• 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

REALISTIC speaker opinions

bondospecial said:
I owned an immaculate pair of Mach II's for a bunch of years. They were an OK speaker. They did not handle anywhere near as much clean power as their size suggested. They were rated at only 40 watts RMS power, 160 watts peak, which for a speaker with a 15" woofer made as recently as these were is kind of laughable and should tell you something about the components used... The tweeters would distort on bass hits at higher volume levels, I'm guessing because they weren't crossed over steeply enough for what they were. The midrange performance was just OK. I replaced them with a pair of B&W DM602s and never looked back. The Mach II was a fun speaker for playing music at moderate levels for backyard parties and such but there are so many better speakers that take up a lot less floor space. I got $250 for my Mach IIs when I sold them about 5 years ago and I thought that was a LOT of money to get for them. I wasn't complaining though. I have read about how great the original pre-ferrofluid cooled Mach I's are but every time I get curious about the Mach I I see that the midrange horn is a tiny plastic bullet stuck in the middle of the speaker and I lose interest.
Click to expand...

Maybe there could have been something "not-right" with yours?? I've played my Mach 1's and 2's powered by a 160wpc vintage Sansui reciever at some pretty-loud peak levels in a large house and never heard any "distress" from either pair..:scratch2:
 
Anything is possible. It showed up with bass heavy music (rock, hip hop) and was notably worse if you turned the bass knob up on the receiver. You'd get a slight but noticeable crackle from the tweeters with a big bass hit at high volume levels. The tweeters weren't damaged, it was just that they seemed to be getting a little low frequency that they couldn't handle. I tried different capacitors to see if it was the result of failing original caps but that did not improve anything, so it wasn't the crossover's fault. I was the second owner of the speakers and put many many hours of listening on those. The fact they were rated at 40 watts rms led me to believe that was for a reason. I can't really tell you if every pair did this though because I never listened to another pair.
 
40 watts?

Were the Mach Twos rated at only 40 watts? Where did you pick up that specification, from the owners manual? The catalog says 160 watts and Radio Shack was always very careful about complying with standard methods of measuring, for example, the power output of their amplifiers and receivers and having owned many different pairs of RS speakers I have never felt that they have ever exaggerated the power handling of ANY of their speakers; e.g. a la "Crazy Eddies" type outfits claiming a 30 watt speaker handles 600 watts (peak, yes, RMS, no). Every system that I owned delivered power handling as good or better than what was stated. Try reading some of the magazines of the day for rigorous laboratory tests on some of the RS gear they auditioned (Audio, Stereo Review, High Fidelity). Incidentally, I just finished upgrading a pair of 1993 Mach Three speakers that I got at the thrift store a few years ago for $50.00. I used the Dayton DC380-8 15" from Parts Express (listed power handling: 100 watts RMS, 150 watts max.)- the driver parameters were so close to the original ones that no changes were needed and boy, they sound noticeably better. Bigger magnets, rubber surrounds and treated paper instead of plain. (They were about 1/32" bigger in diameter so some modification of the cabinet was necessary.) In addition the original made in Korea crummy aluminum horn tweeters sounded like razors to my ears and I replaced those with Foster/Fostex 025N03s. Now these are 8 ohms rather than the original 6 ohms so presumably the crossover fell from ~ 5,000Hz to ~3,750Hz but I chose once again to leave the original crossover intact. They blended just fine (sensitivity and voice matching) with the estimable original midrange horns. Here I was rewarded with much more than noticeable improvement: the difference was like night and day! I am usually not crazy about horn drivers, (there are of course notable exceptions and stand-outs), but these delivered admirably, plus they were on sale at the ridiculous price of $19.80 each! I feel like now they are the speakers they were meant to be. Of course they cannot compare to my Klipsch Fortes but hell they were a lot more expensive than the Shack speakers (the Mach Threes are no slouches, though). By the way, before I upgraded these speakers I used them as subwoofers for two years in my home theater setup driven by a 120 watt per channel amp and they never cried... that just doesn't jive with 40 watts RMS power handling. I know the Mach Twos are not the same as the Mach Threes, I am just trying to make a point...:scratch2:
 
Picture of the Mach Threes

Sorry for the slightly out of focus, I wasn't the camera man...:banana:
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2921.jpg
    IMG_2921.jpg
    64.7 KB · Views: 45
Data

Let's not get testy here, this is just a friendly discussion; I never said I didn't believe you, I simply was informing you of my experience, which is as valid as yours. As for these Radio Shack Legacy support documents, they are rife with errors in my experience. Apparently RS didn't archive data very actively before the computer age and then scrambled to digitize once online support was invented. Some of their gear cannot be found on legacy support at all (I have used it in the past). Also, at the bottom of the referenced dcument it has a disclaimer stating "Specifications are typical; individual units might vary. Individual specifications are subject to change and improvement without notice." Pretty typical in a fluid manufacturing/marketing environment. The document you linked says 400-4032, Radio Shack sold these as 40-4032, not 400-4032. I am looking at a legacy support document right now (for 40-4039) that I printed in way back in 2007: it lists the horn tweeter diaphragm material as "alumineum" (sic). I have found glaring technical errors on other documents as well. At any rate I don't know if the 40 watts RMS is accurate or not but if AKers said they fed well in excess of that amount without harm or audible distress (assuming unclipped power) why doubt them? I suggest if you are not happy with your Shack stuff, move on. It's about the music at the end of the day, not the gear. One more thing: I used to work at Radio Shack...
 
I have been a long RS lover. Hence my 7b avatar. I have read some opinions stating that RS speakers are not detailed or have no sound stage. I beg to differ. For one, when you are dealing with vintage speakers using mainly phenolic ring type tweeters I have noticed you get a warmer less bright sound but not less detailed. Especially with acoustic or orchestral type music. IMO the 7b's and Nova 6's (which I also have a pair) sound excellent. Now to get some 8b's. Thats my next challenge. UKfan4sure! those Optimus 7's are beautiful.:thmbsp:
 
My first set of speakers was a pair of Nova 5's, which I still have although they are rarely used. One set of RS speakers that I got to listen to years ago and really liked were the Optimus T 110's. I'd get myself a set of them today if I could find some..
 
My first "real" pair of speakers, were the Optimus 10's. I remember playing Pink Floyd's The Wall, and the part with the helicopter. I had it cranked. My mother told me she went to the window to see the helicopter fly by. LMAO
I drove them with a RS STA235 reciever. As I remember, they were pretty awesome. Don't know about the current stuff. Sorry.
 
My first RS experience was at age 16 after getting my first job. When I would get to the local mall I would always stop in the radio shack store and drool. I had older brothers that all had great stereos they brought back from being in the army so I always wanted to get a system. I was able to get a STA 64 and some MC-1000s as my 1st stereo, it was great but I craved more power. Soon after I purchased a better RS receiver, it had the two volume slides and a dark gold lighted face (can't remember the model). The next upgrade was to the STA 2100D, Mach 1s, and LAB 400 turntable which I still have today but not used for my everyday system.

Now I know the RS stuff is not considered in the top tier of super quality stereos but they supplied the public with alot of solid performing equipment. You need a studio to hear any big quality differences anyway. I liked rock so as long as it was loud and clear I was happy. The Shack was a part of growing up for me and I still remember the name of the sales lady (Babs)
I enjoy collecting and saving some of these time capsules of vintage electronics and sharing stories.

:nono:The people that feel a need to compare and bash the RS stuff I say WHO CARES! It's just your opinion and we all have one.

I have a nice Yamaha and Klipsch theater system too but it will not shake the house like my RS stuff. I would of never thought that my Mach 1s would still sound good after 33 years of serious abuse. I have set up my old system many times for my graduation reunions that come every 5 years.

I have always thought my T-200s compliment the Mach 1s, but I don't know the tech side of why that is. I have had alot of fun with the old RS stuff and enjoy being able to share the story. Hope it didn't bore anyone. :boring:
 
RS Steve said:
My first RS experience was at age 16 after getting my first job.
...
Hope it didn't bore anyone. :boring:
Click to expand...
Great story RS Steve, not boring at all. I would pour myself over each new RadioShack catalog.

As I've said before, my first system was a Miracord 40C tt, STA-80 receiver, and Optimus-2B speakers. I'm listening to the Optimus-2B now with Spotify.
 
RS Steve said:
My first RS experience was at age 16 after getting my first job. When I would get to the local mall I would always stop in the radio shack store and drool. I had older brothers that all had great stereos they brought back from being in the army so I always wanted to get a system. I was able to get a STA 64 and some MC-1000s as my 1st stereo, it was great but I craved more power. Soon after I purchased a better RS receiver, it had the two volume slides and a dark gold lighted face (can't remember the model). The next upgrade was to the STA 2100D, Mach 1s, and LAB 400 turntable which I still have today but not used for my everyday system.

Now I know the RS stuff is not considered in the top tier of super quality stereos but they supplied the public with alot of solid performing equipment. You need a studio to hear any big quality differences anyway. I liked rock so as long as it was loud and clear I was happy. The Shack was a part of growing up for me and I still remember the name of the sales lady (Babs)
I enjoy collecting and saving some of these time capsules of vintage electronics and sharing stories.

:nono:The people that feel a need to compare and bash the RS stuff I say WHO CARES! It's just your opinion and we all have one.

I have a nice Yamaha and Klipsch theater system too but it will not shake the house like my RS stuff. I would of never thought that my Mach 1s would still sound good after 33 years of serious abuse. I have set up my old system many times for my graduation reunions that come every 5 years.

I have always thought my T-200s compliment the Mach 1s, but I don't know the tech side of why that is. I have had alot of fun with the old RS stuff and enjoy being able to share the story. Hope it didn't bore anyone. :boring:
Click to expand...
Great story. I didn't start spending serious time at the Shack till around 75, when the Mach's first came out. Oh how fun that was. Years later I would be working for the Shack, for almost 10 years. My first new system was the STA-2500, Mach Two's, CD-2000 and an old Dual TT I picked up at a yard sale or something. Still have the STA-2500 and CD, both still working great. The Two's I sold, but then recently acquired another set free. What I have today...

STA-2000
STA-2500
STA-860
SA-150 (amp)
Mach One (4024a)
Mach One (4029) 2 pair (one project set)
Optimus T110 (under reconstruction)
7b (2 pair), my 9-5ers, listen to them all day long. Really enjoy them.
5b
LX5II
LX8 (recently repaired, sort of)

Of course I also have Denon, JBL, Pioneer, Sansui, RTR, Advent, AR3a (2 pair) and on and on...I've actually put a hold on acquisitions till I've unloaded stuff.
 
Is it me or is something wrong with this picture?

I guess I understand why my ears ring constantly after having this much speaker since the late 70s. Just means I have to turn it up a little louder to compensate. :scratch2:
 
Last edited:
RS Steve said:
I guess I understand why my ears ring constantly after having this much speaker since the late 70s. Just means I have to turn it up a little louder to compensate. :scratch2:
Click to expand...
Nice tower system. I may have to try that with my Mach Two's and T-110's, only I'll flip the t-110's so the tweeter is at ear level.

I really shouldn't read these posts, too many addicting ideas.
 
Copa1934 said:
Nice tower system. I may have to try that with my Mach Two's and T-110's, only I'll flip the t-110's so the tweeter is at ear level.

I really shouldn't read these posts, too many addicting ideas.
Click to expand...

I guess if you have to be addicted to something it's one of the better addictions to have. :thmbsp:
 
RS Steve said:
:nono:The people that feel a need to compare and bash the RS stuff I say WHO CARES! It's just your opinion and we all have one.
Click to expand...

AnalogDigit said:
I let them bash away Realistic equipment all they want. It keeps the prices low for the rest of us! :thmbsp:
Click to expand...

:yes: Always wanted a big acoustic suspension 3-way speaker and my Optimus 5b's with the VL mods got me there for under a hundred bucks :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom