John:

Actually no, I have not directly compared the 950 to the Aragon or the others. What I have done however is done strict (and I do mean strict) direct blind A/B comparisons via relay switching of the direct feed from a variety of sources (up to 24 bit feeds from my digital audio workstation, playing master recordings) into my custom vacuum tube preamp and that of the feed through the 950. The results? There is no audible difference, and with the latest incarnation of the 950, no increase in noise. No difference on such subjective factors as "soundstaging", "warmth", "focus" - you name it. If it does not alter the signal in any way, just how much "better" would you suggest it might be? And yes, I know a thing or two about critical listening - I do it for a living. In the real world, not for some audiophile publication. I have an electronics lab in my house (I am an electronics engineer too) and have had the 950 on my bench and taken critical measurements. I actually worked to some extent with Outlaw on improvements in the 950 from earlier versions of the unit. Again, I ask you - if there is absolutely no degradation or change in the sound as it passes through the 950, just how much more "perfect" would you suggest it needs to be?

From your statements, you are obviously going on sheer faith and non controlled comparisons of these preamps. You know of course how fallable the human ear is don't you? I'll remind you that processes like Dolby Digital and DTS rely on the weaknesses of our ears so that they can throw away up to 90% of the audio signal. Our "audio memory" is very short, and extremely vulnerable to the influences of our other senses, such as the perceived "value" of a component. If you think that you can reliably perform an unbiased comparison while knowing the identities of the components, you are either fooling yourself, or are simply being arrogant.

I'm afraid it DOES come down to pure science and engineering when it comes to designing an audio component. If the laws of physics are valid for the Space Shuttle, then there is no reason to believe that something like audio would be exempt. Perhaps you know something we don't know?

If, as you say, it does not matter to you why a component sounds better, I'm afraid you have just summed up the situation for those who are vulnerable to "snake oil" sales pitches. I would hope you are a bit more discriminating than you make yourself out to be.

Purchasing an article that is technology based would seem to demand a certain amount of inquiry as to "why" is somebody charging 3 times the price for "item A" verses "item B". Doesn't this matter to you? Are you so rich that it doesn't matter? Do you like to waste money? If these inquiries are not made, then that leaves you wide open for the excesses of the marketing machine of those manufacturers who would be more than happy to relieve you of your money.

The reason people like me are users of Outlaw equipment is that by and large we have bothered to educate ourselves about the real differences between components. We demand quality, but we are not stupid enough to pay for hype. The owners of Outlaw equipment know that this company is concerned with cutting through the hype and misleading claims and delivering a top quality product at a price that is fair. If this bothers you, well I frankly don't care.

Purchasing high priced components based solely on faith may make you feel good, but I would suggest you stay away from people selling you beachfront land in Arizona.

[This message has been edited by soundhound (edited April 09, 2003).]