Re: Outlaws & Five M80's Conclusion (long post)
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,039
connoisseur
|
OP
connoisseur
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,039 |
Update as of today, still waiting for teh return shipping lables to arrive, may need to call and see what the hold up is, oops, no pun intended.
|
|
|
Re: Outlaws & Five M80's Conclusion (long post)
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,039
connoisseur
|
OP
connoisseur
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,039 |
The return shipping lables arrived today, so will be packing up the 950/770 tomorrw and calling UPS for a pickup. Took 9 days for a letter from Maine to here, good thing it was nothing important. lol
|
|
|
Re: Outlaws & Five M80's Conclusion (follow-up)
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 353
devotee
|
devotee
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 353 |
It would appear the Outlaw amp that you had did not show any problems during testing.
I have to wonder if the Outlaw amplifier is more sensitive to low impedance than the Parasound or perhaps their thermal cutoff limit is set higher to ensure the amplifier's longevity. That is, it may be a "over-safe" safety of the amplifier design rather than a fault.
Apparently after testing, and finding "no problems" they sold the amp as B-stock with no further issues.
I am tending to think that while in use the M80s may drop from their nominal impedance and, while not faulty, were causing the thermal overload in the Outlaw amp.
My Monitor Audios are 6 ohm so they should not have any issues like this.
|
|
|
Re: Outlaws & Five M80's Conclusion (follow-up)
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044 |
Wha? How do you know this?
I am the Doctor, and THIS... is my SPOON!
|
|
|
Re: Outlaws & Five M80's Conclusion (follow-up)
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 353
devotee
|
devotee
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 353 |
In reply to:
Wha? How do you know this?
Checked with the Outlaws. When my home theater room is built, I planned to get Outlaw equipment. This thread peaked my curiosity so I am researching.
It seems like a problem that is explainable but no one seems to have taken it to the final conclusion. The Axiom speakers work, the Outlaw amp and processor work. They did not work together? Something does not add up.
|
|
|
Re: Outlaws & Five M80's Conclusion (follow-up)
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,331
axiomite
|
axiomite
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 6,331 |
Well, that's Outlaw's side of the story. Dennis has a different take on the whole thing. We don't know which side is accurate, and each of us is free to believe what we wish.
Jack
"People generally quarrel because they cannot argue." - G. K. Chesterton
|
|
|
Re: Outlaws & Five M80's Conclusion (follow-up)
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,039
connoisseur
|
OP
connoisseur
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,039 |
Jack has a good point, and as he says, there are two sides of the issue. I do not wish to restart this thread again, if you are interested in the consumer version, contact me privately.
|
|
|
Re: Outlaws & Five M80's Conclusion (follow-up)
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,760 Likes: 40
connoisseur
|
connoisseur
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,760 Likes: 40 |
Funny thing. I have a friend who has an Outlaw 1050 receiver (65 wpc?) driving a pair of M60 like M665s and a pair of M22 like M55s in the back ... sounds terrific.
I have another friend who has the same speakers driven by an Outlaw 950 processor and 5 of the Outlaw 200 watt monoblocks. Does not sound nearly as good.
Go figure.
Enjoy the Music. Trust your ears. Laugh at Folks Who Claim to Know it All.
|
|
|
Re: Outlaws & Five M80's Conclusion (follow-up)
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441 |
Could be the differnce in room acoustics.
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,984
Posts442,691
Members15,643
|
Most Online2,699 Aug 8th, 2024
|
|
0 members (),
595
guests, and
0
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|