[Sweden]

 
Quote:

x2!
 
My 80's PM665 sounds a little analytical than my HK 730. I think it's just design philosophy difference between 70's and 80's.
 
Since I need big power, I pair my citation 11 with a 200 wpc power amp. It sounds better than my other low power HKs. And  the headphone on citation 11 sounds fantastic!! Oh, you need a cable to induce the power from amp speaker terminals back to pre-amp. I checked ePay auctions, most citation 11s don't have this cable. So beware if you want powerful headphone amps also.

How would you say the Citation 11 sounds different than the 730?
 
 

 

[Meewoo]

Quote:

How would you say the Citation 11 sounds different than the 730?
 
 

I would say more punchy, controlled bass and small improvement in clarity. It may just the amp I am using. I didn't try HK730 pre-out yet, I will give it a try tomorrow.
 

 

[Meewoo]

Quote:

How would you say the Citation 11 sounds different than the 730?
 
 

Ok, I gave a extensive listening today with Citation and HK730 as pre-amp. My observation stands as I said before. The HK 730 sounds a little soft, Citation 11 sounds more defined in every bits of music. My wife said Citation's sound was more "man up".

 

[Zafonic]

Another post got me thinking about trying a vintage receiver with my DAC and CD player.  Would virtually any vintage receiver with 20-30 watts per channel be ok to drive something like the Sennheiser HD 600 or 650?
 
I'm thinking of buying a relatively cheap receiver that is in good working order.  Any brands to go for especially?
 
 

 

[Meewoo]

Quote:

Another post got me thinking about trying a vintage receiver with my DAC and CD player.  Would virtually any vintage receiver with 20-30 watts per channel be ok to drive something like the Sennheiser HD 600 or 650?
 
I'm thinking of buying a relatively cheap receiver that is in good working order.  Any brands to go for especially?
 
 

I have HD650 and HD580, I paired them with Yamaha...... You can also consider Pioneer x50 or x80 line receivers.
 

 

[Zafonic]

Thanks
 
What is it about vintage receivers that people like or prefer?  Is it just the extra power that comes from them or the specific sound?  Or the value for money?
 
 

 

[Meewoo]

Sound................
 
Sound for dollar.............
 
Good amp for Headphone........... check why vintage stuff are good headphone amps in the early thread. Anyway, strongly recommend to go through the whole thread for rich information!!

 

[dungeon]

Quote:

Thanks
 
What is it about vintage receivers that people like or prefer?  Is it just the extra power that comes from them or the specific sound?  Or the value for money?
 
 

I own a Marantz 2252, which is as old as I am.   I picked it up for $250 locally on craigslist.  I spent a lot of time looking what was out there before I decided to go with a classic receiver, and in the end, the following factors won out:
 
1.  Superb two channel audio quality.   Most units that are sold today are geared towards home theater, and are packed with a lot of bells and whistles that I decided simply weren't worth the money for me.   For example, I listen to more music and radio than I watch movies.   I don't have 5.1 or 7.1 speakers.   These older receivers were from an era when the #1 focus was sound quality, and the engineers did not have to make compromises to fit in fancy dolby processors, surround sound, internal DACs and so on.   I connected a Nuforce uDAC from my Mac Mini with RCA cables to the receiver and it sounds great.   I can upgrade the DAC down the line. 
 
2.  Value.  For $250, what I can get at most big box stores is an entry level receiver, and like I said above it's going to have a lot of features I don't want.   The new Marantz models that focus on two  channel audio only start at two or three times that much.   I spent the money on speakers instead.
 
3. Looks.  This thing is brushed metal, with kickass looking VU meters and big silver knobs.   It really stands out in my entertainment center.   I suppose this is a matter of taste, but I don't really like the all black units that are out there today.
 
It's not without it's quirks though.   My 2252 is in for repair right now because the previous owner did a poor job repairing the power switch.   Whatever, it's just like owning a classic car.  You have to put up with some of the downsides but in exchange you have a really unique and quality piece of equipment.

 

[cifani090]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dungeon /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
I own a Marantz 2252, which is as old as I am.   I picked it up for $250 locally on craigslist.  I spent a lot of time looking what was out there before I decided to go with a classic receiver, and in the end, the following factors won out:
 
1.  Superb two channel audio quality.   Most units that are sold today are geared towards home theater, and are packed with a lot of bells and whistles that I decided simply weren't worth the money for me.   For example, I listen to more music and radio than I watch movies.   I don't have 5.1 or 7.1 speakers.   These older receivers were from an era when the #1 focus was sound quality, and the engineers did not have to make compromises to fit in fancy dolby processors, surround sound, internal DACs and so on.   I connected a Nuforce uDAC from my Mac Mini with RCA cables to the receiver and it sounds great.   I can upgrade the DAC down the line. 
 
2.  Value.  For $250, what I can get at most big box stores is an entry level receiver, and like I said above it's going to have a lot of features I don't want.   The new Marantz models that focus on two  channel audio only start at two or three times that much.   I spent the money on speakers instead.
 
3. Looks.  This thing is brushed metal, with kickass looking VU meters and big silver knobs.   It really stands out in my entertainment center.   I suppose this is a matter of taste, but I don't really like the all black units that are out there today.
 
It's not without it's quirks though.   My 2252 is in for repair right now because the previous owner did a poor job repairing the power switch.   Whatever, it's just like owning a classic car.  You have to put up with some of the downsides but in exchange you have a really unique and quality piece of equipment.

Are you saying stuff like this doesn't turn you on?
 

 

 

 

[ardgedee]

Quote:

I finally scored the last piece I wanted to complete my Pioneer vintage rig - the elusive SD-1100 scope

Hold on there, Captain Midnight...

 

[Skylab]

LOL! I have seen one of those before but it's just too cheesy looking for me...and that's saying something!

 

[francisdemarte]

That thing screams PARTY even without any music playing!

 

[KneelJung]

Question for you guys. I'm considering picking something up mostly for use as headphone amp to get sort of a different flavor and texture out of my T50's and Grado's. I'm driving them with an Audio GD Sparrow right now and since my Sparow doesnt have any RCA outs, I will have to get an adapter plug that goes into the headphone out of my Sparrow to feed a receiver or integrated amp. I saw Skylab post some thoughts about 20 WPC feeding into 8 ohms maybe not being ideal a couple of pages back. So my first question is what is probably the optimal WPC I should be looking for; and how much difference does brand make. I was leaning toward a Harmon Kardon 330 or 430, then I saw a Kenwood KA405 and thought wow. that thing looks really cool.
 
I know the Marantzes and Sansui's are supposed to have a warm tube like sound too, the HK's even more so from what I've discerned, but this sort of stuff is all subjective anyway.
 
Just wondered if anyone had any impressions.

 

[Meewoo]

Quote:

Question for you guys. I'm considering picking something up mostly for use as headphone amp to get sort of a different flavor and texture out of my T50's and Grado's. I'm driving them with an Audio GD Sparrow right now and since my Sparow doesnt have any RCA outs, I will have to get an adapter plug that goes into the headphone out of my Sparrow to feed a receiver or integrated amp. I saw Skylab post some thoughts about 20 WPC feeding into 8 ohms maybe not being ideal a couple of pages back. So my first question is what is probably the optimal WPC I should be looking for; and how much difference does brand make. I was leaning toward a Harmon Kardon 330 or 430, then I saw a Kenwood KA405 and thought wow. that thing looks really cool.
 
I know the Marantzes and Sansui's are supposed to have a warm tube like sound too, the HK's even more so from what I've discerned, but this sort of stuff is all subjective anyway.
 
Just wondered if anyone had any impressions.

I don't think there are optimal WPC. I don't think anyone can sample all headphones and vintage amps, then conclude a optimal WPC.
When Skylab talked about watts, I remember he is referring ortho planer phones. Are there any dynamic phones requiring more power than planer? I have AKG K-240 sextett which people say hard to drive, but my 18wpc JVC JR-s61m can drive sextett without sweat. And it can drive my efficient Heresy loud enough for me. Yes, if you can find a JVC, they are very good too. I will put JVC in the same league as big names. Some people say Mitsubishi are good too, but I never have a chance to try them.
 

 

[Skylab]

For T50 and Grados, there is not a vintage receiver in the world that doesn't have plenty of power.  Meewoo is right, it's only the very power hungry planars where this is even an issue.