The Best Vintage Amp/Receiver - Review

[LiveMusic]

http://select45rpm.com/pages/hifi/top-amps.html
I had posted this earlier in the pioneer section, but thought of bringing this part of my post to a larger audience.


I came across the below website while doing my search for the best vintage receiver, and finally did buy his top recommendation(Pioneer SX 1500T).
It does sound very good, but I am not sure it is the best.

So, what does AK veterans think about this website and review:
http://select45rpm.com/pages/hifi/top-amps.html

How many of you agree with his findings, and if you dont, what are the counters?
Does anybody know/have dealt with this group(This is a UK based group, I am not sure how many folks from UK are present in AK.)

Thanks for looking at my post. Do reply

 

[SFBayArch]

I've read their reviews, and also some commentary and reaction regarding their opinions here on AK. It is quite difficult to read. After browsing a few pages and perusing a few others, I felt like my head had been drudged through mud.

The writer(s) need a proper introduction to paragraph breaks.

That said, I share their love for the early SS gear, particularly The early SONY ES stuff, as well as Tannoy Gold dual concentric monitors.

 

[KentTeffeteller]

In most cases, I tend to like his favorite circuitry. I liked a lot of the first or second generation SS gear which was all Silicon best. This gear had few or no IC chips, simple ones when used, and tube era design before prettying up designs for spec sheets.

While his paragraphs might need some work, his reasoning on musical circuit design is right on for me. I have a few pieces I like, he does not, but he has some gear on his list I have listened to anew. And liked better. His Yamaha choices for me are actually gear I love listening to. I wish they had fewer issues with heat. I have commented on some of what he has said, and he's been friendly. He makes reasonable sense.

 

[Brian]

I can not complain too much about his thoughts as I found my Sony STR-6120 to be 1 of the best receivers I've listened to and a keeper.

Some of his evaluations rather speculative such as the Sony STR-6060 he shrugs off as probably being too good soundwise or constrictionwise without ever hearing 1. It actually is better made but not as complex a design as the 6120. I never did decide whether I liked the 6060 or 6120 better. The 6060 is more voiced towards the typical tune sound of the times while the 6120 moved closer towards the evolving newer ss sound. When push came to shove, I sold the 6060s but refused to sell the 6120.

As for his dismissal of the QUAD lineup we are not in agreement. Yes, the sound is different from his grail, the Japanese gear and not designed for the marketing managers but when in spec, they are more than competent. The issue he brings up related to the voltages is really a non-issue as most preamps have more than sufficient gain to drive the amps and the preamp output voltage is high enough to drive most power amps. QUAD like many others believed buyers would be buying single brand systems including companies like McIntosh, Marantz, Dynaco.

I especially like his continually noting he has not evaluated everything in the world as some reviewers seem to give the impression of having done. I tend to also share his bias against ICs but, a well designed circuit around an IC can offset any disadvantage but, it seems this is more the exception than the rule in application. I have pair of Sheewood S-3300 tuners. One is the early design with all discrete transistors while the other has micro-circuits, the original IC and side by side in the same system I can not hear any difference. They are not in the audio circuit so maybe only if used in the audio path do they present a universal thumbs down.

Lastly, his breadth of units listed is quite narrow. It might be more meaningful if he also listed units he evaluated but did not make the grade. For me it has more meaning than a discussion about some unit he has not bought but discusses.

Overall, though, I give him a thumbs up as a source to read as a beginning place but like most sources, not the answer to the question presented.

 

[Karl vd Berg]

The Yamaha A-720 is well regarded over there...

 

[Panotaker]

The best two receiver/amps is the one you have at home, and the one you haven't upgraded to yet.

 

[srinath]

I'd only partially agree. I have had a SX1500T - It was fine, its cap coupled and hence sounds beautiful, but I'd rate a few other cap coupled amps above it. Sx2500 comes to mind right away. The sansui 3000a is one damn good sounding receiver. Better than many bigger and so called better receivers.

And he puts a CR800 in there over a CR1000 ? maybe the sliders are something he didn't like. Think the cr800 isn't all sliders ?

Cool.
Srinath.

 

[JohnVF]

From that page:

"This is the only Hifi site online to have the nerve & knowledge to rank vintage hifi amplifiers & receivers against others. Reading forums & seeing what others rave about gives us the idea they've not heard many amps & are raving about an amp we'd consider mediocre."

I would say that same exact thing about their findings.

I have owned a number of the units they review and ...

To be blunt, I can't remember the last time I was confronted online with a bigger pile of malarkey as I have just read. And they're comparing them using headphones? How do you do am amp comparison when your method of comparison often doesn't even involve the amp section? What a bunch of ....whatever. I'll just shut up now. That page was insulting to anybody with half a brain and two ears.

 

[mhardy6647]

if you've never visited the site before, and you'd like to read some truly... revisionist... perspective on certain aspects of vintage high fidelity, spend a little quality time at
http://www.lacieg2s.ca/public/w3terra/ols/audion_index.htm

Like its creator - it's cranky, cantankerous, profoundly nonlinear, funny, articulate, abstruse and obtuse, all at once. It's hard to tell sometimes what's meant to be earnest and truthful... and what's a put-on.

I will say that I've fairly recently picked up an HH Scott 260 amp, though... just in case! ;-)

 

[Brian]

Not sure about the headphone knock. He does not mention what phones he is using or, at least that I read. Most amps and receivers simply pad the amp output so in a listening test generally it includes the power amp. Also, he could be using an e'stat such as the Stax or Koss that requires driving them off the speakers. He does note, can not remember what unit that it uses a separate headphone amp that he knocks but for someone who uses headphones it may be quite meaningful. Avoids having to invest in a dedicated separated headphone amp.

As for using phones, I have almost always used them for evaluating amps as it eliminates 2 possible issues: 1) using different speakers over the years and, 2) eliminating issues such as room resonances, changes in the room such as moving furniture, etc. Also, it works well if doing evaluations outside of your normal test room.

My first set of phones waa a set of Koss ESP9s used for years alo.g with a set of Koss PRO4AAs and K6LC. The 9s eventually were sold off but only a year or so later replaced with the 9b, same phone bit different grounding system. This gave me a good static "standard speaker" system for testing. Trying to evaluate receiver A using a set of K'horns and 6 months later receiver B in either another room or in the same room with new furniture or on the same room with no changes but say a set of M-L Monoliths is going to make evaluating the differences in receivers almost like apples and oranges as to the sonics.

Likewise I kept for years an amp, preamp and tuner that I cycled into use for component testing. As for speakers I only had 3 over the decades, my KLH Nines and Bozak 302a and Bozak Symphonys. I've cycled in and out many other sets but these were/are my keeper systems for some 45 years.

 

[SFBayArch]

From that page:
To be blunt, I can't remember the last time I was confronted online with a bigger pile of malarkey as I have just read. And they're comparing them using headphones? How do you do am amp comparison when your method of comparison often doesn't even involve the amp section? What a bunch of ....whatever. I'll just shut up now. That page was insulting to anybody with half a brain and two ears.

Half a brain and two ears?

Are you suggesting that by using the headphones, the amp section is bypassed?

Unless I misunderstand you somehow, you're mistaken there.

 

[hugeroost]

I own one receiver he likes, yamaha cr820. He says it needs alot of work to be at its best, I wonder what exactly needs to be done. I also have a sx1250 which he acts like is junk basically, I would have to disagree. I have read on here 1000 times its one of the best, thats why I bought it. Also have some Mcintosh, which he didnt mention. He seems to really like the yammi stuff alot.......Roost

 

[JohnVF]

Have at it vintage lovers.

I would at least suggest that you base your findings on a diatribe with fewer grammatical errors and hypocritical use of subjective commentary when it suits them.

"See the new HEADPHONES page, we bought some new ones & were rather deeply shocked how godawful they were! The best Headphones must be a flat response & buying more expensive ones only brings out awful overdesign."

What does that even mean? They should try a pair of Audeze LCD-3s, and find out how little they know. Or spend 5 minutes on Head-Fi. The whole site just screams out as another "I have buried my head in the sand and this is what I found" rant.

 

[Duke58]

I have to agree with Panotaker- "The best two receiver/amps is the one you have at home, and the one you haven't upgraded to yet."

That being said and having said that, thus, my conclusion based on the article of the best receiver/amp in the world is: inconclusive.

Same with the 100 most beautiful people in the world, most eligible bachelor, any comparison regarding the world- you have to compare to the world. No one has time to do that, so my first comment stands, having said that.

Obviously I said that. Why do people say that? Why do people say "synergy?" I prefer Karma. That's why I like this forum. Just sayin'...

 

[Hifirob2]

To me, that site is nothing more than someone's opinion on a very select group of pieces. The omitted brands and models reduce the importance of his opinions to near negligible.

 

[JohnVF]

Half a brain and two ears?

Are you suggesting that by using the headphones, the amp section is bypassed?

Unless I misunderstand you somehow, you're mistaken there.

Do most of them just use resistors across the headphone outs from the amp section? Is that across the board for the amps in question? And if so, what of the other question...how the high impedance of some vintage headphone outputs would affect the sound quality/frequency response of different modern headphones of "neutral balance" used for this purely subjective (it seems) comparison? And what of these amps performance into real-world speakers as opposed to headphones? Why would headphones be a better way to make the comparison?

 

[SFBayArch]

Do most of them just use resistors across the headphone outs from the amp section? Is that across the board for the amps in question? And if so, what of the other question...how the high impedance of some vintage headphone outputs would affect the sound quality/frequency response of different modern headphones of "neutral balance" used for this purely subjective (it seems) comparison? And what of these amps performance into real-world speakers as opposed to headphones? Why would headphones be a better way to make the comparison?

I think the writer explained his reasoning for using headphones to assess the performance of these amps, but he also used Tannoy Gold dual concentric monitors - excellent speakers in their own right. The differences you mention regarding the high impedance vintage headphones affecting the performance would apply also to speakers as well.

But, yes, the headphone circuits uses resistors across its output coming from the amplifier section. I think it's a vast exception to the rule that a vintage receiver/amp would have a separate, dedicated headphone amplifier. I don't know of one, anyway.

 

[reggaenaut]

I like his selections of old Sony receivers and 1120 amp because they agree with my bias.

Hello Brian, always appreciate your posts.
He said the the Sony 6120 is essentially a 6200. Do you know if there is any
truth to this?

 

[LiveMusic]

Thanks for all the responses. I agree that the English there is not the best. However we cantcan'texpect an audio techie to be oxford educated. I see some consensus on the Sony being among the best, but no one seem to agree on the pioneer 1500TF.:sigh:

 

[Daunia 70]

There's some reviews/opinions on there,that I certainly wouldn't agree with.He seems to really dislike the classic Kenwood KR-9600 monster receiver.
Personally I was so impressed with it's sound quality,FM reception and supa cool looks that I purchased two on Ebay UK last year.The last one was on a 'BIN' for £250.
On his review,he really slags it off,then near the end adds,'sadly the buyer who jumped fast on Ebay to buy it for £250 thinking it was a bargain 160 watt monster amp will be blissfully unaware of the crap they've bought'.
I would definitely go with 'thevintageknobs website assessment that say,'it's as good as any monster receiver made during the last era of bigger is better,but your ears will tell you what suits your tastes'.