Call me an old fogy, but I like having a AM/FM tuner in the processor.

Well then call me a young fogy and please keep the "Sirius/XM Satellite Radio Ready" interface as well.

Each time a new processor appears on the horizon, the idea of eliminating the tuner comes up. I think the tuner always sticks around because too many people simply expect it to be there. It is a modest cost for something that, if omitted, has the potential to turn off more people than it pleases. Sirius/XM support and HD Radio support seem to be the other half of the question - if you leave AM/FM in, which do you add? Satellite, HD, or both?

I find it mind boggling that people think the value/price equation in a pre-pro excludes media streaming capabilities and wi-fi but includes support for formats that are effectively dead to all but a relatively few (e.g. SACD and vinyl) and for which they probably already have multiple separate components or even separate systems for. I guess the differences are what makes the world go round, but I am not sure.

Personally, I think that the Oppo BDP-83se has a lot of the guts that would make a great pre-pro especially if combined with the Trinnov system for the audio/room configuration. Drop the Blu-ray player, add in all of the extra connections, embedded Linux system with plenty of added memory and wire/less support and IMO you would have a product that noone else could touch. I think Outlaw could even do it for price-point they are shooting for.

I think it makes perfect sense. The surround processor is, by definition, the hub for all audio sources. It has grown to become the hub for all audio and video sources, but it is still the device to which source devices are connected. You therefore want it to be able to work with the source devices you own. That would include DVD, Blu-ray, SACD, DVD-Audio, cable or satellite, game consoles, and even older technology such as vinyl. A phono pre-amp is a nice convenience feature for vinyl owners, although as long as you have stereo analog inputs and an analog bypass mode those users can still get by. DSD support is a nice feature for SACD owners and can probably be included for little or no cost, although multichannel LPCM support and a multichannel analog input will be enough for almost everybody to get by. Composite video, s-video, stereo analog, coaxial/optical inputs, and component inputs are still necessary to cover the existing hardware that we all have around. It's part of what defines a surround processor. Leaving connectivity off because it will only support old technology is not a great way to promote customer loyalty.

For decades now, though, we have been dealing with each new source technology by creating new source devices for the technology. That was true for cassette tape, CD, VHS, DVD, and Blu-ray. The only source that has routinely been built into our processors is a radio, and even that is sometimes left off. Why does network media suddenly need to be integrated into the processor? Why wouldn't it be just as well served by someone producing a good quality, robust standalone source device? It would allow you to purchase the network media support you desire without having that desire dictate your surround processor purchase.

I'm not disputing that we will probably see more and more examples of surround receivers and processors that offer network media support. I don't agree with it, but that's not going to stop Onkyo and others from using it to add one more bullet point to their feature lists, and that will create a trend that folks will tend to follow. My concern is that we are needlessly over-burdening this central component, and that we could get better quality network media support in standalone products. Here's a theoretical example: let's say the Model 998 ships this December with some form of cool network media support (DLNA and maybe even something like Vudu or Netflix). Around mid-2011, RedBox finally kills off Blockbuster and celebrates by rolling out a direct competitor to Netflix streaming video. At the same time, Google creates some brilliant media management app that works with cloud computing and lets us all store a terabyte of music and movies in our gmail accounts. One or more companies (OPPO Digital, Outlaw, Logitech, Apple, Roku, and/or some entirely new company) rush to capitalize on these new developments and build products that offer a friendly user interface, options for wired and wireless networking (I'll take wired, thanks, but I recognize the value of wireless), and a handy HDMI output all rolled up in a simple box. Do I replace my new Model 998 with a brand new processor so I can use these services, or do I keep the 998 for four or five more years and buy a box that plugs into a spare HDMI port on my 998? Odds are that I'll do the latter, and then the network support in my Model 998 (if I was using it in the first place) becomes a waste. The Model 998 needs to be able to stay on the market for several years after it is released. The market focus for network media could change three or four times between now (when design decisions need to be or already have been made) and then. Part of what Outlaw prides themselves on is trying to design the right product. That's why they've left off all those silly "hall" and "jazz club" surround modes. It may be that the right decision (unless they have some slick trick up their sleeves) is to let a dedicated device handle the network media duties.


The analog section certainly is excellent, as is the video processing. But that's one tiny piece of the puzzle. The architecture is built around a System-on-Chip that isn't suited to being used in a surround processor - the chip was designed from the ground up to serve in a Blu-ray player. You would have to throw out everything except the nice analog board and the ABT2010 chip. You would also have to add a lot of things that don't exist. To use a rather iffy analogy, it would almost be like complimenting me for producing a good air distribution design for a room and then asking me to do an equally good lighting design for that room - the two are going into the same ceiling and serving the same space, but the fact that I did one well doesn't mean I can apply that to my advantage in trying to design a completely different system.

Much like the Mediatek SoC chip in the BDP-83, TI and Cirrus build chips from the ground up to serve in surround receivers and processors. They aren't based on a Linux kernel, and they aren't going to run a Linux kernel efficiently (if at all). You could duplicate their abilities with hardware that ran a Linux kernel, but you'll have to re-write all the underlying code that already exists and you'll probably end up spending more on the hardware required to run that new code. It's going to be costly and it's going to slow down development. It could be an interesting research project for a company like TI or Cirrus, with the resources available to put years into it and the potential to recoup the R&D costs by licensing the resulting product in large volume. I just can't see it being practical for a small company like Outlaw to pull off, especially with the time pressures that exist now. I've been wrong before, of course, so maybe I'm wrong here too. Every time I think through it, though, I wind up at the same place.

Consider being able to say this to your friends:
"I use my NetBook as the remote; can run everything here."

Outlaw can Wi-Fi an HTML dashboard (graphical) style interface that allows a user to see and control all of the device's functions. Since it works on your laptop or mobile device, you can tweak or view settings without interrupting the movie or your spouse. Give it the ability to repeat learned or embedded IR codes for other devices, you may have the biggest buzz since the model 1050 made the cover of Stereophile.

Just a thought

-Mike H.
Atlanta

Using my iPhone or PC as a remote for the Model 998 would be cool, but I wonder if it would just be a gimmick unless the unit was being connected to a Crestron or similar system. I've found that even though I have the ability to control my AppleTV with my iPhone, I only use it when I want to type in a search topic for something (touch screen keyboard beats scrolling around on a non-querty box of letters). The RF universal remote that already controls all of my devices is more practical for general use. Plus my five-year-old doesn't borrow the universal remote to play games or take pictures of the cats.

Of course, that does bring up the other side of the coin: having an Ethernet interface for Crestron control would probably make some people very happy (even moreso than having RS232 control). And being able to make setup changes via my phone or PC without interrupting people using the system would also be pretty snazzy. Yeah, that would be slick.

I have to agree with Gonk on this. To my mind media streaming is best handled off platform, where the focus can be on maintaining compatibility with existing formats and codecs. While it's not the most complicated issue in the world, why would or should Outlaw try to reinvent the wheel on this, especially when their market segment probably has a media streaming capability that can simply be added on through existing inputs?

As for the Linux issue, I have to ask what the perceived benefit of a Linux-driven system would be here? Most of the activities that a prepro needs to do well depend so much on their hardware (ie, good DACs, current HDMI controllers, analog circuits, etc), and it's not as if Linux would bring any added functionality to the table.

My first thought from a manufacturing perspective is the added hassle. Having a linux-based box would make the unit at risk to tweakers and hackers like any other linux system, and that means a ton more support calls and headaches dealing with users that tried to install a mod they read about. It also means your customers will be far more likely to expect you to add or update functionality for every little thing every time they don't like something, you know, "because it's all in linux, so it'll be easy."

Sounds like someone needs to add a HDML output to my laptop and I download some fancy software and plug into the 998 for all my streaming needs. Lets not redesign the 998 to do everything everyone can think of or we'll end up with a Magnavox boom box without speakers.

The pre-pro as the centre of life, the universe, and everything.

That pretty much sums up my expectations.

In my main HT I currently have eleven (11) source A/V components connected in some way, shape, or form, to my Onkyo 886, including phono (MM), cassette, S-VHS VCR, Hi-8 VCR, two LD players, HD Cable PVR, DVD recorder, CD/DVD-V/SACD player, CD/DVD-V/A/SACD player, and a Blu-ray player. And I'm not counting the 886's tuner section as a source.

If it's HDMI-equipped I could probably handle one or two more source components.

Being able to apply today's surround modes to yesterday's recordings is a big plus for me.

My Blu-ray player is connected to my home network via ethernet cable and since my home server and main router are very close by, running another cable to a future pre/pro to tap into that content and the internet is not an issue.

As you can see I tend to not discard formats, still use all of them from time-to-time, and expect that any future pre/pro give me as much, if not more, flexibility than what I currently have. If that costs me a little bit more, I'm willing to pay.

Finally as I was typing this I wandered over to my cassette collection (~180 tapes, most of them dubbed from LPs using very good gear for its day) and scanned through it. Probably 25% of that content I don't have anywhere else in my collection. So I pulled out a tape of The Garfield Band that I made in 1978, popped it into the Nakamichi, set the proper EQ and engaged Dolby B NR and am now really enjoying some tunes that I've not listened to in probably three decades! And yes, that tape still sounds great! I took time away from this message to listen to several tracks using Zone 2 and a single stereo amp / pair of speakers. Then I ran it through the whole system with PLIIx applied. Wow!

That's what I meant by my opening sentence.