Looking for a vintage receiver

Hooligan1

Hooligan1

God gave us ears to listen.
Hey all,

I was wondering if I could get some suggestions on choosing a vintage receiver. I have recently picked up a nice pair of JBL L36s and they sound great! (At least to my ear.) I am currently using a Harmon/Kardon AVR110 that I have had for quite sometime. I bought it back in the day when I was more into HT. I still use it for that purpose, as well as listening to all sorts of music.

However, with the acquisition of the JBLs I wanted something "vintage" to pair them with. I plan on get a TT and buying more vinyl to listen to as well. I would like to purchase something that I will enjoy and use frequently for the next dozen years or more. I don't plan on upgrading form the JBLs unless I happen to come across something in my daily activities that I just can't pass up. My listening space is approximately 12'x20' so I don't feel like I need something overly powerful. There are some many possibilities out there.

My second question would be, would it make sense to purchase say a Marantz 2270 for roughly 500-550 and have to put another 200-300 into it or buy something that is all ready to go. Meaning, I can plug the speakers and TT in and play music.

My budget should be South of $500 but willing to make the larger investment if it were to "pay off".

Let me know what you think! Thanks,
 
Register to hide this ad
What's your market? online or local? obviously if it's local and you're afforded the ability then demo and let your ears be the deciding factor.

The Marantz is a fine piece of gear and is well liked by many here at AK but in the end you'll really need to listen to it for awhile and then determine if it fits your criterias.
 
Thanks Dswankey, the Marantz that I mentioned in the above, is actually about an hour away from me. Like I said though, I am trying to determine if spending upwards of 700-800 dollars is worth it. I do agree with you on letting your ears be the judge. It's all in what you want to listen to and look at.
 
I have a 2270 and I really like it. I kind of lucked into it some years ago when a friend of mine who owned me a bit of $$ gave it to me in leu of payment. He "upgraded" to some kind of home theatre thing so that he could play surround sound blue-ray music discs (which I'm personally not all that impressed with). If you can get away with less than a 1k investment with the needed work done to it, then you're probably doing OK as I've seen these things go for $1300+, particularly if you're dealing with one that has the wood case (like mine!). I will say though that I liked the sound of a couple of fairly inexpensive phono pre amps more than the phono stage on this reviver. I'm on my second one, a Cambridge Audio model and it sounds very nice. It could be though that with some capacitors replaced (or some other mod) that the built=in phono stage would sound as good though...
 
Last edited:
Aaron Hayman said:
I have a 2270 and I really like it. I kind of lucked into it some years ago when a friend of mine who owned me a bit of $$ gave it to me in leu of payment. He "upgraded" to some kind of home theatre thing so that he could play surround sound blue-ray music discs (which I'm personally not all that impressed with). If you can get away with less than a 1k investment with the needed work done to it, then you're probably doing OK as I've seen these things go for $1300+, particularly if you're dealing with one that has the wood case (like mine!). I will say though that I liked the sound of a couple of fairly inexpensive phono pre amps more than the phono stage on this reviver. I'm on my second one, a Cambridge Audio model and it sounds very nice. It could be though that with some capacitors replaced (or some other mod) that the built=in phono stage would sound as good though...
Click to expand...

Hey Aaron, thanks for the comment. I have actually read some of your other post as I was doing some research before I actually posted this question. I have been looking for a lets say more "cost effective" option for a receiver but I am of the personality that I prefer to spend the money up front only to enjoy the lasting investment of a quality product. Whatever that may be.

I haven't had the fortune yet of being able to listen to various vintage models of equipment but I am hopeful that I will be able to come across some great buying opportunities in the near future and I just want to know that pulling the trigger will be a wise decision.

Once again, I appreciate the comment. Have a great Easter,

Jake,
 
Hooligan1 said:
Thanks Dswankey, the Marantz that I mentioned in the above, is actually about an hour away from me. Like I said though, I am trying to determine if spending upwards of 700-800 dollars is worth it. I do agree with you on letting your ears be the judge. It's all in what you want to listen to and look at.
Click to expand...

So true, if it's not mission critical that you get something asap I would just keep my eye open and you might stumble on something similar for a lot less money
 
Hooligan1 said:
I have been looking for a lets say more "cost effective" option for a receiver but I am of the personality that I prefer to spend the money up front only to enjoy the lasting investment of a quality product.
Jake,
Click to expand...


Then buy new.

There is a lot of great sounding 2 channel gear from Yamaha, Parasound, NAD, Marantz and many more that will give you the "value" you seek.

If you are considering spending $500 for a piece of gear and another $250 to "restore/repair" it, just spend $800 or less on something with a warranty.

While I'm all about vintage, I usually recommend new gear to "newbies" in an effort to minimize disappointment. Even "restored" vintage gear is still more failure prone than newer gear.
 
wmgwizard said:
Then buy new.

There is a lot of great sounding 2 channel gear from Yamaha, Parasound, NAD, Marantz and many more that will give you the "value" you seek.

If you are considering spending $500 for a piece of gear and another $250 to "restore/repair" it, just spend $800 or less on something with a warranty.

While I'm all about vintage, I usually recommend new gear to "newbies" in an effort to minimize disappointment. Even "restored" vintage gear is still more failure prone than newer gear.
Click to expand...

Thank you, that is solid advice and certainly gives me a new perspective.
 
I don't know if you have been lurking or not, welcome to ak either way, but there are a few brands that command a significant premium over the actual performance level of their gear. This is due to demand from the fact that these were the units every lawn mowing kid wanted back in the day, buying a smaller unit and now that they have the money they will buy the bigger Marantz, Pioneer, Sansui or McIntosh of their youthful dreams no matter what and pay some significant premium for that brand name compared to at least a dozen other brand names.

Onkyo, who the hell would want to tell their friends they have an Onkyo instead of saying Marantz. The difference can be 100%, a doubling of the price just to be able to hold your head high among folks that don't know that Onkyo made some very fine gear. There are many here that like the TX-x500 and mk II versions of those. You could be well served by a TX-4500 II a 60 wpc unit that would be half the price of the Marantz.

If you have to have the name brand, nothing wrong with that. So really, there are a few more questions that need answers to point you in the right direction, other than saying you might do well to spend the 25 bucks to subscribe for a year and have access to Barter Town where you can ask for a receiver or amp of say 55-90 wpc that is in plug and play condition or fully restored. Folks would PM you with some offers.
 
rode2rouen said:
The fact that I'm a "Natural Sound" junkie may color my recommendation.
Click to expand...

I had a Yamaha RX-V1105 for almost 20 years an loved it. Gave it to my sister when I acquired a somewhat newer Rotel, thinking it would be the better of the two. Nope. The Yamaha sounded much better.

The older, pre-HDMI Yamaha receivers can be picked up cheap. Well built, remote and great sounding.
 
Hooligan1 said:
Hey Aaron, thanks for the comment. I have actually read some of your other post as I was doing some research before I actually posted this question. I have been looking for a lets say more "cost effective" option for a receiver but I am of the personality that I prefer to spend the money up front only to enjoy the lasting investment of a quality product. Whatever that may be.

I haven't had the fortune yet of being able to listen to various vintage models of equipment but I am hopeful that I will be able to come across some great buying opportunities in the near future and I just want to know that pulling the trigger will be a wise decision.

Once again, I appreciate the comment. Have a great Easter,

Jake,
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm really no all around expert as I haven't swapped gear around, much less even checked much of it out in the way that so many folks on here do. I can just say that I really like the Marantz that I have, in all ways except for maybe the phono stage. If that thing didn't fall into my lap though, I'm not sure that I wouldn't have gone for something else, particularly with what those things cost. I know that for vintage receivers that Sansui, Pioneer, Realistic and a few others get great marks and they might actually be more bang for the buck than Marantz. Somebody will put me straight here but it seems to me that maybe Marantz fetches a premium because of stuff not totally related to sound, like the esteem of the brand name and the aesthetics... They are very handsome looking in my book and that might be a factor for you as well.

I've heard here on the forum opinions that something like a vintage Marantz is a better buy than new gear for the same price... and that those things are over valued so it's hard to say just what the truth is.
 
Lots of great receivers other than Marantz. Onkyo,Hitachi,Kenwood and Rotel to name a few that are under the radar,
 
Blue Shadow said:
You could be well served by a TX-4500 II a 60 wpc unit that would be half the price of the Marantz.
Click to expand...

I had a really nice TX-4500 ll and it sounded nowhere as nice as my 2252B. I like a lot of other brands besides Marantz as can be seen by my signature. My Realistic STA 220 smacks the TX 4500 and takes its lunch money in quality and sound however.

The OP needs not worry so much about a brand and instead worry about the condition of a receiver. Onkyos and any other name brand in good condition will probably be very nice sounding. But a 22XX series Marantz in good condition IMO is better than any Onkyo.
 
If you have access to a good tech and the condition of the Marantz is decent I would encourage you to go for the Marantz.

That particular model draws a lot of respect from the audio world. If you do not like it you should be able to get back your money.

Marantz plus JBL, that is vintage statement!
 
And ultimately, the OP would be better off with something that is higher current. Similar to NAD with its large amount of headroom, better Harman Kardon, Yamaha M40 or such, Kenwood M1 or M2 series, and Adcom. It isn't that I don't think they sound good with other amps, but I know they sound better with high current. I've had a few pairs of L36s and those woofers need a good bit of current to get them at prime.
 
Bodyblue said:
I had a really nice TX-4500 ll and it sounded nowhere as nice as my 2252B. I like a lot of other brands besides Marantz as can be seen by my signature. My Realistic STA 220 smacks the TX 4500 and takes its lunch money in quality and sound however.

The OP needs not worry so much about a brand and instead worry about the condition of a receiver. Onkyos and any other name brand in good condition will probably be very nice sounding. But a 22XX series Marantz in good condition IMO is better than any Onkyo.
Click to expand...

I agree completely with Bodyblue's statement regarding the secondary importance of brand names.
I have had many brands of receiver: Sansui, Pioneer, Realistic, Onkyo, Yamaha, Sherwood, Technics, Allied, etc.
I can say good things about all of them.

I would greatly prefer a modest (25-45 W/ch) receiver or amp of less prominent brand, but in cream puff condition than a beat up, high-end, big name model.
You don't need much power for most uses.

I do have a soft spot for the Realistics; I am listening to an STA-90 right now.

If your heart is set on "vintage" and you are on a budget, then don't overlook 1980s equipment.
I have had several 1980s receivers and really liked them.

A couple years back I was gifted a 1981 Onkyo TX-3000 by a guy cleaning out his garage, and I stuck it in my system just to check it out.
It ended up being my main stereo system for nearly a year.
 
Blue Shadow said:
Onkyo, who the hell would want to tell their friends they have an Onkyo instead of saying Marantz.
Click to expand...

Bodyblue said:
But a 22XX series Marantz in good condition IMO is better than any Onkyo.
Click to expand...

reggaenaut said:
If you have access to a good tech and the condition of the Marantz is decent I would encourage you to go for the Marantz. That particular model draws a lot of respect from the audio world. If you do not like it you should be able to get back your money.
Click to expand...

I like all of the above quotes. It seems that we are talking not only about sound quality, but also about collectability and price.

If we are talking about sound quality, every brand will have its fans. Which makes sense, because most of this stuff sounds really good, including all of the brands that "fly under the radar." Fly under the radar just means that its good, but that for some reason nobody is willing to pay a lot. There are probably some exceptions, but it seems that usually doesn't change. The brands that fly under the radar today will still fly under it tomorrow.

If we are talking about collectability, some models are collectible and some are not. That seems to be true with all vintage stuff - cars, radios, motorcycles, watches, or whatever. For many reasons, the Marantz 22xx models are among the most collectible receivers. That means they cost more. But it doesn't mean that they are overpriced. In fact, it seems likely that the price gap between the collectible and non-collectible receivers will widen over time rather than narrow.
 
All of these are good at a price that won't make you cry if they fail.
Kenwood TK 140X


Sony STR-6065


JVC vr 5551


Sherwood S-8900a


Lafayette LR-3500


Rotel RX-800


HeathKit AR1500


Realistic 120b


Marantz 2226


Pioneer SX1000TW
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom