 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
24.225.37.139
I have a really nice pair of Dynaco A-10 speakers. I like its diminutive look which would fit nicely in our bedroom. Without spending much money, what would be a nice inexpensive (cheap) vintage amp/tuner combo or receiver to complete a system for FM airwaves in the bedroom. I think tubes would add to the cool factor, but I would be ok with solid state.
The Mac 1500 seems perfect but way out of my price range. A Dynaco SCA35/FM3 combo would give it a nice vintage compact system look, but the prices of them have crept up from what I remember them selling for. Do I have any real-world cheap options for these speakers. Here is a photo of them on the 36" wide oak dresser the system would be perched upon.
Follow Ups:
I purchased a 60wpc Optonica receiver for my son's birthday about 10 years ago.
Not only did it sound good, but it was the most visually STUNNING looking receiver that I had ever seen....even more so than the beautiful 70's Marantz receivers?
I paid $18 for it on flea bay, but that WAS 10 years ago.
I am NOT sure what kind of $$$$ they go for now days??
Steve
If money is an issue, look on ebay for low powered 70's or early 80's receivers from less popular brands like Technics, Kenwood, Hitachi, Toshiba, or Onkyo. I have owned examples of all of these brands and they sound quite good and go for a song. I have seen many on ebay with opening bids of less than $40 that do not sell. Other bargains include early 90's receivers from Denon or Yamaha that go for less than $100 on ebay.
Do you know what was a surprisingly good sounding receiver, my Sanyo. Damn thing sounds GREAT!
And while we're doing this roundup, let's include Nikko.
I've had a pair of A10s for many years now. I ran them for years in a bedroom system, hooked up to a Pioneer SX-650. Before that, my parents had them in their house (I gave them the A10s as a gift) hooked up to a Pioneer SX-580. They played plenty loud with both of those receivers.
I've been running my Dynaco A10 speakers with a low powered DIY SE tube (12av6/12ab5) amp, while listening to my late Father's Sansui TU-7700 tuner.
Not an optimum amp/speaker match for sure, but for just casual listening....not a problem.
ANY competent vintage receiver over 15wpc, should have NO problems driving the little Dynaco A10 speakers.
Steve
Thanks for your personal insight.
but something like the Advent Receiver might be a nice mate. Plus being very compact could be more suitable for your BR set up than separate components.
"You can't know what the "best" is unless you have heard everything, and keep in mind that given individual tastes, there really isn't any such thing." HP
Now that is another great idea. I like the rotary tuning dial too. I would look excellent in our small bedroom w/o drawing too much attention to itself, yet with a vintage feel.
Sherwood s-8000
HK 330c
HK 430
Dyna sca35/FM3 can be obtained pretty cheap if you wait.
David
Only problem these are a real diy project and by the time you get them decent and reliable you can buy a lot of units as good or a lot less.
The Sherwood S8000 or S7700 would be good candidates and getting them up and running reliably is easier than many tube units. Sound quality is up there with the best, including the 1500. Depending on the budget the Sherwood S5000 and S3000 series tuners and amps are unbeatable. Mike Samra on the forum is a guru with these and the results reported are they are outstanding. If you can live with their ss equivalents, get a S9500series or S9900 series amp and S3300 series tuner. Do not know the going price but my near pristine S3300 and S9500c cost me around a C note plus another C note to have an excellent tech who is on AK go through them. Maybe Mike Samra could work on them. These are good enough that they replaced my McIntosh ss system.
Don Brian Levy, J.D.
Toronto ON Canada
The HK330c looks nice. Are they pretty good?
The Dynaco combos I've seen are about $500 and too rich for me.
I used a Harman Kardon 330B with Dynaco A-35s (same efficiency as A-10s) for about 12 years (1978-1990) as my main system. The HK had enough power for Wagner and Mahler in my apartment living room.
My advice would be to stay away from an SCA-35. I have one, and it does not have enough power (maybe 9 watts per channel) to drive A25's let alone the less efficient A10's. For Dynaco tube, I would not go lower than a Stereo 70, which will really set you back. The good new is that Dynaco speakers work great with solid state, so any good 25 or 30 watt receiver, or amp will drive them well. Amps and receivers in this power range a common and not sought after, so it won't take much to get them up and running. Much more power than that and you run the chance of overpowering the woofers, but 50-60 watts should still be fine if you are judicious with the volume. No Telarc 1812!
Dave
Here's a chart of a working to spec SCA-35, measured and posted by Dave Gillespie.
The first (Before) column is a stock SCA-35, the second is after his simple EFB mod.
Even a stock, working to spec SCA-35 will average about 53% more power than you're giving it credit for. Add the $5 (or less) EFB mod, and it will produce even more power, with less distortion, and many (including me) say it sounds better. In addition, the power transformer runs cooler, and the 6BQ5 output tubes will last longer, both because the tubes are drawing less current.
