Outlaw RR2150 - Is there a better receiver?

the outlaw is a beautiful-looking piece; if aesthetics are a criteria i'd go for it. it also has a usb in, so you can use it with computer source. i also like the much less expensive hk490 (very easy to find used), which has lots of power and digital ins; hks typically have very good tunibg sections. yet another inexpensive option is a high-quality, older avr (b&k, arcam), which'll sound very good in 2ch, have good inboard dacs, etc.

Recently a friend was looking for a receiver, but didn't want all the bells and whistles typically included on most contemporary receivers; he wanted to listen to music, not setup a home theater. He needed a turnkey solution (meaning no separate components), and I recommended the Outlaw to him. My rationale had mainly to do with the quality of construction, the simplicity of use, its domestic construction, its power rating and its uncluttered design. Most receivers today have so much crap in them that something is going to malfunction eventually. In this case, less is more in my opinion.

He is delighted with the unit, and uses it every day driving a distributed speaker system. It has been in service for nearly a year without so much as a hiccup, and it sounds very good, with an excellent tuner. I would recommend the unit to anyone who doesn't need all claptrap, but simply wants to reliably listen to music.

I use a fisher 400 that has been serviced in by family room. Sounds great and has plenty of power for the Rogers LS3/5A speakers I use. I just prefer tube receivers to ss receivers.

Sorry for my somewhat misleading post, guys. looking back at it, I should have said I like the NAD themost out of the stereo receivers I've heard. I haven't heard the Outlaw receiver. I have heard their mono block amps and wasn't much impressed if that's worth anything. They sounded pretty good for home theater, but just didn't do much for me for music. A bit dull and grainy sounding to my ears.

Not sure about model numbers..

The last Marantz stereo receiver I heard was current about 2 years ago. Not sure if it's been updated or not. It sounded overly warm and smooth. Bass was a bit mushy, and the highs were rolled off. The mids were pretty good.

The Rotel receiver was the less expensive one - they had a large one that looked like their AVR and a small one, which was cheaper. I looked on their website and can't find any stereo receivers, so I'm not sure if they have them any more. It sounded pretty good. A tad bright, but no more so than typical Rotel.

The NAD 725BEE is a 325BEE with a tuner and a few other features thrown in. I couldn't hear a difference between the two side by side. Its a bit warm, but punchy and engaging. It's no Mira 3 IMO, but none of these will be.

Denon makes a pretty decent sounding receiver too. There's a few models, and I've heard the about $500 or so one. I think the difference between them is features, but I could be wrong. If your speakers are lower impedence, I'd pass on Denon. As a brand they've got a tendency to struggle with 4 ohm speakers.

Harmon Kardon makes a good receiver too. I haven't heard the latest, but they've traditionally been pretty good. I'd take an NAD over them, but they're another option.

The Onkyo and Yamaha stereo receivers are junk. Stay away.

I don't know your speakers and how loud you're planning on going. That's a big determining factor IMO. My old 320BEE drove my 6 ohm PSB T55s to pretty loud levels without any problems in a room about the size of yours. The 326BEE is an updated version.

Just my observations/opinions.

If you want to keep things very simple and feature packed, have you looked into a Peachtree unit? Not sure about what the various units go for second hand, and which would match up best due to not knowing your speakers' demands. But add a streamer to it and you've got a very convenient system that doesn't need any physical media.

Just to add...

The Peachtree iDecco will allow you to connect an iPod and access it's digital stream.