Richey,

You could be right, I honestly don't know. When I called I told them what I wanted and they took down all my info. They did not say nothing to me at that time. I guess I'll keep an eye on my email, cause I'd like to think they'd email or call if it's not available right now.

I may just give them a call back later on today. At anyrate, yeah I'll keep everyone posted. I plan on doing a little review on it once I receive it and get everything up and running.

Cool. Look forward to a review of some sort.

Muttsinparadise, Outlaw gear is well thought of around here. Great customer service and nice performance makes it worth checking out. Don't know if you really need 200w per channel. Might be worth asking the Outlaws if they will let you trade up if you aren't satisfied with the 7125. That way you'll get what you want.

The Emotiva stuff is nice as well. The DMC-1/MPS-1 has been around for a few years and is well regarded. I'm thinking the MMC-1/IPS-1 combo that Sutter linked would be a positve choice as well...since it is based on the same technology as the BigDogs(DMC-1/MPS-1) Too bad there aren't any reviews on it yet. Hurry up Sutter!

Ah dunno, Ive been pretty impressed with the B&K AVR507 I put in our theater. But I didnt really look into getting seperates.

Well if I do this again, and I’m sure I will………

I’d probably buy a mid level Yamaha 7.1 AVR. I haven’t look at them in a while so I don’t which model. I’d want it to have HDMI switching though. I don’t want video processing, just switching. I like the Yamaha’s audio options. They seam to be one step ahead of the rest of the pack with functions and user options. I’d use the Yamaha for a processor and I’d pick up a good three channel amp to drive the mains and center. I’d be looking for an amp that would put out around 300 WPC at 4 ohm. Any AVR should drive the surrounds and backs. No need to waste money on a big assed amp for them.

In a year or so I’d peddle the AVR and get another mid level AVR with all the new bells and whistles of that year…..like HDMI 1.3 / or whatever it is then and HD Dolby / DTS…..

The three channel amp should be good for a decade.

Mutts, the first point is that you don't have to expect "diminishing fidelity returns". There's very little correlation beween price and sound quality in audio electronics and any of the combos that you list should perform transparently for you without adding any audible sonic character of their own. The small differences in maximum power capacity(2-3dB)aren't likely to be a factor.

My suggestion, somewhat along the line of Mike's, is to first get a powerful receiver such as the Yamaha 2700. Try this first and you might well find that it meets your needs entirely, while saving a significant amount of money for something more important. If you'd find, however, that you'd want something still more for the M80s, you could buy a separate two channel amp or two monoblocks, and use the 2700's excellent processing together with its amps for the center and surrounds. But at this time it shouldn't be assumed that it would be necessary to do that.

My Denon 2805 by itself fills my 8100 Cu Ft room with no problems. Unless you have thousands to spend, you might be better off taking John's advice.

Wow! Great feedback. Still digesting most of it . It's interesting, there seems to be two perspectives. One implies that there is perhaps greater musical experience beyond the $1500-1800 price range, while the other implies that there is little to be gained in musical experience (and indeed there seems to be a decrease in controller "extras" such as HD/XM,Internet radio, HDMI switching, etc.). Recently, I've been reading a research article on psychoacoustics and blinded listeners' preference for loudspeakers. Would anybody know a link to similar research comparing controllers and amplifiers?

Mutts, if you're not familiar with the classic Stereo Review blind listening test on amplifiers which enraged some audiophiles, but opened the eyes(and ears)of others, you might find it to be informative(and somewhat amusing). Among other results, note that the $12,000 pair of tube amps were indistinguishable from the $220 Pioneer receiver. It's also instructive to compare the sometimes flowery language used to describe sound characteristics in the open listening before the blind sessions with the total inability to identify those characteristics in the tests. When the labels and price tags disappeared, so did the sound differences.

Nothing's changed; engineers can design amplifiers with flat frequency response from 20-20KHz and with inaudibly low noise and distortion levels at quite reasonable cost. When operated within their designed power limits they add no discernible sonic coloration and the answer to "How does it sound?" is "It doesn't" .

Honestly I'd have to disagree with John. I have a Yammie 2500 and an HK 635 and I can tell the difference between the two. John insists that receivers don't change the sound, but I think he's confusing receivers with wires.

I've never used separates, so I can't comment on how much of a difference you could expect by going that route. I was considering it, but I decided to hold off. I'm certainly not missing anything by not having them. I can play the music as loud as I want and louder-I'm really only limited by the neighbors.

I'm curious, DrunkenWolf, how would you characterize the difference? And John, I understand your logic, but to extend it a little, why even then purchase a mid-level Yamaha, Denon, Pioneer, etc? Why not go with one of their lower cost models, which seem to have the same bells and whistles and similar power ratings? Should one assume there are certain elements of 'build quality', below which undesireable sonic character is noticeable? In a nutshell, "How cheap can one go?" And again, thanks to everybody - this is great info!

DrunkenWolf, the truth is that I do have a little spare change to play with, even after expensing for accessories and room acoustics. But the money isn't burning a hole in my pocket. I know from my own history of hifi buying behavior that factors other than sonics influence my decisions; some logical like warranty and service; others less logical like appearance and 'extras' that I have no likelihood of using. I'm comfortable with this psychology, as I understand that they all contribute to the enjoyment or disappointment of the post-purchase experience. At first, I was confused by, for example, John and Haoleb's varying perceptions of the correlation between price and reproduction fidelity. But now I'm glad to have gotten both of their opinions - if there were no variability in our perceptions of this equipment, these discussions and this hobby would be much less interesting to me. BTW Haoleb, the furniture example is pretty funny - shopping for most things in Hawaii contrasts sharply with the mainland - thank god for e-tailers like Axiom!

Sure mutts, the requirements for amplifying transparently are well-known(flat frequency response, inaudibly low noise and distortion)to design engineers and are applied to even units quite modest in price. So, as long as a unit meets those specs no "undesireable sonic character" appears regardless of make or price. Unfortunately there're quite a few old audiophiles' tales to the contrary floating around based on perceptions not founded on objective evidence. Carefully controlled blind listening tests show that what is claimed to be heard isn't what really is heard when variables in loudness,etc. aren't a factor.

If receivers are sonically neutral then why does mine have graphics dedicated to telling me how it is altering the source sound for each speaker? If 'true neutral' sound from a receiver is the prime metric by which we rate the device then why does so much engineering go into measuring and compensating for speakers and room conditions?

I believe that most of what is heard as different sounding recievers would be coming from the preamp section of the reciever. If one would do a side by side comparison while running them in pure direct mode, or whatever the particular reciever calls it, then the perception of sounding different would be nullifed.

I still think that a system can be benifited by an external amp if one plays their music or movies in the +90db range.

Is running in pure direct what people tend to do?

Mine is always in pure direct mode. I run a Rotel amp and preamp, no unnessesary DSP mode for me . It's a 2.1 music system only.

That Emotive system is SEXY, damn.

However if it doesn't work well, then pffffft

- D

I think what John was saying is that amps don’t change sound. Not AV/Pre amp processing. Anyone with any common sense knows that the manor in which a processor manipulates a signal can have significant changes in how it sounds. After the signal gets manipulated by the processor, it goes to the amp and the amp does nothing but ‘boost’ that signal. It is this part of the chain where there is no coloration occurring. An extremely overly simple way of looking at it is to remember that the signal is nothing but a mix of electrons traveling from point A, to point B as pulses. An amp does nothing more than piss off these electrons and get them moving faster with more force. It doesn’t add or subtract the number of electrons in the pulses. The processor on the other hand does screw with them. It changes the quantity of electrons, the shape of the pulses and also directs them in different directions.

