KR-4400 sound character

Status
Not open for further replies.
lshj2015

lshj2015

Active Member
I think it's better to start a new thread because this is a different topic.

I have a question regarding the sound of KR-4400. I recently purchased 3 receivers. Kenwood KR-4400, Marantz 2275, and Pioneer SX-838. I like the appearance of KR-4400 the most. However, I have noticed that the sound from my KR-4400 is significantly less bright compared to Marantz 2275 and Pioneer SX-838 that I have. I am not sure if that is "warm" sound that people usually mentioned. If that's called "warm" sound, it would be too warm to me. I have the Elekit Tu-8200R tube amplifier, the sounds from Marantz 2275 and Pioneer SX-838 are more close to the sound from my Tu-8200R tube amp. I don't have critical ear and most time I couldn't tell or care about subtle difference. There might be subtle difference between the sound of Marantz 2275 and Pioneer SX-838, but the difference would be very subtle to me and I couldn't tell if I like one or the other. But the sound from Kenwood KR-4400 is significantly different from all other amps or receivers that I have, the difference is Huge to my ear. Both Marantz 2275 and Pioneer SX-838 sound significantly brighter, more dynamic, and have much more details compared to KR-4400. Another friend here just mentioned to me that other Kenwood models like KR-7600 would be better. Do you guys think KR-7600 would sound different than KR-4400 or similar? Do you think recap or restore the KR-4400 would make some difference? I really love the appearance of KR-4400, but the sound character of this receiver is not ideal to my ear. I am wondering if it's worthwhile for me to spend time restore this receiver, or just get a better Kenwood model because I kind of like the appearance of Kenwood receiver than others? Any recommendation is highly appreciated.

By the way, the speaker that I tested was JBL 4410. Maybe the KR-4400 is not powerful enough to drive this speaker? But I don't listen to very high volume. It seems like KR-4400 has plenty of power to drive this speaker to me.

20200623_220841.jpg
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
The way that vintage amps and receivers age has more to do with their sound than brand/model does. When those receivers were new they sounded more alike than they do now. Electrolytic capacitors age, and corrosion forms in the many pots and switches that the signal must travel through. I would say that the Kenwood did not age as gracefully as your other two receivers. Could have had a harder life, less favorable conditions, inadequate cooling, greater exposure to airborne contaminants, etc. Yes, a recap and the best possible switch/pot cleaning you can do will make a noticeable difference. Don't underestimate the negative effects of corrosion on the contact areas of those pots and switches. The Deoxit sticky thread is a good place to start
https://www.audiokarma.org/forums/i...diots-guide-to-using-deoxit-revisited.207005/

But...all that being said, it will take a lot of work, and time, to do a recap and thorough Deoxit treatment. And I have no idea if you really want to get involved in that type of project. So I am not trying to dissuade you from trying another model of Kenwood if there is something decent available to you.

That is a pretty receiver though
 
Last edited:
As i said in your other thread, i did own a KR-4400, that i fully re-caped and DeOxit. It did sound better after all of that but, i now have a KR-6600 (same as a 7600, only less powerfull and less switches to play with). The 6600 has gotten the same re-cap/ Deoxit treatment and, maybe cause of the power difference or, 2 years ''younger'', the KR-6600 sounds way better to ME. It is also way nicer looking!. I LOOVED my 4400 but, no match!.
 
roger2 said:
The way that vintage amps and receivers age has more to do with their sound than brand/model does. When those receivers were new they sounded more alike than they do now. Electrolytic capacitors age, and corrosion forms in the many pots and switches that the signal must travel through. I would say that the Kenwood did not age as gracefully as your other two receivers. Could have had a harder life, less favorable conditions, inadequate cooling, greater exposure to airborne contaminants, etc. Yes, a recap and the best possible switch/pot cleaning you can do will make a noticeable difference. Don't underestimate the negative effects of corrosion on the contact areas of those pots and switches. The Deoxit sticky thread is a good place to start
https://www.audiokarma.org/forums/i...diots-guide-to-using-deoxit-revisited.207005/

But...all that being said, it will take a lot of work, and time, to do a recap and thorough Deoxit treatment. And I have no idea if you really want to get involved in that type of project. So I am not trying to dissuade you from trying another model of Kenwood if there is something decent available to you.

That is a pretty receiver though
Click to expand...

Thank you. I actually did do the Deoxit cleaning. I probably will try to do the recap or restoration for KR-4400 because I really like the appearance of this receiver. I like the simple design, not very big. Some of the more advanced models of these vintage receivers have just too many knobs to me. I already purchased the Marantz 2275 restoration kit from Randy (a AK member here) and also purchased a Hakko FR-301 as recommended by Randy. There is going to be a lot of works to do. I actually like fixing things but I have very limited knowledge about electrics. Recently I built the Elekit Tu-8200r tube amplifier (from kit) and I really enjoyed the whole building process.

The inside of KR-4400 looks a lot simpler compared to my other receivers, I would assume it will be a little easier to restore than Marantz 2275 or Pioneer SX-838. Do you guys know if there is any list or restoration kit that I could buy for KR-4400? Or that I have to figure it out by myself? I can recognize electrolytic capacitors, but have no idea if there are any other parts that should be replaced.
 
Last edited:
turboyam said:
As i said in your other thread, i did own a KR-4400, that i fully re-caped and DeOxit. It did sound better after all of that but, i now have a KR-6600 (same as a 7600, only less powerfull and less switches to play with). The 6600 has gotten the same re-cap/ Deoxit treatment and, maybe cause of the power difference or, 2 years ''younger'', the KR-6600 sounds way better to ME. It is also way nicer looking!. I LOOVED my 4400 but, no match!.
Click to expand...

Great, I will try to re-cap it. Do you have the list that which part should be replaced? Did you figure it by yourself or you purchased the rebuild kit like I did for my Marantz 2275? I will see if I could get the more powerful Kenwood model later.
 
You should replace only electrolytic and tantalum. I believe there might be a couple tantalum caps in there. And as far as a "kit" or list or BOM etc, it really is best to make your own list from the parts that are installed in the amp. Mistakes are common in Service Manual parts lists and on schematics. As long as the installed parts look original, use those parts as your guide.
 
roger2 said:
You should replace only electrolytic and tantalum. I believe there might be a couple tantalum caps in there. And as far as a "kit" or list or BOM etc, it really is best to make your own list from the parts that are installed in the amp. Mistakes are common in Service Manual parts lists and on schematics. As long as the installed parts look original, use those parts as your guide.
Click to expand...

Got it. Thank you. Sort out every capacitor would take me some time. Still try to learn electric circuit.
 
Well get the Service Manual and study the schematic. First learn to recognize the main sections like the main amp, power supply, tone amp, pre amp (actually this term is often used for the phono amp+EQ). It is a learning curve that takes time.

Even if you wanted to use a kit or a somebody else's list, I doubt they exist for this receiver. I don't think it is that popular of a receiver. But I could be wrong, don't know. Another good thing about doing it yourself is that you get up close and personal with all of the internals and could potentially see issues with something other than caps.

Take lots of pictures including every capacitor. Digital pics are free. https://www.audiokarma.org/forums/i...9500-restoration-issues.918697/#post-13885960

Studying the amp (receiver in this case), listing the parts, finding the parts and ordering them, verifying the order....all part of the process.

What I do..and FYI, I am very OCD so I don't expect you to do this...but what I do is use gridded paper with multiple columns for each part. I record
part#, type (sometimes it is not electrolytic), diameter/lead spacing, original nominal uF and voltage ratings, DC voltage across the cap, measured uF and DF of old cap, measured uF and DF of new cap, new part nominal uF and voltage ratings, model and/or type of new part

Like I said, pretty OCD. I wouldn't expect anyone to do what I do as it does consume significant extra time. But that might give you some ideas for how you would like to do it, or what you might want to include in your parts list.
 
roger2 said:
Well get the Service Manual and study the schematic. First learn to recognize the main sections like the main amp, power supply, tone amp, pre amp (actually this term is often used for the phono amp+EQ). It is a learning curve that takes time.

Even if you wanted to use a kit or a somebody else's list, I doubt they exist for this receiver. I don't think it is that popular of a receiver. But I could be wrong, don't know. Another good thing about doing it yourself is that you get up close and personal with all of the internals and could potentially see issues with something other than caps.

Take lots of pictures including every capacitor. Digital pics are free. https://www.audiokarma.org/forums/i...9500-restoration-issues.918697/#post-13885960

Studying the amp (receiver in this case), listing the parts, finding the parts and ordering them, verifying the order....all part of the process.

What I do..and FYI, I am very OCD so I don't expect you to do this...but what I do is use gridded paper with multiple columns for each part. I record
part#, type (sometimes it is not electrolytic), diameter/lead spacing, original nominal uF and voltage ratings, DC voltage across the cap, measured uF and DF of old cap, measured uF and DF of new cap, new part nominal uF and voltage ratings, model and/or type of new part

Like I said, pretty OCD. I wouldn't expect anyone to do what I do as it does consume significant extra time. But that might give you some ideas for how you would like to do it, or what you might want to include in your parts list.
Click to expand...


Thank you again. Very helpful.
 
You're welcome. With that I am going to leave it in your hands. There are plenty of people answering questions here. Good luck with your 4400. I agree it is nice looking...understated and sharp with good colors. I am an integrated amp guy, but appreciate the beauty of vintage receivers. You'll lose those nice colors if you ever go to LED lights...and lots of guys will try to persuade you to do that....lol. Just sayin'...
 
What Roger2 said!. I will add that you have to be carefull with non-polarized capacitors, it is mentionned in the service manual. There might be one or 2 of those in the 4400.
 
Update!
I recently bought a Marantz 2245. It sounds very similar to kenwood Kr-4400, maybe the Marantz 2245 is slightly brighter, but the difference is very subtle and most time I couldn't hear major difference. Both receivers have not been restored so their might be aging factors, but my other pioneer receivers have not been restored either and they sound brighter than Kr-4400 and Marantz 2245. Marantz 2245 has been recognized as "warm' sound, then if it sounds very similar to Kenwood Kr-4400, then I would think Kenwood Kr-4400 is a great bargain. I heard from other peoples saying that Kenwood is well known to have warmer sounds than other brand. If it sounds so similar to Marantz 2245 which was considered as to have similar sound character of 2270, then Marantz is way overpriced compared to Kenwood.

In addition, I used JBL 4410 to test these receivers. JBL 4410 is considered to have very flat response so it should be quite accurate to reflect the receivers.

20200718_204517.jpg
 
Last edited:
Marantz stuff has this ''Marantz Blue Tax'', that increases it's prices basically for the ''modern'', in fashion Blue color. People like em blue LED's!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom