Marantz 500 or 510 on infinity kappa 9?

[SB Marantz]

I suppose that there are people here that are familiar with the infinity kappa 9?

This speaker is known as the amp killer because of it's impedance dip in a low frequentie AND a high one around 0,8 Ohm's!

Alot of amps are NOT able to drive this speakers.

I have the 2 biggest Marantz amplifiers from the 70's; model 500 and model 510 and tonight i will take the 510 to the guy with the kappa 9's and give it a shot :scratch2:

His Yamaha amplifier goes into protection mode with these guy's so i am qurious what the 510 is able to deliver on these?!

Does anyone here know how stable the 500 and 510 realy are under pretty extreme conditions mentioned above?

Echowars pherhaps???????

 

[Marantz 500]

Are you sure you want to subject your classic amps to that treatment? Be kind to your classics!
Sorry, I'm just being jealous. My Model 500 is broken and I'll probably never afford to get it fixed...

 

[jstang]

Why are you taking the 510 and not the 500 to test? Is the 500 too heavy for your car?

I guess another way to judge if a 500 or 510 will do...is find out what people typically successfully run as amps driving these speakers then compare those specs to the 500 or 510. But its kind of hard imagining anything will out do a 500.

I would be interesting to heard what loads people have successfully driven with either of these amps... Ohm F's a not amp friendly, my 500 before I started the restore was fine with them...and the 500 was in pretty sad shape... I should be done with it this week end..... Would like to heard what Echowars has to say.....


jk

 

[SB Marantz]

Here is how it went;

The 510 performed pretty good, especially because it is not designed for very low impedance's under 2 Ohm's

As mentioned, the kaap 9 dip's under 1 Ohm!

The volume knob from the 3800 could be turned to 12 o'clock before the clipping líght's begun to flicker.

Allso, the 510 made the kappa sound very good; very tight bass, open mids and clear and crisp highs, nice overall balance.

Pherhaps the 500 will perform better, i dont that yet.

Next fact is that it took about 1 hour before the 510 was sucked dry. :scratch2:

With the volume at about one quarter we suddenly heard a crackling sound comming from one woofer and the owner saw the left clipping light flicker.

A bit strange because when i turned the volume up there was no such thing.

The 510 has gone through from top to bottom by myself and it's completely ok and re-capped.

 

[HAL9000]

Are you sure you want to subject your classic amps to that treatment? Be kind to your classics!
Sorry, I'm just being jealous. My Model 500 is broken and I'll probably never afford to get it fixed...

I will fix it against parts only!!! :thmbsp:

 

[jstang]

Are you sure you want to subject your classic amps to that treatment? Be kind to your classics!
Sorry, I'm just being jealous. My Model 500 is broken and I'll probably never afford to get it fixed...

Can you afford to sell to me?

 

[SB Marantz]

Are you sure you want to subject your classic amps to that treatment? Be kind to your classics!
Sorry, I'm just being jealous. My Model 500 is broken and I'll probably never afford to get it fixed...

You have a PM

 

[Jim Eck]

Are the Kappa's bi-ampable? That could help with the impedience problem.

Jim

 

[stuwee]

Here is how it went;

The 510 performed pretty good, especially because it is not designed for very low impedance's under 2 Ohm's

As mentioned, the kaap 9 dip's under 1 Ohm!

The volume knob from the 3800 could be turned to 12 o'clock before the clipping líght's begun to flicker.

Allso, the 510 made the kappa sound very good; very tight bass, open mids and clear and crisp highs, nice overall balance.

Pherhaps the 500 will perform better, i dont that yet.

Next fact is that it took about 1 hour before the 510 was sucked dry. :scratch2:

With the volume at about one quarter we suddenly heard a crackling sound comming from one woofer and the owner saw the left clipping light flicker.

A bit strange because when i turned the volume up there was no such thing.

The 510 has gone through from top to bottom by myself and it's completely ok and re-capped.

That cracking sound is the Marantz crying uncle. Unless you want to redo it all over again, stop please! Get an amp made for this kind of abuse, lot's out there:yes: Get the 9's and play nice and low with the Marantz till you get something more stable with that monster load:thmbsp:

Craig

 

[SB Marantz]

It was only a test to see if the 510 could handle them.

Ok it went better then expected but it is not the amp to drive them long term.

Those kappa 9's are not mine.

 

[Arkay]

You came close to performing what is known as a "destruct test". It's when you take something and over-work it until it dies, to see how much it could handle. PLEASE DON"T DO THAT AGAIN!

And whatever you do, PLEASE, PLEASE DO NOT EVEN THINK of still trying to do it with that 500! The 500 is a more fragile/breakdown-prone amp than the 510. It WILL fry itself trying to drive the amp-killer Infinity speakers, and you will probably never be able to get it back to 100% original sonic state again. You don't need to prove that it will self-destruct trying to keep up with the Infinities. It WILL happen!

Almost any amp -- even a low-ranking HT system amp -- will drive those Kappas for a little while, and at lower levels, before it gives up the ghost. Crank it up, or push it too long, and snap-crackle-BBBZZZZTTTT!!!! The magic smoke will escape. It's very possible one or more of the EMITs will be fried along the way, too. What does that prove? Nothing, except someone was foolish for trying it.

The 500 is one of the best-sounding amps ever made, and the 510 isn't far behind it. The big old Infinities like those 9 Kappas are also among the better-sounding speakers ever made. They just are not compatible with each other. Only a relative handful of amps CAN safely drive those Infinities; most amps made (regardless of WPC ratings!) canNOT do so. Please go back to ordinary 8 ohm (or 16 or gentler 4 ohm) speakers for your Marantz amps. Your wallet and your conscience should thank you greatly for it. Tell your friend to get some big Adcoms, Soundcraftsmen, Bryston or other high-current amps that can properly drive the Infinities. Thank you!

[Yeah, I get a little passionate about this topic. I have Kappas and other "amp killer" Infinity speakers, and I have Marantz amps I love, too... and I have to keep them separated. I know it's hard... but you don't want to go there. Trust me... you don't!!!! :tears: :yes: ]

 

[jstang]

Never had Kappas....

But I do have a Soundcraftsmen MA5002 in addition to the Model 500. The Soundcraftsmen has fewer output drivers, lighter gauge wiring and much smaller power supply caps than the 500. It has the advantage of being a CLASS H amp, but that does not even get used on supper low impedances. I would think that if a Soundcraftsmen can handle them, then a 500 would too....

I am not suggesting anyone waste a Model 500 to prove a point... I think the difference is in the transformers and the ability to provide an actual 500+ watts WPC into 4 ohms. The 500 can and the 510 can not. Even the Soundcraftsmen's transformer , while very big, can not match up to the 500's transformer. Soundcraftsmen can deliver close to 450 watts in to 4 Ohm, which is more then the 510 can - 350WPC into 4 ohms.

Also the Dampening factor is over 400 for the Model 500, over 200 for the Soundcraftsmen and not sure what it is for the 510. I think this is critical spec too for low impedance, because those rating are for 8 ohms. Lower the impedance the lower the Dampen Factors.

What size are the Caps in the 510? I think they are 10,000 uFs x2s for 20,000 uF, the Soundcraftsmen has 60,000 uF.... the 500 has a total of 100,000 uF in the supply.


jk

 

[SB Marantz]

Thx for your concern arkay but this was a one time event only.
I know what will happen on long term bases too.

My 500 is not going to be hooked on those infinity if he could drive them or not.

This baby is far to precious to me

 

[Negotiableterms]

One really good bargain amp that will drive the K9s is a PS Audio 200cx. The cx only; other versions won't work. Beyond that, you're hunting for some giantish Threshold or Krell unit, or some particularly robust Adcoms (most won't last long).

I had the PS Audio/K9 combination, all brand new, back in the day (1987), and it's a joy to listen to.

