Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Calling All "Vintage" Integrated/Receiver Owners
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Calling All "Vintage" Integrated/Receiver Owners - Page 862

post #12916 of 13911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Silent One View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Groucho View Post
 

Thanks Silent One.

You're most welcome. Last autumn, I nearly bought a mint 500c from a cat just 30 minutes away. Came with original Manual, carton...everything. Based on input from moodyrn, I was prepared to pay the premium price asked.

 

And then...

:popcorn:

 

...the seller got COLD feet and removed his listing. Decided he couldn't part with it at the time. :(

That really stinks Silent One.  I can just see you, all anxious & just waiting to put your hands on that baby just to have it pulled away at the last minute = major bummer.  Do you check ebay periodically ?  I don't know what the premium price was for the one you mentioned but I've seen a couple on ebay that are in pretty good shape; one in particular has been serviced & according to the seller is in perfect working condition.  Good luck if you're still looking for one ;)

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by LugBug1 View Post
 

I can barely type here Im so drunk but groucho babes thats one hell of a buy!! congrats bud :D

LugBug1 LOL !!!!  I truly appreciate it.  Have on for me buddy. :beerchug: 


Edited by Old Groucho - 7/12/14 at 6:41pm
post #12917 of 13911
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeakerBox View Post
 

Well, I got up this morning and see a Marantz 2270 listed on CL for $150.  I am thinking this will be gone real fast - or there is something real wrong with it.  I contact the seller and get over there as fast as I can.  It is not hooked up to anything - so can't be demoed (forgot my phones in the rush), but the cosmetics were mint and it powered up fine.  I put down the $150 and took it home. Plugged in the phones and sure enough no sound :( but heard the relay click.  So I start looking around and discover the pre-out/main-in jumpers are missing.  After connecting some patch cords she is up and running!!!  After a recap if it beats the 1250 (doubtful) it stays and I sell the Pioneer, if not I sell the Marantz (maybe).  Got my work cut out for me (in a good way).  :etysmile: 

 

 


Why can this never happen to me? Any time I see Marantz, Pioneer, Sansui, etc. type stuff on Craigslist, it seems to always be roached out, and the seller thinks it is worth the highest price he has seen on e-bay for the same model.

post #12918 of 13911
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeakerBox View Post
 

Well, I got up this morning and see a Marantz 2270 listed on CL for $150.  I am thinking this will be gone real fast - or there is something real wrong with it.  I contact the seller and get over there as fast as I can.  It is not hooked up to anything - so can't be demoed (forgot my phones in the rush), but the cosmetics were mint and it powered up fine.  I put down the $150 and took it home. Plugged in the phones and sure enough no sound :( but heard the relay click.  So I start looking around and discover the pre-out/main-in jumpers are missing.  After connecting some patch cords she is up and running!!!  After a recap if it beats the 1250 (doubtful) it stays and I sell the Pioneer, if not I sell the Marantz (maybe).  Got my work cut out for me (in a good way).  :etysmile: 

 

 

Great deal & beautiful amp.  Back in '79 I bought a 2238B brand new with Castle Speakers & a Phillips turntable : it was my first "good" stereo set.  I loved that receiver especially the "look" (of those 70s Marantz). I remember it had a rich, full sound with excellent bass.  From what I've read the 2270 is a favourite amongst vintage receiver collectors.  Congratulations Speakerbox. :beerchug: 


Edited by Old Groucho - 7/12/14 at 7:30pm
post #12919 of 13911

I may have semi-accidentally agreed to buy a (maybe) working pioneer sx-1080 from a guy who was selling something else entirely (but I happened to see the amp). I'll put up pics from the doghouse where I'll undoubtedly be staying until it's gone again haha.

post #12920 of 13911

Yeah, the 2270 is a nice unit, as is the 2245. I've always been kind of partial to the later Marantz B receivers, and have had a 2238B, 2285B, and 2330B at one time or another. I still kick myself for selling the 2330B. It had a mint faceplate, and sounded beautiful. The only problem was that it needed a new wood case, as the one it came with had seen much better days.

post #12921 of 13911

Speaking of the 2245, I was just browsing the auction site and came across a listing where the seller said the 2245 he had "looked like it came out of a time capsule".

Processed By eBay with ImageMagick, z1.1.0. ||B2


I wonder who in the time capsule swapped out the original faceplate bolts for the Phillips head screws!

post #12922 of 13911
Quote:

Originally Posted by Old Groucho View Post

 

 

That really stinks Silent One.  I can just see you, all anxious & just waiting to put your hands on that baby just to have it pulled away at the last minute = major bummer.  Do you check ebay periodically ?  I don't know what the premium price was for the one you mentioned but I've seen a couple on ebay that are in pretty good shape; one in particular has been serviced & according to the seller is in perfect working condition.  Good luck if you're still looking for one ;)

 

I was really ok about the whole thing. I too, sometimes change my mind just before listing something I feel I might regret. He was conveniently nearby and on CL. Having just sold my Sansui G-22000, not really in the market for anything until I resume working.

 

The interest for the '500c' came right on the heels of moodyrn enlightening the thread about the Fisher's wonder. Talk about timing! But not looking to get one specifically. If anything, I'm gonna save my money and look to make a return purchase from the buyer with a sweetener. :evil:

post #12923 of 13911

A pic of my Sony STR-6055 since I took it out of its shelf today.  A friend was kind enough to give me this unit (in exchange for some work I did on his other receivers), and a parts unit where this case and faceplate came from.  So the case and nice faceplate were swapped onto the working unit and I fixed the parts unit (just rerouted around a bad power switch), which is now a garage unit.

 

 

 

There's something special about these Sonys - they sound really good.  My friend ended up missing this Sony and bought himself a nice 7055, which he's enjoying now.

 

Here's an updated picture of my CA-600 after I refinished the case.  I belt-sanded off the fake woodgrain vinyl, stained it red chestnut, and put a couple of layers of tung oil varnish on it.

 


Edited by captouch - 7/13/14 at 12:52am
post #12924 of 13911

Here's an update of the receiver/integrated battle I posted that I was going to do a few posts ago.  First a picture of the contestants - the Sony is missing, but it's in the post above.  Again, I used Yamaha NS-690 II's as my test speakers, volume matched as best as I could with a iPhone SPL app, used several music cuts of different genres and styles.

 

 

Round I, Match I (SS Integrateds):

 

Yamaha CA-600 (original) vs Marantz 1060 (restored):

 

Close match, but the Marantz seemed to have a bit larger soundstage, a touch more realism/dimensionality vs the Yamaha.  The Yamaha had stronger bass on a couple of tracks.  Not a mismatch by any means, even though the Yamaha had the disadvantage of being original vs the Marantz which was fully restored.

 

Winner: Marantz 1060

 

Round I, Match II (Tube Integrateds):

 

Scott LK-72 (restored) vs Fisher KX-100 (restored):

 

Quite different sound signatures, even though both used the same preamp tubes and were restored with many of the same caps (K40 PIOs all over in Scott, K40 PIOs and K73's in Fisher).  The Scott seemed much more the tubey unit, it was more mid-centric, fatter sound, a bit rolled off, less separation.  The Fisher had a wider soundstage, more airy and extended, more sense of dimension and separation, better imaging.  Both are pleasing in their own way, but my preference was the Fisher.

 

Winner: Fisher KX-100

 

 

Round I, Match III (Receivers):

 

Mac 1900 (original) vs Sony STR-6055 (original):

 

I was originally going to pit the Mac 1900 vs the Sansui Eight Deluxe given their similar (and greater than the rest) power ratings, but I got lazy in removing the 8D from its shelf, so faced these two off instead.  I've read that Sony was trying to compete with Mac on their early receivers, so this seemed like an OK match anyway.

 

Quite different sound signatures once again.  The Mac had a much sweeter, mellower sound, arguably a bit veiled, but fuller sound - very euphonic.  Vocals were more diffuse than focused.  This sometimes sounded better (Coltrane's sax on some test tracks), and you would never say the Mac was fatiguing.  The Sony seemed clearer with more transparency, more extended on the top, wider soundstage - just more detail and PRaT on percussion.

 

I'm not sure whether McIntosh designed the sound to be this way, or it's a reflection of how the caps have aged over time.  This would be a flavor preference and it also might be a matter of synergy with speakers.  But I had a hard time giving the Mac the win given how far it seemed to be from neutral.

 

Winner: Sony STR-6055

 

 

Round I, Match IV (Leftovers):

 

Sansui Eight Deluxe (original) vs Harman Kardon A300 (restored):

 

I finally got off my butt and disconnected the 8D and brought in the A300 even though it had less than 1/3 of the power of the 8D.

 

The HK seemed to have a bit more depth to soundstage, dimensionality, more air/delicacy, perhaps a bit more detail.  But it also had less weight, with the 8D seeming to have more substance and was more dynamic/punchy.  In the end, I personally preferred the more dynamic punchy sound of the 8D in this case.

 

Winner: Sansui Eight Deluxe

 

 

On to round II. . .

 

Round II, Match I:

 

Marantz 1060 vs Fisher KX-100:

 

A very close match actually.  Both were well balanced, neutral, nice detail, soundstage, air.  The Marantz at time seemed just a bit punchier, while the Fisher seemed to be a bit more airy and have the more holographic sound.  Subtle differences, but the Fisher just seemed to have a bit more "magic" in the sound.

 

Winner: Fisher KX-100

 

 

Round II, Match II:

 

Sony STR-6055 vs Sansui Eight Deluxe:

 

Also very close, as in they sounded much alike.  In the end, the Sony seemed just a bit richer and more detailed, but just very slightly.  Just a bit more air, with percussion (hi hats, brushes) just a bit more splashy/present.

 

Winner: Sony STR-6055

 

 

The Final:

 

Sony STR-6055 vs Fisher KX-100:

 

Well, unfortunately, this was somewhat inconclusive.  There was some volume fluctuation, despite my efforts to use signal tones, SPL meter, etc.  First one channel of one was just a bit louder, than the other, and it seemed to change a bit over time, which made things harder.  When I'd think one was coming out ahead, I found it was just a tad louder than the other.  I brought my 8-yr old daughter (and her better hearing) into the mix, and she preferred the Fisher, but it's really hard for me to say at that point that the Fisher wasn't a bit louder.

 

This was done over two days, but still, by the end of this, I was pretty fatigued from all the careful listening, swapping of gear, wires, etc.  So rather than fight with the volume issues further, I left it as co-winners.  The Sony was the best SS by a hair, and the Fisher was the best tube by a bit more than that.  Some time it would be fun to face them off again, with more people involved to give their opinions.

 

I think it's impressive that the unrestored Sony could be in the same ballpark as a fully restored, tube classic like the Fisher.  But it did, so cheers for both winners.

 

 

 

The usual disclaimers apply - just reflective of my preferences in my environment, with these particular speakers.  But it was a fun couple of days.

post #12925 of 13911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Groucho View Post
 

Great deal & beautiful amp.  Back in '79 I bought a 2238B brand new with Castle Speakers & a Phillips turntable : it was my first "good" stereo set.  I loved that receiver especially the "look" (of those 70s Marantz). I remember it had a rich, full sound with excellent bass.  From what I've read the 2270 is a favourite amongst vintage receiver collectors.  Congratulations Speakerbox. :beerchug: 

 

Thanks much.  Can't wait to hear what a recap and service manual adjustments do to the sound.

post #12926 of 13911
Quote:
Originally Posted by captouch View Post
 

 

The usual disclaimers apply - just reflective of my preferences in my environment, with these particular speakers.  But it was a fun couple of days.

 

Well done captouch! I think I will end up doing something like this to decide between my 1250 and 2270.

post #12927 of 13911

I'm glad to hear that I'm not far off on what I've been saying for a while. :popcorn: Great experiment and impressions.

Welcome to the Sony side of the street!

post #12928 of 13911
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixG View Post

I'm glad to hear that I'm not far off on what I've been saying for a while. popcorn.gif  Great experiment and impressions.
Welcome to the Sony side of the street!


Yeah, I hear the 6060F and 6120 may sound even better. I think people just have an image of Sony based on how mainstream they are today, and don't immediately think of them when they think vintage. But seriously good stuff to be sure.
Edited by captouch - 7/13/14 at 12:00pm
post #12929 of 13911
Great post, Captouch! Yep, the Fisher KX-100 is a fine, fine piece of kit. No doubt.
post #12930 of 13911
Quote:
Originally Posted by captouch View Post Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
 

Here's an update of the receiver/integrated battle I posted that I was going to do a few posts ago.  First a picture of the contestants - the Sony is missing, but it's in the post above.  Again, I used Yamaha NS-690 II's as my test speakers, volume matched as best as I could with a iPhone SPL app, used several music cuts of different genres and styles.

 

 

Round I, Match I (SS Integrateds):

 

Yamaha CA-600 (original) vs Marantz 1060 (restored):

 

Close match, but the Marantz seemed to have a bit larger soundstage, a touch more realism/dimensionality vs the Yamaha.  The Yamaha had stronger bass on a couple of tracks.  Not a mismatch by any means, even though the Yamaha had the disadvantage of being original vs the Marantz which was fully restored.

 

Winner: Marantz 1060

 

Round I, Match II (Tube Integrateds):

 

Scott LK-72 (restored) vs Fisher KX-100 (restored):

 

Quite different sound signatures, even though both used the same preamp tubes and were restored with many of the same caps (K40 PIOs all over in Scott, K40 PIOs and K73's in Fisher).  The Scott seemed much more the tubey unit, it was more mid-centric, fatter sound, a bit rolled off, less separation.  The Fisher had a wider soundstage, more airy and extended, more sense of dimension and separation, better imaging.  Both are pleasing in their own way, but my preference was the Fisher.

 

Winner: Fisher KX-100

 

 

Round I, Match III (Receivers):

 

Mac 1900 (original) vs Sony STR-6055 (original):

 

I was originally going to pit the Mac 1900 vs the Sansui Eight Deluxe given their similar (and greater than the rest) power ratings, but I got lazy in removing the 8D from its shelf, so faced these two off instead.  I've read that Sony was trying to compete with Mac on their early receivers, so this seemed like an OK match anyway.

 

Quite different sound signatures once again.  The Mac had a much sweeter, mellower sound, arguably a bit veiled, but fuller sound - very euphonic.  Vocals were more diffuse than focused.  This sometimes sounded better (Coltrane's sax on some test tracks), and you would never say the Mac was fatiguing.  The Sony seemed clearer with more transparency, more extended on the top, wider soundstage - just more detail and PRaT on percussion.

 

I'm not sure whether McIntosh designed the sound to be this way, or it's a reflection of how the caps have aged over time.  This would be a flavor preference and it also might be a matter of synergy with speakers.  But I had a hard time giving the Mac the win given how far it seemed to be from neutral.

 

Winner: Sony STR-6055

 

 

Round I, Match IV (Leftovers):

 

Sansui Eight Deluxe (original) vs Harman Kardon A300 (restored):

 

I finally got off my butt and disconnected the 8D and brought in the A300 even though it had less than 1/3 of the power of the 8D.

 

The HK seemed to have a bit more depth to soundstage, dimensionality, more air/delicacy, perhaps a bit more detail.  But it also had less weight, with the 8D seeming to have more substance and was more dynamic/punchy.  In the end, I personally preferred the more dynamic punchy sound of the 8D in this case.

 

Winner: Sansui Eight Deluxe

 

 

On to round II. . .

 

Round II, Match I:

 

Marantz 1060 vs Fisher KX-100:

 

A very close match actually.  Both were well balanced, neutral, nice detail, soundstage, air.  The Marantz at time seemed just a bit punchier, while the Fisher seemed to be a bit more airy and have the more holographic sound.  Subtle differences, but the Fisher just seemed to have a bit more "magic" in the sound.

 

Winner: Fisher KX-100

 

 

Round II, Match II:

 

Sony STR-6055 vs Sansui Eight Deluxe:

 

Also very close, as in they sounded much alike.  In the end, the Sony seemed just a bit richer and more detailed, but just very slightly.  Just a bit more air, with percussion (hi hats, brushes) just a bit more splashy/present.

 

Winner: Sony STR-6055

 

 

The Final:

 

Sony STR-6055 vs Fisher KX-100:

 

Well, unfortunately, this was somewhat inconclusive.  There was some volume fluctuation, despite my efforts to use signal tones, SPL meter, etc.  First one channel of one was just a bit louder, than the other, and it seemed to change a bit over time, which made things harder.  When I'd think one was coming out ahead, I found it was just a tad louder than the other.  I brought my 8-yr old daughter (and her better hearing) into the mix, and she preferred the Fisher, but it's really hard for me to say at that point that the Fisher wasn't a bit louder.

 

This was done over two days, but still, by the end of this, I was pretty fatigued from all the careful listening, swapping of gear, wires, etc.  So rather than fight with the volume issues further, I left it as co-winners.  The Sony was the best SS by a hair, and the Fisher was the best tube by a bit more than that.  Some time it would be fun to face them off again, with more people involved to give their opinions.

 

I think it's impressive that the unrestored Sony could be in the same ballpark as a fully restored, tube classic like the Fisher.  But it did, so cheers for both winners.

 

 

 

 

The usual disclaimers apply - just reflective of my preferences in my environment, with these particular speakers.  But it was a fun couple of days.

Thanks for the wonderful round of audio infotainment.

:beerchug:

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphone Amps (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Calling All "Vintage" Integrated/Receiver Owners