Onkyo and Denon

Status
Not open for further replies.
There's something going on with that head unit. Sometimes the speakers sound "decent;" sometimes they sound weak, low, and distorted. Like sometimes it has power and sometimes it doesn't.

I personally think the other speakers are blown.

I'm "into" my car now so.. I'm liking the "cheap but complete" approach. Head unit upgrade so I can have my Bluetooth is a must.

Crutchfield sells some reasonably priced kits that would be a good fit if that's the case. They'll even provide you with the wiring adapter.
 
Our Sanyo looked like this, kind of. Had the same dials and VU (Volume Units.)
VU meters are nice to look at, even though some consider them Virtually Useless meters.

Foobar2000 has a bunch of VU meter skins available - I cycle through them sometimes... Teac, Sony, Denon, Technics, McIntosh, etc.
 
I have many friends who back in the day bought their equipment from RadioShack(Realistic) or JCPENNY(MCS Series) when both stores carried some pretty good stuff. For both home & car. And I have to admit that their equipment matched my more expensive stuff in many areas of listening pleasure. It all looked good too! I mean, the equipment was out sourced /made by a major audio company(Panisonic/Technique, Sanyo etc.) or others.
 
Last edited:
This is almost turning into a modern vs vintage audio discussion.

I agree with other posts here about how people cared about audio more in the past than they do now. Hell, look at what some of that vintage audio cost new. Not exactly chump change. People were willing to pay for the best. Because of that high demand, competition was up, and there were higher quality offerings back then as far as build quality and aesthetics. This is certainly one subject where "they don't make 'em like they used to" applies.

All of my setups are powered by vintage equipment. I listen to them nearly every day. The look, touch, feel, reliability, and sound are unmatched by all but the highest end (and very very expensive) audio today. I'd rather play with a beautiful sounding sub-$300 vintage silver face than a $2,000 black plastic modern unit.

IMG_20201028_100122508.webp
IMG_20201028_100130777.webp
IMG_20201016_184015342.webp
IMG_20201203_145447321.webp
 
This is almost turning into a modern vs vintage audio discussion.

I agree with other posts here about how people cared about audio more in the past than they do now. Hell, look at what some of that vintage audio cost new. Not exactly chump change. People were willing to pay for the best. Because of that high demand, competition was up, and there were higher quality offerings back then as far as build quality and aesthetics. This is certainly one subject where "they don't make 'em like they used to" applies.

All of my setups are powered by vintage equipment. I listen to them nearly every day. The look, touch, feel, reliability, and sound are unmatched by all but the highest end (and very very expensive) audio today. I'd rather play with a beautiful sounding sub-$300 vintage silver face than a $2,000 black plastic modern unit.

View attachment 37632View attachment 37633View attachment 37634View attachment 37635
This thread has some great replies and yes, I was getting at modern vs vintage. We have some other aspects peppered in, but this thread is great.

I absolutely love your units. Your Technics receiver looks a LOT like our Philips. Big giant tuning knob... channel A B ...yes.

Does the giant tuning needle section light orange backlit when turned on?
 
I started off my stereo life with an NAD 3020 integrated amp and KEF 101 speakers. KEF speakers were being used by the BBC at that time as studio monitors. If you've never heard of either of these components I'd suggest you read up on them, they're both still considered quite respectable except for the lack of deep base. In those days there were no sensible subwoofers. The ones I tried only muddied the otherwise excellent sound.

So I graduated to Mirage M1 speakers. They're very large towers and "don't need no subwoofers". Absolute Sound considered them the best speakers in the world at the time. For quite a while I powered the M1s with a Cyrus Two integrated amp. An even better sound but clearly not enough power.

So I bought a (used) Mark Levinson No 23 Power Amp: 200 Watts/channel RMS continuous into 8 Ohms. I looked and looked but could never find a used Mark Levinson preamp, and I wasn't going to pay the very steep price for a new one.

So I bridged the analog and digital worlds and got a preamp "for free" with a Benchmark DAC preamp. It all sounds pretty good. When we want convenience we use a SONOS Connect as the data source. When we're seriously listening, we use an ancient PCM 7000 as a CD disc drive with the digital data all processed by the Benchmark DAC, or occasionally an album played by a NAD 9000 moving coil cartridge and a Technics turntable into an analog port on the Benchmark.

Not absolutely top end but pretty good. And yes I could probably improve on my system, but only by spending big bucks, and I'm not sure I could hear the difference.
That sounds like a nice system. The Kent's would have enjoyed the Apt Holman Amp 1, I was using that amp with a pair of KEF Corelli I had modified. I always thought the KEF 101 were great location/van remote monitors, moreso than the LS3/5a Rogers.

The dealer near me that sold KEF in the 70's and 80's employed, successfully, a Swedish AudioPro B2-50 subwoofer with the KEF reference 101

they had small, long throw drivers so thy blended well with Small Monitors,

I am not a sub woofer guy. so I didnt go there.
Need bass? get better current drive out of your amp.

audio pro b2-50.webp
 
That sounds like a nice system. The Kent's would have enjoyed the Apt Holman Amp 1, I was using that amp with a pair of KEF Corelli I had modified. I always thought the KEF 101 were great location/van remote monitors, moreso than the LS3/5a Rogers.

The dealer near me that sold KEF in the 70's and 80's employed, successfully, a Swedish AudioPro B2-50 subwoofer with the KEF reference 101

they had small, long throw drivers so thy blended well with Small Monitors,

I am not a sub woofer guy. so I didnt go there.
Need bass? get better current drive out of your amp.

View attachment 37640
I bought my KEFs at a stereo show. [They had stereo shows back in the '80s.] What impressed me about them was their clean sound and that they were being driven very nicely at the show at quite a high volume with a 200 or 250 Watt amp. The KEFs handle all that power quite handily and just sound better. There were a number of LS3/5a speakers at the time but I liked the KEFs.

For any of you who don't know this, more power gives you cleaner sound. The theory is that with an infinite amount of power, any wave form can be reproduced exactly. So all else being equal (and it seldom is) a 200 Watt amp will give a truer reproduction of the actual sound than a 50 Watt amp.

I'm still using the KEFs as my TV speakers, left, right and "center" channel. I don't really have a center channel of course, the left and right speakers image it. A friend traded me a Yamaha AV Receiver which I now use in 2 channel form to power the TV KEFs. The Yamaha has a sub output as well so the TV system is just crying out for a sub.
 
Onkyo and Sansui were my favs' - after Macintosh.

I Ilke all the new little pods and bars and stuff - but lets be honest it does't get it done like the old school stuff.

Im using the same amp I've used since 90, a Mcintosch MC2500. Its so powerful you can arc weld with it literally lit my JBL 4412's - on fire.

Im currently running Bowers and Wilkins and have turned it down so as not to blow them up.

View attachment 37355View attachment 37356
Uncle Dave, I think I have those same B&W's or maybe mine might be the little brother not sure. I have had them for at least 20 years, they sound really good. The only speaker I've had longer than these B&W are my Dynaco A10's
PXL_20201221_182418096.webp
 
In the mid '70s I spent ~$1000 w/tax and after my best negotiation and all I bought were:
Yamaha 50 watt/4 chan stereo receiver
Dual belt drive/straight arm turntable
Pair of Cizek loud speakers
Phillips cassette deck w/Dolby ...WOOOO!
Through the '80s I upgraded much of my equipment to better stuff and added even more speakers & EQ, CD etc.
 
Char,

Those Cizek were better than AR back in the 70's. The ubiquitous Peerless silk dome was a bit over-stressed due to the design flaw of not having looped the voice coil wires wires whee they exited on the fornt plate, but before they travelled in the termination channels. Withc the low crossover point, you often popped the tweeter multiple times during ownership.

I met Roy Cizek at an electronics store in Lawrence Called MILO-ALCO, they also sold mid-hifi equipment like b&o, Yamaha, Kenwood, ADS, AR, ALTEC and CIZEK. My good friend still has a few pair of mint Model 1 and 2. I also lived just a few miles from the ADS factory in Wilmington. Grew up the True Boston area "rabid" audiophile. One of the passions before the distraction of VHS, TV, Home theatre then Smartphones.

Later in the 90's, I sold a friend - with too much money - a super high end system consisting of a pair of Krell MDA300 amps, a pair of Apogee Diva ribbon loudspeakers and a Wadia DC player.

I think that system went for over 25 grand. The amps (600W at 4ohms, 1200W at 2ohms) weighed 100 pounds each and he had to re-wire his room to power these.

The Diva had Marble bodies and went floor to ceiling. They were almost 200 LBS Each. and 3 ohms nominal

I didnt like the sound of that combo, but he did so ...

A similar setup with different amps:
Apogee-Diva-marble.jpg


krell mda300.webp
 
Those ribbon speakers sound so good with the right music, but the sweet spot is sooo small. I spend way to much on audio, not quite audiophile level but enough. I have speakers that are 85lbs each, most of that is because they are furniture grade wood. They sound awesome but are a pain in the backside to move.

In fact thinking about it I just researched and found out the speakers in my den are 112lbs each. Somehow they seem easier to move.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom