Video Asylum

Posted by Karl W. on October 27, 2000 at 21:00:15:

In Reply to: Cal SSP 2500 Vs. Proceed AVP posted by jl on October 27, 2000 at 09:24:50:

Have you come to the right place! I owned a Proceed AVP and was unhappy about because they were slow to upgrade. I wanted to be able to process 24/96 signals so that I could listen to Chesky and Classic DADs. The Proceed still can't process such a signal. Proceed is planning to upgrade the AVP but it is going to be a year from now. as for sound quality, I was happy with the AVP until I my CAL SSp-2500 broke-in. Man, it is very clean and a true hi=end pre-amp on 2 channel. When I first bought it the soundstage was a little narrow and I was wondering if I had made the right decision. But damn did it break in well. The dacs are 24/96 on all channels even the subwoffer. Also the frequency response extends to 44khz which give you more benefit when playing the new formats. The major drawback is there are only 5.1 channels. Cal is supposed to be upgrading the units to 7.1 channels. Also the unit is not as flexible as the Proceed, no adjustment for delay on the front 2 channels, just center and surrounds. But my main consideration was sound quality on 2 channels. The CAl unit is the best on 2 channel that I have heard. I have heard the Krell units, both Theta units including the newest one, EAD, Aaragon Soundstage, Lexicon, Meridian,Parasound,B&K and Sunfire. They all do well on the surround formats. But for 2 channel with the analog bypass, they are very far behind this unit. You probabely have seen the Widescreen Review of this unit. In time I am sure the "rest of the field" will catch up, but rigth now Cal Audio is way ahead of the game. Another reason that I was not happy with the Proceed is that it could not switch component signals. The CAl video swithcher can. I do not know if even when they upgrade the unit if the Proceed AVP will be able to switch component signals. My major complaint with Cal Audio is that there customer service SUCKS!!! It has taken them several days to respond to e-mail. I have been given mis-information. They will give little to not information about the status of upgrades to the unit or even if they are planning such upgrades. It appears to me that this is due to Cal Audio being taken over by Sensory Science. When I call the actual factory I finally got some real answers and the information I need. Sensory Science forwards all of Cal Audio's e-mail to their customer service apparently and they don't know shi#@# about the SSP-2500. E-mail them and ask them when they plan to add 7.1 channels, the line doubler to the video processor, or the on-screen menu display and see if you can get some straight answers. I seriouly doubt you will be happy with the answers you get. They are very evasive. Proceed was not like this. Even still I am much happier with the performance of the Cal unit. I am confident that the promised upgrades will take place but Sensory Science is just a "tight lipped " company. I read in Widescreen Review that they are cautious about answering because they do not want to be sued. Sounded like a bunch of bull though considering that I every other company has anwered my questions. Bottom line, the Cal unit sounds better, is more advanced, has a greater capacity to be hardware upgraded, and can process 24/96 right now without an upgrade. The Chesky and classic disk on this unit are exceptional almost as good as SACD but not quite. I sold the Proceed on ebay but before I did I compared it in my system against the Cal unit. So I know what the differences are in the same system. Another dealer even allowed me to bring the CAl unit in and demo it against a Krell unit. He was confident the Krell would win. About 5 min. into the demo he walked out of the room. He refused to comment but it was obvious why he left, his product was getting a sound beating! Enough said?