|   Outlaw 1050 vs. Denon 2802 | pegasusxls2
Aug 26, 2002 4:09 AM | | I recently compared a 1050 to Denon's 1802 and 2802.Same room,same speakers,same CD,same DVD.The Outlaw clearly was supperior to the 1802.The Outlaw 1050 was on a par with the 2802 when watching a DVD movie,however the Denon 2802 was much smoother and richer when listening to an audio CD.Can anyone tell me why? |
| re: Outlaw 1050 vs. Denon 2802 | igor
Aug 26, 2002 6:46 AM | | My guess would be that while everything being equal, did you use a SPL meter to make sure the volume settings were the same? Even a little difference in volume can easily make one piece of equipment sound better (the louder one) than the other one. I would have guess that your findings would have been the opposite in regards to the 2802 -- that The Outlaw would have sounded better on CD, but the edge to the 2802 on video. The 2802 does have a higher watt rating, might make some difference. Maybe the dvd player you used was just better suited for the Denon than it was the Outlaw. FOr my money, I would go with the 2802. Better features, especially the Dolby PL2 which is worth it me, if the $$ for the two units is within $150 or so. I would expect the Outlaw to release a newer version soon, with these newer upgrades. And Denon should be having newer versions this fall, so the 2802 will be even better priced soon. And one advantage of the 1802 is that it does have preouts, so adding an amp (for the front 3 channels) could also be a realistic proposition. |
| re: Outlaw 1050 vs. Denon 2802 | pegasusxls2
Aug 26, 2002 3:49 PM | | It probally was just the settings........I monkeyed around with the volume and everytime the CD audio was warmer and smoother with the Denon 2802.The 2802 is now $200 more than the 1050.....still a good sound for the money with either one.......I am considering useing a tube to amp my front two speakers.....is that possible?? |
| re: Outlaw 1050 vs. Denon 2802 | igor
Aug 27, 2002 5:54 AM | | Sure, you could add a tube amp to power the front two speakers. Whether you would want to use it every time you use your rig for HT is another matter, just make sure that the levels are matched, otherwise you might find the front channels are underpowered compared to the centers and surround, or vice versa. Plus tubes have a shelf life, so I don't know about you, but my HT receiver is on a lot during the day -- wife is home with the kids for now. If I had a tube amp turned on as often as my system is used, the tubes would probably be needed to be replaced quite often. But I suppose you could always unhook the cable from the reciever to the amp when you use it for HT.
There are some compromises using a less expensive HT receiver as a pre amp, vs. a real preamp, receiver pre amps are not as quiet, and may add "color" to the sound. Others can explain it better. But there is a reason why good pre amps cost a lot of money, and why HT receivers are more affordable. Integrated amps are a nice compromise.
I've decided (especially now that I have more room in the new house) to have a dedicated HT room (and the equipment is pretty humble for now) which is used in a family type room, and a dedicated 2 channel music only system in the living room. The new system will be nothing too fancy either; a decent integrated amp, quality cd or sacd player, and a pair of decent floorstanding speakers, with no sub. Perhaps going with 2 systems might be easier for you, and ultimately not that much more expensive. You really don't need to spend that much $ on HT gear to get decent sound out of dvds, and TV. It's different though for music. But budget plays a big role here, maybe for, definitely for me!
Over all though, if it's possible for you, see if you can demo the 2 receivers in your home, and see which one you like better. Both have pre-outs, so you can add a 2 channel amp (or 6 channels if you want). And if possible, borrow a tube amp, hook it up and see what you think. I haven't tried it myself, but it is possible. Good luck, I'll be curious to see what you come up with. ian |
| |
