Stereophile reviews the Outlaw RR2160

sanford12

sanford12

Old Stuff New Stuff As long as it's Good Stuff
Subscriber
My bother texted that the RR2160 is on the cover and they have a 6 page review. Said they had nothing bad to say about it and highly recommended for a ridiculously low price. I'll have to go to the library today and give it a read.
 
Register to hide this ad
It's a very positive review. Contrary to those who dislike magazine reviews, there is no mention of "jaw dropping" or "suspension of disbelief". For all you objectivists there are very comprehensive tests performed using an Audio Precision analyzer.
 
I just finished the article and agree with the reviewers assessment. His observation on the MC side of the phono section is exactly what I conclude. You can see this in the 1st post on the second page of thread "Trigger has been pulled and a New Outlaw RR2160 is here". You can read it in the New Gear - Performance section
 
Last edited:
IME Outlaw delivers a lot of bang for the buck. Spec wise the Outlaw seems to be a receiver I could live with. However, I'm not all that fond of the "Art Deco" looks. In any case, I hope you enjoy it Sanford12.
 
JoeESP9 said:
IME Outlaw delivers a lot of bang for the buck. Spec wise the Outlaw seems to be a receiver I could live with. However, I'm not all that fond of the "Art Deco" looks. In any case, I hope you enjoy it Sanford12.
Click to expand...
I'm an art deco fan and the RR2160's styling is not my favorite. But the layout and functionality are above average. It does look better in person.
 
I have the RR-2150 paired with some Focal Profile 908 speakers. This system is in the wife's sewing room. It certainly can create some nice sounds, tho it is not a primary system.
 
A quality unit and a great value, but the Art Deco styling is just... stupid. With the re-hash of their previous receiver, not going with a late 1970's "Silver Era" style look was a huge mistake. Art Deco was the 1930's... they did'nt even HAVE "stereos" in the 1930's!

Glad to see the great review, sad about the small knobs and the stupid "WTF??" styling based on what Outlaw's owner saw at his great-grandma's house when he was 6...
 
Last edited:
JoeESP9 said:
It's a very positive review. Contrary to those who dislike magazine reviews, there is no mention of "jaw dropping" or "suspension of disbelief". For all you objectivists there are very comprehensive tests performed using an Audio Precision analyzer.
Click to expand...

Apparently, I missed all the prior "drama" in the thread. I don't know what it was, but I hope my comment is not deemed part of it.
Yes, JA did a nice job on the tests and for the most part, the receiver did well. The only thing that bothered me was the SNR - it seems the receiver is noise-limited to around 13 bits.
 
It has a remote. Build a front panel covering like a speaker grille cover, done. It would make it look 5000% better.

Because... looks do matter for me.
 
909Hemi said:
A quality unit and a great value, but the Art Deco styling is just... stupid. With the re-hash of their previous receiver, not going with a late 1970's "Silver Era" style look was a huge mistake. Art Deco was the 1930's... they did'nt even HAVE "stereos" in the 1930's!

Glad to see the great review, sad about the small knobs and the ridiculous styling.
Click to expand...

It's not how big the knob but how you use it. Art Deco is still relevant designers borrow from it all the time. Here it could have been done better. Heck look at some of the butt ugly NAD and Carver stuff and it doesn't stop people from buying it because it's good stuff. Most NAD pieces looks like you were a bad boy and got a lump of coal for Christmas.but I still owned several of them. I wouldn't let looks keep me from a fine piece of equipment and I wouldn't go on someones post and let them just how ugly and stupid looking I thought their new piece of kit was. Sorry but even in the day of the internet it's bad manners. KInd of like that person at work that's always saying mean stuff with the excuse of "Hey I'm just being honest". And since were talking looks the Pioneer SX-780's face full of cheap looking toggle switches is not one of Pioneers finest efforts. Glass houses and all that.
 
Last edited:
I'm not loosing the fact of the price point of $799! I could live with a little bizarre face. It actually grows on me after seeing a couple times. I like the against the current trend in AV, design of it. Just two 110 watt channels with two sub outputs. And a remote. Less in actually more in my opinion.
 
It looks better in real life. There are several colors and textures to the faceplate. The 100 watts RMS power per channel is the real thriller.
 
I will probably buy it, but I will just be embarrassed when my friends look at it and say "WTF!?" :(
I will apologize for it's retarded looks, and tell them "but... it works really good!!".

With all the money, time, and resources spent in designing the style of a new product, this was a MASSIVE missed opportunity to totally dominate an entire segment of the Audio marketplace! :( If Kenwood, Yamaha, Pioneer. or Marantz came out with a cool looking retro Silver-era styled receiver with the Outlaw's specs for less than $1,000, then all of the other receiver manufactures would be put out of business...
 
sanford12 said:
And since were talking looks the Pioneer SX-780's face full of cheap looking toggle switches is not one of Pioneers finest efforts. Glass houses and all that.
Click to expand...
Wow really? I think the 780 is a very classy lookin receiver and I love toggle switches.Why do you think they're cheap looking?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom