The issue with the displays was a clear defect (part that wasn't within spec, basically) that they fixed. These other quirks are different from that. None of us know just what the design decisions were behind some of these issues. The source knob could have had the detents eliminated, but that might have been less comfortable because it would have turned more easily (thus making it easier to skip past a desired input). The volume knob's response to the remote might be the way it is because an alternative that was slower might have also relied on a different part (different motor) or additional part (separate speed control) that wasn't as transparent sonically. Or none of those could be true.

....what Gonk said, as usual.

Having been one of the those "complaining" in an earlier thread, the question of whether these QC issues (to use your term) bother me, is easy to answer.

No. Certainly, not enough to even momentarily consider taking advantage of the 30 day money back return policy. Nor were they bad enough for my wife (a confirmed technophobe) to complain about it after I sat down with her and showed her how to operate it.

Thanks guys...
your replies make me feel batter about all this.

I haven't heard the 720BEE, but before owning an RR2150 I had an NAD 320BEE integrated. Sonically, the Outlaw was clearly superior; the sound had a lot more "life" than the NAD, which sounded kind of sterile by comparison. I didn't find the source knob any problem at all. The volume knob, on the other hand, was something of an issue because I listen at low volumes, from across the room, and it was virtually impossible for me to adjust the volume properly with the remote - no problem with the knob, though. And if your CD player has variable output, it should be OK.

Ultimately, I ended up selling the RR2150 and upgrading to a higher end integrated. But if I were choosing between the NAD and the Outlaw, I'd choose the latter.

The NAD, I found, had a flaw of its own. The headphone jack is automatically "switched", so that when you plug in the phones, the speakers turn off. That seemed useful, until the day that the tip of my headphone plug didn't come out with the rest of it - and no one would fix this for a reasonable price. I assume that the 720BEE has the same design flaw. The Outlaw's headphone jack has its own volume control and is independent of the speaker amp - a very nice feature. Unfortunately, my new integrated doesn't have a headphone jack at all, but that's another story...

Bill

This is an interesting point - for those needing greater fine control of volume via the remote, reducing the output volume of the source (when possible) is one option. There's also a thread around here somewhere about folks adding devices between the pre-amp output and main input to attenuate the signal, achieving the same thing globally. I wouldn't do either unless there was a problem (and my 980H, the only source aside from the tuner that I use with the RR2150, has a variable output if I ever decide I need it), but it's something that folks have done successfully...

Just my 0.02 cents….

Interesting thought on 'designed on purpose' or 'that was how the volume knob was designed'.

I see this as more of picking a part that meets a specific nominal requirement for a specific price point.

What we are seeing from the end user is the variation or tolerance in the part.

In the walls of Outlaw…..There is some noise from end users…..
Outlaw reviews the variability as acceptable or not – asking questions like…. what is the cost of the current bill of material if we change the part? Is the part in spec? Or, did we purchased the part in quantity and would have to pay fees for returns.

Then, there is the replacement part: test, order, time of delivery, cost, does it affect contracts agreements, etc......

In the end: it is one thing to force a supplier to fix an incoming part problem - via the display issue.
It is entirely different to modify a part that may have a loose technical/physical spec.

well in my case, I can't control the vol/output level of my source, and I don't think anyone, not just me, has to pay for extra equipment to remedy a fault on something that you paid the full price for. I think the best thing is to try to live with it.
It has to do with the principle, not whether one can do it or not.

I must say I'm a bit disappointed. From all I heard at av123 and other places I had high (perhaps too high) expectations of the Outlaw CS...
In order get a sense of how bad this vol and source knob problem is I called Outlaw and talked to a gentleman from CS, and not only did he get edgy and short once I mentioned the problem, his answer to it was basically "I don't know what to tell you/that's the way it is", and never accepted it as a fault.

I really do want to like this receiver, and still haven't given up on it, so I hope if/when I order it, the SQ would make up for it.

Just when I thought these were the only 2 things I have to deal with, I just saw another post where the tuner doesn't work as it's described in the manual (something with resets not working the way they should)...

Hello Washburn,

I'm sorry to hear of this experience. Even the best CS folks occasionally have an off day. Give me a shout today (866-OUTLAWS) and I'd be happy to talk you through any of your concerns and make sure you're making the right decision for you.

Best,

Scott

Hello Washburn,
Just another 0.02-the source knob is NOT an issue for me. As others have posted, selecting the source w/ remote makes it a non issue. If you use the knob, just turn it SLOWLY. As for the volume via remote, it is a bit touchy, but I've learned to use very quick taps (holding the remote w/ one hand, and tapping with the other). It never crossed my mind to return it because of either of these two "issues". I do believe that you will be impressed w/ the SQ of the Retro. Good Luck!

Porta