The main reason I'd steer the original poster away from the SCA-35 is the unavailability of the 7199 input tube. As Eli Duttman says, "They've gone the way of the dodo". There are adapters available to convert 7199 amps to use other tubes, or the amp can be modded to use the 6U8A (link below), if he found one cheap enough.
The 17 WPC may still not be enough for his A10 speakers, but I'm betting that for FM radio (background music?) on a bedroom system, it could be.
"You won't come back from Fletcher-Munson curve"-Jan and Dean
I was talking stock, not modified. Given my experience with the SCA-35, Gillespie must of had that thing pretty optimized to get 14 watts out of it. Even in that case, we are talking a little over 1.5 decibels, which is very barely audible. Note also that distortion is pretty high in that chart. I believe the standard is 1% for tube gear, which is a distortion level that I still wouldn't want to listen at (YMMV). I would not expect the amp to be very listenable at those power levels.
Back to my original point, which is not negated by Gillespie's measurements. My fully functioning SCA-35 does not have enough power to drive my Dynaco A25's let alone the smaller, less efficient A10's, that is when driving modern stereo records. It could be drive them fairly loud listening levels, but the sound was compressed and distorted. At those levels it was unlistenable in my opinion. It was useless for classical or rock, although it did work for folk and small chamber music. YMMV, but from your dislike of the amp, it may not have. So I stand by my 9 watts, but I am talking about real world power in stereo, with tolerable levels of distortion, but I am willing to give or take a decibel or two. Yes, it was a estimate, comparing it to other amps like Mark IV's which I have also owned. I don't have power measuring equipment.
From Gillespie's article, "On the bench, the ambiguity of the "each channel" designation is shown for what it really is: each channel at a
time. Measured as such, the SCA-35 is generally capable of meeting its performance standards. That may have been fine for early stereo that often threw nearly all the sound to one channel for dramatic effect, but with the more balanced presentation of today's stereo sources, full performance is required in both channels at all times. The fact is, when a stock SCA-35 is tested under conditions of both channels driven, the specifications suffer significantly such that it becomes about a 27-28 watt RMS (total) amplifier, at greatly elevated distortion (typically 3-5 times that of single channel performance). To be very clear here, that means that when both channels are driven, the power output of each channel drops to about 80% of single channel performance, and at that reduced power, distortion is 3-5 times higher than what is produced at the higher power output of single channel operation."
Dave
It's not a very good amp. I subjectively believe it sounds better after the EFB mod (I can't measure power either), but even still, there's that 7199 issue.
It's noted for having great output transformers though. Eventually I'd like to build a good 6BQ5 amp around the second SCA-35 I own.
"You won't come back from Fletcher-Munson curve"-Jan and Dean
Another option is to go passive with the preamp and put a modern ST-35 board. The ST-35 is a much better circuit and you can buy boards that use available tubes. But then you still have that "marginal" phono stage!
Dave
thanks for the good info if I find one at a good price.
Everyone seems to agree that the EFB mod sounds good at high volume levels near clipping. How does the lower operating point at idle affect the sound quality at low levels?
Edits: 04/22/15
Everyone? I've never read that before. Can you provide a few links?
As I've posted before, I could never stand the sound of an SCA-35. It was like someone threw a wet blanket over the speakers, in other words, dull.
The EFB mod didn't "transform" the sound of the amp, but it certainly improved it for me. As for it only offering improvement at full power, my main amp is a First Watt F1J, which is 10 WPC. I'm not regularly clipping that amp, so I doubt I'm getting anywhere close to the EFB modded SCA-35s 17.6 WPC. It sounds better to me than the stock amp did, and that's at any volume.
"You won't come back from Fletcher-Munson curve"-Jan and Dean
Apparently you misunderstood my question. How does the lower operating point at idle affect the sound quality at low levels?
Thanks for the heads up. I've been recommended the HK330c solid state receiver at 20wpc. It looks cool enough to not disrupt the decor in our bedroom, but will it's power rating be satisfactory for modest volumes?
It's a surprising 20 watts! Not to get into the rating system. But 20 watts in the 70's was a different 20 watts today. My bedroom system is 22 watts and it can blast me out if I wish too.
Go for the lower HK unit. The SCA-35 is a fine little stereo. But you will need to invest some money to have it restored. And "it is what it is". A "nice" little stereo.
And if you really like the HK you can have it restored fairly easily and cheaper than a tube stereo. Don't sell these little babies short.
Also the HK receivers of this vintage were engineered to sound good as well as meet specs. HK's can deliver their power into real loads with some headroom to spare.
Dave
Yes, 20W should be fine for bedroom use.
Beat me to it. Ditto on all these plus maybe a Marantz 2230 or 2215. Or a Model 26 like the one I have driving Fried Betas.
I like the smaller Marantz myself as well. Like the 2216/2216b. And one of my favorite marantz was the 2226b.I also really liked the lower powered HK much more then their higher powered offerings. With the A-10, you can't go wrong with any of these.
charles
Edits: 04/23/15
Thanks for your recommendations. I have a lot of good recommendations now to begin my search.
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:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
