I'll wager that the Outlaw has a superior analog board that would account for what you hear. The actual DAC chips have far less to do with it. To put it another way, the board is what makes it possible to hear the difference in DAC chips but all things being equal most people cant hear differences in DAC.
Make sure that in the Oppo, the "LPCM Rate Limit" is set to 192k so that the DAC is receiving full-res audio from the decoder. This will also ensure that full res PCM is sent out over SPDIF.
Most of what was developed for the 83SE was ported into the 93. The 95, comparatively speaking, is on steroids. You can sell that 83SE and pay for a 93 and more. But as demanding as you are, the 95 has your name written all over it.
As for the analog by-pass etc., I haven't heard any Outlaw gear, but of the dozens of AVRs and Pre-pros I have heard, not one had an analog by-pass or "pure audio" or whatever that ever really impressed me. Isn't your K2 system a dedicated two channel set up? Those speakers deserve a real 2 channel preamp.
I agree with the points you made about possible settings issues or DSPs that might still be lurking in the Outlaw's circuit... "Professor" I would also suggest using a coax over optical. I have heard real improvements in going with S/PDIF over Toslink.
All of which has nothing to do with JBL Performance Series speakers. (I was late to the party and missed the Oppo/Outlaw comparo)
As for a "real two-channel amp," send me a couple on approval, and I'll let you know what I think.
In a vain attempt to get this back on thread, the Citation 5.0 I'm using on the PT250 is a stellar analog two-channel pre. It and its 7.0 sibling were/are known for their analog qualities. Since the surround modes on them are outdated (except possibly 6 Axis) they make p-fine stereo preamps with clean, pure analog stages.
Since the PT250 is a bastardized offspring of unholy intercourse, it's okay for it to have a such an unblessed stereo pre.
BDP-83SE analog board:
BDP-95 analog board:
The one with the bigger board looks better
Performance Series 5.1/1990s L1.L5.L7/L100A
A nice thing... the "PT250" is already (IMO) at the level where comparing things like sources and front ends is interesting. This, in a room that most would think would present a few...
challenges ... a topic that came up at lunch, including a replay of some Toole-ish thinking
about room design and accuracy in replay, vs. what the sampled populous responds to as being an enjoyable listening experience.
For some reason, the kludgey combination of MacOSX, Parallels, Windows7, London Architect, USB-serial converter, BSS-366 didn't want to play in Peoria this time...
Next time, for sure
We had a good (too brief) time anyway (as has been mentioned)... Thanks Doug.
I’m having a problem figuring out how I’m going to bass manage my performance system. I have 4-PT800s, 1-PC600, 2-PS1400s, 4-HTPS400s. I’m planning on running the fronts as PS/PT towers using the internal PS crossover. I’m using a Yamaha RX-V3800 as a Pre-Pro (I have separate power amps). I want to run the front towers as small and cross over to the HTPS400s at 40-Hz and the center & surrounds as small crossed over at 80-Hz. The problem is that the Yamaha won’t let me do that. There is only one crossover setting for all speakers set to small. I have a Velodyne SMS-1 that I could run the front signal through but it has a fixed crossover at 80-Hz. Would it cause a problem to run the fronts as large, the center & surrounds as small and crossover to the HTPS400s at 80-Hz? Any other options you can think of? I've exhausted my HT budget and have to make this work until I can afford a dedicated Pre-Pro.
I run the front stacks as large, plus I feed them the LFE signal too. But with 4x HTPS400 you don't really need the PS1400 for sub duty. I think you'll be very happy with the simple 80Hz crossover and fronts as large.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)