[PhoenixG]

Well, that's a complex question. A cd's max bitrate is higher than standard FLAC, but there are higher quality FLAC formats that can be higher than CD's. My own feelings about human ears aside, even the best regular hi-fi amps are only good to ~100kHz, while both FLAC and CD's nearly double that bandwidth, so the odds you can tell the difference on an average track is probably slim. It is possible, that one source might be a different mix on the same song though. That is as likely as anything else.
Also, I've heard tell of both formats being delivered under their promised resolution, or even upscaled from a lower resolution format, which outputs poop recordings.

 

[hojomojo96]

Well, that's a complex question. A cd's max bitrate is higher than standard FLAC, but there are higher quality FLAC formats that can be higher than CD's. My own feelings about human ears aside, even the best regular hi-fi amps are only good to ~100kHz, while both FLAC and CD's nearly double that bandwidth, so the odds you can tell the difference on an average track is probably slim. It is possible, that one source might be a different mix on the same song though. That is as likely as anything else.
Also, I've heard tell of both formats being delivered under their promised resolution, or even upscaled from a lower resolution format, which outputs poop recordings.

My question was more on terms of the quality of the DACs in these older CD changers - it doesn't have a digital out, unfortunately. I considered opening it up and trying to hack together a digital out, but I don't have the technical knowhow. Thanks for the insight, however. Since I ripped the FLACs from the CDs, I doubt the mix is much different.

 

[captouch]

  Quick question for you guys regarding my setup - although its not receiver related, I figured you guys would be the best place to come for advice.
I recently came into a JVC 200 CD changer, a xl-mc222bk, along with a bunch of CD's (all of U2, REM, and many others) for free. Since I mainly use open LCD 2's with my setup, and my computer can be quite loud, I'd love to be able to use the CD player into my mac-1900 to have a quiet(er) listening environment. The only catch is, I don't know whether the JVC will degrade sound quality in comparison to FLAC files feeding into my Aune T1. Do any of you have experience or knowledge regarding these CD changers and the quality they put out?

 
Others may disagree, but I think differences in DAC's are generally pretty subtle.  If the environment around the computer is loud enough for you to hear it through your LCD 2's and disturb you even subtly, then likely it's washing over any sonic advantages your FLAC/Aune T1 would have over the JVC changer in a quiet environment.  Just test out the JVC with your Mac and LCD 2's and see how it sounds.  Likely, it's just fine.

 

[buson160man]

I'm confused. Do they just pull these prices out of the air? Good grief its a hunk of metal and 40 year old electronics... Sheesh even the guy i can get an absolute mint 1050 from wants less than $500... This fella is nuts!> http://roseburg.craigslist.org/ele/4678062712.html

Look at the price of esoteric high end equipment these days. Things are ridiculously priced these days. The high end stuff is unobtainable for the common man these days. But I have to say something about these older high end receivers. At least in the case of my late seventies concept 16.5. I got my recapped receiver recently and now that it is broken in it sounds extremely good.
    So good in fact that it is easily competitive with a lot of the modern high end equipment these days. I use my concept 16.5 exclusively for headphone use(I have no passive speakers because I use active monitors these days). I can not comment about how it sounds on speakers but with headphones especially with my akg 701s(I am constantly amazed  by this studio headphones almost microscopic sonic abilities to honestly reproduce the sound of the source) they have never sounded this good or should I say great.
   The pricing of some of the vintage stuff is based on the availability of the product.. I Imagine that something like say the technics sa-1000 which cost around 1800 in the late seventies was a very limited product. How many did they sell back then maybe a thousand units maybe? So its supply and demand. Look at some wines these days they can ask outrageous prices for some of the rarest and best wines these days.
   Some of these 40 year old products do not necessarily sound inferior to more modern designs. I imagine that the capacitors and resistors and other components made today have been improved over the last 40 years. So when a product is restored using modern parts it is probable that the unit will sound superior to how it sounded with the parts available 40 years ago. Also the transformers made back then had superior iron to a lot of the transformers made today.

 

[Oregonian]

Looking at the back of my SX-1050, and there are the "adapter" inputs and outputs.

What are these connections for? They are RCA formats just like all the other connection on the back.

 

[SpeakerBox]

Looking at the back of my SX-1050, and there are the "adapter" inputs and outputs.

What are these connections for? They are RCA formats just like all the other connection on the back.

 
May be for quad sound.

 

[PhoenixG]

Looking at the back of my SX-1050, and there are the "adapter" inputs and outputs.

What are these connections for? They are RCA formats just like all the other connection on the back.

 I can find the page in my sx 1980's manual if you give me a day or so. I imagine they're for the same thing on such similar units, and I remember reading about it.

 

[SpeakerBox]

A question for Skylab - wondering what speakers you are currently using with your 1980?  Trying to determine the best match for my 1250.

 

[jgreen16]

Looking at the back of my SX-1050, and there are the "adapter" inputs and outputs.

What are these connections for? They are RCA formats just like all the other connection on the back.

In the manual I have it says these are used "when employing adapter components, such as a graphic equalizer adapter, RG processor, or Dolby NR adapter".

 

[Skylab]

Looking at the back of my SX-1050, and there are the "adapter" inputs and outputs.

What are these connections for? They are RCA formats just like all the other connection on the back.

Yes, as JGreen suggested, the most common application back in the day was for use with a graphic EQ. And that's how I have one of my 1980's configured.

However, it can also be used as another line input. That's what I use it for in my other vintage system. Just be aware that the adapter when used as an input doesn't appear at the tape outputs, so you cannot tape from it.

A question for Skylab - wondering what speakers you are currently using with your 1980?  Trying to determine the best match for my 1250.

System 1: Pioneer DSS-9
System 2: B&W DM-16

Both are basically "period correct" - early 1980's high end speakers. Hard to say which I prefer. Both sound absolutely ravishing with the 1980 The B&Ws are a tad mellowed as one would expect from that era B&W - they're really good sounding and image very well but they're pretty laid back. The DSS-9's are higher resolution overall and far from bright, but they're not as laid back as the Beamers.

 

[SpeakerBox]

Thanks for the reply, Skylab.  B&W are one of the lines I was thinking of - I like my sound a little bit laid back.  My Advents sound a little to bright with the Pioneer (odd because I never thought of Advents as bright).  It is what it is,

 

[buson160man]

  Thanks for the reply, Skylab.  B&W are one of the lines I was thinking of - I like my sound a little bit laid back.  My Advents sound a little to bright with the Pioneer (odd because I never thought of Advents as bright).  It is what it is,

B&Ws offer good performance for the cost. The only line I had experience with was the 600 budget line. They were pretty decent sounding but could be a bit bright on top with the metal dome tweeter . They were also an easy load on the amplifier. So using your receiver should be no problem.

 

[claybum]

I picked up a pair of DCM Time Frame 600 a couple weeks ago. Amazing speaker for the price. I have them hooked up to a Kenwood KA8100 in my living room along with a SVS sub. A very fun listen!!!
 
 
 
 
 

  A question for Skylab - wondering what speakers you are currently using with your 1980?  Trying to determine the best match for my 1250.

 
I'm not Skylab....but I can recommend some HPM 1500 to go with your SX1250. Mine sound like they were pretty much made for each other! 

 

[PhoenixG]

  I picked up a pair of DCM Time Frame 600 a couple weeks ago. Amazing speaker for the price. I have them hooked up to a Kenwood KA8100 in my living room along with a SVS sub. A very fun listen!!!
 
 
 
 
 
 
I'm not Skylab....but I can recommend some HPM 1500 to go with your SX1250. Mine sound like they were pretty much made for each other! 

I have tried that exact match, sx-1980 with hpm-150's (monocoque version of the hpm 1500's), and can personally say that they are a fantastic match. Smooth, effortless extended bass and highs all the way up. Hard to find and very large though. If you're thinking that kind of money, just buy some klipsch cornwalls. You can find those a lot faster.

 

[Skylab]

I have tried that exact match, sx-1980 with hpm-150's (monocoque version of the hpm 1500's), and can personally say that they are a fantastic match. Smooth, effortless extended bass and highs all the way up. Hard to find and very large though. If you're thinking that kind of money, just buy some klipsch cornwalls. You can find those a lot faster.

I'm sure that's a killer match. Never had the privilege of hearing a pair of HPM 150/1500's but I'd sure like to.