Diehard Bose Head

[zebra03]

I didn't read all eleven pages, but the information the OP found and linked to would seem to indicate otherwise. Other past threads I've seen about his Pioneer have also suggested finding speakers with a "friendly" impedance curve, one that doesn't dip much below 6 ohms at any frequency. That leaves an awful lot of good speakers to choose from; for example, Vandersteen speakers are considered to be a reasonably easy load.

I REGULARLY drive 2 sets of 8 ohm speakers ( HPM150 and Genesis 210 ) with my similar SX1250 Pioneer receiver for hours on end and have no problems . My receiver sees this as a 4 ohm load with no problems . And that is simply the truth with components I own and use daily .

 

[zebra03]

The speakers I mentioned (Magneplanar, Acoustat, especially any speaker with a Watkins woofer) are widely known to be unsuitable for most receivers.

I also spoke from experience. I've owned Magneplanars or Acoustats since 1976. In those many years more than one of my friends has brought a receiver over to try on my Acoustats or the Magnepans I previously owned.

I'm well aware that there are some separates that have the same problems. Even so, there are far fewer separates with current starvation problems than receivers.

I have no particular axe to grind over any receiver. I'm merely stating the truth.

What receivers might these be ? Generalizations are not very helpful .

 

[tomlinmgt]

There is a lot of anti-receiver sentiment floating around here . Mike , your Sx-1280 will drive most any speaker with out breaking a sweat .

This is a crock of ****. What's floating around here are people stating facts (based on experience, I might add) so that others may have access to sound, accurate information. I've seen not one single statement here on AK where someone has outright marginalized (quality) receivers in a negative fashion. What I have observed are statements indicating a higher build quality and a higher performance ceiling than is available from a receiver is attainable with (high quality) separates. If you can only see that as a negative comment against receivers then you elect to deny facts for what I can only assume to be personal reasons. And furthermore, by propagating that perspective you could very well be putting someone of lesser knowledge at risk of learning a potentially expensive lesson. If the OP is considering driving 4 ohm load speaker designs with a receiver, that should be considered on a case by case basis. Making a comment like "your Sx-1280 will drive most any speaker with out breaking a sweat", though not entirely inaccurate, can instill a false sense of confidence which, if not checked, could lead to an unfortunate and avoidable outcome.

- Michael

 

[zebra03]

This is a crock of ****. What's floating around here are people stating facts (based on experience, I might add) so that others may have access to sound, accurate information. I've seen not one single statement here on AK where someone has outright marginalized (quality) receivers in a negative fashion. What I have observed are statements indicating a higher build quality and a higher performance ceiling than is available from a receiver is attainable with (high quality) separates. If you can only see that as a negative comment against receivers then you elect to deny facts for what I can only assume to be personal reasons. And furthermore, by propagating that perspective you could very well be putting someone of lesser knowledge at risk of learning a potentially expensive lesson. If the OP is considering driving 4 ohm load speaker designs with a receiver, that should be considered on a case by case basis. Making a comment like "your Sx-1280 will drive most any speaker with out breaking a sweat", though not entirely inaccurate, can instill a false sense of confidence which, if not checked, could lead to an unfortunate and avoidable outcome.

- Michael

Let's see , you are agreeing with me but arguing with me ? :screwy:

Those receivers (SX1250,SX1280) have existed for over 30 years driving all kinds of speakers and now all of a sudden , they are fragile ? I stand by my receiver and how it performs everyday for ME driving a 4 ohm load . That is real world experience .

And profanity is is surely not appreciated .

 

[zebra03]

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=522571

Post #6

 

[jazzmans]

zebra, your threadjack isn't helping anything.

 

[JoeESP9]

Let's see , you are agreeing with me but arguing with me ? :screwy:

Those receivers (SX1250,SX1280) have existed for over 30 years driving all kinds of speakers and now all of a sudden , they are fragile ? I stand by my receiver and how it performs everyday for ME driving a 4 ohm load . That is real world experience .

And profanity is is surely not appreciated .

No one said they were fragile. We merely said they were inadequate with certain loads. That's the truth, nothing more, nothing less.

After hearing both a SX1050 and SX1250 among others run out of gas trying to drive a pair of MG-3As and seeing several Carver T series amps shut down when confronted with Infinities with Watkins woofers I have some insight. My buddies and I were afraid of using a receiver on the Watkins equipped Infinities.

Couple this with other posters here and elsewhere who have reported the same things with comparable products and my initial statement starts to carry some weight.

 

[zebra03]

There is a lot of anti-receiver sentiment floating around here . Mike , your Sx-1280 will drive most any speaker with out breaking a sweat .

I said MOST here . I never said all .

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=522571

Post #6

Joe, you said same thing HERE .

Why are you arguing with me Joe ?



If it were me , I would stay away from those kind of speakers and would consider them not even remotely worth my time . Especially when there are many other great speakers that are not destrutive to their power source .

OP , Have you been able to find any speaker to listen to yet ?

 

[HeezDeadJim]

So this thread had dipped into the "Bose dismay" to a new "does the SX-1280 suffer from impedance impotence"?

I was wondering why this thread was still going on.

 

[JoeESP9]

I said MOST here . I never said all .



Joe, you said same thing HERE .

Why are you arguing with me Joe ?



If it were me , I would stay away from those kind of speakers and would consider them not even remotely worth my time . Especially when there are many other great speakers that are not destrutive to their power source .

OP , Have you been able to find any speaker to listen to yet ?

I choose speakers first and then get the gear necessary to make them work properly. IMO that's the correct way to build a system.

I happen to like the speakers I mentioned. So, if it were me I'd stay away from a receiver. Prior to moving to electrostatics (1983) I owned three different pair of Magneplanars (from 1976 to 1983). So, since 1976 most receivers have been off my list.

Those speakers aren't destructive to any amplifier without the compromises inherent in most receivers. That being a general inability to drive low impedance and/or reactive loads.

There are very few "monkey coffins" that are acceptable to me. I make no apologies about being a panel guy.

BTW: Running two pair of 4 Ohm speakers with a relatively benign impedance curve means that when running both pair your receiver is seeing an 8 Ohm load. Even the most modest receiver should have no problem with a benign 8 Ohm load.

 

[zebra03]

I choose speakers first and then get the gear necessary to make them work properly. IMO that's the correct way to build a system.

I happen to like the speakers I mentioned. So, if it were me I'd stay away from a receiver. Prior to moving to electrostatics (1983) I owned three different pair of Magneplanars (from 1976 to 1983). So, since 1976 most receivers have been off my list.

Those speakers aren't destructive to any amplifier without the compromises inherent in most receivers. That being a general inability to drive low impedance and/or reactive loads.

There are very few "monkey coffins" that are acceptable to me. I make no apologies about being a panel guy.

BTW: Running two pair of 4 Ohm speakers with a relatively benign impedance curve means that when running both pair your receiver is seeing an 8 Ohm load. Even the most modest receiver should have no problem with a benign 8 Ohm load.

Ohm x Ohm 8x6/8+6= 3.4 ohm load This is what my SX1250 sees and I use them everyday .
Ohm + Ohm

Never mind Joe , you have it all figured out . Next time I need somebody to come over and turn my system on for me , I'll give you a call .

 

[RamblinE]

This is a crock of ****. What's floating around here are people stating facts (based on experience, I might add) so that others may have access to sound, accurate information. I've seen not one single statement here on AK where someone has outright marginalized (quality) receivers in a negative fashion. What I have observed are statements indicating a higher build quality and a higher performance ceiling than is available from a receiver is attainable with (high quality) separates. If you can only see that as a negative comment against receivers then you elect to deny facts for what I can only assume to be personal reasons. And furthermore, by propagating that perspective you could very well be putting someone of lesser knowledge at risk of learning a potentially expensive lesson. If the OP is considering driving 4 ohm load speaker designs with a receiver, that should be considered on a case by case basis. Making a comment like "your Sx-1280 will drive most any speaker with out breaking a sweat", though not entirely inaccurate, can instill a false sense of confidence which, if not checked, could lead to an unfortunate and avoidable outcome.

- Michael

+1 :thmbsp:

 

[Soundminded]

I've owned Bose 901 original design among many speakers (I never sell or get rid of anything) since 1970. I understand these speakers, their strengths and shortcomings. I'm not here to convince anyone they're good or bad and I have no emotional attachment to equipment, I'm an engineer not an audiophile in the usual sense. I made two attempts to re-engineer these speakers. The first one in the 1990s ended in failure. A much more serious attempt took four years from 2004 to 2008. The speaker IMO has three main flaws. One, it has a significant peak around 250 hz. Two, its bass falls off much too rapidly, approximately 6db per octave even with the equalizer. It's output reaches the 1 kHz level at about 90-95 hz and keeps dropping. These were easy to fix with equalization although the added bass boost can eat up all 138 wpc per channel I've got for them without any difficulty. Within its limits when properly sealed and functioning it can produce very very deep undistorted bass with enough equalization and power. Three, it's most serious shortcoming is that it can't reproduce the top octave of sound. A carefully designed multidirectional tweeter array and bi-amplification solved that problem but it took a long time and a lot of effort (but not a lot of money) to arrive at a satisfactory arrangement and it is designed specifically for the spot and room it's located in. When properly redesigned this way and adjusted for each recording it is in most ways better and more accurate than any other speaker I own or have heard. The only thing I've got better is the bass in Teledyne AR9. It would take at least 3 pairs of original or series II 901s and about 600 to 1000 wpc to equal AR9's bass.

 

[JoeESP9]

Ohm x Ohm 8x6/8+6= 3.4 ohm load This is what my SX1250 sees and I use them everyday .
Ohm + Ohm

Never mind Joe , you have it all figured out . Next time I need somebody to come over and turn my system on for me , I'll give you a call .

Sorry about my math. I forgot that receivers connect multiple pairs of speakers in parallel. I've never run more than one pair. So, it's not something I think about very much.

The speakers you use are not considered to be a difficult load anyway.

Magneplanars, electrostatics in general and all systems with Watkins woofers are generally considered to be difficult loads for one reason or another. This is exactly what I said that started this whole discourse.

Electrostatics can present a highly reactive load that in the case of Acoustats also goes down to 2 Ohms. Magneplanars are a fairly constant 4 Ohm load that needs lots of current. Watkins woofers have a load that goes below 2 Ohms and still needs lots of current. All three of these speakers are not good candidates for any receiver based system because of the current limitations inherent in the compromises made with the power supplies in many receivers.

I built my system around speakers that sound good to me. The simple truth is that some speakers (like mine) aren't suitable for receiver based systems. For those of us who choose those speakers that pretty much rules out using a receiver. I don't understand what is so contentious about that. Others who post on this forum have experienced the same thing.

Stating that some speakers aren't candidates for receiver based systems doesn't put down anyone's choice of anything. It merely states the facts.

BTW: I didn't mention the speakers that are probably the most difficult load of all, Apogee Scintillas. They can be strapped for 4 or 1 Ohm operation. They pretty much put Krell on the map because nothing else could drive them. Yes, I've heard them at length and yes, they sound a lot better when strapped for 1 Ohm.

 

[zebra03]

Sorry about my math. I forgot that receivers connect multiple pairs of speakers in parallel. I've never run more than one pair. So, it's not something I think about very much.

The speakers you use are not considered to be a difficult load anyway.

Magneplanars, electrostatics in general and all systems with Watkins woofers are generally considered to be difficult loads for one reason or another. This is exactly what I said that started this whole discourse.

Electrostatics can present a highly reactive load that in the case of Acoustats also goes down to 2 Ohms. Magneplanars are a fairly constant 4 Ohm load that needs lots of current. Watkins woofers have a load that goes below 2 Ohms and still needs lots of current. All three of these speakers are not good candidates for any receiver based system because of the current limitations inherent in the compromises made with the power supplies in many receivers.

I built my system around speakers that sound good to me. The simple truth is that some speakers (like mine) aren't suitable for receiver based systems. For those of us who choose those speakers that pretty much rules out using a receiver. I don't understand what is so contentious about that. Others who post on this forum have experienced the same thing.

Stating that some speakers aren't candidates for receiver based systems doesn't put down anyone's choice of anything. It merely states the facts.

BTW: I didn't mention the speakers that are probably the most difficult load of all, Apogee Scintillas. They can be strapped for 4 or 1 Ohm operation. They pretty much put Krell on the map because nothing else could drive them. Yes, I've heard them at length and yes, they sound a lot better when strapped for 1 Ohm.

I wish I had quoted your original post . It was a hoot .

What you first posted had me wondering if my receiver was different then almost every other receiver ever built . I knew your math was way off .

Actually , I would like to hear your system someday . It sounds really nice .

And yes , I DO know the technical aspect of my receiver . :thmbsp:



Have a good night

 

[JoeESP9]

A rating of 160WPC @ 8 Ohms and only 200WPC at 4 Ohms says there is some serious current limiting or general inadequacy in the power supply. Ideally the rating at 4 Ohms would be double that at 8 Ohms. The closer any amplifier comes to doubling wattage as the load impedance is cut in half the better it is at driving low impedance or difficult loads.

 

[zebra03]

Really , more math ? Are you sure you want to go there ? There is no shame in your lack of knowledge of receivers .

All I know is what works for me . I don't think either you or I are helping the OP at this point .

Just in case the OP is still listening , I have had great luck in Genesis speaker and Pioneer receiver combo's .

 

[JoeESP9]

Those specs are from the SX-1250 product brochure. I just looked it up on the HiFi Engine. The specs reinforce my point.

Not having a lot of experience with receivers has nothing to with knowing Ohms law and how amplifiers work.

Please note: The only thing I've said about your receiver is that the speakers I specifically mentioned aren't a good choice for it or most other receivers. I've made no statement or judgment regarding it's sound or overall quality.

Genesis speakers are a fairly easy load.

 

[zebra03]

Those specs are from the SX-1250 product brochure. I just looked it up on the HiFi Engine. The specs reinforce my point.

Not having a lot of experience with receivers has nothing to with knowing Ohms law and how amplifiers work.

Please note: The only thing I've said about your receiver is that the speakers I specifically mentioned aren't a good choice for it or most other receivers. I've made no statement or judgment regarding it's sound or overall quality.

Genesis speakers are a fairly easy load.

Yes , yes , I understand . I was just having a bit of fun at your huge gaffe before you erased it .

I also understand you are not saying Pioneer receivers are bad sounding . I am getting the feeling you are arguing for the sake of arguing . We have BOTH said this receiver will run most any speaker . This is getting very old .

 

[canuckaudiog]

..the OP's question was with regards to what speakers he should look out for for his SX-1250 (or was it 1280?).

This has gotten way off course.

Fact: Pioneer SX-1250 does not produce much current, making it a less than suitable choice for 4 ohm or lower loads. If the speaker is nominally 4 ohms, the Pioneer will more than likely run them OK without melting down, but is definitely not the ideal situation.

Fact 2: The Pioneer SX-1250 will run a good number of speakers without trouble. Speakers hovering around 8ohms would be a suitable choice power-wise. Sound-wise is another story

I think we can move on to helping out the OP with some speaker suggestions now...