[moodyrn]

Wow what a killer price for a Mac 1900. You really scored with that one.

Joehalo I also use to own and loved the 1010. I'm still a big fan of it's sonics. I think it loses out a little to the 1280 when it comes to transparency and detail. But it also best it when it comes to musicality IMO. Beautiful receiver as well, yours look stunning.

 

[Skylab]

The SX-1010 looks great and sounds great. Ultimately I sold mine because no amount of deoxit treatment could get those damned push buttons to function properly/reliably. This was the Achilles heel of that design, over time. They all have them. The SX-1980's Achilles heel is the power supply board, which MUST be rebuilt with some uprated parts if the unit is to work properly and reliably.

I also preferred the transparency and detail of the 1980 over the 1010, but I freely admit I would love to hear that 1010 I had on my Pioneer DSS-9 speakers, which I didn't have when I had the 1010.

 

[.Sup]

Nice nice nice. Congrats buddy, hope you're enjoying it  

I know I've banged on about these NAD's quite a bit, but I genuinely do think they make fantastic headphone amps.  

Thanks man! I don't want to make any final comments but so far it falls behind the Yamaha in terms of energy and musicality. Its well balanced with good amounts of everything but it just doesn't have the sparkle, its a bit dull. Trying different DACs now. If it doesn't work out as a headphone amp then it will surely be my primary speaker amp.

 

[LugBug1]

Thanks man! I don't want to make any final comments but so far it falls behind the Yamaha in terms of energy and musicality. Its well balanced with good amounts of everything but it just doesn't have the sparkle, its a bit dull. Trying different DACs now. If it doesn't work out as a headphone amp then it will surely be my primary speaker amp.

Hey no probs bud, but this is always going to be the case - one mans flavour is never going to be for everyone. 
 
A couple of things I would recommend however, if the amp hasn't been used for some time it may need a good long drive to open up again. I've noticed this before with vintage amps that have sounded dull to begin with, just keep it playing or switched on overnight for instance. Also, a little deoxit on the pots and switches will help you get a cleaner signal. This is very important with older amps and the results can be surprising

 

[SpeakerBox]

  The Mac is just a whole lot more listenable - warmer, better resolution in the highs without emphasizing them, more body in the upper bass/lower midrange.

 
This also pretty much describes the sound of vintage Sherwood gear - in fact all of them I have heard to date (S-8900A, S-7200, S-7100A, S-7110).  Listening to Diana Krall on a 7100A now and it is magical.

 

[jnorris]

I found a Sherwood S-7xxx at Goodwill for $15.  The manager of the store was pissed off that someone marked it so cheap, but sold it for that price anyway.  I had it for a while then offed it at a tag sale.  I wasn't that impressed.  Must have been the low end of the line.

 

[joehalo]

I must have gotten lucky with my SX-1010. It only had minor static in the push button controls despite them looking filthy. After a good deoxit cleaning they are silent and work perfectly.

 

[captouch]

I found a Sherwood S-7xxx at Goodwill for $15.  The manager of the store was pissed off that someone marked it so cheap, but sold it for that price anyway.  I had it for a while then offed it at a tag sale.  I wasn't that impressed.  Must have been the low end of the line.

Did you adjust bias on the unit? I've come across multiple units that didn't sound right or had outright problems (static, distortion) on one channel or both. After adjusting bias current and offset (where applicable, the last Sherwood I worked on didn't have an offset adjust), they sounded so much better.

 

[SpeakerBox]

Did you adjust bias on the unit? I've come across multiple units that didn't sound right or had outright problems (static, distortion) on one channel or both. After adjusting bias current and offset (where applicable, the last Sherwood I worked on didn't have an offset adjust), they sounded so much better.

 
As you rightly point out, with out the adjustments (and possibly recap) the sound won't be there.  My experience so far is that all the early S-xxxx units sound pretty darn good when restored correctly.

 

[Skylab]

I must have gotten lucky with my SX-1010. It only had minor static in the push button controls despite them looking filthy. After a good deoxit cleaning they are silent and work perfectly.

That's excellent. Keep them clean, and exercise them regularly, and you should be fine.

 

[joehalo]

Hopefully I can have Matt recap both my SX-1010 and SX-1980. It's about an 8 month wait

 

[Skylab]

Yeah, Matt does great work, and his reputation has spread, and now his wait is really long. Some of the longer-time techs who do these full restores have wait lists that are YEARS.

 

[analogsurviver]

  Hey no probs bud, but this is always going to be the case - one mans flavour is never going to be for everyone. 
 
A couple of things I would recommend however, if the amp hasn't been used for some time it may need a good long drive to open up again. I've noticed this before with vintage amps that have sounded dull to begin with, just keep it playing or switched on overnight for instance. Also, a little deoxit on the pots and switches will help you get a cleaner signal. This is very important with older amps and the results can be surprising

There is also a fairly large possibility for the vintage piece of electronics to need a long time drive prior sounding acceptable again. If this is observed, you may well have to keep it running 24/7 - as if and when powered down for say a day, it might be "creeping" again to its "present full glory".
 
The culprit are the electrolytic capacitors - although their value may still be spot on, they just do not have the performance as when new. The only real remedy is recapping - but if (not so inconsiderable) funds are problem, you might wish for 24/7 operation in order to get at least an acceptable sound.  At least to the point when funds allow for recapping - this thread is full of testimonies that all prove it is worth the cost. 
 
All the above assumes (reasonably) clean contacts and pots - Deoxit ... 

 

[.Sup]

There is also a fairly large possibility for the vintage piece of electronics to need a long time drive prior sounding acceptable again. If this is observed, you may well have to keep it running 24/7 - as if and when powered down for say a day, it might be "creeping" again to its "present full glory".

The culprit are the electrolytic capacitors - although their value may still be spot on, they just do not have the performance as when new. The only real remedy is recapping - but if (not so inconsiderable) funds are problem, you might wish for 24/7 operation in order to get at least an acceptable sound.  At least to the point when funds allow for recapping - this thread is full of testimonies that all prove it is worth the cost. 

All the above assumes (reasonably) clean contacts and pots - Deoxit ... 

Well Ive ran it from yesterday evening over night until today late afternoon when I got home from work. Playing music all that time but the sound is still pretty anaemic and dull. Not sure if if worth recapping at this point, I think its best I sell it and get another Yammie
Its kind of ironic that HD800 with the NAD aren't bright enough for me...not that the Yammie is bright but its very...sweet sounding with lots of energy. I do get slight hum with HD800 but its so slight and I can only hear when music is paused that it doesn't bother me at all, and even slightly microphonic tubes bother me for example. I initially found a lot of hum with HD800 but its because the loudness know was turned all the way up, hum is in the highest frequencies.

Im not sorry I got the NAD, I really wanted to hear how it sounds but it only confirms I am really into Yamaha's sound signature ever since I got a receiver about 12 years ago.

 

[analogsurviver]

Well Ive ran it from yesterday evening over night until today late afternoon when I got home from work. Playing music all that time but the sound is still pretty anaemic and dull. Not sure if if worth recapping at this point, I think its best I sell it and get another Yammie

Its kind of ironic that HD800 with the NAD aren't bright enough for me...not that the Yammie is bright but its very...sweet sounding with lots of energy. I do get slight hum with HD800 but its so slight and I can only hear when music is paused that it doesn't bother me at all, and even slightly microphonic tubes bother me for example. I initially found a lot of hum with HD800 but its because the loudness know was turned all the way up, hum is in the highest frequencies.

Im not sorry I got the NAD, I really wanted to hear how it sounds but it only confirms I am really into Yamaha's sound signature ever since I got a receiver about 12 years ago.

I agree it is a hard call to decide whether a particular vintage piece is worth recapping - or not. A decent recapping is likely to cost more than the vintage piece of gear acquired at a really good price - so this no longer means it is a low priced solution. Still perhaps the best for the money, but definitely no longer "a $30 amp to drive HD800".
 
I grew zero tolerance policy for hum - even from the most sensitive phono inputs, let alone a receiver. Because any hum introduces colouration due to intermodulation distorsion, even if not directly audible during (louder) music. Chances the originally fitted capacitors are up to the job today are slim .
 
I am personally not familiar with Yamaha sound signature, so can not comment on that.