Regards,
Tony.

Cool test, palmer - thanks for the info!

I'm glad to hear that button presses on the remote yield volume changes in perceptably even increments.

I'm currently using a DENON DRA-395 which has an electronic (infinitely turnable) volume control. The resolution of volume changes with button presses of the remote with the DENON is 1db. But I suppose that's an advantage of a non-mechanical volume control over an "old school" potentiometer.

I'm not positive about this, but I think it may be that in order to implement an electronic volume control, the signal must first be digitized, and then converted back to analog on the way out. So if a pure analog system is what you want, you must employ a mechanical poteniometer. Maybe someone can confirm whether or not I am full of poop on this one.

I don't know if I read it on this forum or in a review, but someone was lameting the fact that the 2150 did not display its current volume level. That, it seems to me, would also be difficult and/or disruptive to the signal path in a pure analog system.

My understanding is that the position of the RR2150's volume knob indicates the volume level - can any 2150 owners confirm that?

I think the person/reviewer I mentioned was lamenting the lack of a "digital" display, as in something that displays "-30db," or whatever level the 2150 is currently playing.

There is a little blue pointer (I wish that it were illuminated) on the volume knob that indicates the level very well.

I tend to listen to mine at low levels, position less than 9:00. I find it touchy to set volume at those lower levels. Sometimes it takes several up/down stabs to get it where I want it. At positions at 9:00 and above, I have no problem setting the level where I want it. The other issue I have is, at the lowest levels I like to listen to, the left channel drops out!!

JimP , I know it's drag to send it in, but that's a definite warranty issue. It should not do that.

One final question about the "play" in the 2150's volume control, as I am not 100% clear about it:

Does the volume control have play in its longitudinal axis? In other words, can one pull and push the volume control in and out a couple of millimeters from the face plate of the receiver? Or, when turning the volume control to the left or right, does the knob move a couple of millimeters before a change in volume is effected?

If the former is true, then I accept Outlaw's explanation for the phenomenon.

The play is not in the longitudinal axis.

Assuming the play on my rr2150 is similar to that on others, then if one manually, turns the volume up; then, when turning the volume down manually, there is a bit of play (about 1 or 2mm), and vice versa. When using the remote to change the volume, there is no play; but the granularity of change may be larger than desired. Quick taps do work, and may yield the desired change. It is not that hard to get the hang of.

In my opinion, the standard volume change on the remote seems to be calibrated for the phono input. This works for me, as the phono stage of the rr2150 is a real treat.

I agree with cruise on the volume control.

Cruise I have a question for you, or anybody that may have an answer, if you don't mind..... Should the volume playback for a record be similar to that of a cd? When I play one of my records, the volume is much lower than when I play a cd. Not sure if it's supposed to be that way or if maybe it could be my record player, an old no frills Sansui I've had for over 20 years. Thanks.

CDs, historically (especially pop and rock) have been mastered at higher and higher levels since their inception. It's really a terrible problem that is progressively degrading the state of quality recorded sound.

Chalk it up to idiotic direction from management at the labels and/or a contingent of folks producing albums that have no business doing so, and wouldn't have had the means to do so 15 years ago, if it weren't for the accessibility of technology today.

Thanks for the reply. Looks like the old Sansui has some life left in her after all!

Jayz, You might also toggle the phono stage switch between "MM" (Moving Magnet) and "MC" (Moving Coil). This control has to do with the type of phono cartridge you are using. I believe my 2150 was set to MC from the factory and I didn't bother changing it. When I noticed the phono volume to be significantly lower that the CD, I played with it and found the MM setting provided significantly better sound and higher volume. I believe most consumer cartridges are MM.

JayZ,

The volume for LPs is significantly less than for CDs. With CDs, I usually have the volume at or below 9 o'clock...with LP's it is usually at about 11 o'clock.

As has been previously stated, some CDs seem to be mastered hotter than others.

Moving Coil (MC) cartridges are generally considered to be more sensitive and better sounding than moving magnet (mM) cartridges, but they have a lower output and require greater amplification.

Thanks for the help everybody. Will test later today and let everybody know the results.

I just received my 2150 Friday and don't think the volume control via the remote a problem at all. A light touch adjusts the volume level very little, my old Sony STR-DE725 was extremely touchy especially at low volume.

I'm having a similar issue with the sensitivity. My speakers get pretty loud by time I get to the 9 0'clock position. I haven't hooked up my phono yet to see if the volume control is better at higher "0'clocks".

As a plus, power is definitely not an issue! I'm running a 4-ohm load, bi-wired using A+B terminals. Almost no heat on the top of the unit.

OK, time for me to weigh in on this issue, well sort of, as I'm about to go down a rabbit trail. Please stay with me. I have had my RR-2150 for about 3 months now, so I believe I can be fair and objective. The knob is not as sensative as I would like via the remote & it also has some play, about 1/8 of an inch when turning the volume up via the knob. I tried the tapping technique, and it works, but it's annoying to do. My take is that Remote controls are not exactly what I would call retro anyway. In fact the digital tuner could go away as well. Give me a good old fashioned analog tuner, nice and tight! The remote is good for controling the unit in general, as I don't find the interface on the front panel very retro and often a pain. For example, the source selector knob clicks solidly twice and on occasion, seems to miss the next selection anyway. OK, here's the good news and the point - I didn't buy the RR-2150 for the interface or the remote. I bought it because of it's execellent sound quality. I'm no audiophile and I don't understand half of what people are talking about here in the saloon, but I am learning and comming up to speed! When I lay down a LP, the RR-2150 delivers what I want to hear and that is the bottom line. The little stuff is just that, little stuff. I'll also say that I love the style that the owners manual is written. Kudos to the technical writer(s)!!!

-geo

geo.

Yes, it's bottom line for me also..... it simply has excellent sound quality. Sure, (fill in the blank) could be changed ..... but unless it's going to make it sound even better , it's better to get used to it as it is, it makes life so much less stressful.

There is no pleasing everyone all the time. No matter what is built and presented for sale, there's always going to a percentage of people who are displeased.

The only perfection I know in anything , is it's imperfection.

As I have had my 2150 for several months now, some feed back on the volume control, and the unit in general. I have mine connected to my B&W 802 speakers, which are reasonably efficient. The sound has definitly improved over time. I was not impressed when I first set it up, that has changed with time. While it does not compare with the Linn's, Krell's, ARC's, Macintosh's of the world, it doesn't cost thousands of dollars either. I think sound wise, dollar for dollar, it is about impossible to beat the value of this unit. I don't have a record player, so no input on that. I did try hooking up my computer via USB and I was pleased with the sound from that. It was not 'CD' quality, but would pass muster. Listening to a CD or DVD movie the sound is great, I listen for hours. With CD/DVD I have no issues with the remote finding the volume level I want. The volume knob is usually between the 9 and 12 o'clock postions, depending on my mood. Getting the level much past the 12 o'clock position and I find the sound quality takes a nose dive. FM.. not so good, it picks up many more stations than the Denon DR-95 that it replaced. But it just doesn't sound right, it seems bright and harsh, I can only listen to most stations for a short time. I am not sure if it is the receiver or the broadcast station. The only station that I can listen to for any length of time is the local classical station. Which is leading me to believe it might be the stations. I am using the dipole antenna that came with the unit. When the weather warms up.. I will try hooking it up to a good external antenna and see if that improves the sound. The FM seems to have a higher input level and the volume knob is usually between the 7 and 8 o'clock postions and it is very difficult for me to get the volume where I want it, even with tiny taps on the remote. I usually end up adjusting the volume with the knob rather than the remote when listening to the radio. Time to upgrade CD collection so I don't need the radio.

Having enjoyed the RR2150 now since about November, I can honestly say that the volume control isn't really an issue. I still think the knob is "squirrelly," as I posted when I first received the unit, but adjusting to the play in it didn't require some huge learning curve. I guess I'm kinda with Garthr: It just is what it is.

My most recent findings, however, concern the USB port. Bought a cable about a week or so ago, and have been listening off and on from my computer ever since. By comparison, the sound quality seems more brittle for jazz records, not quite as inviting as the RR2150 paired with my Marantz CC-4300 CD changer. My guess is that this has something to do with the clarity of analog recordings, because the difference in audio quality I noted on a reissue (to be specific, Stan Getz and Bob Brookmeyer's …Recorded Fall 1961) was not there on something like OutKast's "So Fresh, So Clean" (which, for anyone who's interested, I've decided should be Illinois senator Barack Obama's new theme song). I peruse tracks from Myspace pages and videos on YouTube a fair amount, so I'm pretty pleased with the convenience of the USB.

I believe the "slop" in the volume control is from a gear reduction off the drive motor for the volume control. I wouldn't worry about it.

Try this....two quick taps to the volume control up or down has the effect of increasing or decreasing volume control in smaller increments. Basically....its like a new wife...you just have to get used to her. (oh boy, here it comes!)

I have the NAD C720BEE, Outlaw RR 2150 and Nakamichi RE 10 and I can say that the Outlaw is my least favorite. The volume control is very jumpy compared to the NAD or Nakamichi, the selector on the Outlaw is weird to say the least. It doesn't always land on the function you want. Power wise the NAD and Nakamichi are my picks, bass extension on both are much better than the Outlaw. The Outlaw does have a nice phono section but you can buy a NAD PP-2 and it's really better in my opinion. I would go for the NAD only because the Nakamichi is no longer made. That's something Nakamichi should bring back because it's a great receiver...

I've had the RR for a few months now, and I'm not a fan of the volume control/remote combination. I have no problems with "play" or "slop", but rather with the excessive speed from 7:00 to 9:00 o'clock (or a poor law on the control).

I'd be quite satisfied to just have the motor go half as fast. If any Outlaw techs monitoring this board - any possibility of modding the motor or gear assembly?

Dave

As I use my 2150 more, I find the volume control sensitivity is very dependent on which input I am listening to. For me, it is a non issue with USB, CD/DVD, VIDEO, etc. BUT for the TUNER modes... it is WAY too sensitive, I suspect if we could find a way to attenuate the TUNER output to the unit, we would all be much happier.
Another item I would like attenuated... the blue light on the power switch. I have my 2150 in the bedroom and that blue light when the unit is off is mighty annoying. Presently I have a strip of black tape over the power switch. There has to be a better way.
While I am on a roll of annoyances, any ideas why Outlaw put such a high resistance on the phono MC input??? Is there any way to change that? From what I gather it limits one to a med or high output cartridge if one goes the MC route.

Jim, as a temporary solution to the power LED problem, why not just turn the power strip (or regulator) that it is hooked up to off when you are done with it ? Besides not being irritated by the light, you'll also save a bit of electricity !

Doug