[moodyrn]

Quote:

Better transformers, much better power supplies, separate amp boards, better shielding, more robust build quality, beefier caps, etc...I could go on and on.

Here's a copy from a post I made a week ago in cased you missed it.

 

[Skylab]

I own an SX-680, it's a nice little receiver, but its an absolute toy compared to the SX-1980. Which is not a denigration of the 680...it powers Infinity Infintesimals in my bedroom and sounds nice doing it. But the difference between it and the 1980 isn't even close to subtle. The SX-680 weighs just under 20 pounds. The SX-1980 weighs just under 80 pounds. The massive toroidal transformer in the 1980 weighs more than the whole of the 680. The engineering, parts, and build quality are simply on a different level.

This is just one example at sort of the extremes. But 580, 680, and 780 were build to one basic set of price constraints, the 880, 980, and 1080 another, and the 1280 and 1980 yet another. The higher up you go, the more features you get and the better the build quality gets. All are very nice indeed, for what they were and are.

 

[kstuart]

Quote:

But 580, 680, and 780 were build to one basic set of price constraints, the 880, 980, and 1080 another, and the 1280 and 1980 yet another.

This is more what I was looking for.
 
What was posted by you and moodyrn about the TOTL products being massive and costly was known to me (but perhaps not some lurkers, so a restatement is always good).
 
So, I was interested in knowing more about how much difference there was between the various models - in terms of sound quality issues.  The "dividing lines" that you describe are helpful.
 
Does the same thing apply to the xx50 series ?   Is an 850 a level above the 650 and 750 in the same way as 880 ?
 
And... as I look back, there seems to be some disagreement between you and moodyrn, as he says:
Quote:

Originally Posted by moodyrn /img/forum/go_quote.gif

 As good as the sx6x0, 7x0, 8x0 are, the sx10x0 and above are just in another league

So, one of you puts 880 in the same group as the 1080, while another puts it in the same group as the 780.
 
One reason all this is important, is that there are now a lot of people out there with disposable income who will buy things that are "vintage receivers that look good" and are "top of the line", so that when their friends come over, they have the glowing light on the dial (despite the fact that they never really listen to music).
 
So, knowing about vintage receivers that have much of the electronic circuit design quality, but are not TOTL is helpful.

 

[moodyrn]

I did go into more detail than massive and costly when I talked about better caps, better trannies, better power supplies, separate amp boards, better design, parts, shielding and build quality. But I'm glad you get the picture. I never listened to the 880 so it was more of a generalization but I have owned a 650, 1010, and 1280. Matt also commented on the massive difference sonically between his 650 and his 1280.

 

[Silent One]

When I brought the SX-D7000 home, the SX-650 sounded like 

it belonged to another manufacturer.

 

[Skylab]

I can't provide as specific an accounting of the SX-xx50 series since I have only owned a 1250. But I have at one time owned a 680, 780, 980, 1280, and 1980. Like Moody, I've not owned a 880 (or 1080), but looking at them and their specs/features, I feel pretty confident that the groupings I gave for the SX-xx80 series are valid.

And of course Moody hit all the right reasons why these get better sounding as you go up the food chain.

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

I own an SX-680, it's a nice little receiver, but its an absolute toy compared to the SX-1980. Which is not a denigration of the 680...it powers Infinity Infintesimals in my bedroom and sounds nice doing it. But the difference between it and the 1980 isn't even close to subtle. The SX-680 weighs just under 20 pounds. The SX-1980 weighs just under 80 pounds. The massive toroidal transformer in the 1980 weighs more than the whole of the 680. The engineering, parts, and build quality are simply on a different level.

This is just one example at sort of the extremes. But 580, 680, and 780 were build to one basic set of price constraints, the 880, 980, and 1080 another, and the 1280 and 1980 yet another. The higher up you go, the more features you get and the better the build quality gets. All are very nice indeed, for what they were and are.

If there is ONE Infinity loudspeaker I always wanted to but never got to actually hear it - it is the Infinitesimal. SX 1980 must be doing at least something right if these "sonic microscopes" do not complain too much.
 
Curious - how do woofer surrounds on your pair survive the age? Still original, refoamed ?

 

[Meewoo]

Quote:

New headamp
 

 
WOW, Accuphase E-202, I always hope to listen to it. I heard Accuphase sounds a little analytic,  is it true? Do you have Yammy stuff, how these 2 compare to each other??
Quote:

 
Nevertheless I also can take one of them
 

 
Besides Sansui, is it another Accuphase? I am just jealous!!

 

[Skylab]

If there is ONE Infinity loudspeaker I always wanted to but never got to actually hear it - it is the Infinitesimal. SX 1980 must be doing at least something right if these "sonic microscopes" do not complain too much.

Curious - how do woofer surrounds on your pair survive the age? Still original, refoamed ?

The Watkins woofer on the "0.1"/original Infinitesimal, which is what I have, was a butyl rubber surround, so no concern about rot. They are really quite amazing little speakers.

 

[MattTCG]

Sha...BAM!! Deoxit strikes again. This stuff is freakin' magic. All noise on the hd650 is gone. 

 I can even run the hd650 without the -20db engaged and the sound is still clean. Wow...just wow. 

 

[analogsurviver]

Quote:

The Watkins woofer on the "0.1"/original Infinitesimal, which is what I have, was a butyl rubber surround, so no concern about rot. They are really quite amazing little speakers.

Thank you for the reply. Nice to hear it confirmed - both butyl surround and their sonic capabilities. That bass out of tiny speaker must be quite something to hear - and the rest should be at least very good by any standard.
 
Infinitesimal ( original, not later non Watkins woofer etc version ) is rare in the  US, let alone across the pond. In a way, I consider it Infinity's greatest achievement - sure IRS V is overall better speaker system, but squeezing that much in an enclosure of less volume than LS3/5a was feat then and probably remains so to this day. 

 

[moodyrn]

That's great Matt? I thought given the specs the hd650 shouldn't have hissed, especially given my w3000 only hisses a little. The 650's would be a much better match than those. I bought an old marantz once that didn't produce any sound at all. A full deoxit treatment brought it to life. That stuff do work wonders.

 

[jasonb]

Nice to hear! DeoxIT FTW!!! I think it has some sort of magic pixie dust in it.
Quote:

Sha...BAM!! Deoxit strikes again. This stuff is freakin' magic. All noise on the hd650 is gone. 

 I can even run the hd650 without the -20db engaged and the sound is still clean. Wow...just wow. 

 
Quote:

That's great Matt? I thought given the specs the hd650 shouldn't have hissed, especially given my w3000 only hisses a little. The 650's would be a much better match than those. I bought an old marantz once that didn't produce any sound at all. A full deoxit treatment brought it to life. That stuff do work wonders.

 

[frank2908]

Thanks

It sounds quite good..

Nevertheless I also can take one of them

How's the Sansui Au20000 compared to that accuphase e202? I own an au20000 and am very curious about the accuphase

 

[MattTCG]

Can the sx-1280, or any receiver for that matter, be retro fitted with proper binding post for the speakers cable? It's one of the things that bug me about vintage receivers.