The discussion regarding ‘how much’ amplification is needed is one that I tend to disagree with folks who say all you need is a few watts of power. But I tend to listen to music / movies a little louder than most. Loud enough to where I need my cell phone set to vibe and stuck in my pocket……Even this discussion gets morphed into a ‘how many watts do I need argument’ when in fact it has little to do with watts, but the current in which the wattage calculation is based off of. Current has more an effect than voltage when considering usable power. You can in theory have an amp that is rated at 300 watts that won’t drive squat whereas a different amp rated at 25 watts will do just fine. Even though the voltage is adequate, if there is not enough current to maintain that voltage, voltage will drop which will reduce wattage. Watts = Amps x Volts or P (watts) = I (current) x E (voltage)

Another way to look at this is to apply the theory of internal combustion engine power and their application in vehicles. A diesel engine rated at 300 hp will move a 10,000 pound truck much more efficiently than a gas engine producing 300 hp. The reason being is that the diesel engine develops 300 hp at a much lower rpm because it has much more torque. The 300 hp gas engine has to spin at a much higher rpm to develop the same HP. Comparatively speaking, torque would be current, whereas wattage is comparable to HP. HP is nothing more than a mathematical sum of torque over time. T (torque) X N (rpm) / 5252

Let’s say this 10,000 pound truck is cruising along at 60 mph pulling a 5000 pound trailer and you come to a hill. If it has the diesel engine, the truck maintains speed up the hill and the rpm stays fairly constant. It does this because it has the torque to maintain this speed. The same scenario but now the truck has the gas engine with the same HP rating. The truck starts to slow and then downshifts, which raises engine rpm. Pretty soon the engine speed is pegged at red line and the truck continues to slow. Even though the HP is the same, the truck can not pull the load as effectively as the diesel engine powered truck…….it just doesn’t have enough torque.

So now to relate this analogy back to audio…….

You are watching some bass heavy movie with a big action scenes and your speakers are large towers that have multiple and/or large drivers. During normal volume scenes, everything is fine and it’s plenty loud enough. But when the action kicks up and if your amp is rated at 120 watt but has low current, the action scenes do not play as loud as the sound track is supposed to play and the speakers clip (truck slows down). But if you had a similar rated 120 watt high current amp, the action scenes make you reach for the remote to turn it down.

Thanks for the analogy MDrew - could you extend it further. Is this the logic behind the continuous power / dynamic power comments I've read? And if so, when comparing amps or receivers, what measurements in the specs would identify average and max sustained "torque"? Are there multiple amperage figures?

<<<<An amp does nothing more than piss off these electrons and get them moving faster with more force>>>>

Is this why, for instance, when I listen to Green Day at insane levels vs. listening to, say, Abba at "normal levels", the Green Day stuff has more "attitude"? 'Cuz the electrons are really pissed off?

Seriously, I liked your analogy and explanation... just couldn't resist a "pissed off electrons" setup...

Without getting into a 50 page dissertation about atomic structures, electrons, protons and magnetic fields, the most effective and simplest thing to look for is ratings that say something to the effect…….”all channels driven simultaneously”. You will see this in bold print on HK’s, NAD, Rotel and other high end manufactures. I rarely put much faith in WPC ratings and rely on max current capabilities.

Ya Mark, that’s one way to look at it. Especially at high volume…….electrons with attitude.

I’m not about to profess to be an expert on how an amp works, but I do know electricity to some extent. And that’s all a signal is, an electrical current that is made up of a bunch of electrons traveling around a magnetic core. The energy of these electrons can be called power.

If you’re really interested and have a lot of spare time to dig into this, here’s a great web sight with some outstanding articles. They are quite technical, but as you start to read through them, you’ll start to understand.

Index
http://sound.westhost.com/articles.htm

Amps sound
http://sound.westhost.com/amp-sound.htm

Amp basics
http://sound.westhost.com/amp-basics.htm

Those articles just talk about physics. We're talking about electron psychology

So maybe I was too general with the analogy. Seeing how there seams to be an interest in this topic, here’s another link to an even better article. It’s not as technical and easier to understand.

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/amplifier.htm