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 645

post #9661 of 13503

Do you guys think a SX-5580 is worth $500?  Pristine shape, no info if its' been recapped or anything but sounds flawless. 

 

I must be out of my mind even asking this..........................

post #9662 of 13503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oregonian View Post
 

Do you guys think a SX-5580 is worth $500?  Pristine shape, no info if its' been recapped or anything but sounds flawless. 

 

I must be out of my mind even asking this..........................

You probably know this, but for the lurkers, it is a "black" version of the SX-1050....

Quote:
SX-5530 ⇔ SX-535
SX-5560 ⇔ SX-750
SX-5570 ⇔ SX-950
SX-5580 ⇔ SX-1050
SX-5590 ⇔ SX-1250
SX-7730 ⇔ SX-737
SX-9930 ⇔ SX-939

Edited by kstuart - 9/3/13 at 8:03pm
post #9663 of 13503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oregonian View Post
 

Do you guys think a SX-5580 is worth $500?  Pristine shape, no info if its' been recapped or anything but sounds flawless. 

 

I must be out of my mind even asking this..........................

 

You sir are Pioneer of audio downgrade!!:wink_face:

 

If for good-looking, Setton RS-660 would be French Chick, and Marantz has blue lights..............

post #9664 of 13503
Thread Starter 

Congrats Matt on the 1250. You have a killer line up now. Can't wait to read your comparison vs the 1280.

post #9665 of 13503
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattTCG View Post

SX-1250 in the house!!



I'm just doing a basic cleanup right now. Knobs, switches, glass and cabinet get the cleaning treatment. Then the bottle of deoxit to the pots.

Initial impressions...she sounds NICE. biggrin.gif

Woop woop! 

 

lookin good! 

post #9666 of 13503

I'll leave a few impression now...the differences seem to stand out the most when I first acquire/listen to equipment. 

 

The sound between the 1250 & 1280 is very close. I'd call them first cousins but in fact they may be brothers. Overall the 1250 wins on sound signature, both with speakers and headphones. The bass has more weight without any looseness and I find the treble is silky smooth while being very detailed. Mids are indistinguishable to me. The 1280 has a touch less emphasis on the bass and is slightly brighter, but this is a very minute difference and can almost be made to sound the same with a bit of EQ. 

 

Sound Results:

 

1280: 8.5

1250: 9.0

 

For me, the 1280 wins on look and feel and it's not very close. It has those lovely black faced meters. Also, there are some subtle but very slick touches the 1280 adds. The biggest for me is the flanged knobs which get larger towards the front face of the receiver. I know that this seems small, but it really just feels perfect in the hand when adjusting the settings...more expensive. It would be tough to beat the 1280 on look and feel period (1980 cough cough). The 1280 just has that luxury car look and feel. Pioneer just nailed this on IMO.

 

Beauty Queen:

 

1280: 9.5

1250: 7.5

 

I've got to spend more time listening. I only had a brief listening session last night before I went to work on cleaning. So far:

 

*all pots and switches deoxit soaked (ran out though before I was finished)

*all switches and knobs soaked and then hand polished

*wood cabinet light refinish (only needed Howards because it was in really nice shape)

*front facia carefully restored with Mr. Clean eraser

 

Got to listen for about a week and then decide which to keep, 1250 or 1280.  


Edited by MattTCG - 9/4/13 at 4:36am
post #9667 of 13503
Nice impressions, Matt. Overall I can't say I really disagree with any of them. I too found the two units very similar sounding, and both sound excellent. And I too prefer the 1280 in every other way aside from the sound (which again is very close but I agree the 1250 is slightly better).

At the risk of sounding like a broken record: I had stock 1250 and 1280, and then sent the 1280 off to Mattsd for a full recap/restore. When the 1280 came back, it sounded MUCH better than either the 1250 or 1280 had sounded stock. MUCH better. Just sayin'. I wish I had heard a 1250 with a full recap, and of course it would have sounded much better than stock, too.
post #9668 of 13503

Rob, I hear you 100% on the restore. For me, it comes down to economics. Once I've decided that I have my end game vintage receiver, I'll sell off the all but two and have them restored. Can you share what the restore cost you?

 

I'm actually leaning toward the 1280. 

 

The front face cleaned up to near mint on the 1250. The cabinet came out to about an 8.5 with Howards. Knobs and switches are perfect. Got a little static left in a few of the pots. Now I'm gonna give a light dusting to the inside with a compressor and then...clean up all the internals with a soft toothbrush. (yes, I do know that I'm a little nuts)


Edited by MattTCG - 9/4/13 at 5:56am
post #9669 of 13503

IMHO you have to keep the one that sounds best.  That is really what we are all after, right?

post #9670 of 13503
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeakerBox View Post
 

IMHO you have to keep the one that sounds best.  That is really what we are all after, right?

No we collect them! or I do :) I had to move my office to my room since I ran out of space! I have a really small room now (small 50's ranch house) but a bigger room now for all these wonderful things and can finally set my speakers up correctly. 

post #9671 of 13503

I gather that at least partially, the point Rob is making is that none of these vintage receivers will sound their best until you have them restored. Also, the restore would be necessary before truly judging them and coming to some final verdict. 

 

I think that I'd be happy with the 1280 as end game and that is before it's restored. With the restoration added would be like two huge spoonfuls of gravy on top of this delicious receiver. Yum...:beerchug:

post #9672 of 13503

Understand, although there is at least a chance that if an 1250 sounds better than a 1280 pre-restoration that it will still sound better after they are both restored.

post #9673 of 13503

You are certainly right. The problem is you rarely get impressions, outside of Rob and Moody, on what these receivers sound like restored especially comparing one restored receiver to another. But based on Rob's comment on the restored 1280 above and how I feel about it already, I'll likely ending up with the 1280 restored as end game. 

post #9674 of 13503
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattTCG View Post
 

You are certainly right. The problem is you rarely get impressions, outside of Rob and Moody, on what these receivers sound like restored especially comparing one restored receiver to another. But based on Rob's comment on the restored 1280 above and how I feel about it already, I'll likely ending up with the 1280 restored as end game. 

Based on his description, Rob's 1280 was more than just restored as many crucial components were also upgraded from the stock components. It is really almost "upgrade"!

As such it could sound even better than new. This is what makes it so hard to compare 40 year old components - none sound stock and the differences have as much to do with age and condition as design and quality. 

 

While I agree that the 1280 is a prettier receiver, I'm surprised you don't prefer the 1250 after looking at the guts! The 1250 will also be less expensive to restore, maintain or upgrade!

 

I have heard "mint" versions of both from collectors and the 1250 is a very special unit.

My vote for the two best mass market Pioneers are the 1250 and SA-9100.

I prefer to the later 1280/9800


Edited by parbaked - 9/4/13 at 6:54am
post #9675 of 13503

Just threw on on the Marantz 2270 to a/b with the Pioneers. It's not a fair fight. The 2270 is not in the same ballpark IMO. 

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