I was seriously considering getting the Outlaw 950 + 7100 package recently, then I got to thinking... what does this package offer me, for $1500 or so (b-stock), that a similarly priced (or even lower priced!) receiver wouldn't offer me, other than the fact that the amp and processor are seperate? I couldn't come up with any valid answers, so I'm turning to the Outlaw forum. Any thoughts on this? The Denon 3803 streets for around $1200, and is apparently available for under a grand. The Outlaw package is available for $1700, new $1500 b-stock. That's a big difference in price, and I can't see what features justify that. I'm open to suggestions, as I like the idea of moving to seperates, but I don't think that alone is worth $500+.

Currently I have very small, but quite efficient speakers: The old Energy Take5 satellites. I also have an SVS 20-39pci sub. My current HT room is my living room which is small/medium in footprint, but high in volume, due to the vaulted ceilings of my condo. Given that info, I am not an upgrade-aholic... My current receiver is a Yamaha rx-v995, which was my first digital receiver, bought back in January of '98 I think. My speakers are even older. So, this purchase/upgrade to something like the 3803 or the 950+7100, should last a long time, and be appropriate for a possible speaker upgrade in the next year or two. I doubt I would upgrade the speakers to anything other than medium to large-ish bookshelfs. But, that's down the road regardless. For now, I'm happy with my take5's and besides I may be moving w/in the next year.

Thanks for any and all advice, ideas, thoughts, oppinions and/or suggestions!



------------------
-Kieran

I'll toss out a few benefits of separates (950/7100 or other approaches) over receivers, even pretty nice receivers like the Denon.

- Better isolation of power amplification from signal switching/processing by putting them in separate boxes.
- Typically you can get better amps by buying a power amp than found in most receivers (example -- the Denon 3803's amps are rated to safely drive speakers down to a 6 ohm load, while a good amp like the 7100 can comfortably drive a 4 ohm load). See this thread for a little discussion on this topic.
- More flexible upgrade path. When the next big digital audio format comes along, you can keep your amplifier and upgrade the pre/pro only.

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

First, you've left out some disadvantage to separates - you'll also need seven interconnects (Outlaw sells nice ones in a package for about $100).

So why separates? The main benefit is picking and choosing features on the processor side, and picking and choosing power levels on the amp side. For example, the 950 is more flexible in setting crossover points than most receivers I've reviewed. Composite to S-video conversion is a huge convenience for VCR owners – a few receivers offer that feature, most don’t. [Note that Outlaw recommends against using this feature, though.] On the amp side, if you have power hungry 4 ohm beasts, you can match them with a monster amp. But if you have efficient, 8 ohm speaker loads, then honestly, the typical mid/high end receiver ought to have all the power you need unless your room is huge and/or you consistently listen at levels today that will ensure you can't hear anything tomorrow (due to hearing damage).

Audiophiles will claim sound quality is better with separates, and there may be something to that. However, in my experience, even when separates are an improvement, it's a very subtle thing. And when you stack up a 950/7100 combo vs. a higher end Denon or Yamaha, I’d be skeptical of “dramatic, clearly audible differences that my wife, my mother-in-law, and the dog all heard” without at least a properly calibrated A/B comparison (never mind double blind testing).

-avi

[This message has been edited by Avi (edited May 26, 2003).]

Woah... I didn't know that the 950 does a composite to s-vid conversion. That is nice.... in theory. I got all excited, then realized I don't own a vcr. And, if I were to buy one, I'd buy an s-vhs one anyway... they're so cheap these days.

I agree that seperates allow more flexibility, but realistically, even if I do upgrade my speakers, I doubt I'll be moving to 4-Ohm monsters... probably just better 8-Ohm speakers. So, the choice I would make would be an amp like the 7100, which to me, seems pretty similar to the amps found in some of the better receivers, although I've never demo'd the 7100, so that's just based on paper specs... which unless they're printed on Brawny paper towels, don't hold much water...

------------------
-Kieran

Just a thought:

If you get a receiver with pre-amp outputs; you can always add an amplifier at a later date. The 950 will certainly give more control over those outputs than a receiver, but the option is there.

Seperates give a better upgrade path than a one-box solution. I know you said you're not thinking about it now but this technology is certainly changing. In a few years, your top of the line receiver is going to be missing some key features. Then you'll be stuck with not only changing your processing but also having to change your amplification. That's a key part of your system. Amplifiers may look the same according to specs but all impart their own sound signature. Do you really want to have to change that part of your system everytime some other technology changes?

Of course, Outlaw gives you 30 days to try them out. You can always try it out.

How about: MUCH more room on the back panels for plugging/unplugging various wires and interconnects.........but on the other hand another box to put somewhere.
Mike

Ok,sooo it is safe to conclude that sonically the 950/7100 does NOT offer a detectable improvement over let's say the 1050. Only flexibility?

IMO, whenever you split out the power amps from the preamplification/processing portion of a receiver, you get an improvement in fidelity. Plus, the 950 is a "current" generation piece 'o gear, whereas the 1050 is basically a 3 or 4 year old design?

I would agree with Kevin on that one -- I recall a sonic improvement between the 1050 and the 950/750. Mrs. gonk agrees, too.

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

I own the 950/770 combo. For the past 20 years I owned receivers: Pioneer, Akai, Technics, and two Harman/Kardons. Why the switch to seperates? Speakers! I had a combo of 8 and 6 ohm speakers & my H/K ran hot driving all of them. I wanted to add a pair of 4 ohm speakers to the mix and was concerned about the receiver's amp. Not any more, the seperate amp can handle this load easily. So I no longer have to concern myself with any future speaker purchases. All I will have to do is upgrade my pre-amp and leave the amplifier alone. By the way, the 950 is fabulous, even my wife immediately notice the improvement - and that's saying a lot! Hope this helps.

I'll let you know soon. My 950B + 7100 will arrive tomorrow. They will replace a 1050. I was hoping to have a somewhat direct comparison but alas I sold the 1050 within hours of posting it. It was pick up and cash paid within 24 hrs. Wow!! And after a year of trouble free ownership I sold it for 80% of what I paid for it. Cost of ownership for 1 year $99.

So I've tripled my cost and now have $1498 invested. Will I be able to sell them for 80% of purchase price in a year ... well, I believe I have a better chance than with a receiver from BestBuy or Crutchfield. And oh, If I really like one or the other I can upgrade one piece at a time.

I've never owned a receiver from Denon, Onkyo or whatever so I decided to see if I should have bought one rather than the 950B + 7100. Since I haven't heard the separates or the receivers I guess it's fair too look at spec sheets to try to determine the proper path. I noticed a few things. First the Denon etc. receivers have loads of features ... Unbelievable ... and they are lightweight too ... wait, that doesn't seem right. Turns out the AVR 3803 at 36.4 lbs. weighs 0.1 lbs. more that the Outlaw 1050. Lets see it sports seven channels all at 110 watts per channel. That's bigger than the 7100!!! What does the 7100 weigh ...51 lbs. Seems strange. But of course you would have to add a 950B to make it a fair fight ... that's another 17.6 lbs. For a total of 68.6 lbs.

What the heck since we're not listening to anything lets see what the cost per pound is for these set-ups.

Denon AVR 5803 List $1199 weighs 36.4 lbs. = $32.94/lb at $900 it = $24.73/lb
Outlaw 950/710 List (no discount)$1798 Weighs 68.6 lbs. = $26.21/lb at $1498 = $21.84/lb.

What about the top of the line Denon the AVR 5803 it lists at $4300 & is 63.9 lbs. = $67.29/lb

The other strange thing I notice in my silent comparison was the length of the warranty. All three receivers, the Outlaw, and both Denon's, even the one listing at $4300, have two year warranties. The separates all have 5-year warranties. So what's up with the receivers? Do the manufactures know something the buying public doesn't. Oh yes that extended warranty offered by the superstore. Looks like it's a good idea.

Take a look at the Denon site under support. It says:
"Check back here in the near future for all support and service information, including:
Warranty and Service policies and procedures"

Yep, the warranty isn't published for any Denon product. I found the 2 years listed at one of Denon's authorized dealers sites.

Man, I can't wait to get my Outlaw 950B + 7100.


[This message has been edited by Xyzfla (edited May 13, 2003).]

Interesting. I'm curious what Xyzfla will conclude once his new equipment arrives. I guess I'm still somewhat skeptical that there would be a $1200 difference in sound? I would love to do a side-by-side comparison since I wouldn't expect anyone who purchased the 950/7100 to say that the 1050 was better sounding..........

Well the 950B + 7100 have arrived. I'm impressed with the build quality. After hearing so much about the 950 "look" I must say I'm pleasantly surprised. And the 7100, what can I say, it’s built like a tank. How does it sound? .... might be until the weekend before I know.
To "armstrg" point I do believe the new equipment will sound better than the 1050. But if it doesn't back it will go. I don't expect a $1,000 improvement in the sound. I'm also buying increased capability such as surround processing modes, multi-zone, ability to place the amp where I want it, a more powerful amp with 1 more channel, an improved upgrade path and more.
The 1050, while I think it is a great buy had some sonic characteristics I am hoping (expecting?) will be improved upon by going to separates.

To clarify my previous (and brief) reply, when I replaced a 1050 with a 950, I was already using the 1050 purely as a pre/pro -- the 750 and Parasound HCA-800II amps that I am using with the 950 were already in the system. The improvements I heard were only related to the pre-amp and processing roles. Going from a standalone 1050 to a 950 and amp (be it the 7100 or the 770 or a stack of 200's) would offer the additional benefit of separate amplification. Like Xyzfla, I got a 950 in part to gain new features (surround modes, bass management, more inputs, better remote, ...) and to improve the sound of the system. What the dollar value of that sonic improvement and those additional features is depends on the person, of course -- I think I got my money's worth, but some people would probably think I spent entirely too much money on it all.

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

Kieran, I am a relatively new 950/7100 owner who did upgrade from a Sony receiver to these separates. I thought I would be hearing improvements but my penny-pinching wife just said HA! When it arrived, I played one of her CD's and brought her down to listen-- she couldn't believe how much improved it was-- she heard things on the CD she never realized was there!!

In regards to Xyzfla's poundage comments, I was just reading the latest Home Theater mag. (June 2003) where Mark Fleischmann (the reviewer) commented in his review of the Harman/Kardon AVR 325 A/V Receiver "... If I could condense everything I know about receivers down to four words of advice, they would be these: Buy by the pound. A heavier black box is more likely to house a beefier power supply, and that suggests greater dynamic prowess, among other benefits."

Hope this helps, and remember-- you have 30 days to test this combo IN YOUR OWN HOME AND SEE IF IT WORKS FOR YOU. If it doesn't, send it bacK!!

about a year and a half ago, i decided to try an A/V receiver. the first receiver ever to be in my rack.

first, was the onk 797. a terrible piece of hardware, IMO. next, the onk 898, which, after the pro-logic adcom pre (a really terrible piece of hardware), sounded pretty good and had many 'features'. i used it as a preamp, as i have 260 watt mono blocks and 12 channels of pro-sound amps. (this is the first advantage of seperates...the amps are forever, if minimal care of them is exercised).

the onk sounded a bit thin to me so i got in line for a 950 and, in the meanwhile (a LONG meanwhile), off i went to compare (outlaw 1050, marantz, H/K, denon).

i also looked at the other pre-pro of that time, the rotel 1066, but i simply did not like the business model of a manufacturer that protects a dealer who tells you that you shouldn't buy the rotel.

much has been said about the triple priced pre-pros superior too (oops) to...er...that's not it...oh, yeah...two channel capabilities. that's not why i bought a pre-pro, so it matters not to me.

i think the 950 is a hall of fame multi-channel pre-pro. movies are great, but multi-channel audio is it's strong point. DTS-CD, SACD, DVD-A. as far as a 'sonic signature' goes, i feel that the 950 is simply CLEAN. the only 'signature' point i personally would make is that of the low end. it's warm, full and smooth.

i'm positive that you'll hear a marked improvement in sound over ANY receiver.

to me...any sonic improvement is priceless. i'm as happy as i can be that i got that without having to choose from $3K pre-pros.

setting up your system to compliment the 950's strong points is important and that takes a bit of tweaking, as is the same for any pre or receiver. this is the place to come to get help in doing that. the 950/(amps) beats ANY receiver. i stand ready to be proven wrong.

i'm interested to hear your conclusions...let us know and good listening!



[This message has been edited by bossobass (edited May 14, 2003).]

Good discussion. I'm Anxious to hear Xyzfla's honest /unbiased opinion on the 950/7100. Wouldn't this debate be a great CONTEST for the folks at Outlaw??

950/7100 vs. 1050

Wow.

Thanks for all the great feedback everyone. I was this >><< close to pulling the trigger (how's that for Outlaw colloquialism?) when my girlfriend and I decided to spend 9 days in Europe this July. Cost: ~$1500. So, the 950/7100 may have to wait... Although I'm still very tempted. The benefit of having a quality multi-ch amp like the 7100 as a permanent fixture in my system is very tempting. We'll see...

------------------
-Kieran

I can relate Kieran, I've resisted until the last price drop. I really don't NEED (but that's not the point is it) the seperates I've enjoyed the 1050. I keep telling my wife the Outlaws made me do it.
As an update on my new setup .... the equipment is in place ... all cables are attached (I found it works better if the cables ARE hooked up correctly). All seems to work. It's 1:30 in the morning and right now I couldn't tell the difference between the best setup and a clock radio ... sleep is in order. Serious listening, and I assume some break-in of the electronics, will have to wait.

My suspicions are slowly materializing concerning this debate. I'm ALMOST convinced that the 1050 is pretty close to being sonically equal to the 950/7100. Aside from the flexibility/expandibility the 1050 seems like the better value?

Obviously, different people will hear things differently, but I still feel that the upgrade from 1050 to 950 offered a definite sonic improvement. That comparison was with the 1050 acting as a pre/pro only; there was also a somewhat less obvious improvement when I added a Model 750 to the 1050. The two upgrades combined (external amplification and 950 in place of the 1050) seemed to me to offer a very clear improvement without even factoring in the extra features provided by the 950. Granted, that is my opinion only, but mrs. gonk (who would have happily done without the $850 expense of the Model 950) also noticed the improvement.

I guess what I'm saying is that I would not qualify the 1050 as sonically equal to the 950/7100. I still think that the 1050 sounds very good, but at the end of the day it is only a $500 receiver. The 950/7100 combo offers better sonic performance as well as more power and more features. Whether those extras are worth the extra $1200 is another matter -- for some people those extras will make it a better value, but other people will choose to forego those extras and hang onto the $1200, in which case the 1050 is likely a very good solution for them.

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

Folks,

I've only posted replies a few times because I don't have time to check the Forum more than once a week or so - and by then the keen amongst you have pretty much wrung the last drop of blood out of most topics.

However in this case the topic gets close to what's near and dear to me: cost versus return.

To cut to the chase, at almost every price point, except for those that only Mercedes owners will touch, a receiver will almost always give you much more bang for the buck - in my opinion. The problem with the debate (in general) is that people always choose unfair comparisons. "Do I buy the $1000 receiver or the $1700 separates?" Not fair - to either. Better to ask "if I have only $1000 to spend, should I buy separates or a receiver?" The answer is obvious - at least to me.

Or better yet, why not ask "if I have $3000 to spend, and want to upgrade my current system, including speakers, what should the relative split be between pre/pro/amps (or receiver) and speakers?" I would argue that buying better transducers (ie. speakers) is almost always the best way to get more bang for your buck. So to answer the question (and I know there no perfect answer) I might be inclined to spend $1000 on a receiver and $2000 on speakers, rather than $1700 on pre/pro/amps and $1300 on speakers. I think that would be the way to get the most value for your dollar spent.

Now before before the afficionados out there start tearing into me, I know, I know, I've oversimplified the discussion. I'm actually a separates guy myself. I also have the luxury of running two complete home theatres in my house: one for me, and one for the rest of the family.

Mine is full of separates (and then some) because I'm forever tweaking and replacing bits and pieces because it's a lifelong hobby and if I ever assemble the PERFECT system I'll be forever miserable because there would, by definition, be no more tweaking to do. (I sense a collective "AHHH" from the home theatre Collective out there.)

But the one for the family - that's another matter. It's got a good receiver (Yamaha) and good/ok speakers (Paradigm/Energy), and if I ever need to use it (because my son just has to demonstrate to his friends how awesome Metallica's S&M sounds in my theatre) I'm happy with it - and the value that it represents.

And by the by, I added a new model 950 to my main theatre, and it is, in my opinion, by far the greatest value in "separates" that I have ever come across - bar none! If the question were "$1700: Denon receiver or 950/7100 combo?" I'd have to take the combo. And THAT's why I said "almost always" in the third paragraph above. Outlaw has really thrown the wrench into the old value equation.

Regards.

Jeff Mackwood

ps. to Gonk: thank you very much for the terrific reviews on the 950 that you have posted. I've just printed a copy that's now attached to my 950's owner's manual. It's definitely required reading!

Jeff,

I have started to stack receivers (NAD and Sony in particular) which have failed to continue to be useful. I find it hard to believe that a 7-channel amplifier will be useless in the next decade. Whatever happens on the A/V side, in an era of rapid evolution of A/V standards, I think the amp/pre-amp divide is more useful than ever. As someone who bought his first amp/pre-amp combo, I think that receivers are a scarier and scarier investment, at least as one who just made the move from a straight reciever.

Replacing the 950 looked a lot easier than replacing an integrated Marantz product or equivalent.

Jeff Mackwood,

Thanks for that thoughtful post. Your final point about a $1700 950/7100 combo vs. a $1700 Denon is interesting... first of all it is hypothetical, because there is no Denon in that price point.

(side note: anyone know of a great receiver in the $1500~$1700 street price range to which we could better compare/match it against the 950/7100?)

The Denon that comes closest in features to the 950/7100 combo is the 3803, which is available for MUCH less than the 950/7100 combo.

edit: BTW, could you post a link to the reviews by gonk that you said were "required reading?" Thanks...

------------------
-Kieran

[This message has been edited by Kieran (edited May 19, 2003).]

Kieran -- A link to my 950 review is in my sig below (after the Saloon Links and the pre/pro chart), or right here . Your question reminded me of a link I have in the pre/pro chart -- a receiver chart at HTF. You've got the Denon 3803 in there (at $1200), and several others units in the mid-$1000's. Marantz SR8200, Sherwood R-963, couple of Yamahas... For what it's worth...

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

Jeff's remarks are someting to consider however let's not forget the original question that started the thread. It isn't about an unfair comparison based on $$, it's about whether or not you actually acheive a sonic improvement by going with the 950/7100 over let's say the 1050.

Of course the cost associated with the 950/7100 will be greater. But the real question is, does the increased cost reflect the improvement in sound quality or is it SIMPLY the cost associated with producing separate units?? I've heard all about the flexibility and expandibility however, NO ONE has stated factually that in a side to side comparison, the 950/7100 sounds superior to the 1050.

In fact, based on what I've read thus far, I would be willing to bet that 90% of the people that responded to this topic, would NOT be able to hear a definite sonic improvement over the 1050 in a blind test?!

You could very well be correct. However, the 950 is a newer generation of pre/pro and reflects more recent thinking in surround formats and bass management options. The amplifier undoubtedly has a bit more output capability that is not reflected in the static wattage ratings, especially at lower impedances. Seperates simply give more flexibility, and that is something that is hard to put a number value on, as it varies with the individual purchaser.

I find this statement a bit puzzling. Rather than re-state my previous side-by-side comparison experience, I'll offer some quotes (all taken from earlier in this thread):



My initial post regarding your question, stating that I and my wife both found a sonic improvement (even though she could have cared less which box we used).



A clarification of my post -- I noticed a sonic improvement between 1050 as pre/pro and 950 as pre/pro. The upgrade from 1050 to 1050/750 the previous year had already provided some improvement in sound, meaning the superior sound I noted in the 950 would likely be even more pronounced for someone replacing a 1050 along with a 950/7100 or 950/770.



I don't mean to seem as if I'm beating the issue to death here, so I will step away from the cut-and-paste, but there are some other posts in this thread that also speak toward the question. Bossobass, for example, went through a number of receivers -- receivers that are all similar in price and performance to the 1050, and in fact even including the 1050 -- before settling on the 950. TANGO replaced a receiver (a Sony, not the 1050) and found enough improvement to amaze his wife.

As for a 1050 vs. 950/7100 blind test? Not having actually tried it, none of us can speak with certainty to the outcome, but I would expect that most people would be able to hear the difference. I know I heard a difference between my 1050 and my 950, for what that's worth.

I hope this big, rambling mess of a reply helps...

------------------
gonk -- Saloon Links | Pre/Pro Comparison Chart | 950 Review

[This message has been edited by gonk (edited May 27, 2003).]

The 1050 is a good receiver for the money, but it is not a 950. I have had the 1050 as a pre pro, I have also used a Denon 3300 as a pre pro with the Outlaw 750. The Denon and Outlaw 1050 were really close. I would not have picked one over the other to use as a pre pro. When the 950 was put in line with the Outlaw 750 it was no contest. If you really can't hear the difference between the Outlaw 1050 and 950 when used as a pre pro than you dont want to spend your money on seperates. Move on and fine yourself another hobby.

I realize this thread is referencing 950+7100. But your comment about Denon not making a $1700 receiver made me think of the Denon 4802 and the 950+770, both of which cost almost the same and were both reviewed in a popular home theater magazine not long ago. So, I would like to relate information I received during correspondence with a reviewer/writer that reviewed both the 4802 and 950+770.

I asked him which he preferred with emphasis on musical performance and his reply was:

"The answer to your question is fairly simple: If space is a limitation and you want a tidy all-in-one package that sounds terrific then go for the Denon. If on the other hand you have the space and want even better performance, then the Outlaw separates will take you a step beyond, particularly with straight music listening. Hope this is helpful."

Again, I realize you're looking for feedback on the 7100 but the reference and comparison to receivers vs separates seems to hold true.

Audvid, good reply useful information.
Dobeman, the question is "can ANYONE notice an improvement in sound quality" not just me in particular. You should read and understand the entire thread prior to posting a reply.

It’s taken me a lot longer to come to grips with the 950/7100 then I thought it would. I posted a few weeks ago that I’d be seriously listening to my new equipment a few days after it arrived on my doorstep. In anticipation of the arrival of the separates I sold my 1050. This means I couldn’t do a side-by-side nor could I go back to it unless I bought a new one. Well, the first weekend was disappointing. Using the same speakers, sub-woofer cables etc. I found the sound rather congested, lacking in dynamics and a bit harsh. After awhile I turned it off and went to listen to my two channel stereo setup which has none of those problems. Then it dawned on me …break-in …. So back to the home theater I went and turned it on and kept it on for more than a week. Mostly on tuner. What a difference. I’m not sure it’s fully broken-in yet as it seems to sound better every time I turn it on. Over the holiday weekend the HT setup was used a lot. While everyone else watched the screen I marveled at the improved sound. The dynamics were perhaps the most notable difference but also the music during parts of Drumline was great. Nothing like a rim shot out of 5.1 speakers. Also it was very easy to follow the dialog even when there was a lot going on in the movie. I felt the 1050 didn’t do well in these areas. The 1050 seemed rather bland. The family all mentioned the improved sound with the 950/7100 … without being asked …. go figure. The 1050 sound never got a mention either good or bad. Lastly, I decided to listen to several CD’s through the 950/7100. This is an area I thought the 1050 was particularly poor at. I was very surprised at how good the 950/7100 sounded. I went to get more CD’s to try. I never did this with the 1050, it was always one and out.
As to the question of the 950/7100 being worth the extra $1,000 over the 1050, you’ll have to judge that for yourselves. All I can say is that, with time, the separates are delivering in the areas I expected, better sound, a more capable set-up (surround modes, 2nd zone, OSD) etc.
But on the other hand I’m wondering if I would have been better off keeping the 1050 and spending $1,000 on a new cartridge for one of my Linn turntables … ummmm. More to follow.

Xyzfla -
The million $$ question. Is the 950/7100 worth the money?

You know, I met the top two executives from Linn Audio at CES 2001, and to my embarassment, I hadn't even heard of Linn at the time. We sat together during the SACD presentation and we chatted for a while, but I'm sure they were thinking that I was a total doofus for not knowing who they were.

Jeff


[This message has been edited by D'Arbignal (edited June 05, 2003).]

Am I ahead of the times or behind, the last receiver I purchased was a Kenwood TK140. That was a while back and I have never regretted my decision to go to separates. Whether you decide on Outlaw or something else, I think it is a wise move to go to separates. The value in separates is their flexibility. You will save more money in the long run with separates, IMHO.
------------------
MeanGene's Home


[This message has been edited by MeanGene (edited June 04, 2003).]

Linn Sondek LP-12. One of the best turntables ever made. The design is maybe 15 to 20 years old now.

You ask good questions armstrg --- I guess I can best sum up my feelings about my new 950/7100 purchase by saying "I’m going to keep them". I’m enjoying them more everyday. The harshness, the one shortfall not completely cured by the break-in period, seems to be the greater resolving power of the separates than I experienced with the 1050. In other words the 1050 was more forgiving (I think I used the term bland in my last post) the 950/7100 doesn’t mask a “hot” DVD. I’ve found this to be true with better equipment. Feed the separates good material and they really sing. An important point is that most (by a wide margin) of the DVD’s I watched sounded great.

So, D’Arbignal, you met Ivor Tiefenbrun from Linn? He’s quite a character. There are few companies I respect as much as Linn. I’ve enjoyed the LP-12, & many other Linn products, since they started in the 70’s. And I still have two LP-12. Neither are hooked up to the 950/7100. I use them in a separate two-channel setup.

Yup, I met him. Got the photo to prove it: http://www.smr-home-theatre.org/ces2002/people/page_08.shtml .

In retrospect, I'm just terrible embarassed at the whole incident. "So, what do you guys make?"

Gah! That reminds me of John Cleese's line to James Bond: "And you are ...?"



Jeff

Processor technology changes frequently so it's good to keep the same amps and have less invested in the box that goes obsolete.

Here's some ramblings...

Isn't the LINN LP12 from years ago a totally different unit other than the cosmetics? The power, the bearings, the arm, etc. Shopping for an LP12 can be complicated with all the variances. The setup also seems to require a more advanced user. I would agree this is a class TT but I'm not sure if those old units selling under $1k are as attractive as other options. They certainly don't seem to be comparable to the $2K+ newer Linns...or so I'm told.

I have a 1050 and I have totally replaced it for 2-channel with an early 1960's Scott 222c which is heaps better sounding with my Cornwalls...and oh how wonderful the phono stage. Now I still like separates so I'm getting a Scott 130 preamp and updating my ST-70 amp for more headroom.

I use the 1050 for HT center and three sourrounds. It does a fine job although it's getting a bit dated in features which is making me tempted to get a 950 and a 5-channel Outlaw amp using the DYnaco for the mains.

My perception is that the 950 for processing along with a 2-channel preamp with HT pass-through would be ideal. One can then add the amps of their choice which for me would be 2 tube amps and a 5-channel Outlaw although if I had modern less effecient speakers I'd probably go with all SS amps.

[This message has been edited by Hoots (edited June 07, 2003).]

Ivor has quite a sense of humor. I would have loved to see the expression on his face and the “humorous” comments that might have followed an inquire about what Linn makes.

As to the LP-12. Yes, it has changed over the years. It was first available in 1972, I believe, and the first update was a new main switch in 1974, Since then it has seen many updates including, “nirvana”, “valhalla”, “lingo”, “trampolin”, “cirkus” and now a new version of “lingo”. Also, the arm and cartridge can be updated from “Basic” to “Ekos/Arkiv”. Don’t you love those names? All of which can be retrofitted to the original LP-12. What a concept!!! And yes, I’ve found the latest updates improve the sound. The setup of the LP-12 and other “sprung” tables is more complicated than say a Rega (also a very good table) but more capable I think you’ll find. This isn’t to say that the only table choice is LP-12 there are very good reasonably priced tables from Music Hall, Rega, Pro-ject, Basis, Bluenote, JA Michell, VPI and others. Seems to be a good time to buy/upgrade your turntable. There are more and better offerings at all price points then a few years ago.

As far as buying a used LP-12, I’d get one from a Linn dealer or have a Linn dealer check out your prospective purchase. The check out should be reasonably priced especially if you agree to a tune up (new belt, oil, and perhaps springs & grommets and suspension adjustment) on your new purchase. Make sure it is in good original condition (meaning Linn parts regardless of upgrade level, although there are quality upgrades available from companies like NAIM) and go from there. Add, or have the dealer add, the upgrades you feel make sense from a cost and a sonic standpoint. Or leave it alone and enjoy it for years. A last thought if you have an LP-12 shipped make sure the original box is used (replacements are available from Linn), and the outer/inner platter ARE REMOVED. If they are not removed for shipping you’ll need a new bearing or the “cirkus” mod which includes a new bearing. And, once re-assembled the suspension will need to be adjusted for the “proper bounce”.

I also have separate setups for 2 channel stereo and home theater. Let me leave it at “I rarely play music on the HT setup”. That said, my new 950/7100 does a much better job with music only playback than the 1050 did.


[This message has been edited by Xyzfla (edited June 07, 2003).]

This 2-channel stuff is sucking my money away from my interest in upgrading the HT section from 1050 to 950/7100. It appears the 950/7100 would be a good upgrade for my HT.

I went to the local Linn dealer who was pretty focused on selling what he had new. The pitch was focused on new LINN or new REGA...pick your price point. Lot's of FUD was thrown at the Music Hall which he didn't carry.

I bought a 30 day old MusicHall MMF-5 for $350 to get started...a good fit for my mid-fi system. Eventually I'll look at the MMF-7, VPI Jr, VPI Scout, and for sure a LINN.

If I can get a used LINN from a dealer tuned then I would like it. I could upgrade over time (as you can do with other brands).

I am using an Audiosource amp for my surrounds, and a B&K reference 3 channel amp for my system with the 950.
I can't speak to any personal experience with the 7100 but would surmise it to be similar in performance, for the simple reason it is an Outlaw.
This is my first time at full separates...I went from the older Onkyo which sounded good for a 'receiver' to an 09TX Pioneer which sounded better, a NAD T751 that sounded a bit more warm than the Pioneer but not really better, and then used the NAD as a pre-pro which it did quite well especially since it had 6 analog channel input capability.
Now with the 950, the sound has reached a new plateau. And not a small change either IMHO.
In all modes it sounds better. It may not have a Rega Planet/Theta/Martin Logan, 2 channel sound (I am running M&K 750 theater system) but for the price of all the components, it is way and above anything else I have heard recently with a receiver in the group.
The sound has more depth, clarity and a lower noise floor of anything in my personal experience.

Hoots,

That next step up is in the Music Hall (the MM7) or a ProJect table (wood, RM4 or Perspective) and that will get a really nice arm the Project 9. Three years ago I sold off an expensive table (at least for me it ws), arm, cardridge (had about $5M invested in it) and picked up a Project table that they were trialing with that Project 9 arm. I thought it gave a good account of itself performance wise. I added a Benz moving coil and I was back in business. I missed my old Sota, but with my reduced playing of LPs the Project was not bad. With the Music Hall MM 7 you also get a very nice cartridge. It is worth it as you going to want to upgrade that cartridge in the MM 5 almost immediately. The MM 7 gives you a $450 moving coil as part of the package and a pretty good one from what I hear. Hard to go wrong with that table. I keep getting thinking about stepping back up, but with my level of listening, the upper level Projects and Music Halls will do nicely thank you.

That's a shame. My local hi-end dealer sells Rega and Linn and a couple others. When I went in there looking for a new cartridge for my little POS Denon my dealer showed respect for it.

------------------
Philip Hamm