Vintage, new, or somewhere in the middle??

[mattsk8]

I'm just about to finish up some ER18 speakers I'm building. My plan is to put these in my basement for music only. I've been told these are fairly efficient, and can be driven w/ anywhere from 50w/ch up to 150+w/ch (obviously higher is better is what I've been told).

My original plan was to power these w/ my vintage Pioneer SX-950 receiver. While my Pioneer works excellent, I'm sure a minor rebuild is in order. Before I go forward w/ that, I was wondering if an all together different route would be better.

That said, my SX-950 is rated at 85w/ch. I'm not sure how they come to those conclusions for rated power output; but I also have a new Yamaha HT receiver that's rated at 120w/ch and that Pioneer will annihilate the Yamaha in terms of bass output and volume. Why is that?

Maybe I'm thinking too much about all this and I should just plug the speakers I'm building into the SX-950, but I just want to get the most out of them I can! I'm considering a Harman Kardon HK3490 http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/receivers/hk-3490 based on a recommendation. I'm also wondering if I should look for an Adcom or likewise used amp and a preamp?!! So many questions and decisions!

Sticking w/ the SX-950 is the most appealing to me, and I'm happy w/ it's sound so far (right now I use it on a pair of monkey coffins w/ 15" woofers and it drives them w/ authority!); and also LOVE it's vintage looks. But, if I can get better sound going a different route, I'm all ears :T

Thanks for any input and suggestions on this! I know a lot of this is subjective and based on personal preference, but I'd love to hear some different opinions!

[wkhanna]

If I am not mistaken, the SX-950 is a solid state amp. Tube replacement, therefore is a moot point. But other components like capacitors and such do age over time. If you like the unit, then by all means I would encourage you to consider a having it refurbished and ‘freshened’ up, as it were.

I am V familiar with a local shop that specializes in such endeavors. They are highly qualified, highly regarded and serviced some of my personal, prized equipment. Their fees are reasonable beyond expectation. So much so, that shipping a unit to them is well worth the cost & hassle.

If you are interested, PM me & I can put you in touch with them.

[mattsk8]

PM sent :T . Thanks for the reply!

[madmac]

I'm just about to finish up some ER18 speakers I'm building. My plan is to put these in my basement for music only. I've been told these are fairly efficient, and can be driven w/ anywhere from 50w/ch up to 150+w/ch (obviously higher is better is what I've been told).

My original plan was to power these w/ my vintage Pioneer SX-950 receiver. While my Pioneer works excellent, I'm sure a minor rebuild is in order. Before I go forward w/ that, I was wondering if an all together different route would be better.

That said, my SX-950 is rated at 85w/ch. I'm not sure how they come to those conclusions for rated power output; but I also have a new Yamaha HT receiver that's rated at 120w/ch and that Pioneer will annihilate the Yamaha in terms of bass output and volume. Why is that?

Maybe I'm thinking too much about all this and I should just plug the speakers I'm building into the SX-950, but I just want to get the most out of them I can! I'm considering a Harman Kardon HK3490 http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/receivers/hk-3490 based on a recommendation. I'm also wondering if I should look for an Adcom or likewise used amp and a preamp?!! So many questions and decisions!

Sticking w/ the SX-950 is the most appealing to me, and I'm happy w/ it's sound so far (right now I use it on a pair of monkey coffins w/ 15" woofers and it drives them w/ authority!); and also LOVE it's vintage looks. But, if I can get better sound going a different route, I'm all ears :T

Thanks for any input and suggestions on this! I know a lot of this is subjective and based on personal preference, but I'd love to hear some different opinions!

Wattage ratings are a tricky thing and can be easily 'cooked' to sound higher than they really are. I had a Yamaha amp 'rated' at 100 w/ch and then I moved up to a 75 watt Rotel and it blows it away power and sound wise. Rotel conservatively rates their amps while many others 'cook' their ratings. :W

[wkhanna]

PM sent :T . Thanks for the reply!

PM Returned.
Enjoy!

[Glen B]

That said, my SX-950 is rated at 85w/ch. I'm not sure how they come to those conclusions for rated power output;

The SX-950 was built to meet the 1974 FTC trade regulations for amplifier power output claims. It has been bench tested to deliver 108W @ 1% THD (clipping point), 20Hz to 20KHz. You did not say which model Yamaha AVR you have, but I would not be surprised to learn its power output ratings are spec'd at an easier to meet 1KHz.

but I also have a new Yamaha HT receiver that's rated at 120w/ch and that Pioneer will annihilate the Yamaha in terms of bass output and volume. Why is that?

The Pioneer was made at a time when manufacturers did not skimp on materials, power supplies and output stages. The Pioneer is all metal construction, has a substantial sized transformer, 44,000 uF of power supply capacitance, parallel pairs of output devices, and generous sized cast aluminum heatsinks.

I can understand one amp having better bass performance than another, the Pioneer may just have more headroom. The volume part may be attributable simply to differences in volume control taper. Both units are almost identical in power, and should in theory be equally loud. It takes a doubling of power or increase of 3dB to obtain a perceived increase in loudness. The Pioneer would have to be delivering at least 200W to be noticeably louder than the Yamaha. The only way to confirm output is to put both units on an oscilloscope, and check their outputs at the point the waveform clips.

[mattsk8]

The SX-950 was built to meet the 1974 FTC trade regulations for amplifier power output claims. It has been bench tested to deliver 108W @ 1% THD (clipping point), 20Hz to 20KHz. You did not say which model Yamaha AVR you have, but I would not be surprised to learn its power output ratings are spec'd at an easier to meet 1KHz.

Yamaha RX-V1065. As an HT receiver, I love it so I don't mean to sound like I'm bashing Yamaha. I also have an older Kenwood (Circa 1990) receiver in my garage that's rated at 85w/ch that doesn't come close to the Pioneer.

The speakers that I'm running w/ the Pioneer right now are a pair of JVC 3 ways w/ 15" woofers. I used them in my garge on that Kenwood originally, then when I built some new ones for the garage (a pair of Tritrix MTM TLs, not quite as huge) those got moved to the basement temporarily (to use until I finish the ER18s while I'm shooting pool). In the garage, the JVC speakers worked but nothing special. I just assumed they were JVCs and were garbage so I never gave it a thought. But, when those things are hooked to that Pioneer they're stupidly loud w/ incredible bass! Almost makes me second guess why I'm building the ER18s; almost, they still lack the depth and definition I'm after (after all, they are just some JVC speakers).

I can turn the Yamaha up to about 3/4 volume and not really worry about the JVCs, same w/ the Kenwood. My 13 year old son will concur, w/ the Pioneer at just below 1/2 volume I'm dangerously close to setting those JVCs on fire .

Aside from seeking the 'perfect stereo system', I was just curious how or why that is based on the rated power output of each one. Comparing the Kenwood to the Yamaha, the Yamaha wins for sure and that makes total sense. But comparing the Yamaha to the Pioneer (which is so old Noah may have used it on the ark), something must have changed in power ratings between then and now. Is it the difference between solid state (I don't even know what that is) and digital??

Thanks for all the replies btw 8) ! I've always wanted a better understanding of these things!

[Glen B]

Volume control position has no bearing on amplifier power. You can't assume one amp is more powerful than the other simply because it plays louder at a given volume control position. The fact that the Pioneer at 1/2 volume position is as loud as the Yamaha and Kenwood at 3/4 position only means the Pioneer has more signal gain or its volume control taper attenuates less of the incoming signal for a given control position.

To understand this, a volume control potentiometer (pot) only attenuates (cuts) the source signal. At the zero position, the pot is applying maximum attenuation of the signal. As you turn the control clockwise, it attenuates the signal less and less. All volume control pots are not created equal. If the Pioneer unit's volume control pot applies less attenuation of the signal at the 1/2 way point than the volume control pots of the other two units, it will appear to be more the more powerful unit when its not.

A bench test of the Yamaha RX-V1065 by Home Theater Magazine indicated power output of 120.7W into 8 ohms at 1% THD, the clipping point. This is audibly equal to the Pioneer's 108W @ 1% THD, so both are equally matched as far as continuous rated power goes. Now, the Pioneer could have better dynamic power (a.k.a., headroom or ability to deliver greater power into momentary peaks) and this could account for better bass performance and/or more effortless sound, especially when pushed hard.

[wkhanna]

Glen,

I always look forward to your posts. They are infomative and writen so as to be easily understood.

Thanks for sharing your wealth of knowlegde with us. :T

[mattsk8]

Ditto ^ ! Thanks for dumbing that down Glen, makes total sense!

So, to answer the original question (vintage, new or somewhere in the middle?), I'm guessing that just like most things this is fairly subjective; and based on that I'll move forward w/ restoring the Pioneer 8) .

Thanks again to all for the help and comments, an awesome and very informative forum/group of guys!

[madmac]

Volume control position has no bearing on amplifier power. You can't assume one amp is more powerful than the other simply because it plays louder at a given volume control position. The fact that the Pioneer at 1/2 volume position is as loud as the Yamaha and Kenwood at 3/4 position only means the Pioneer has more signal gain or its volume control taper attenuates less of the incoming signal for a given control position.

To understand this, a volume control potentiometer (pot) only attenuates (cuts) the source signal. At the zero position, the pot is applying maximum attenuation of the signal. As you turn the control clockwise, it attenuates the signal less and less. All volume control pots are not created equal. If the Pioneer unit's volume control pot applies less attenuation of the signal at the 1/2 way point than the volume control pots of the other two units, it will appear to be more the more powerful unit when its not.

A bench test of the Yamaha RX-V1065 by Home Theater Magazine indicated power output of 120.7W into 8 ohms at 1% THD, the clipping point. This is audibly equal to the Pioneer's 108W @ 1% THD, so both are equally matched as far as continuous rated power goes. Now, the Pioneer could have better dynamic power (a.k.a., headroom or ability to deliver greater power into momentary peaks) and this could account for better bass performance and/or more effortless sound, especially when pushed hard.

Well said!!!....Dynamic power and headroom is what good performance of an amp is all about!!. :T