 

[Brent71]

I definitely would not drive any low impedance speaker with a 500, they have a habit of blowing up as it is. I used one to drive my old Carver Amazings for a while and managed to blow up one channel.

 

[SB Marantz]

I definitely would not drive any low impedance speaker with a 500, they have a habit of blowing up as it is. I used one to drive my old Carver Amazings for a while and managed to blow up one channel.

Hi Brent,

I assume you don't know that in the beginning the 500 was released with motorola power transistors wich were not stable and blew up after a while.

Replacement wich was allso mentioned on the schematic with 2sb-600 and complementary solved the problem.

 

[jstang]

Hi Brent,

I assume you don't know that in the beginning the 500 was released with motorola power transistors wich were not stable and blew up after a while.

Replacement wich was allso mentioned on the schematic with 2sb-600 and complementary solved the problem.

Almost anything would be better then the junk Motorola gave Marantz as matched pairs. From what I saw with my 500's Sj250x transistors, they were a matched if they "worked".... I saw the Betas as almost being twice on some as others and they were all mark as being the same. Other people have stated they have seen the same, even when the units were new in the 70's... This seems to have been a Motorola issue as they did the beta matching for Marantz and Marantz fell victim.


I replaced every output with a quality modern transistor...and spent hours matching them. Time will tell on mine....


jk

 

[ruesselschorf]

Almost anything would be better then the junk Motorola gave Marantz as matched pairs. From what I saw with my 500's Sj250x transistors, they were a matched if they "worked".... I saw the Betas as almost being twice on some as others and they were all mark as being the same. Other people have stated they have seen the same, even when the units were new in the 70's... This seems to have been a Motorola issue as they did the beta matching for Marantz and Marantz fell victim.




jk

I don't think you can blame Motorola, on the contrary!
The Marntz 500 was one of the first (if not THE first) complementary high power transistor amps. Other manufacturers of that time used quasicomplementary designs - needing only npn power transistors (Crown, Phase Linear e.g.)
A pnp transistor as needed for the complementary Marantz 500 may look the same as an npn, but was far more complex to manufacture, esp. for the high voltages needed in such a huge amp.
I guess the Motorola SJ pnp's must have been the first transistors of that kind and I'm sure they did their best at Motorola

Besides, the NEC 2sb600/ 2S555 came in style a few years later, when the Japanese had cached up in semiconductor technology.
Today the NEC transistors are out of production since long ago, if you buy a 2sB600 today it is for 90% a fake, beware!
For the Marantz 500, 510, 510M i had excellent results with Onsemi MJ...... transistors, even without matching them.
B.t.w. Onsemi is former MOTOROLA !

Helmut

 

[jstang]

Well the 70s were the pre 6-sigma days for the BAT....

An other member states he knew a Motorola Engineer back in the days of the 500. Seemingly the major defense contracts took priority over Marantz, which meant the 500 (& consumer products) got the left overs...The cold and hot wars of the time came fist. I bet the SJs being used for the Minuteman Missiles were correctly beta matched. I remember hearing the story of how the US lost the lead in power transistor for consumer manufacturing back in those days to Japanese and that Motorola specifically put in major 6-sigma programs to improve quality. It was classic story of the US developing the tech then losing the market. Motorola had great products but very poor quality in 70's.

Good post on the 6-Sigma story....

http://www.isixsigma.com/library/content/c020131a.asp


jk

 

[Brent71]

Hi Brent,

I assume you don't know that in the beginning the 500 was released with motorola power transistors wich were not stable and blew up after a while.

Replacement wich was allso mentioned on the schematic with 2sb-600 and complementary solved the problem.

I don't know which transistors it had in it when it blew up on me. It wasn't the first time it had been in for service either, my dad had to send it in three or four times over the years for service and he was driving a pair of Altec's which were simple to drive in comparison to my Carver's. The 510m he had never gave him a minutes problems in over 25 years. He bought the 500 new in 1975 and I think he got the 510m new in 1978. The last time I saw the 500 was in 2002 after I'd had enough of trying to get it fixed and gave it back to him.