Just thought I'd vent a little

L

littleb

Junior Audioholic
I'm in a bit of a foul mood, so I thought I would let it out while I'm in the mood. Years ago, before the HT craze, I had a couple of stereo receivers, a HK and a Technics. I thought both were wonderful, but the Technics lasted longer. When the Technics was getting long in the tooth, I upgraded to a Pioneer surround receiver. Since I mostly listen to music, it's purpose was mainly for 2 channel stereo production. I noticed right away that something was missing. I never figured out exactly what was missing, I just knew I had lost something in the exchange. Later on, I jumped on the AVR bandwagon, spent hard earned money on a 5.1 speaker set up, got me a Yamaha AVR, then later, a Denon AVR, believing this would be the upgrade I was looking for. Well, it wasn't...it was OK for HT, but I found it profoundly lacking as a 2 channel stereo receiver. I have since given away the Denon and gone back to the previous Yamaha, which I consider the better of the two, even though it has less wattage, less little holes in the back, etc, etc. While the Yamaha sounds better to me, somehow I find myself yearning for my old Technics, with the silver face, of yore. This was a 40 watt/channel receiver that I drove 4 ohm speakers with. I'm really beginning to think that audiophiles and music lovers have been sold a bill of goods when it comes to the quality of modern day AVRs.:( :(
 
Shadow_Ferret

Shadow_Ferret

Audioholic Chief
It's funny, but everyone here keeps talking about upgrade-itis and how they are constantly buying new and better equipment and that makes me wonder, is it because the entry level and mid-grade stuff is just crap?

I'll be facing what you're experiencing here in the next few months. I have an ancient Pioneer 1970s receiver and a pair of Sansui 1970s speakers. I love their sound. But I want to move to surround.

Now I'm worried that when I make that move to an AVR I'll be totally disappointed, especially since I'll only be able to spend now what I spent then on my receiver, around $400.
 
R

Reorx

Full Audioholic
What I have noticed...
When I hooked up my 75wpc yamaha amp to my receiver's pre outs, and LR speakers, it made a large difference in 2 channel audio. My receiver is a yamaha 5760, rated at 110wpc.

So, what you might want to do is get a good 2 channel amp. This would definately provide more power, to your power hungry speakers, and help give you that umph.

Reorx
 
Resident Loser

Resident Loser

Senior Audioholic
Join the club...

...folks...IMHO HT sucks...no pleasant way of putting it...I don't necessarily mean it doesn't serve some purpose, but it ab-so-lute-ly killed reasonably priced two-channel gear.

Switching options, multiple inputs, phono inputs, pre-out/pwr-ins...none of it, not no where, not no way...

Sold a bill of goods, you betcha'...big-time.

Even newer stuff like the Marantz PM-7200 and the newer Yamaha integrated fall short of my expectations...

Brushed aluminum faceplates...walnut cabinets...solid, metal build quality...switches that switch, knobs...things that don't require LED indicators...nothing made in China...

jimHJJ(...dem was the days...)
 
J

JES14

Audioholic
Homer voice...MMMMMM, clean power goooood.
When I added the Nad to the system it enhanced the 2 channel experience nicely. But you're right, these expensive av's are set up mostly for ht.
 
jeffsg4mac

jeffsg4mac

Republican Poster Boy
I could not disagree more on this. My Yamaha RXV2600 sounds awesome in two channel. I have several seperate amps and it sounds better then all of them, some by a large margin. However, the 2600 is not exactly entry level either. You get what you pay for. These mid-priced HT receivers are seperates killers IMHO and the reviews and testing on this site and others prove it.

This thread does belong in the steam vent so I am moving it there.
 
toquemon

toquemon

Full Audioholic
Older amps had different sound because of the recordings made in those years. Older amps had an unnatural tendency to over-emphasize bass notes.
 
Resident Loser

Resident Loser

Senior Audioholic
Not for nothing...

toquemon said:
Older amps had different sound because of the recordings made in those years. Older amps had an unnatural tendency to over-emphasize bass notes.
...but where did you get this factoid from?

jimHJJ(...jus' wunnerin'...)
 
Duffinator

Duffinator

Audioholic Field Marshall
jeffsg4mac said:
I could not disagree more on this. My Yamaha RXV2600 sounds awesome in two channel. I have several seperate amps and it sounds better then all of them, some by a large margin. However, the 2600 is not exactly entry level either. You get what you pay for. These mid-priced HT receivers are seperates killers IMHO and the reviews and testing on this site and others prove it.
I'm pretty much in agreement with this statement. Check the link in my signature, I have a decent mid-fi HT setup along with some nice quality vintage gear. There is not much difference in sound quality although they do sound a bit different. I have different speakers hooked up to different systems so that's where the biggest difference is. But I remember back in around 1992 when I semi retired my Sansui 3000A and bought my first surround sound receiver, a Sony STR D911, and I was disappointed with the sound quality. I don't know what it was but it sounded like crap. I then dumped that POS and bought a HK AVR 70 and was much happier with the sound quality. I hang out at audiokarma.org and many guys there rag on AVR's and think they all suck. While I do like my vintage gear and have no intentions of getting rid of it I also enjoy my HT setup and have no intentions of going backwards. Quality new gear sounds fine and in my opinion sounds no worse, or really better, than the quality vintage gear of the 70's. My Denon 3805 holds up well compared to my 1977 Pioneer SX-1250, which is one of the finest pieces of audio gear ever made.

You can check your local craigslist for people getting rid of their Pioneer, Sansui, and Marantz receivers from the 70's. Last month I got a pristine Pioneer SX-950 for $50. But beware, much of the vintage gear needs to be serviced by someone who knows what they are doing. Caps don't last forever regardless if they are used or not and dry out or leak over time.
 
toquemon

toquemon

Full Audioholic
Resident Loser said:
...but where did you get this factoid from?

jimHJJ(...jus' wunnerin'...)
One of my buddies still owns a Gradiente amp (like 30 years old) and it sounds with lots of bass but weak highs (Maybe a malfunction?).
 
Buckeyefan 1

Buckeyefan 1

Audioholic Ninja
Duff: My Denon 3805 holds up well compared to my 1977 Pioneer SX-1250, which is one of the finest pieces of audio gear ever made.
Duff,

Out of curiosity, how does the 3805 hold up when listening to LP's compared to the SX-1250? How about tapes - remember the TDK MA-XG90, Maxell MX-S90, and Denon HD-M90?

Here's two of my favorite vintage units:



 
mike c

mike c

Audioholic Warlord
look at those funky switches on that technics unit! looks like a helicopter panel!
 
j_garcia

j_garcia

Audioholic Jedi
My dad has a 1970s Pioneer stereo receiver and that thing ROCKS. Absolute ton of power and it sounds nice and clean. Could use a service though. It's actually doing garage duty these days.
 
Duffinator

Duffinator

Audioholic Field Marshall
Buckeyefan 1 said:
Duff,

Out of curiosity, how does the 3805 hold up when listening to LP's compared to the SX-1250? How about tapes - remember the TDK MA-XG90, Maxell MX-S90, and Denon HD-M90?
I couldn't tell you as I retired my Technics turntable about a decade ago and have no intentions of dusing it off. I did hook up my Pioneer CT-F1000 to my 1250 and it sounded fine. But if I get the drift of where you are going here I'm sure the 1250 would be better, maybe a lot better, with a turntable and possible with the tape. I know the 3805 does have a phono input but I've never even noticed tape inputs. :confused: One things for sure, the FM reception on the 1250/950 and my Sansui 9090DB is a LOT better than my Denon. :eek: My point is that not all old stereo receivers, and all new AVR's should be grouped together. There are excellent units in both groups.

FYI, I really like my new Sansui and am on the lookout for a G 8000/9000 to add to my collection.

http://www.sansui.us/PGMP_9090DB.htm

http://www.sansui.us/images/G9000_Sereis/g9000.jpg
 
Last edited:
Sheep

Sheep

Audioholic Warlord
Heres what they should do.

Take a 200watt/channel (or so) power amp, and put processing stuff inside.

TA DA.

Sure it will be huge, but it won't take up any more space then a prepro and amp together.

SheepStar
 
highfihoney

highfihoney

Audioholic Samurai
Resident Loser said:
...folks...IMHO HT sucks...no pleasant way of putting it...I don't necessarily mean it doesn't serve some purpose, but it ab-so-lute-ly killed reasonably priced two-channel gear.

Switching options, multiple inputs, phono inputs, pre-out/pwr-ins...none of it, not no where, not no way...

Sold a bill of goods, you betcha'...big-time.

Even newer stuff like the Marantz PM-7200 and the newer Yamaha integrated fall short of my expectations...

Brushed aluminum faceplates...walnut cabinets...solid, metal build quality...switches that switch, knobs...things that don't require LED indicators...nothing made in China..

jimHJJ(...dem was the days...)
very well put & i couldnt agree more:)
 
Resident Loser

Resident Loser

Senior Audioholic
Not familiar with the amp...

toquemon said:
One of my buddies still owns a Gradiente amp (like 30 years old) and it sounds with lots of bass but weak highs (Maybe a malfunction?).
...in fact, never heard of it (which means nothing)...What is it hooked up to? Some loudspeakers from that era tended to be bass-heavy...one amp connected to speakers of unknown qualities should not indict an entire generation of gear that generally measured ruler-flat with astonishingly low distortion.

jimHJJ(...that's like saying all burgers suck based on only tasting Col. Macwendybelles...)
 
Buckeyefan 1

Buckeyefan 1

Audioholic Ninja
mike c said:
look at those funky switches on that technics unit! looks like a helicopter panel!
That is the epitomy of stereo receivers. Mind bogling power - 330 watts per channel and 87lbs. Compare that to the Denon 5805 at 170 watts into two channels at .05% thd and 92lbs. :eek:
(The Denon 5805 is only 121 watts into 5 channels tested at 1 kHz - not 20-20,000Hz per S/V bench test - http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/assets/download/DenonAVR-5805lab.pdf)

Check out some of the links:

http://ckopfell.com/TechnicsSA1000.htm

http://www.vintagetechnics.com/receivers/sa1000.htm

http://www.classic-audio.com/technics/SA-1000.html
 
Last edited:
Resident Loser

Resident Loser

Senior Audioholic
Not really a receiver fan...

...but man-O-man those pics do it for me...

Style and substance typical of the era...my fave toys, the first an exceptionally versatile integrated

http://www.classicaudio.com/value/pio/SA9100.html

And it's matching tuner

http://www.classicaudio.com/value/pio/TX9100.html

Addendum, these are better shots of the above:

http://www.classicaudio.com/forsale/pio/SATX9100.html

And just for grins, check this out and click on the pics

http://www.stereomanuals.com/about/pictures.htm

jimHJJ(...thanks folks...)
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top