Outlaw Amps vs. Mark Levinson Amps - Page 2

To echo some of the more rational sentiments here, buy the Outlaw amp. Put the money you save into treating your room to improve its acoustics and then spend the rest of the money on better speakers. The improvement in sound will dwarf any potential difference in sound between the Outlaw and the Levinson. Those advocating the Levinson might well tell you that adding Shakti stones to it will really help you bring out the best of what the amp has to offer. I've been part of audiophile demos where several amps at different price points from $2000 to $10000 were switched out back to back to back to back for two channel listening and the differences were, at best, minimal.

And yes, I've heard Levinson amps and Outlaw Amps but in different rooms with different speakers and at different times. I left both demos liking the speakers used a great deal, but not really having a feeling about the amps one way or another. The rule with this gear is really that you get AT MOST what you pay for, but often much, much less, especially when buying at the high end.

I would always apply my budget to my weakest link first. Often, the biggest gains are to be main by upgrading acoustics and the speakers. Then also make sure you have enough power to make it sing. If I had the means and the budget, I'd have no qualms to buy ML gear provided everything else was in place because you are buying a beautiful sounding, beautifully made piece of gear that you should enjoy for years to come (with a company that will back it up). That's why I always like Bryston gear, their warranty is excellent (20 years!). You are buying for the long term and thus I can justify paying more up front for a great sounding, solid piece of gear.

For me, since I can't afford ML gear, I would be looking at Outlaw stuff, but I don't see anything wrong with splurging for a high end model from ML provided the rest of your system is already top notch.

Although I pretty much agree with you, playing devil's advocate, the audiophile could say, "Crown, QSC, etc. are not designed to sound good. They are designed to be punished by 2 ohm loads for days on end without shutting down. You don't see true audiophiles running Crown amps do you?" I still believe, when money is an object, room acoustics first, speakers second, everything else last in whatever order floats your boat.

Something has to be said about an amp that can be punished with a 2ohm load for extended periods of time. I will also argue that it will be hard to hear the difference between crowns studio line and a Levinson. However I prefer the live sound of thier live sound stuff Macrotech line. I have heard some great sounding systems with these amps. Only issue is loud fans and that is easly resolved I can see much bigger changes from good room acoustics and quality speakers then any other part of a system.

No doubt about the acoustics and the speakers. I haven't heard any of the Macrotech line, but they look like beasts.

Peter, if you're still reading this thread, what sort of loads do you test your amps with? For example, would your amps have issue with speakers that drop to a low (bordering on 1 ohm) resistance at higher frequencies where the phase angle is somewhat unfavorable?

That they are nothing will get the poliece over quicker then a macrotech running your sub They look like hell but are really great amps. They can get priecy but will last a really long time for home use. You need to have speakers to handel that kind of power though. They are very punchey.

I once worked with a guy who spent big bucks on his audio system. His system in todays dollars would be somewhere in the neighborhood of $1,000,000. He and a few of his other audio fanatics decided that double blind testing was the only way they were going to be able to sort out all the BS that floats about as audio truth. Being an engineer and a pretty smart fellow, his team set about designing some tests. The bottom line, none could identify thier favorites in double blind testing. Only the most shoddy of products could be discerned. There is a reasonable level of performance at some reasonable cost that will clearly be better than an off the shelf $39.95 KMart home theater in a box setup.

Beyond that, nothing but double blind testing would convince me of any "betterness".

And I agree that if you cannot change your room, (read WAF), then speakers will be the best bang for the buck improvement you can make. Go to the DIY section here and you can probably have some very fine speakers for a reasonable price.

For example, my IB subwoofer is reasonable in cost and superb in performance and even WAF friendly.

That's actually a fairly well-known phenomenon.


Why do you say that?

IMHO, hats off to Outlaw for making high quality, reasonably priced HT audio gear.

Hi, Peter:
Quick question. After searching in the owners manual, I could not find anything that says what class of amplifiers, (i.e., A, AB, D, or ?) are in the Outlaw 7900? Any ideas?

Thanks, in advance

You dont need to convince me, I absolutly love my 7 2200 monoblocks. I just couldnt see anything really being all that much better anywhere near the price. Ive run em hard for hours and hours and they never feel above luke warm.

Tribeman's comments are a welcome relief compared to some of the BS I have heard from audio companies.

This is true. I love when people wax rhapsodic about the "massive" differences between receivers, or even DACs, and haven't spent a minute on what really counts.

Wow the Amplifier debate again.

I remember sometime in the late 1980's or early 1990's somebody posted a $10,000 challenge if a person can tell the difference between amplifiers in terms of sound quality alone. Guess what..........as far as I can remember: NOBODY WON the challenge

I'll try to dig up the internet if there are still remnants of that challenge. You guys do the same too

As far as I can tell, the difference between the high end amps are cosmetics and the high quality of components used. YMMV
If I had oodles of money, I'll buy the high end amps for the pristige factor alone but hey, back to reality

Dang. Nothing dies in the internet. Just typed in $10,000 challenge and amplifier and it spit out a bunch like this:
http://www.tom-morrow-land.com/tests/ampchall/index.htm

My budget IS my weakest link

What Crown amp line are you refering to? The highest-end line I can find at crownaudio.com is the MacroTech series.

Demo both amps and see what sounds best for you.

I'll weigh in on my personal experience with amplifiers. While I agree that room acoustics and speaker placement as well as room treatments have the biggest impact, I disagree that there is no appreciable difference between entry level amplifiers and higher end amplifiers.

Perhaps it's not really a comparison of cost but more in the design of the amplifier. I had a Rotel RMB 1095 amplifier mated to a Denon 3805 receiver which sounded very good. Many audio salesman told me I would hear a noticeable difference by stepping up to a "higher end" amp such as Anthem or Parasound Halo. Do to some issues with hum from my Rotel (not ground loop issues by the way) I decided to audition a Halo A51. WOW!!! The difference in bass slam and overall detail was night and day! Nothing else changed in my system other than the amplifier.

The amplifier hum I experienced from the Rotel was also present from the Parasound Halo. It turned out that the problem was with my incoming house power and not the amp. But the difference between the two amps was significant without any other changes in my equipment other than the amplifier. So to say that no one can tell the difference between any two amps with similar specifications would be, in my opinion, a bold and unsubstantiated claim.

I would be willing to take a double blind challenge test between a Parasound Halo A51 and a Rotel RMB-1095 any day. I'm not knocking the Rotel, I'm just stating that the difference for me between the two was night and day. And I suspect the same can be said for other amplifier comparisons.

No offense, but the difference between two quality amps should not be night and day. But it may just be your defintion of night and day which confuses me.

My concept of night and day would be like AM vs FM stereo. If non audiophiles can hear the difference, I would call it night and day. 40kbs AAC vs. 64kbs is night and day. I can instantly hear the difference. But 64kbs vs 128kbs AAC is much less obvious even though some people would use the term night and day to describe that difference.

1. outlaw 7500 has a sight hum that you can hear about 3" away from amp.
2. Outlaw amp has problems with very low impedance loads (less than 2 ohms ). This makes them problematic for Electrostatic speakers.
3. In a normal HT setup they sound truly superb.


There are lots of very very good amps out there that are not ML. Bryston makes some. So does Krell. Outlaw makes amps that are very good that most of us can afford.


Joel

It is just the Svengali effect. Note that in the tale Svengali was an unsuccessful mid aged musician. These days he would be the sales manager for an audio related business.


http://www.hypnotism.org/Svengali.htm

None taken.

I became interested in audio in 1974 and got my first job in a custom audio company shortly after that.

I can tell the difference between a slight difference and a major difference. The difference between the Rotel and the Halo were major differences with my system. I would bet that anyone comparing the two would agree.

I also have a hearing loss from my military service so my ears aren't the best either. So if I can notice a substantial difference in sound between the two I have no doubt that others could as well.

This entire forum is full of them. It's usually the entry level enthusiasts: ones who have been in the hobby for 4-5 years, knows how to hook things up, knows their way around the receiver menus, but still studies the spec sheets due to lack of confidence in their own listening skills. They haven't discovered their own taste in sound and haven't formed any strong opinions. They obsess about DTS-MA, deep color, HDMIv1.3, various BR profiles, cramming 7.1 speakers into their living room, and if $700 receivers can drive 4ohm speakers.

Given the same budget, the ones who have more experience who turn to room acoustics/placement and sinking their money on speakers will inevitably make a better sounding system using older technology.

I am one of those "enthusiasts" with less than five year's experience with the newer technologies. I just recently sold my Mac 1900 receiver from 1975, and am a believer than vinyl (new or good condition) will always sound better than disc. So you know where I come from.
I'm currently upgrading to separates from a Marantz SR18 receiver, and jumped on the Integra 9.8 pre/pro bandwagon after reading its thread. I tried to feed the Marantz' amp-only circuit with the Integra, but am getting a hum which I think is from the interconnects, or a ground loop, or both. I'm thinking of becoming an Outlaw and hope that using the two on separate circuits with balanced cables will solve the hum problem. Outlaw's reviews here and on ultimateavmag influenced me, along with my budget.
My question is, how does one go about improving room acoustics, and is it relatively inexpensive to DIY. My DEf Tech BP 2002s are 10+ years old and serve me well, but I would think the bi-polar array is affected even more than usual by the acoustics of the wall behind them. It is a very thin textured overlay on drywall, and being an inside wall I'd would assume it's uninsulated. Can that be improved upon? Also, there is an entry door w/window along with a doubled up window on one side of the room. The other side of the room is open. Close in that side of the room? Heavy drapes on the windows?

I'd like to chime in with the standard cheap guy knee jerk recommendation before anyone else: "Monoprice, Oppo".....oops! wrong thread.

I have not heard the Outlaw amp (did own a Outlaw 950 AVP briefly) or the Levinson amp, but I have owned some pretty good amps (Bryston, Citation, Chiro, Marsh, Carver, and the H/K Signature series). I heard differences in all of them - some subtle, some not so subtle - and price was not a consistent factor. My reference stereo amp is the Innersound ESL (built by Coda) and it is not cheap, though cheaper than a Levinson, and IMO it is one of the world's great amps. Ironically, Innersound is no longer in business, but the same amp is still made and sold by Roger Sanders, its original designer, now dba as Sanders Sound Systems. OTOH, my HT multichannel amp of choice is the quite inexpensive ($1k street) Sherwood Newcastle A-965 to which David Rich gave considerable praise in his "Sensible Sound" technical review. Next to the Innersound, it is the best sounding amp I have owned, and I highly recommend it. As to the OP's question, my advice is (after you get the most accurate speakers you can afford) listen to as many amps as you can get your hands on and decide what sounds best to you, whether it is the Outlaw, the Levinson, or some other brand.