|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
74.67.16.10
nt
Follow Ups:
I myself like the SX 737!It is not a high wattage Receiever,but not really Low wattage as well! It was from there midline back in the 70's according to folks here & was one of Pioners best Sellers!
actually, I forgot that I have another Pioneer myself -- an SX-727.
Also fairly nice... but it uses the goofy polarized two prong speaker connectors.
Fortunately they are not too hard to find.
all the best,
mrh
Yeah, I agree about the plugs especially when moving things about and they pull out. Not difficult to pull and replace, though, with either a set of screw terminal blocks or even banana jacks.
About the only time I appreciated them was when moving them around in the display room.
Don Brian Levy, J.D.
Toronto ON Canada
I OWNED an SX-727 and it was just OK.
FM tuner would SUDDENLY detune. Receiver was Always well ventilated, not enclosed or restricted.
'They' couldn't fix it, not that I suspect they really tried.
sold it.
And yes, there WERE those wacky speaker connectors. But you also had the pre / main jumpers which I'd take with me when I left to keep the roomies from DESTROYING the thing.
Too much is never enough
My personal favorite is the SX 1250, hope to have a new appreciation of mine after a full restoration performed by EchoWars.
I've had a couple of SX-1980s and now 5 SX-1250s come through my shop.
The SX-1980 is surprisingly good sounding for its power output. It has one huge strike against it: It uses output transistors that have proprietary packages and are long out of production. That makes the SX-1980 difficult to sustain. When an output device goes out, the only legitimate replacement is an expensive used part of unknown remaining lifespan, or milling the heatsink to take a TO-3.
The SX-1250 sounds a little better, especially in the bass, and uses TO-3s, so is sustainable. It's also about half the price of the SX-1980.
I am a big fan of the SX-1250. I don't know of as good-sounding an amp in its power range for the price. And it has a nice tuner section, too.
I have a few receivers, but I primarily stick to separates. With recovers, there are to many potentially fatal points of failure under one hood.
Dave
270 watts per channel with speakers with 98 db sensitivity would be like putting a big black Chevy engine on a go-kart!
Later Gator,
Dave
.
I was thinking skateboard; a sure way to destroy someting, only a matter of time. The go-kart analogy is just a might safer.
Don Brian Levy, J.D.
Toronto ON Canada
PING Bold Eagle
Oh guru, what do you suggest. ,Speakers will be 4 Pi with 15 inch JBL woofer, 98+ db efficient
Apply Joppa's Rule to that 98 dB. number! The rule states for a "typical" listening space, an amp/speaker combo should be capable of producing 102 dB. SPL peaks, at a 1 M. distance. 3 WPC meets Mr. Joppa's criteria.
Find 1 of the lower powered models from Pioneer's respected 1970's product lines that has the minimum number of features needed to keep you happy.
Mr. Hardy's remark about something tubed is SPOT ON. With those speakers, a Sherwood receiver that uses 7189 O/P tubes could make your ears bleed and will sound very, very, good at sane listening levels.
Eli D.
Am playing with speakers in the 96db range and am finding all of my higher powered amps and receivers are being bested by the lower powered ones, even those of the same generation and model series. I have had the best luck in the 15-30 watt range and could easily go lower but no longer have anything smaller.
Don Brian Levy, J.D.
Toronto ON Canada
If one forgets the "monsters" and liits oneself to say 80 watts or less, what have you? Would anyone suggest another brand/model?
Yamaha CR-820, CR-1020, CR-2020, or CR-1000.
For a high-sensitivity speaker -- you might want to think about vacuum tube amplification.
all the best,
mrh
(and my opinion is pretty biased because, except for their aesthetics and - in some cases - build quality, I am not a big fan of the 1970s Pioneer receivers)
The aforementioned SX-1980 is a monstrosity in every sense of the word. It was, briefly, the winner of the receiver "power wars" of the late 1970s, just before hifi sort of fell out of fashion near the end of the decade, having fallen victim to demographics and economic downturn. It's too much of everything in a huge, slightly garish package. Not BAD, but not really a good, practical solution for... well, anything... then or now.
My nominee for "best" would be from two model series before the SX-1980 -- in terms of aesthetics and overall physical quality, I like the SX-*3* series of Pioneer receivers the best. The best of THAT series was the SX-1010 (yeah, the model number's "out of sequence") - one of the first high power super-receivers. Today, one of these could offer good performance for a pretty small fraction of the going price of an SX-1980.
The next model down, the SX-939, would also be a worthy contender, I'd opine.
... and no, I own none of the above. The only Pioneer receiver I own is an SX-1050 (from the series between the SX-*3* and SX-*80 model years). It is substantially built :-P, well-designed, attractive in the aesthetic of its time, 'feels' nice, and performs pretty well.
.. but, if I had to actually listen to a high(er)-powered, 1970s era hifi receiver... I'd be lookin' at a Yamaha.
All just my opinions, of course. None of this probably helps the OP at all, though... ;-)
PS. FWIW, the "winner" of the receiver power wars was the otherwise rather lackluster Panasonic Technics SA-1000 at 330 watts per channel per the FTC spec. I don't think this receiver was really in the same category as the SX-1980 or the few other high-power receivers of its era.
all the best,
mrh
For the 30 watt difference, I would go with the Marantz 2600. Better, build (yeah, I know about the pwr trfmr issues), much better sound.
Don Brian Levy, J.D.
Toronto ON Canada
at 270 w/c it'll drive anything you throw at it. It also has a good tuner and phono stage.
If a thing's worth doing, it's worth doing well
(Proverb)
Edits: 06/08/14
Later Gator,
Dave
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: