• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

New Sansui 2000x - boomy and thin?

Jkaput

Jkaput

New Member
Hi folks,
I recently replaced my Nakamichi AV-2 with a Sansui 2000x and am surprised at the results. For a long time I wanted to jump into the classic silver face stereo scene, but nothing came up that was a good deal. The Sansui was in great shape cosmetically and almost dust free inside. I did need to clean the pots, but after that its running well. But after all the fanfare this unit receives, for some reason, to me it doesn't sound as good as the Nak.

Here's how I have it setup. I have a Adcom GFS-6 speaker selector with two Klipsch KG 4.5's and a pair of Cambridge Audio S30's in the main room. In separate locations and on separate switches on the selector I have a small Jamo SAT-300 and a pair of ADS AW-4's.

I am new to this stuff, but am enthusiastic to get started. In my humble opinion, the AV-2 sounded great - it pushed the Klipsch's just enough and the bass produced sounded rich and full. Highs were good, mids as well. It was a stellar sound. Now, I always wanted to try to go more vintage and had great experience with a Sansui in college. What I ended up with makes the Klipsch's sound very boomy, even if I select only them. I guess I would describe the sound as somewhat thin, especially if I try to pare down the bass. The Cambridge's sound fine.

I really don't know how to proceed, and honestly, I'm pretty bummed that this is the outcome after all these years of looking. Does anyone have any thoughts on what to do about this? I would really appreciate the advice.

Thank you so much in advance.
 
Register to hide this ad
Your newly acquired 2000X is almost 50 years old. If you post the serial number I can tell you when it was made.

The sound you describe is a symptom of old dried out electrolytic capacitors. If the unit was stored unused for a long time, the caps may reform with more use but it will never sound like it did when new without replacing the old caps.

- Pete
 
The 2000x is a low powered cap-coupled receiver. IMO, the power stage isn't all that wonderful technically, but it has a warm sound people seem to like. It doesn't produce quite as much power as the specs say; Sansui was a bit optimistic. The unit typically has some transistors that tend to go noisy (458 series) and have weird curves. That can affect the sound, even if the noise level isn't high, so they should be replaced. I think later units may have used a different part. At any rate, the thing needs to get on the bench for an evaluation, probably get a full or partial recap and probably have some transistors replaced. After all that, it will be a nice 2000x, but maybe not the best choice for your speakers. Have to try it to know. There's a page on my site with more info, but it still won't really answer your question.
 
Okay, so when I cleaned the pots there were a lot of caps in there. Do they ALL need to be replaced? Ivr never done it either, is it very difficult? It would seem to be rough on the neck.

I'll look into that more. But just to clarify, you are saying that the caps and transistors would cause the boom and lack of depth on the low end?

Thanks so much...

The greenhorn.
 
There's a lot more to a rebuild than just the mechanics of changing out parts. Unless you have some experience, or even if you do, it's common to create some new problem that has to be fixed. Can you do that? IMO, the job isn't complete, or the results even known, until some basic measurements have been made. At the very least, frequency response, noise and THD, just to be sure the circuits are doing what they're supposed to. You'd think a good listening session would tell you the same but the ear is a really unreliable test bench! I've seen some seriously messed up receivers judged to be OK by ear.

As to what to change, most people can't reliably test parts. I used to suggest that many caps don't need to be changed, but two things have happened since then. First, I realized that people aren't equipped to test what needs to be tested. Second, these units are another decade or two older than when I suggested component testing. The odds of bad caps and other parts are a lot higher, so yes, if you're going in there, you need to change all the aluminum electrolytic caps. Not films or ceramics, just the electrolytics and tantalums if it has any.

You should add your location, even if approximate, to your profile.
 
Last edited:
Okay, thats good to know. Sounds like a pro outta get this job. I will add my location. Thanks again for all the wisdom.
 
One more observation in further listening. The bass, in particular, imprecise. It doesnt punch on a particular bass note. For instance, listening to american beauty, there is a lot of bass, but I would say that it sounds pretty mushy. I've had to turn the bass down to a little under 50 percent (43ish), which results in less mid range too (at least that's how it appears to me). Its got a sort of boom (too much at 50-50) but it's not precise (is there a word for that?) Its just there. I've had to turn the treble up to a little over half, and I suspect I may end up w fatigue based on this.

Does this hint at caps to you all?
 
Yes, most of the capacitors and they will probably have drifted substantially higher, and their specs will generally not be good. That is why it sounds terrible.
 
Agree w/above assessments. I have two Cap-Coupled units in the stable and they are the nicest pieces of SS gear I have, sonic wise. They have both been re-capped and signal transistors have also been replaced. No listener fatigue, they produce a nice warm, smooth sound. If you’ve never heard a CC amp, they do have a “punchier/deeper but looser” bass reproduction. DC amps have a tighter/ slam bass response. So that may be part of what you are describing. They do not sound boomy or thin when operating correctly. I sold my 9090 and AU9500 in favor of the sonic qualities from CC offerings and tube gear.

After you give that receiver some bench attention it will sound awesome with your Klipsch. I don’t know off hand what the wattage rating is on that particular model, but it will have enough power for your Klipsch in a mid-size room. Nice snag.

Good luck.
 
Last edited:
Boomy and thin can also be the room.

Do you have experience with these same speakers in this same room with a different amp?
 
I recapped a 2000A but only the pre and driver amp boards, others areas tested ok and I felt not so critical. I used Elna Silmic II and the results met my expectations.
I would go by the above recommendations if you intend on keeping the amp, they really do sound great when running well.
 
I have the low filter on, and it def improves the sound. And the CC comment is probably spot on. I'm used to a 1993 Nak. It's been a long time since my last sansui. 20 years or more.

To answer the question, the room and setup was excellent with the nak.

A question...I've been reading (and often wondering what the hell half of the words mean) that some people feel like the recap effs up the sound. And I did end up going down the rabbit hole on recapping. Jeepers creepers, what a live wire that subject it. Anyone have have any thoughts on that?

I thing the stereo shop in Hartford is the only game in town. It's a hike. Im in western ma. Know anyone?
 
I'll say this about recapping: it is necessary past a certain age, both for the sound and the longevity of any unit. Yes, it will change the sound back to what it should be for a given amp (if done correctly with quality parts) versus the slow but inexorable deterioration of the sound quality that has occured over multiple decades and is ongoing.

In other words, the loss of sonic quality happens too slowly and over too long a time frame for anyone to notice it clearly(nobody is that perceptive over 40-50 years) unless it gets to the point the old caps are so bad, that it sounds like complete crap. Then, of course, it is all too obvious what has occured.

There are guys in the audio hobby who get in pissing matches over the absolute sanctity of the original parts versus doing a restorative recap, but here's the thing: eventually all electrolytics will reach a point of catastrophic failure. What are they going to do then, still refuse to recap a prized amp? I think not, in most cases. So, either you eventually break down and do it, or you have a paperweight. And better to do it prior to a catastrophic failure, as that will cause even more damage that needs to be repaired.

Regarding the 2000X, I'd not ever call one in proper working condition boomy and/or thin, they are not best described as highly accurate when compared to modern (post 1985-90 timeframe) high end amps, but they do sound good when in good order.

I'd call the bass "stout" and the midrange well defined. The high freq range is clear without any obnoxious qualities to it. So, if it sounds boomy and thin, then something is wrong.
 
Last edited:
Awesome reply sansuiman. Exactly what I was looking for. Thank you, and everyone else.

I've learned a lot just through this conversation, and I thank all of you for your time.
 
You have little gem in your hands. As previous mebers sad, it is 50y old. Take samo care and patiente and you will have one seriosly good soud. Mine is working perfectly, stock, and drive anything 4 or 8 ohm, low sensitivity Ar ( 86db)...I am not cranking but even if you feel going a little bit :banana:on your volume pot, little fellow won't mind ( just don' t push to extremes) .
 
I have the very similar 2000A, look at the face and schematics hard to tell that there is much difference between the two. Recapping improved the sound from mine, some old units can sound a bit flat with the old ones, especially when you turn up the volume. Boomy and thin does not describe mine.

Then again my first project was a Pioneer SX-535 that sounded a bit muffled with AUX sources (CD) and even worse with FM. Think take your speakers and throw a couple of heavy comforters over them. Recapped it and replaced a number of transistors since Pioneer used a lot of transistors in that vintage that have not aged well. Afterward it no longer sounded like it had a head cold.
 
Good info. Did you replace the caps yourself? If not, how much do you wager it was? I'm just trying to prepare the bankroll.
 
I've had 2 X 2000x's and one 2000, and they all sounded great and full sounding. It was very surprising for me, after having a few more modern Sansui that I thought sounded thin with my speakers. I particularly liked the preamp section in the 2000x, and used it to soften a Mitsubishi DA10 amplifier I once had. They made beautiful music together. The phono section is quite nice too!

One thing the OP should do if he hasn't done it already, is to deoxit (contact cleaner) all the controls and switches. I have found that will often bring back that fullness. :music:

Addendum: But yeah, if you are planning on keeping it, you should consider a recap and get the prone to failure or degradation parts replaced.
 
Hey Bilbo - I did a deoxit cleaning bc it def needed it. I did just the dials, but it helped.

Question: someone said that playing the unit will rejuvenate the caps if its been sitting. Is there any truth to this?
 
Just my 2 cent's
I had a pair of KG 5.5's for years-2x10"'s vs single 10".
They were picky on the amp that drove them-to get clean/deep bass-but also overall coherence of sound. Some would call this transparent.
Yes they are efficient-but need enough clean power to drive the woofers.
A direct coupled amp is the way to go.
I think-even with a recapp-the KG's are going to sound boomy, (or overly "smooth") as you described.
The S30's probably have little output below 60 hz- the KG's probably reach the high 30's
IMHO, the KG's are a great sounding speaker-I would keep them over a 50 year old receiver-regardless of looks.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom