Yamaha PC5002M extremely rare
- Thread starter neanderthal
- Start date
Yamahalic
Super Member
Interesting History PCM Series Pro Amps
Thx for the great photos of the PC5002M, first one I have ever seen! Interestingly, I noticed some visual differences from the other PCM pro beast masters that led me to check out the timeline on them to see when each was introduced. Here is what I found:
1982...PC2002M, PC5002M
1987...PC2602M
1989...PC4002M
Hmmm, I had never heard of the PC2602M model, so in case anyone else has not, here is a link I found to view these bad boys...
http://www.masterserviceshop.com/shop/images/finali.jpg
Thx for the great photos of the PC5002M, first one I have ever seen! Interestingly, I noticed some visual differences from the other PCM pro beast masters that led me to check out the timeline on them to see when each was introduced. Here is what I found:
1982...PC2002M, PC5002M
1987...PC2602M
1989...PC4002M
Hmmm, I had never heard of the PC2602M model, so in case anyone else has not, here is a link I found to view these bad boys...
http://www.masterserviceshop.com/shop/images/finali.jpg
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
I second the cool running nature of Yamaha Pro amps. I left my PC2002M stack on overnight and they are as cool as ever.
jhal
Titanium Bliss
I have PC-2602M, running my woofers (see sig). I have owned it for about 6 months. I have nothing but good things to say about it. I will add more if anyone is interested, but I don't want to hog the thread.
I have a couple of threads involving it here on AK. Too lazy to post links now.
Last edited:
the-real-mandak
Super Member
You properly seen it all over, it's also called M-85 in the non pro version.
Nice find cdfac :thmbsp: that is an insane amount of power, the bench puts the 101M to 1800W in mono @ 8ohm before clipping (1 kHz).
I had a feeling they would have adequate power,when bridged.
Only adequate(mind you).
Lots of power. Most pro sound amps I have heard have lots of power-play loud, but don't sound very good-especially at lower volumes-Crown comes to mind. Perhaps they sound a bit too transistory- I like lots of fast bass-but the highs and mids seem too congested for me- perhaps it's more of a equipment mismatch-
IDNKT :scratch2:
On second thought, you sure? I found an internal image of one and it looks nothing like the innards of my dual tranny M-80's and wasn't the M-85 just a slightly updated version of the M-80? Or *was* it like this?
Last edited:
in terms of parts and such, that looks a lot more like the PC5002M than the M-80/5. in particular, the transformer looks to be sized like one from the 5002, which is a lot bigger than those in the M-80/5, and the copper capacitor bus is similar in execution also. there may be no counterpart, just as with PC4002.
IDNKT :scratch2:
On second thought, you sure? I found an internal image of one and it looks nothing like the innards of my dual tranny M-80's and wasn't the M-85 just a slightly updated version of the M-80? Or *was* it like this?
the-real-mandak
Super Member
Not anymore, you put me in dought there. This would be another of the compair SM's, but due to the different power supply there will be differences.
All amps have a sweet spot, the task is to work as close to this as posible (gain structure is the pro description for this). Pro amps (read for live music) is not designed to dose on at low level program, just look in the manual and see the graf for distortion. The PC2602 has its best performance around 100W, unless it only do low mid or bass then it's just at 260W or a little below (would't we just love thise grafs for all our gear).
Last edited:
jhal
Titanium Bliss
That's my 2602 pictured, and now you've got me wondering, since I am actively searching for another one to put on my mids/highs. Should I now consider a Yamaha "home" amp around the same power (M-2)? I need to reconfigure my system to run off the 2602 full range, since I have never done that, and hear what my ears tell me.
Last edited:
the-real-mandak
Super Member
No, the mid/high do not need nearly as much power as the bass. The lower the frequency the more power it needs, so mid/high only needs a fraction of the bass. Just think of how the meter is acting when the kick drum or bass kicks in (most meters shows how much power is drawn from the amp).
jhal
Titanium Bliss
At my crossover point of 260hz, I need about the same amount of power as I have on the lows. My M-4 is an awesome sounding amp, but it simply doesn't have not enough power to prevent clipping at "live" levels. The JBL's can do it, they just need the ass. It's all about dynamic headroom. At a crossover point of 260hz, the amount of power needed is a lot more than you may think.
Think about when the snare drum hits. Hard. A lot of power is needed to make you duck.
Think about when the snare drum hits. Hard. A lot of power is needed to make you duck.
Last edited:
Remember we pointed out the PC-2002/2002M is the Pro version of the M-2 (same specs) that has internal bridging capability and built more tank-like. That, and the fact I picked up a pair for less than a single M-2 led me down the path of enlightenment for *some* of Yami's pro amps.
The PC2002M uses the same output transisters as the PC5002M (AKA the 101M). The PC2002M is a terrific amp - dare I say BETTER than the home audio version? :yes: Just curious, does anyone know what output transisters the M-2 uses and how many pair it has per channel?
I don't know this for sure but I believe the M-2 uses the same outputs as are used in the M-4 described here; awesome outputs. :tresbon: :thmbsp:
From the M-4 tech report. Sorry for the poor read.
Last edited:
Thanks Vint Age. My M-2 uses slightly different transisters from the ones listed in the brochure for the M-4. The NPN's are 2SC2461B's and the PNP's are 2SA1051B's. So the M-2 does not use the same transisters as the PC2002M. The M-2 transisters are 15A 150 watt devices, the PC2002M transisters are 17A 200 watt devices. It's pretty obvious that the output stage of the PC2002M is significantly overbuilt compared to the M-2.
M-2 output transisters:
2SC2461B NPN TOSHIBA 3 per channel (Alternative: 2SC5200)
2SA1051B PNP TOSHIBA 3 per channel (Alternative: 2SA1943)
PC2002M output transisters:
2SC2608 NPN SANKEN 4 per channel (alternative: 2SC3858)
2SA1117 PNP SANKEN 4 per channel (alternative: 2SA1494)
Last edited:
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
The further confirms the PC2002M's sleeper status and what a great value it is!
