990 vs Anthem AVM 30

Just curious if anyone has compared the two directly.

Also, are there any concerns noted over the low output impedance and voltage on the 990 ?

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?p=5747855&&#post5747855

Regarding this thread on avsforum, why are there so many people with so much anger/vitriol? Especially this Robert George...does he think he's the king o' audio/video? Give me a break...he's never even heard a 990. But of course, since he's omnipotent, why would he need to. He can sit on Mt. Olympus and pass judgment on us mortals.

This is one reason I've been enjoying reading here, people actually know the equipment, and don't have an agenda except they are excited and want to help. Imagine that!

Oh, wait, I guess I got emotional. Sorry...

I participate on both forums, but enjoy this and some of the other smaller ones more. People are more friendly and aren't as snooty. There are some people with A LOT of dough invested in their systems at AVS and I guess they have to stomp people once in a while to justify why they spent 2 to 10 times as much on a piece with performance on par or only slightly better (to their ears) than something at a fraction of the cost.

Sure information will be biased towards Outlaw here. After all it is the Outlaw forum. I take everything people say with a grain of salt anyhow and let my ears do the real judging.

Well, if you think about it....If you spent $2k more on a processor that sounds only slightly better than the Outlaw, you'd be pretty upset too and would stomp on the cheaper guy.

Outlaw has created an impressive name for themselves and the Anthems/Parasounds/Arcams should be worried.

Yeah, I guess so, but come on, let your ears do the walking! And not let your wallet do the talking!!

Just peeves me when people act like they are all-knowing, yet haven't bothered to even audition the gear.

Kinda want the chance to tell one of 'em where to put their gear. But then, wouldn't I be like them?

So, guess I will continue to be in the know quietly.

Welcome to the world. Same reason a person with a Bentley chuckles at a person with an Audi or a BMW....

Stereo equipment is one of those areas where you often do NOT get what you pay for. Hype and marketing play far more important of a role than you think for the typical "well off" person who just wants "the best stuff" and knows little about what makes things "the best" other than what they read in the awful audio rags.

If you start hyping gear that costs too little, the "big boys" stop advertising in your rag, you stop getting freebie equipment, etc....

It's for that reason that ATI probably decided to create Outlaw in the first place. "If it's too cheap, it must not be good." *shrug*

Ritz,
I was not aware that ATI "Created" Outlaw. Where did you hear this?

syvlvr,
I've seen a lot of Outlaw bashing over at AVS myself but if you hang around and watch the threads, It's always a very vocal few that are doing the bashing.
I've always been a fan(and still am an owner)of Outlaw Audio.
I've learned to ignore those elite few who think they know everything and seek out the soft spoken few who do know something. It's kind of like speakers, If you listen long enough you'll find out the truth for yourself and after all it's only you that matters in the end.

Just my .02
Lasher

Ritz:

What evidence is there that ATI "Created" Outlaw? The Outlaws clearly state that their first, and most subsequent, amps come from ATI, but Outlaw and ATI would appear to clearly be two separate entities. If ATI owned OUtlaw, why would Outlaw be in Mass, not in California? Look at the ATI processors -- they are nothing near the Outlaws.

As to AVS, there is always someone there to pitch manure at any brand, including OUtlaw (and AV123 and others) and in many cases, yes, by people who have never heard, let alone owned Outlaw (or the brand they are bashing's) products.

That's life in the internet "value priced" product world!

uh, topic please ?

ATI did not create Outlaw and in fact doesn't even have any ownership stake that I'm aware of - Outlaw was created by a group of individuals with a lot of industry experience (the most obvious being company president Peter Tribeman), and because they chose to operate without a factory of their own they turned to ATI to manufacture multichannel amps for them back when they came out with the Model 750. They've since used a number of different partners to provide the manufacturing support (Eastech, Etronics, and I think at least one other).

Topic, topic... Oh, yeah. The AVM20/30 is a platform that has seen a long and successful history, and I doubt Anthem will part with the platform any time soon even though they have scaled up a bit with the Statement D1 and D2. It is a very respectable piece of gear that some reports have indicated still has a slight sonic edge on the 990, but the 990 gets real close for a lot less cash. Considering the fact that neither platform is in a position to fully support the HDMI audio outputs that Blu-ray and HD-DVD will be bringing a lot of attention to (whether or not the formats have much market success). True, the AVM30 may be factory-upgradeable to HDMI 1.1 at some point in the not-too-distant future, but my understanding is that it'll cost you about as much as a Model 970 to get the upgrade once it's available. I don't think either choice is bad, but for a big savings and very close performance I think the 990 is a pretty appealing choice.

Um...Outlaw and ATI share a few key management personnel and share manufacturing facilities. It's hard to say what the ownership structure is exactly since neither Outlaw or ATI is saying. I'm not sure how Gonk can say definitively how things are or are not structured unless he has some insider knowledge. My statement is merely a guess.

As for the original topic, I can't see spending the extra money for the Anthem gear when the 990 sounds so good for so much less $$$. The output impedence of the 990 seems to be a very good match for the Outlaw/ATI amps.

Cheers,

I've talked to a couple of Outlaw's personnel over the years and haven't heard many specific names - just Peter Tribeman and Scott Jackson - so I can't speak to the personnel connection, but without any sort of official information I find it to be an odd statement unless you have some insider knowledge. On the other hand, Outlaw doesn't have manufacturing facilities to share with anyone.

Hah. 8-)

Again, my comment is clearly marked as a guess. 8-) By sharing, I mean that ATI does the producing, and Outlaw does the sharing. 8-)

And now back to our regularly scheduled theater programming....

BTW, in case y'all think I'm new to the online/Outlaw thing, been there for awhile. My comments were more of a "utopian", why can't people get over themselves thread. However, consider myself in a continuing education mode. Thanx for all you've already given!

Back to topic...been looking hard at the AVM-20/30 vs the 990...was really leaning toward the Anthems for awhile, but since I've been happy with the 950 and most of the people who actually have a 990 or who have auditioned them seem pleased in comparison, just about ready to pull the trigger on the 990/7500 combo. While the Outlaw gear is a bit less expensive than the Anthem used, I am more concerned with warranty and quality.

Also I encouraged a friend to get a 990 and he's pleased. My only complaint is it's rather tall, but that's only true of all the better processors.

Has anyone consider the NAD T163? It's $1,500. I'm also thinking about getting a 990, upgrading from my Outlaw 950. I've been comparing these two since they're closer in price.

Have had NAD in the past. Good stuff, but while this might be good, doesn't seem to have a lot of the 990's stuff, like dvi and such. But if you like it, must be right for you. Also seems to be from '04, so I'd wonder about a new unit?

Maybe someone should contact Robert George and find out why he is selling his AVM30. http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?homeproc&1144728512

Prolly getting a 990 quietly...not. D1 is my guess.

I just sent this email to Robert's for sale listing:

=====================================
Finally upgrading to an Outlaw 990?
You won't be disappointed!
Enjoy,

1lonster
=====================================
:-) :-0 :-0

Lonster, that's funny! Let us know what his response is.

Heh.

I will, if he does.

Pete,
I am an NAD fan, and considered the NAD T163 before I got a 990. I think the T163 was missing some feature that I considered a deal-breaker...I think it was video conversion. And the balanced outputs of the 990 are nice too (I just use the subwoofer balanced out for a long run to my subwoofer).

Hey thanks! I don't use most of the features. I run video direct to TV.

Music is 85% for me.

Yet here you are stomping on 3 companies, and I'm willing to bet you've never seriously compared the AVM, Parasound, or P-9 (or P-8) to the 990.

To me its foolish ownership pride taken to an extreme level.

I own Arcam equipment, Martin Logan speakers, and an Outlaw sub. I even have some outlaw cables.

I have actually taken part in a blind test with people with a 990, P-8 (now replaced by the new P9), AVM30, and a NAD T163.

A Bel Canto amp was used (don't know why) and some really nice PSB speakers.

We had 9 people. All 9 people had a tough time discerning the AVM and the 990, as they almost tied, with the AVM just edging it by one person's opinion. This happened with both stereo music playback and both Dolby and DTS movie playback.

The NAD on the otherhand came in 2nd, and it wasn't by a whole lot, but it was more than "slightly," better, I'd say almost significantly. This was for music playback, and the NAD fell into the pack with movie playback.

So you could safely say that for Movie playback the NAD, Anthem, and Outlaw were pretty much dead even.

The Arcam on the otherhand won out without one person ever saying it wasn't the best on any part of the tests. The difference between the lot was significant. Movie playback sounded far more spatial. It was easily the biggest difference between two pieces I'd heard in years. Its why I bought an Arcam.

I would TOTALLY expect that from a Pre-Pro that costs nearly FIVE TIMES the Outlaw. I put some thought into the Outlaw and NAD, but the final decision came down to the fact that once I'd heard what the Arcam was capable of, I didn't want anything less. Call it 25% better, but 5 times the cost... and I judged the difference worth it. I just moved my budget around by getting said outlaw sub and some other changes.

We also did a Receiver test, and Arcam came in 1st and 2nd with their 2 receivers. Again without any form of competition except in the form of the Denon 3805 which competed well with the 250, but the 300 by Arcam won every test.

We did have an Outlaw, but it was the original Outlaw receiver, and it came in dead last, and I didn't think anything of it, and neither did anyone else. However out Outlaw guy insisted we see how it stood up.

What amuses me is that there are people who actually think that Outlaw is trying to get into the Arcam market. I seriously doubt that you could even find an Outlaw employee who would even say they are competition.

Outlaw is a very smart alternative to the NAD, Anthem, Pioneer, and Harmon Kardons of the world. However when I read an Outlaw owner pumping his chest trying to compare his product to the true high end (which I don't think Anthem is, Anthem Statement possibly) it disturbs me. It makes the Outlaw faithful look silly, when you have a lot to stand on.

Outlaw does a great job of competing with products that cost 50% more than their own price point and they are very good at showing what pieces are severely over priced (the AVM30 for instance). However there are still companies out there who do a standup job in the high end. Outlaw wasn't made to compete with them. Perhaps make it tougher to justify spending so much more, but not to compete.

Well...you had me sold b/c its all believable till you mentioned the 3805 which I owned and consider a pile a crap for 2ch.It could NOT compete with a lowly Rotel 1056 or HK 630 for 2ch,and that's no BS it's 100% for sure.The 990 is superior to the hk/pioneer etc.. top offerings in my experience(based on 2ch)not day and night but still better.The 990 is no giant killer but it can keep the giants on their toes and is still WELL worth its price.Again,I agree with some of your comments,hey... nobody agrees on everything.

Um...I didn't see any "stomping" going on. Just an opinion that the 990 can give some established, quite more expensive gear a good run for the money.

I don't know what to say about your issues with the 3805, which frequently gets reviewed as being very musical. All I can figure is that there might not have been good synergy with your speakers, or speaker placement... I don't really know. I found it to be better than most receivers at stereo playback. It couldn't touch the Arcam equipment, but we didn't have a lot of top notch receivers. If memory serves we had a Yamaha, Onkyo, both Arcam units, Denon, Pioneer Elite, and the Outlaw.

Perhaps the Rotel and the Harmon Kardon would have rated better than the 3805. I don't know. I can only say it was better than a Yamaha, Onkyo, Pioneer Elite, and the original Outlaw receiver.

The test we did was in a controlled environment and the setting was far better than most people would have in their homes. It wasn't an anechoic chamber, but it was an extremely well designed room for acoustics.

The test was blind, so our findings weren't tainted by manufacturer ties.

I believe I also mentioned we didn't have the new Outlaw Receiver in that test. The new Receiver might have shown the 3805 up. I'm sure it had to be better than the Outlaw unit we had. Which correct me if I'm wrong was one of the first things Outlaw ever made.

The 990 was extremely impressive to me. For the money the 990 and the NAD T163 can't be beat. If stereo playback is important, the NAD is the choice. If DVI switching is important (and it is to a lot of people I'm sure), then the 990 is the choice. Both cost about the same on the street. $1,100 for the Outlaw, and its easy to get the T163 for around $1,200.

There is no doubt in my mind that anyone with a mid-budget home theater being designed should seriously consider the Outlaw. However, if you're designing a high end system and have a well sized budget, there are Pre-Pros out there that blow the Outlaw away in sound quality, features, and upgradability. I can think of Arcam, NAD's Master series, Theta Digital, Bel Canto and Meridian just to name a few. The 25% better that these units might be is justifiable for many of those that can afford it.

Of course there are giant priced Pre-Pros out there that the 990 can stand up to. All that proves is that those units are vastly over-priced.

Right, except that it was a silly statement and based on his hopes and pride as an owner.

Just as he pointed out how foolish it is to bash an Outlaw unit based solely on pride, its just as foolish to compare the Outlaw to the High End world. Outlaw didn't make the 990 to compete with Arcam or Parasound. The Anthem unit may have very well been on their radar. The Anthem is a slightly better unit. To me, spending $2,000 more is far more than slightly stupid all things considered.

However the Arcam unit is a far better sounding unit in stereo and movie playback. I've seen the specs on the Parasound unit as well. Just knowing the DACs and circuitry involved the Parasound should have an edge as well.

I'm positive the Outlaw people would be quick to point out that the high end equipment has better parts that are far too expensive for the market that Outlaw is after. They just can't compete, and aren't meant to. I'm not going to compare the performance engine of a Ferrari to that of a Honda Civic engine. Two totally different ballparks, but I'm sure that consumer reports and most buyers still consider the Civic a class leader.

Personally I'd love to see what Outlaw could do with the same DACs, processing power, power units, circuitry, etc. If they had a $2,500 pre-pro that competed with the Arcams, Parasounds, Bel Cantos, Meridians, Krell, Theta Digitals, etc. of the world I'd definately take a good hard listen.

Fact is they don't. So when Outlaw owners say that they're competition to the big high end companies they look foolish.

Why can't they just be damn proud that they are better for the money than the $1,000 to $2,000 market that their Pre-Pro is in? Mind you I accept the fact that there are units that cost $3,000 that are hard to justify when the Outlaw is considered. However there are steals in the same ballpark of $3,000 that have an exceptional sound.

Bottomline: The internet has forums where people say stupid things. However, there are Outlaw owners who say just as stupid of comments. They are baiting the jerks out there.

Actually I was pretty impressed that the discussion stayed civil. Pretty good for a 'net forum. Even the Anthem guy (forgeet his name) was only mildly snobbish and had the good taste to bow out soon.

As for what is and isn't high end .... I tend to assume most outlandish claims are untrue. Further, companies and people who make such claims taint their other, less incredible claims by association. Things like:

• Power wires that make a processor or power amp sound "better" with no instrumental proof
• Premium wire in general, but to a lesser degree
• Descriptions of "better" sound that are like listening to a wine critic.
• Unfalsifiable claims in general

I also believe that, to a degree, a person generally gets what they pay for. Folks like "Mr Anthem" get irate, but really, look at the products! The Anthem may sound similar, but the plethora of non-sonic features and options catapult it in a different class than the 990, and in this price class being able to smoothly integrate into a system is worth substantial $$$, since by this time it's assumed the sonics are at least passable.

Nice 1,000th post, charlie (and a good post regardless of the number).

Good discussion, but I can't believe no one has brought up the Sherwood P-965. The 990 twin, but now with SNAP room EQ, it looks to fill a nitch very few other processors fill. When you have a couple of peaks in your bass, as I do, this can be a very important feature.

I also want to log in on the 990 is not as good as the Arcam debate. I have a question I hope some one can answer. Does the 990 have discrete 192 kHz 24-bit DAC’s for all channels, or is this done via a single chip?

I guess I always assumed there was individual DAC's for each channel, but while reading a review recently on the Arcam AVP-700 I found it uses a single chip for all eight channels for D/A and A/D conversion.

http://www.ultimateavmag.com/surroundsoundpreampprocessors/1205arcam/

Is this normal, or are they cutting corners with the AVP-700?

Also, it was mentioned the 990 was not designed to compete with the Arcam line, so was the AVP-700 designed to compete with the 990, P-965, AVM30, etc? List price of just over two grand, and it has balanced outputs, HDMI switching. Seems like something has to give. If this model also sounds much better than the 990 then it looks like Arcam has hit a home run.

Anyone heard both that can comment?

According to the Outlaw web site, the 990 has discrete stereo DACs from Analog Devices:

http://www.analog.com/en/prod/0%2C2877%2CAD1852%2C00.html

Of course, it is more than the part itself that determines the sound of the product, but the AD parts in the 990 are a very good choice.

I don't think the new AVP-700 was made to compete with Outlaw, etc. I think it was made for the Arcam crowd that wanted a separate version of their high end receiver. Its supposed to be a hell of a deal, but I haven't had the opportunity to demo it.

The review you point to fails to mention that the AV8 has been replaced by the AV9. Which is supposedly a big thing over at Arcam. The AV8 won best processor awards from The Perfect Vision, Home Cinema, Hi-Fi Choice, TechTV, Hi-Fi News, Widescreen Review, and some others I'm sure that aren't listed in my 1 year old product guide.

They aren't cutting corners either that is normal. Its just one reason the AV9 will sound so much better than a 990 they just aren't built fairly enough to compare.

This is true. I've always had issues with power cords making my system sound better. I've heard the difference I think. However I'm not convinced its really there.

Premium Cables... well I can tell the difference between brands which means they do something to "taint," the signal. I suppose the taint that suits your tastes is the one to go with.

As for critics who use wine tasting like comparisons I concur. I understand "harsh," but someone had to explain "bright," to me when I first read about it. I want a description that lets me know why its really better. "Rounded," sound? WTF, I need a reviewers glossary.

I hope I was able to say why we all thought the Arcam AV8 was better than the rest. The image was deeper wider and more defined. Meaning that if someone dropped something and it broke on the floor you could sense the exact spot where it broke. Master & Commander you could hear the wood creak in direct spots. It was far more defined than any of us (except the lucky Arcam owner) had heard before. The sound image was far more three dimensional. Hopefully that description makes sense.

No magic, just the best sound we'd heard from movies we KNEW.

To me it was a painful double edged sword. It proved that at least some high end really do something better to make them worth more money (to some people anyway).

Unfortunately it also made me want an Arcam. I think my pocketbook would have been much happier if I'd never witnessed that and just had to make the 990 or AVM30 decision. Which to me would have been easy and saved me $2,000. Instead I spent $4,000 more.

Again when you look at the specs and see the innerds you understand why one is better than the other. There is no magic going on, just a lot more processing power, more DACs, etc.

Good discussion here. Really appreciate all the input.
I am in the same boat, I was set on the Outlaw 990/7700 combo until I came across the Arcam AVP700/P1000 combo. Yes, I'll be spending more money with the Arcam's but the real test of course would be to have these 2 combos in an A/B test. My dillema is do I get the cheaper with the more powerful amp Outlaw combo or the more expensive Arcam combo with the higher end sound? Since I was going to use these with very innefficient Magnepan speakers (3.6Rs but also looking into the 1.6QRs, CC3 and MC1s) and I've heard the wonderful Arcam sound, I am thinking Arcam is sort of the Outlaw in the high end world, where their performance is high end and the price is mid-end. Of course this may well apply to their FMJ series but possibly not with the Divas. So my thoughts for now are to go with the Arcams since they just seem to be a level above the Outlaws in terms of sound quality and also their resale value later on will be much better.

What do you think?

Well, I'll be looking at the AVP-700 for sure, and Rotel is seductive with those sexy digital amps ....

The arcam stuff is nice. Expensive...but nice. If you're hung up on the arcam sound, my suggestion would be to pick up the AVP700, but skip their amp. The P1000 is nothing special and a bit expensive for what you get. You could make much better use of those funds with a more value priced amp since you'll need the extra juice to drive 3.6's.

I've got two friends with rather expensive Tact systems and both of them have remarked (independently) that if they were on a tighter budget they'd have gotten an Arcam pre and some other amp. One is driving MMG's and the other is driving Thiel 7.2's.

Cheers,

Thanks Ritz! What if I just stuck with the 1.6's? Will the P1000 be sufficient to drive those? I am thinking this is not a very high end system anyway, so the 3.6s can be bypassed for now which will save me more than $2500. I see you're driving your 1.6's with the 755. I was planning to biamp the front L+R speakers to improve the sound of my 2 channel music system and only run 5.1 for HT. Does anyone here think 7.1 is the way to go instead with such a setup?

Sorry, I think I am getting out of line here posting non-Outlaw products.

I initially set my 1.6's up biamped with the 755 before I had my theater system totally set up. I didn't notice even a hint of difference in sound.

The 1.6 and 3.6 are equally piggy in terms of efficiency. So switching to the 1.6 in the hopes of saving some $$$ on an amp is really not going to help. That said, I didn't really hear any advantage in the 3.6 vs the 1.6 either. Audio equipment is a very personal choice and we've all got different aspects weighed in at different levels. I personally don't find the P1000 to be a very good bang for the buck. But I've also not spent any real time with one. If you're going to "overpay" for something like that, it would be in your best interests to sit down and listen to one for a while and make sure you're happy with the bang/buck tradeoff. I have no doubt that it will be "sufficient," but I guess I'm just a bit puzzled at spending premium bucks for sufficiency when you can spend less and get more/better amp for your $$$.

Good luck with whatever you decide.

Cheers,


Hope that helped.

Cheers,

.

Wayne's got a very good point. There's an extra piece to that puzzle that reinforces the value: Outlaw has proven a commitment to maintaining their performance/value product line. That means the 990/7700 combo is still a significant value today, but in a few years you can factor in the ability to ugprade the 990 to a next-generation successor (selling your 990 for a respectable share of the original price, if history is any indication). The 7700 (or 7500 or 7125 or whatever amp you might have) can stick around for many years. True, that's been a selling point of separates for years, but the cost of admission used to be restrictively high.

Anyone heard both that can comment? [/qb][/QUOTE]I don't think the new AVP-700 was made to compete with Outlaw, etc. I think it was made for the Arcam crowd that wanted a separate version of their high end receiver. Its supposed to be a hell of a deal, but I haven't had the opportunity to demo it.

The review you point to fails to mention that the AV8 has been replaced by the AV9. Which is supposedly a big thing over at Arcam. The AV8 won best processor awards from The Perfect Vision, Home Cinema, Hi-Fi Choice, TechTV, Hi-Fi News, Widescreen Review, and some others I'm sure that aren't listed in my 1 year old product guide.

They aren't cutting corners either that is normal. Its just one reason the AV9 will sound so much better than a 990 they just aren't built fairly enough to compare. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Not sure what your trying to say here. If the AVP-700 was not designed to compete with the 990, then who is their target? Are you saying the AVP-700 is that much better or worse?

Also, you still didn't address the single DAC issue. Appears to me the better processors, including the Arcam AV8, have individual DAC's for each channel. The AVP-700 does not, but it looks as though the 990 does. I'm not sure if it has anything to do with performance and this is why I was asking. But, seeing how the higher end processors seem to have individual DAC's, I think it probably does.

You said the link I provided fails to point out the AVR-8 has been replaced by the AVR-9? So what? I'm not trying to compare the 990 to either of these, I've been talking about the AVP-700. After all, it only double the price of the 990. :0)

If we have to use the AVP-8 or 9 to compare to the 990 there really is no comparison. If the 990 is even mentioned in the same breath, then the 990 is a clear winner.

Your final statement has me really confused. You mention all the awards the AVP-8 has won, but once again this is not the processor I was talking about. Then you reply to my questions about cutting corners, but once again, I was talking about the 700. I know the AVP-8 didn't cut corners, but look at what it sells for.

And, exactly why aren't they "built fairly enough to compare"?

ninoe99, my Maggie 1.6's aren't biampable - the crossover network would have to be removed or bypassed with shunts from the external binding posts to the tweeter and woofer "voice coils". That would require some pretty delicate internal surgery and of course void the warranty. Then of course you'd need to buy an external line-level crossover. Yet you say you biamped yours, Ritz. How? And are the results worth the trouble and expense?

When I biwired mine (not using exotic wire) I did notice some apparent improvement in cleanness and detail. It might be interesting to try to compare one biwired with the other monowired (?), using mono material (if I can find any) and the balance control and see whether I was just BSing myself.

I suspect that Ritz is passively bi-amping - retaining the internal crossovers and simply using separate amps to feed each set of binding posts. The significant surgery you describe is required for active bi-amping (setting up external crossovers upstream of the amps). Most folks who have experience with both approaches seem to suggest that active bi-amping offers the greatest benefits, whereas passive bi-amping yields similar results to employing a single larger amp.

Thanks, gonk - I never tried passive biamping, just biwiring. It must require Y connectors from the preamp to feed the two amps in each channel. Makes me wonder what my results would be with my nOrh monoblocks connected to the 1.6 woofers and my old Dyna Stereo 70 to the tweeters - assuming it still works, and both amps have about the same gain, and the 990 accepts their combined parallel impedances.

I just discovered this thread... very interesting. I've owned both the Anthem AVM30 and Arcam AVP700. I've also recommended Outlaw gear without hesitation (a good friend got the 950 combo based entirely on my recomendation). Here are my thoughts on some of the topics:

- Comparing the Outlaw 990 to the Arcam AV8 is not fair. They are in completely different leagues. The AVP700 is a much better comparison.

- From my experience, the "Arcam sound" is very real. My experience with the AVP700 is much the same as tsd's AV8. The imaging and spaciousness is unmatched by anything I've ever heard, though admittedly I haven't heard the $5k+ pre/pros. The 2 channel music performance still makes me shake my head. This thing lived up to the hype, which bring me to...

- It's not only about price. I bought a more-expensive Anthem AVM30 and was never quite happy with the sound quality. It was only marginally better than my Marantz SR8200 receiver at more than double the price. When I heard all the hype about the new Arcam AVP700, I brought one home to audition. Well, needless to say, I sold the Anthem at a considerable loss (and explanation to the wife) after only six months of ownership. The Arcam was about a grand cheaper than the Anthem.

- With respect to the single chip DAC solution: I'm not an engineer, so I can't give any scientific explanation. I can only tell you that I compared the Marantz SR8200 as a pre-pro (which is dual differential - 2 DACs per channel in stereo), Anthem AVM30 (one DAC per channel) and AVP700 (all channels on one DAC chip). The detail and sound stage was pretty much the inverse: Arcam was the best by far, Anthem second, and Marantz was close to Anthem but still third. Is it because the Wolfson's are better? I don't know. I even saw another post that theorized that a single chip may actually help with its shorter signal paths.

- For what it's worth, I've also heard some reports that the P1000 amp is not as special as the Arcam receivers and pre/pros. I kept my Anthem PVA7 (which I like quite a bit). If I didn't already have the Anthem amp, I'd probably have gone the used route.

- I haven't heard the Outlaw 990, but from what I've heard, it sounds like a great value. For music-first enthusiasts, I'll always recommend Arcam, though I've heard great things about Audio Refinement and NAD. For those who are looking for a good balance (or mostly HT) at a good price, I still wouldn't hesitate recommend the 990 - at least for an audition.

Chris

.

.

I don't know about the AVM30, I've only heard it a few times, but I have compared the Anthem D1, to the 990. The D1, was cleary, and I mean clearly a step above the 990 in sound quality. I would love to do a blind test. The D1 brings things to the next level, but look at the price.. you have to ask yourself is it worth the price? If I had the cash, yes.. until you have heard the D1, Lex MC12, or Meridian G68, I've heard them all you don't know what you are missing.. once again, however, the price. Unless you have very good speakers, it's a waste of money IMHO, hence, 90% of the world would be pleased with the 990.

Hi Chris, everyone,
I really appreciate your input on this. When you mentioned "if you are a music first...", then that reasoning fits well with my bias towards the Arcam. I think I will have my dealer set up the Arcam's with the Magnepans this week for a good listen on CDs and movies I am familiar with. I only wished you gave the P1000 a more positive feeback as well so I wouldn't have to look for a more decent 7ch amp now. I would still favor a decent audiophile-quality amp in case I am not happy with the P1000 that would be in the same price range ($2300). Thanks a lot again!

Hi Ritz, your inputs do make a lot of sense. I guess I will go with the 1.6 for these systems. Choosing the P1000 is sort of a way of keeping everything in the system Arcam, AVP 700 + P1000 + CD73 (CD player for 2ch music listening)...although I am really tempted to go with a beefy 2ch amp (Used Bryston 4B SST, Belles, etc.) then get the 3.6Rs plus use my old 5 Marantz MA 500 mono blocks to power the center and surround speakers for 7.1. I can compromise the HT part of my system and get a top notch 2ch stereo OR get an all Arcam system as stated above with decent HT (since all channels will have a common 7ch amp) and music performance. Decisions, decisions...

Gonk and Psyprof, ahhh, you have just answered this question for me...now what I heard also is that the only way you're really bi-amping is when you do active bi-amping (meaning to bypass the speakers x-over) to reap it's true benefits (deeper bass, enhanced detail, etc.)...I'd love to hear the Magnepan's done both ways to judge for myself if it is worth it, or just do bi-wiring instead.

Actually, pysprof is right. I said "bi-amp" when I really meant "bi-wired". My bad.

Cheers,

C

Thanks for the compliment, ninoe99, but the Maggie 1.6QR is simply not biampable without ripping out all the circuitry in it and voiding the warranty. Its big brother the 3.6QR can be biamped, but it's >$2500 more. Nice if you have the $$ and space, but I have neither. There are a lot of DIY upgrades for the 1.6QR at http://www.integracoustics.com/MUG/MUG/ and they all involve upgrading the crossover components or rebuiilding the whole crossover network, and/or putting external braces on the speakers. (I'd be interested in hearing one of these upgraded speakers - anybody know of any in southern California?) But none of the changes involve making the 1.6QR biampable.

ninoe99,

I can't give the P1000 positive or negative feedback, since I've never used it. Also, I don't think anyone is saying that it isn't a quality amp... just a bit pricy compared to the alternatives. I am of the opinion that amp technology doesn't change all that much, and if you look out on the used market, you can get something just as good for half the price or less. In my case, I got an Anthem floor model with full warranty for less than some of the used prices I've seen. That's another way to go. In the end, you can't go wrong either way... lots of people are quite happy with the P1000.

Chris

Since the 1.6's came up in this thread I'll throw my two cents in. I just sold mine not long ago and had them in my system for a couple of years. I drove them with my Outlaw Model-755 and it worked great. I see you guys are discussing allot of other amps, but I have to tell you the 755 is one killer amp, and I've owned a bunch.

Over the years I've come to realize that amplifers sound more alike then just about any other component IMO. I've heard drastic differences in pre-amps, CDP's, DVDP's, but most well built amps were fairly similar.

As someone mentioned the Maggies are a true 4 Ohm speaker, but it's a consistant 4 Ohms, so they really don't present a problem to a good amp. However, they are fairly inefficient and I think this is why a amp with allot of current works best with these speakers. Especially to pull the bass out. And yes, the 1.6's do have some bass capability contrary to popular belief. It's not all that extended, but what is there is articulate and beautiful. Never heard a stand up bass sound better then with the Maggies.

Best sound I've ever heard was a pair of 3.6's with all AR equipment (Acoustic Research).

Bryston would be an excellent match for the Maggies, no doubt in my mind, but I have to wonder if the differenc between this and the Outlaw would be noticable.

Duno.