KLH And Yamaha? An Unlikely Romance + Pioneer CS 88s

After running my newly rebuilt KLH 6s on my main rig with 125wpc I figured when I moved them back to the bedroom I would be disappointed. Not that the receivers I have back there are in anyway bad, they just are not in the same league as the Marantz 250/1060 in the front rig.

I was going to use the 75 wpc Fisher RS 2007 but was too lazy to move it. So I hooked them up to my cherry Quadraflex 979. After listening to that combo for the past few weeks I realized it sounds really freaking good...not just nice, but really nice.

The 979 is in superb condition and so are the speakers so i am sure that makes a difference. But, WOW, sometimes things just click and these two do. I have a Yamaha 1040 inbound so I am interested in how much, of any, difference there will be. The Yamaha is 80wpc and the Quadraflex 60. Does more power always around better? That is the question that get argued all the time. Does the 60 watt 979 sound better than the 125 watt Marantz 250? No, but it sounds damn good with these speakers in our big bedroom.

Sometimes less can be great, if not more.

View attachment 1418378
View attachment 1418379
View attachment 1418380
I love the look of this piece of equipment. Reminiscent of the display on my Sansui TU-717 tuner. Is it silver face? The Sansui is black. And I would think the very clean sound of Yamaha would work nicely with the warmth and body of the 6's. Good to know it does.
 
I love the look of this piece of equipment. Reminiscent of the display on my Sansui TU-717 tuner. Is it silver face? The Sansui is black. And I would think the very clean sound of Yamaha would work nicely with the warmth and body of the 6's. Good to know it does.


Sorry for no pics!

20190215_184626.jpg 20190216_104002.jpg
 
Glad you like it! I think one keeps the other in check to make a good match. I'd be curious to hear your impressions of the Yamaha paired with some of your other speakers as well. Keep us posted!

I will try them Monday or so with the Dynacos and the Pioneers
 
After running my newly rebuilt KLH 6s on my main rig with 125wpc I figured when I moved them back to the bedroom I would be disappointed. Not that the receivers I have back there are in anyway bad, they just are not in the same league as the Marantz 250/1060 in the front rig.

I was going to use the 75 wpc Fisher RS 2007 but was too lazy to move it. So I hooked them up to my cherry Quadraflex 979. After listening to that combo for the past few weeks I realized it sounds really freaking good...not just nice, but really nice.

The 979 is in superb condition and so are the speakers so i am sure that makes a difference. But, WOW, sometimes things just click and these two do. I have a Yamaha 1040 inbound so I am interested in how much, of any, difference there will be. The Yamaha is 80wpc and the Quadraflex 60. Does more power always around better? That is the question that get argued all the time. Does the 60 watt 979 sound better than the 125 watt Marantz 250? No, but it sounds damn good with these speakers in our big bedroom.

Sometimes less can be great, if not more.

View attachment 1418378
View attachment 1418379
View attachment 1418380

Glad you like it! I think one keeps the other in check to make a good match. I'd be curious to hear your impressions of the Yamaha paired with some of your other speakers as well. Keep us posted!

Wait, now I am confused. What are the pics of in the OP? They look Sansui to me. But this one looks a lot more like my Yamaha. Am confused as to what is pictured in the OP.

PS, here is my Yamaha tuner with my Music Hall. I think it looks nice too, and provides a nice signal and sound to my 6's at the office.

CCD7B030-557A-4E1E-9FFF-BB12FC7B9286.jpg
 
Bodyblue, thanks for a great thread. I'm a newby in every way, taking a stab at putting a system together again. I recently picked up a Yamaha CR-1040 and I'm over the moon as to how pleased I am with it (my only frame of reference a Yam CR-420 I had 40 years ago) even using what I call my Kenwood "department store" speakers I pulled out of the garage, which I plan to replace.

I've been interested in how Yamaha's "natural sound" is described, both good and not-so-good. I like your phrase "ice cold clear".
 
Bodyblue, thanks for a great thread. I'm a newby in every way, taking a stab at putting a system together again. I recently picked up a Yamaha CR-1040 and I'm over the moon as to how pleased I am with it (my only frame of reference a Yam CR-420 I had 40 years ago) even using what I call my Kenwood "department store" speakers I pulled out of the garage, which I plan to replace.

I've been interested in how Yamaha's "natural sound" is described, both good and not-so-good. I like your phrase "ice cold clear".

And that description is in no way a knock against it. I do think it does well (as others have said) with a pair more warmish speakers. I usually use an EQ on all of my systems because all of our rooms are very "soft" (not a lot of hard surfaces) and I boost a bit at the 4K because of my hearing......but with this receiver I run that frequency flat.

For rock music I dont think it makes a huge difference but for classical or jazz, having that extra definition is incredible. For example, my wife and I listen to a Spotify Premium play list and one of the songs is Bill Evans Trio's "My Foolish Heart". It was recorded live in a small club and I usually dont like live recordings like that but it is so good that I play it every night. What sounds so good is the drummer's brushes sliding on the drums with that light hiss. I can hear it with the Quadraflex and Realistic receivers for sure but that sound is so much more defined with the Yamaha.

I run the Loudness control all the way up but keep the other tone controls flat and use the EQ for just a boost or cut here and there. Overall, I am really enjoying it, but it does indeed sound different that other receivers.
 
Oh and after using the 1040 with the KLH speakers I am firmly convinced more power is better with them. They just sound better with more power. Not to say they dont sound great with less, because they do. But they sound better and better with more power. It is kind of sad that after getting the KLHs rebuilt I have almost no interest in the Dynacos anymore. I still like them but they dont blow me away like the KLHs and my Imperials do.
 
I had a burst of energy this afternoon and swapped out the KLHS for the Pioneer CS 88s.

The Pioneers are a difficult speaker to nail down. Mine have been recapped btw just 5 months ago. Sometimes they astound me and sometimes they confuse me. Even though I have them in a 20x15 room they really need something a bit bigger. That being said the Yamaha and the CS 88s mean freaking incredible highs and mids. I play my night time play list that I know every note of and while bbn the KLHs can stay with them in bass, at least in medium levels, the Pioneers eat them up in the heights for sure. During the song recorded in a club, I hear somebody coughing that I never heard before.

Where the 88 are confusing is in bass at mid volumes. They have a decent amount and sound nice but when you crank them it feels like having your head kicked in....crazy powerful. But my other speakers have better bass at lower volumes. When I try to EQ them a bit they get muddy. In a big room with some decent power they are a speaker that can compete easily.

20190217_140606.jpg 20190217_140547.jpg 20190217_140547.jpg
 
Well after an afgof trying to get the cs88s to play nice with the Yamaha I gave up and took them down. The highs and mids were actually nice but the lows were either too light and muddy or kick you in the head.......they only sounded decent at high volumes.

So next set are the Dynacos and they of course sound terrific. More and better quality bass at lower volume and very nice highs. I love my Imperials and the KLHs but I am always impressed with how these tiny Dynacos sound. There is no way in hell a 10 in woofer in such a small cab should sound so good but they do.

So far two sets sound good to one that does not.

20190217_171848.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom