• 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

Vintage Power Vs. New Power ?

N

numerique

Active Member
I recently purchased an old MCS 3207 receiver ( 7 watt per channel ) as a replacement for an old and small boom box for use in a small room at home.

Added a set of $4.00 Thrift store Radio Shack 40-5014 ( RCA ) book shelf speakers rated at max 50 watt per channel figuring they would be more than enough for such a low output unit.

Seems a speaker upgrade may be in order as the MCS receiver's 7 watts per channel is more powerful than I expected.

I recall reading a discussion about a Pioneer SX 2300-
a comment was made on page 2 about vintage power vs. the 1990s era "new" power.
http://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/sx-2300-question.56733/page-2


Can the distinction be made delineating a difference between "vintage power" vs. "new power"?
If so, does such a distinction exist because of the introduction of integrated circuitry?
 
Register to hide this ad
Rather than start the new vs. old debate, as there are already countless threads like that, let's focus on why you're asking the question.

What's the symptom you're having that leads you to this question?
 
Didn't realize that there are many threads on the subject of vintage vs new power.
I will do a search as the topic is new to me.

Sorry about that.

( woofer on the speaker seems to be over driven at higher output levels.
I am making the presumption that the amplifier is OK as no distortion at moderate volume levels. )
 
Loudness control is off.
Tone controls at center.

I have not yet switched the speakers to another, known good amp.

Perhaps that should be the next step.
 
Have you checked the speakers out? Are the woofer surrounds good? I would suspect a problem with the speakers first hearing your description.

There are differences in the way older amps were rated. That and back then the engineers tended to over build them. That 7 watts per channel was the minimum output needed so it would pass. If it put out a little more, no problem, still passed inspection.
 
At this time the speakers are suspect due to the woofers in 50 watt speakers don't seem to handle the power.
The woofer surrounds seem OK, though one center is slightly concave and needs to be pulled back out to form the semi-sphere.

Thanks for the info about how amps are rated- that will help quite a bit in a search:thumbsup:
 
I don't exactly know what your link is saying in relation to your statement, but focus on this quote from the following article

"In 1974 the FTC instituted a ruling requiring audio power and distortion ratings for home audio equipment to be measured in a defined manner with power stated in RMS terms."

Here's the article: http://nobleamps.com/measuringpower.html

Basically, before this ruling, watts ratings was the wild west. Any manufacturer could use whatever method they chose for stating their amp's power rating They could use RMS, peak, PMPO or whatever else they chose. This means that a lot of advertised watts were well let's just say "overinflated".

The FTC ruling in 1974 specified what method b used to get power ratings to keep everyone on a level playing field. A lot of 100 watt amps were now 20 watts. Is this what you're referring to?

But, as for that 7 watts sounding remarkably loud, most speakers use only a watt or two to play at room filling levels on music. It's only when played painfully loud that more are needed on a steady basis. It's the musical peaks that demand the extra watts. Of course, speaker sensitivity has a lot to do with this.

as for loudness and watts, it's not as simple as it seems. Three decibel change in loudness is barely noticeable. To achieve a three decibel change in loudness requires twice the power. An apparent doubling of loudness requires ten times the power. Here's a link to help explain it

.http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/voltageloudness.html

Finally, those watts on speakers are the maximum power they can safely handle on a continuous basis. it has no bearing on how loud they play or how good/bad they sound.
 
the skipper said:
................

The FTC ruling in 1974 specified what method b used to get power ratings to keep everyone on a level playing field. A lot of 100 watt amps were now 20 watts. Is this what you're referring to?...............
as for loudness and watts, it's not as simple as it seems. Three decibel change in loudness is barely noticeable. To achieve a three decibel change in loudness requires twice the power. An apparent doubling of loudness requires ten times the power.
Here's a link to help explain it

.http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/voltageloudness.html
Click to expand...

I sort of presumed that 7 watts might be lower in reality than it's rating stated - but wasn't certain what to expect in actual output.
After reading that article on http://www.gcaudio.com, it may very well be either that the speakers aren't designed to accurately handle more than a couple of watts, the amplifier can't supply sufficient power rapidly enough to account for changes-----or both.

As for my initial question about Vintage vs. new power- I was wondering mostly about the difference in power output as the Audiokarma thread I referenced seemed to suggest that older designs may have been more powerful than their ratings stated.
 
I have a hard time accepting they published a 7 wpc power number for this receiver. They would have never sold one back in the 70's if they did. From the digging I did, JC Penny put out a number of 45 wpc for this receiver. But I suspect that was peak power, and a more realistic number would be about 20 to 25 wpc.

Regards
Mister Pig
 
Unfortunately, I have not yet found much about the unit.
It does seem logical that a 7 watt per channel amplifier would attract few component buyers.

Budget conscious buyers would have gravitated towards low priced all in one units.
 
numerique said:
woofer on the speaker seems to be over driven at higher output levels.
Click to expand...
Why didn't you say that in the first place?

It sounds like the speakers are shot.

Or, maybe you're expecting to much from them. They are small speakers rated for only fifty watts to begin with.

Another possibility is that you're overdriving that receiver into clipping.

too many variables to pinpoint the problem. Playing playing those speakers on another amp, or using that amp with other speakers might help isolate the issue.
 
Last edited:
Mister Pig said:
I have a hard time accepting they published a 7 wpc power number for this receiver. They would have never sold one back in the 70's if they did...
Click to expand...

Dunno about JC Penney/MCS, but there were retailers selling some pretty low-powered receivers post FTC "1974".
They really didn't have much choice.

Whether many/any actually sold, of course, is another matter.

014.jpg

013.jpg


source: www.radioshackcatalogs.com (1977)
 
the skipper said:
Why didn't you say that in the first place?

It sounds like the speakers are shot.

Or, maybe you're expecting to much from them. They are small speakers rated for only fifty watts to begin with.
Click to expand...

The speakers are the prime suspect.

My concern is replacing them with something capable of matching the power output of that MCS receiver.
I was initially presuming that the MCS was less powerful than results seem to indicate- which is why I bought such small speakers; ergo the question about vintage vs new power as posted in the
http://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/sx-2300-question.56733/page-2

thread.
 
Last edited:
Here's a thread on your receiver.

http://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/mcs-3207-receiver-specs.339980/

Yes, it is 7 watts. That's doable for normal listening levels.

Yes, that's not a lot if you crank it up or pump the bass.

Again you've got to isolate the problem like I mentioned above.

IF it turns out that that (assumed working) receiver cannot drive those (assumed good) speakers to a level which satisfies you, about the only option would be looking for highly efficient speakers. That could be quite a challenge.
 
Post 1974 the playing field was leveled....for a while. That rule was apparently changed later, or was perhaps worded in such a way that it didn't apply to surround sound. Maybe it just took that long for the writers to think of a work around.

Toward the late '90s I started noticing ratings listed for 40-20k hz rather than 20-20k. Soon after that I started seeing power ratings at 6 ohms instead of 8 and ratings for a single frequency (1k hz) rather than a range of several octaves that roughly corresponded to human hearing ability.

I think this may be behind most apparent discrepancies between old and new power.

If your receiver is so low powered that you routinely drive it into clipping, that could sound like a wimpy speakers issue when the real problem is a reckless hand on the volume knob.
 
Last edited:
As the speakers were sold in Radio Shack at roughly the turn of the century, I would presume that the speakers might be bad first as it would be easy to over drive 'em with the more powerful units currently available.

So far no circuit diagrams for the MCS unit pop up on a Google search.
I have not yet opened the MCS unit for inspection, but the receiver has at least one intact fuse.

Sorting out just what speakers may do this MCS unit justice will indeed be difficult as I neglected to study up on the subject of speakers during the days of my youth.
I never did buy speakers due to primarily using headphones for my formative audiophile years( late 1970s thru late 1980s ).

I will try hooking up the speakers to another, known good, amplifier and see how well they do.

If results are similar, then the speakers are simply not up to the task.
 
stereofanboy said:
...............
Toward the late '90s I started noticing ratings listed for 40-20k hz rather than 20-20k. Soon after that I started seeing power ratings at 6 ohms instead of 8 and ratings for a single frequency (1k hz) rather than a range of several octaves that roughly corresponded to human hearing ability.

I think this may be behind most apparent discrepancies between old and new power.

If your receiver is so low powered that you routinely drive it into clipping, that could sound like a wimpy speakers issue when the real problem is a reckless hand on the volume knob.
Click to expand...

Actually, the unit was actually purchased last weekend and was combined with the Radio Shack speakers for only the first time last night as a test to see if the MCS unit's power actually matched the speaker rating or not.

I don't crank up the volume on a routine basis as it hurts my ears..........but do like the term "reckless hand on the volume knob" and would like to use it in the future. ;):thumbsup:.

What I really need to do is find some method for determining how to choose speakers that will match this MCS unit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom