Tron

Uh... WHERE did you find the Fostex PD-4 for $150? You might have found a carrying case for the recorder at that price, but ... Here's Sweetwater.com's price for the above portable DAT recorder: Retail: $7,395.00 Your Cost: $6,079.97 You save: $1,315.03

Hmmm... Sweetwater hunh... I didn't know. Thanks for steering me toward Sweetwater.

James, DAT-Man portable dat recorder Where and when did you get that, and how much was it, if you can remember? A reasonable DAT recorder is so hard to find these days...

Here ya go. Try this link for a portable Sony DAT recorder over at Amazon.com . Get ready for the sticker shock. :

Well... I thought maybe I'd try to find a good deal on a portable DAT recorder for making some high quality digital samples of all sorts for making music and sound effects. Oh, and since I would have the good recorder, for lectures as well. And then I found what I was looking for from several dealers only to get a very sobering dose of sticker shock. For as long as DAT technology has been around, why must they charge such outrageous prices for the DAT-based products? I can understand that the DAT tech is considered a 'professional' standard (if that's what you want to call it), but why must the most inexpensive portable DAT recorder still be in that 'professional' realm (the "you'll never get enough benefit out of me to justify my cost" realm)?

Heh... Speaking of Malaysia brings to mind memories of debates over which Intel Celeron 300A cpus overclocked the best; those made in Malaysia or those made in Costa Rica... Seemed the Malaysian made cpus were more stable... Then again, what does that really say... Possibly Intel put more money into the Malaysian fabrication plants. But, silicon is silicon... Maybe the Malaysian labor pool has more experienced workers than that of Costa Rica, or in this case, Korea? All that is just ranting though... No real basis for comparison.

Hmmm... After reading about Denon's history from their own site and reading reviews that comment about Denon products being made in Japan and that they are high quality because of Japan's history of making quality products, etc., the "MADE IN KOREA" stamp on the rear of that Denon really gets my attention... Hmmm...

Diggs, Don't forget to have a few listening 'sessions' while at your father's during thanksgiving. I'm definitely interested in getting your review/opinion on the sound quality between your Denon and his Outlaw. As far as my receiver choice, after reading through these forums and other reviews around the net, I've decided to just save up for a Denon AVR 3802. Has anyone else checked out Denon's documentation for this baby? It has everything I need, including all the latest surround algorithms and has an Analog Devices SHARC 32-bit floating-point DSP to decode them all. What can I say, I'm a DSP freak; but I also want clean amplification with plenty of 'dynamic headroom.'

wm12324 "and the 2802 for 499.00." ?! Are you sure that wasn't the 1802 ?! Otherwise...

I'm game for the gory details on ohm ratings... Anyone else?

Olaf, So, you made and tested the Cat. 5 network cable tip from tnt-audio.com and the best design they've come up with so far, the Full Frequency Range Cable. I'm curious as to whether or not you've tried wiring your whole setup that way yet, and if you have decided not to, what's holding you back? The Cat. 5 should be pretty cheap at a good local computer shop, or maybe ordering a reel online. I'm mostly just wanting to read an extensive 'review' of the FFRC when used for the whole system. Have you tried any other experimental wiring jobs? What's your thoughts on the DIY AC shielded cable? Anything to get better sound with a small investment of funds (at least compared to the 'commercial' alternatives) is of great interest to me.

After reading several of the reviews over at AudioReview maybe my first impression (through their own website and documentation) may have been a little prejudicial (I was thinking the Outlaw receiver had a very appropriate name for a con-artists' product). However, the facts speak for themselves. Outlaw's own specs compared to Denon's, which I trust. Also after reading the reviews I've come to the conclusion that most people, after spending $500+ on audio equipment, don't want to be wrong or concede that perhaps they made an error in judgement. Don't get me wrong, I'm ready and willing to read everything anyone has to say about the Outlaw. But the specifications are very hard to ignore, at least for me. Maybe I'm just too skeptical... But I have to be. Whatever I order I'm stuck with unless I want to lose between $50-$100 in return shipping costs (I'm overseas).

After studying the documentation for both receivers again, mainly to ensure my above statements were correct, I've discovered something that did not "sink-in" the first time. The Outlaw 1050 has one (1) 195 watt power amplifier, which they so deceptively label on their specifications as: Output Six-Channel Surround Mode, Three Channels Driven: 65 watts per channel (8 ohms, 20Hz-20kHz, <0.05% THD) When three channels are driven, eh? 3 x 65 watts = 1 x 195 watt amplifier. Oh yeah, and just to re-emphasize, the Denon has 6 discrete 90 watt power amplifiers. I'm pretty sure the benefits of seperate, discrete amplifiers over a single amplifier have been covered somewhere in these forums.

Alright, is it just me or is the feature set of the Outlaw 1050 lacking quite a bit, including the stuff that counts - quality and quantity of amplification (or at least what one would hope for in a receiver that is in a $500 - $650 price range). Why a $500 - $650 price range? Well, the Outlaw 1050 goes for $499 ($500) straight from the manufacturer, Outlawaudio.com , and the receiver I'm comparing it with here is the Denon AVR-2802 which can be had for under $650 from several different sources. First, the quality and quantity of power issue. It's been stated several times before on this board that most of the speakers we have (Klipsch!) use only around 5-20 watts of power at normal listening levels. But, extra power reserves in your amp determines your "dynamic headroom." So, the more the better, right? Quantity of power: 8 ohms, 65 watts per channel for the Outlaw 1050 compared to 8 ohms, 90 watts per channel for the Denon AVR-2802 . Quality amplification is also a factor, and I remember reading in one of the threads here that 0.05% THD on the RMS wattage rating does not necessarily mean the amplifier(s) are producing that clean or purer of a signal at lower levels. I assume most trust the reputation of the brand when accounting for the quality if they cannot hear the system for themselves before the decision is made whether the audition is at the audio shop or at home. This kind of auditioning cannot be done with either brand in my situation (overseas), so I have to rely on reviews and the history of a company. Outlaw audio doesn't have a history yet, but their marketing (their website and pricing structure) looks cheap. Maybe that's just my opinion though. So, let's look at a few other quality details. The Outlaw specs state that the S/N ratio for their "preamplifier" section is 97dB compared to Denon's analog "DIRECT mode" (I assume these specs are equivalent to that of the "preamplifier" section of the Denon receiver) S/N ratio of 102dB. A S/N ratio of 102dB applies to the digital output of the Denon as well. The S/N ratio for the FM tuner in the Outlaw is rated at 55dB/55dB (mono/stereo) whereas the Denon's S/N ratios are 77dB/72dB. The total harmonic distortion ratings for the FM tuner section of the Outlaw is 1.5%/1.0% (mono/stereo) whereas the Denon's THD ratings are 0.15%/0.3%. Enough about quality, the difference should be evident by now. How about the features? Well, the two that intrigue me the most are Dolby Prologic II and DTS Neo:6. What are they? Here's some clips: Dolby Pro Logic II Dolby Pro-Logic II is a new multi-channel playback format developed by Dolby Laboratories using feedback logic steering technology and offering improvements over conventional Dolby Pro Logic circuits. Dolby Pro Logic II can be used to decode not only sources recorded in Dolby Surround ( ) but also regular stereo sources into five channels (front left, front right, center, surround left and surround right) to achieve surround sound. Whereas with conventional Dolby Pro Logic the surround channel playback frequency band was limited, Dolby Pro Logic II offers a wider band range (20 Hz to 20 kHz or greater). In addition, the surround channels were monaural (the surround left and right channels were the same) with previous Dolby Pro Logic, but Dolby Pro Logic II they are played as stereo signals. Various parameters can be set according to the type of source and the contents, so it is possible to achieve optimum decoding. DTS Neo:6TM surround This mode applies conventional 2-channel signals to the high precision digital matrix decoder used for DTS-ES Matrix 6.1 to achieve 6.1- channel surround playback. High precision input signal detection and matrix processing enable full band reproduction (frequency response of 20 Hz to 20 kHz or greater) for all 6.1 channels, and separation between the different channels is improved to the same level as that of a digital discrete system. DTS Neo:6 surround includes two modes for selecting the optimum decoding for the signal source. DTS Neo:6 Cinema This mode is optimum for playing movies. Decoding is performed with emphasis on separation performance to achieve the same atmosphere with 2-channel sources as with 6.1-channel sources. This mode is effective for playing sources recorded in conventional surround formats as well, because the in-phase component is assigned mainly to the center channel © and the reversed phase component to the surround (SL, SR and SB channels). DTS Neo:6 Music This mode is suited mainly for playing music. The front channel (FL and FR) signals bypass the decoder and are played directly so there is no loss of sound quality, and the effect of the surround signals output from the center © and surround (SL, SR and SB) channels add a natural sense of expansion to the sound field. The Denon AVR-2802 has all of the processing features of the Outlaw 1050 (Dolby Prologic, Dolby Digital , DTS ) plus DTS-ES Discrete 6.1, DTS-ES Matrix 6.1, and both of the above DSP features. There is also a multitude of differences in the I/O section of the two receivers (Denon offering more in this area, of course). Is the Outlaw really worth saving $150 (or less) when you are already investing $500 in an A/V receiver? Just tossing a few facts at ya (and some opinons). This message has been edited by Tron on 11-06-2001 at 01:01 PM

Just recently I picked up the Sound&Vision Holiday Guide and quickly turned to the receiver section and looked up Denon's models to see what it said. The guide is full of errors concerning the AVR-3802. The guide states that the receiver only has 6 channels when it actually has 7 and that the power per channel is 105 watts when its actually 110 watts per. So, I flipped through it a little more and quickly placed it back on the newsstand after finding a few other miscellaneous yet blatant errors. This message has been edited by Tron on 11-06-2001 at 10:04 AM

Well, Gil effectively pointed out that there really isn't any need for this particular THX technology. There definitely isn't any need for it today since we have Dolby Prologic II and DTS Neo:6 for stereo sources. Thanks to all that replied. This message has been edited by Tron on 11-06-2001 at 10:02 AM

Thanks for the reply DD2. Exactly how much "dynamic headroom" can I expect for 20 watts more per channel? Is it really that noticeable? Are there other characteristics that the added wattage may improve upon? This message has been edited by Tron on 11-02-2001 at 12:19 AM

Hmmm... What if the receiver has the ability to delay the left and right surrounds seperately? Delay one side a step or two more than the other and you have "Adaptive Decorrelation...?"

Hmmm... So, the receiver or decoder you have doesn't comply with all of the THX technologies to be considered "THX Ultra" compliant (nor did the manufacturer pay the royalty to be "THX Ultra certified"). This post begs the question: is it possible to apply a few mods (in this case non-permanent) to your HT system to enjoy some of these technological innovations? Here's one idea: First off, here's a clip from one of Denon's manuals explaining Adaptive Decorrelation (which, according to the manual, is a patented THX technology)... Adaptive DecorrelationTM In a movie theater, a large number of surround speakers help create an enveloping surround sound experience, while in a home theater there are usually only two speakers. This can make the surround speakers sound like headphones that lack spaciousness and envelopment. The surround sounds will also collapse into the closest speaker as you move away from the middle seating position. Adaptive Decorrelation slightly changes one surround channels time and phase relationship with respect to the other surround channel. This expands the listening position and createswith only two speakersthe same spacious surround experience as in a movie theater. So, even though the phase difference is only "slight" with the THX technology, would switching the positive and negative leads of one of the surround speakers have the same effect? What would the drawbacks be?

I've decided to get the quintet system as well, but I'm thinking of saving up for a receiver that's gonna make the most of the quintet's potential. I'm trying to decide whether the I should go with the Denon AVR-2802 (90 watts x6, 8 ohms, <.05%THD) or the AVR-3802 (110 watts x7, 8 ohms, <.05%THD). Since the quintet system is rated for 100 watts continuous and the above ratings are RMS wattage ratings for the Denon receivers, I'm a little perplexed with how an extra 10 watts of continuous wattage would affect them. I've read that more wattage gives the system more "dynamic headroom," but are there other issues I should know about? More to the point, I'm seeking clarification as to how the continuous wattage ratings of speakers and receivers correlate. Oh, one more thing, do you think the KSW-15 would be excessive? How about the punchiness between the KSW-15 and the KSW-12? I prefer punch over boom. Thanks in advance.

Well, I didn't read the article and don't really care to now since it seems the technical accuracy of it has been questioned. After absorbing the content of the replies to this post and taking notice of the quality of the information provided, who needs a magazine like _Stereophile_ anyway? Off to read more about the "phonon phenomenon."

I don't claim to be an expert (I'm no electrical engineer), but don't various types of materials (metals) have varying impedances? If so, then the materials directly relate to the impedance of a cable system, no?