High Quality 2-channel sound potential?

**Lex** · 20 March 2002, 19:35 Wednesday

Well Jon Marsh is officially our design topology expert, Did you know that Jon?

What I see here sounds pretty good. Some of it is likely fairly standard practice among even mid-fi receivers, like large toridial transformer, along with shielding from low level level circuitry etc...

Likely one critical point might be metal film resistors, that sort of thing, right Jon?

Anyway, I am in over my head, so I will sit back and let the experts chat.

Lex

**Andrew Pratt** · 20 March 2002, 20:16 Wednesday

I'm interested to hear what Jon has to say about it as well.

**JonMarsh** · 21 March 2002, 13:01 Thursday

Hi Guys,

I was listening to so much music, and messing around with my test gear that I didn't even turn on the 'net computer last night.

It's kind of unfair for me to comment on a unit I've never heard, but as long as you take anything I say with a couple of handful's of salt, (a grain won't be nearly enough

) I'll ruminate about this- both in a positive sense, and maybe a little as a devil's advocate.

First, it does look like they took some care with the analog bypass mode- I would expect that to be a factor in the beta tester's positive comments about two channel sound. But, what was the analog sound being compared with? A good standard analog preamp? (now, tell me what a "good standard analog preamp" is- just ask ThomasW about some of our experiences with preamps).

The list of design features is solid and reflects a lot of care for a product which is built to a budget- that is a big part of Outlaw's appeal- high bang for the buck, compared with the established Japanese mid-fi companies. (Sony, Pioneer, Denon, etc).

Based on what I've heard about previous Outlaw products, and about the testing and development of the 950, there's little doubt in my mind that it's a good value. But, that doesn't mean there may not be a few points to discuss, and to put in perspective.

Let's go down the list of features.

-Large Toroidal Transformer Power Supply For Low Noise And Excellent Dynamic Range

-18,000mfd Of Main Power Supply Capacitance

-Main Power Supply Is Physically Shielded From All Low Level Circuitry

-Multiple Locally Regulated Power Supplies In Addition To The Main Regulated Supply To Isolate Analog, Digital, And Video Processing Circuits

-All Input/Output Switching Circuitry Is Located Directly Adjacent To The Rear Panel For Minimum Cross Talk And Noise

-All Input/Output Switching Circuitry Is Electronic To Maximize Signal Purity And Further Reduce Cross Talk And Noise

-All Inputs And Outputs Are Buffered, Which Isolates Them To Reduce Potentially Detrimental Sonic Impact From Cable Variations, Differences In The Impedances, And The “Load” Presented By Connected Components

-All Video Switching/Processing Located On A Dedicated Circuit Assembly Carefully Positioned To Minimize The Possibility Of Any Audio/Video Interaction

-Digital Processing Circuitry Is Physically Isolated From Audio Processing Circuits

-4 Dual Channel High Speed 24 Bit Crystal Processors Allow Advanced Decoding Of Up To 7.1 Channels Of High Fidelity Information

-Selected Critical Components Are 1% Tolerance

-Star Grounding Reduces Hum And Ground Loops

-Optical Encoder Volume Control

Large toroidal power transformer-
Toroidal transformers are used because they're compact and have less flux leakage than an EI core transformer of average design. Drawbacks to toroidal transformers include greater HF bandwidth (line noise above 60 Hz is more readily coupled to the power supply circuits), and greater HF coupling between windings.

Even some "budget" DAC's like the Asseblage DAC's from the now defunct Parts Connection, or the APN MP-DAC, use separate transformers for the analog and digital sections. This costs more, of course, but is the hallmark of a good digital audio unit.

18,000 uf Power Supply capacitance
This is a good number- hard to believe, but many power amps- even some old Phase Linear'sl, for example, used less power supply capacitance.

OTOH, my MP-DAC has about 3X the power supply capacitance, so it's by no means overkill.

Multiple Locally regulated Power supplies to isolate analog, digital, and video processing circuitry

This is a good, important feature, but pretty widely implemented these days. I'm more impressed when there are invidual regulators on every IC, or better yet, on every power pin on the IC, such as in the MP-DAC. This cuts crosstalk and especially helps with jitter in the digital circuits, as there won't be power supply induced signal correlated jitter.

All Input/Output switching circuitry is Located Directly Adjacent to the Rear Panel for minimum Cross talk and noise

This is a very desirable feature, but fairly wide used, because it also lowers costs. An extreme example is units like the Ayre preamp, where the whole active board sits on the back panel- only auxiliary functions are further into the chasis.

All Input/Output switching Circuitry is electornic to maximize signal purity and further reduce cross talk and noise

This can definitely reduce crosstalk, if well implemented, but then it does place an onus on the active circuits- it means there's more active circuitry in the signal path. Usually the swtiches used are JFETs or MOS transistors, in this case integrated into a crossbar switch IC. The problem is that the semiconductor elements are not ideal; they have nonlinear charcteristics with regards to capacitance vs. voltage and on and off state resistance which don't exist in a good coin silver switch contact. Whether it's a benefit or a problem is up to the implmentation.

All Inputs and Output are buffered, which isolates them to reduce potentially detrimetnal sonic impact form cable variations, differences in the impedances, and the "load" presented by connected componnets

This is an inherent feature of having electronic switching. Now, this would make you think that this would be much superior to my passive preamp I use in my main system... no buffers in that one... but is it sonically inferior? Let's concede that if you connected a tape unit or CD player that had a poor internal output stage, my passive preamp wouldn't make it any easier for that unit to drive the power amp. But if you've got a good DAC or player hooked up, it also won't add or detract anything from the sound.

All video switching/Processing located on a dedicated circuit assembly carefully positioned to minimize the possibility of any audio/video interaction

This is pretty standard. You cant' pump around signals in the 4-20 MHz area around audio without isolating them in this manner.

Digital Processing Circuitry Is Physically Isolated From Audio Processing Circuits

Same issue, digital is even higher in harmonics than video.

Star Grounding Reduces Hum and Ground loops

Totally standard practice for a long time

Optical Encoder Volume Control

Necessary when you use digital processing and switching controls; it's the easiest way to generate the encoding signal for the digital volume signal. The Crystal DAC's have a digital volume control built right into them. Whether they're using it or not, isn't said.

The on site "specs" are somethat sparse, in my opinion; for example, THD given at 1 kHz, not any other frequency.

Now, while it may look like I've been picking on this unit, I do have to say, it's obvious they're carefully designing for bang for the buck- it's a lot of Pre-Pro for the price at $899. The only comparable kind of "deal" I've seen is getting a Sony 9000ES at one of the Sony outlet stores, when they're available there- typically Canadian "champagne" models can be had for about $1100.

Now, Bruce, I have a question for you, if your interest is 90% music, 10%HT, how does a Pre-pro fit into that?

I'd describe my interest in about the same proportion, and I had a Sony processor, which included analog bypass, but ended up parting with it. I've been messing around with some smaller speakers, trying out some drivers and crossover ideas, and those speakers will probably eventually become surrounds when I setup for that again. But right now, I'm just two channel for HT (aw guys, don't feel sorry for me, now!

).

I've heard a lot of surround that isn't as satisfying as my stereo setup, including so called subs that don't go as deep as my mains. But then, I'm the crotchety music curmudgeon on this board, even if I'm not the senior member by any means! (nonetheless, after listening to some CD's last night, I replayed the Premiere episode of "Farscape" just to see refresh my self after viewing the 10th disk last month).

How are you considering revising your system, Bruce? Would you use this as a core control unit for both music and HT?

To be "tough" on it, I'd put it up in bypass mode against a passive preamp (like the Marchand PR41, or a Placette), driving a good NLFB amp like an Ayre or Theta, with a comparable quality source unit (Theta, Ayre, APN, whatever). If it holds up well in that kind of comparison, then it's very well engineered. Even if it has some mild colorations, they may not be an issue in most people's systems that would use it with similar range components.

I hope some of this rambing has been useful- hopefully Outlaw will put up some more detailed info to help potential customers in making their decisions.

Best regards,

Jon

Earth First!
_______________________________
We'll screw up the other planets later....

**Bruce** · 21 March 2002, 14:31 Thursday

Jon,

Thanks for the detailed inspection and discourse, it was very helpfull and enlightening. I'm fanmiliar with product design as I'm a product director in the LAN equipment industry, (although out of work currently).

I use a Parasound 1100D active stereo preamp and Parasound 1205a amps to drive my Dynaudio Contour 2.8 mains, center and 1.1 Surrounds.

I use a Marchand XM-9L xover and M&K MX-700 sub on the Contour 2.8 mains (@60Hz). I also use a parametric EQ on the summed L+R bass output from the xover to the sub.

Most of the time the DD/DTS processor (Technics SH500) isn't even turned on. It's L&R main preouts feed a set of AUX L&R inputs on the stereo preamp.

Yes, the 950 would replace all of the above, becoming the nerve center of my system. I also use an RS phono preamp for my TT and have a Parasound CD player with analog and digital outs (currently using the analog outputs).

Bruce
____________________________________________

**Lex** · 21 March 2002, 20:50 Thursday

Nice post Jon. turns out I was at least right in theory, that some of this is fairly standard practice.

Bruce, goodluck on the career front too man!

Lex

**JonMarsh** · 21 March 2002, 21:41 Thursday

Hey Bruce, I cheated and sneaked a peek at your equipment list in your user profile. With luck the Outlaw may provide comparable two channel sonics to your Parasound- but then, it may not! Only one way to tell, of course.

Times have been a little hard in SV these days. I'm still working for the same company as 17 years ago (new name, of course), but my boss was pushed out, wound up in the Quality group, and I almost lost my tech in February. Now I'm reporting to a VP that I never hear from- who's in Detroit. Well, it could be worse, I guess.

Good luck finding a situation you can enjoy and thrive in.

Best regards,

Jon

Earth First!
_______________________________
We'll screw up the other planets later....

**Bruce** · 21 March 2002, 22:29 Thursday

Jon,

Thanks for the advice and encouragement. Yea, I'm on the reservation list to demo the Outlaw for 30 days so I know for sure.

By the way, after I'm working again, I hope to get a chance to try out some Ayre gear. First things first.

Hope you don't mind, I put the 950 inside jpg up on my website and pointed a few other people to it.

Thanks Lex.

Bruce
____________________________________________

High Quality 2-channel sound potential?

High Quality 2-channel sound potential?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment