PDA

View Full Version : New amplifier for L100A , which one to chose ?



Viking
12-27-2007, 02:34 PM
Hi All,

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year !

Its now 2½ years ago since I got my pair of fine and for ever L100A´s, ( and almost same time lag I last wrote in this forum.)

Im about to upgrade/change the amplifier - what will be a suitable amplifier for the good old L100A´s ? I suppose some 70-80 model ... ?

Im also looking for a additional L100A pair, and two sets of stands, which will be the chair fods from the Danish Design Company Fritz Hansen ( 60-70ties ) - what do you think ? ....... yes I know they propably cost 5 times the speakers ......

Viking
12-27-2007, 03:39 PM
To narrow it a bit more in - Im thinking of a Marantz 2x2, any advice of specs and models suitable for the L100A ?

Mr. Widget
12-27-2007, 10:51 PM
To narrow it a bit more in - Im thinking of a Marantz 2x2, any advice of specs and models suitable for the L100A ?I've used a Marantz 2275 receiver with a pair of L100s and been pretty happy with the results.


Widget

Viking
12-28-2007, 06:31 AM
I've used a Marantz 2275 receiver with a pair of L100s and been pretty happy with the results.


Widget

Thanks Widget - Marantz it will be then. Found this database on the vintage Marantz products:

http://www.classic-audio.com/marantz/mindex.html

Since analog radio will be replaced by digital soon, I will go for the amp only, thus the 11xx and 12xx series, all from the late 70´ties. I remember them well, they did cost a fortune then ....

hjames
12-28-2007, 07:29 AM
Since analog radio will be replaced by digital soon, I will go for the amp only, thus the 11xx and 12xx series, all from the late 70´ties. I remember them well, they did cost a fortune then ....

Hmmm - there hasn't been any notice about Analog RADIO going away, just Analog TV .... unless its a personal choice.
I know FM has gotten pretty useless in most markets (poor syndicated choices like ClearChannel), and NPR has put a lot of their neat stuff on HDradio (which ISN'T HD) ...

Mr. Widget
12-28-2007, 08:12 AM
Hmmm - there hasn't been any notice about Analog RADIO going away, just Analog TV .... Analog radio is next. :(

What'll that do to the value of a Marantz 10B?


Widget

boputnam
12-28-2007, 10:14 AM
I've used a Marantz 2275 receiver with a pair of L100s and been pretty happy with the results.Yea, but it is STLL a pair of L:):)'s... :rotfl:

Viking
01-09-2008, 05:54 AM
Just a silly question - when specs on a Marantz 2252B says 52W pr channel, is this in total or 52 pr speaker ?

boputnam
01-09-2008, 05:31 PM
one speaker per channel (presumably), therefore...'zactly.

They may specify "XXw into 8Ω". That is what to look for - what is the load on the output.

I've recently seen some manufacturers advertise "100w per channel", but the fine print sez "...6Ω" load. Now who in the hell has a 6Ω load cabinet. Sneaky bastards...

Fangio
01-10-2008, 02:15 PM
Just a silly question - when specs on a Marantz 2252B says 52W pr channel, is this in total or 52 pr speaker ?

FAQ:


Why does a 35 watt Marantz sound better and louder than many 100 watt receivers?

Longish answer:

Because 35 watts/channel as specified by Marantz in the 1970's meant...
"The unit can deliver 35 watts into 8 ohms for one hour, from all channels at the same time, with no significant change in distortion, or other specifications, at any time during, or after, the test hour." ...while 100 watts/channel today (for instance, in my JVC surround system) means...
"The unit can deliver 100 watts for a fraction of a second, in one channel only, if the other channels aren't running and nothing else high energy has happened to drain the power supply of stored energy in the last few seconds." In fact, my JVC 5-channel Dolby surround receiver claims 500 watts RMS, but the power consumption label on the back panel tells the story:


320 Watts


If my JVC receiver was 100% efficient, meaning that every bit of power it took from the wall was delivered to the speakers as audio power (which it isn't), that'd give you only 64 watts a channel, about 2/3rds of the claimed power rating (which is 100 watts per channel, remember, 500 delivered as 100 per each of the five channels.)

But since the receiver can only (at best) convert about 50% of the available energy to the speakers, and the available energy is what is left over after the heat is generated (did I mention that this model JVC runs almost too hot to touch on top, even when making no sound at all?) and the watts that go to lighting the panel and powering all of the other circuitry are accounted for, the system can perhaps, when brand new, on a good day, generate 32 watts a channel continuously with all the channels going, which is pretty sorry compared to the claimed 100 watt per channel rating. That is less power per channel than an old 2235 receiver. Shocking, eh?

Turning it around, because of the way that the units were rated in the 1970's, that classic 2235 Marantz receiver, rated at 35 watts a channel, can dependably produce much more than 35 watts in both channels at the same time for a minute or two (far longer than the peaks in a modern receiver.) An honest rating for use with music for the power amplifiers of an older Marantz is generally in the range of 120% of rated power or even higher.

These ratings were instituted because of many false claims for power output that were being made using many different types of power measurement and general baloney at that time. IHF, RMS, Peak, Peak Music Power, Average, etc. RMS is what was settled on, and it's still widely used today, but the one hour rating was dropped some time back.

Interestingly, the situation that caused the RMS for one hour ratings to be made standard is now recurring - as I mentioned above, my JVC's ratings are pretty obviously designed to deceive the consumer to an extreme degree. Certainly there is no way that they can claim that those ratings paint an accurate picture of the amount of power the receiver can actually deliver in real world conditions - loud music and cinema surround takes a lot of power, in a lot of channels. Try listening to Jurassic Park... wait till the Tyrannosaur walks up behind you, or there is something exciting going on. Those 32 watts are pretty puny...

JVC isn't alone in this, however, many manufacturers you might think would be more honest in their claims are just as deceitful. For instance, my Sony car stereo suffers from the same kind of exaggeration: Right on the front it claims a very high wattage, but reading the manual, it turns out that the actual RMS power is far, far less than the front panel claims. I guess it's time for someone to step in again and slap these people around.

To the relatively straightforward power issue, you can add the fact that the design of the audio and RF circuitry in a Marantz is absolutely top-notch, and you can hear that in the character of what little distortion there is, in the way the bass, midrange and treble controls (and loudness contour and filters) affect the signals, in the way the FM signals come out sweet and clean, and so on. As an engineer, I really don't like to drop into using descriptive terms meant for food or lovemaking and so on for sound, but you know, when you A:B a Marantz against other units that are supposedly equivalent, the bottom line is it sounds better, and obviously so. (/quote)

SEAWOLF97
01-10-2008, 04:36 PM
Hmmm - there hasn't been any notice about Analog RADIO going away, just Analog TV .......

I was just reading that they are about to turn off analog phones ....no big deal , except all that wonderfull GM "On Star" has been analog thru the 2006 models....should be interesting to see what happens.:(

dllyons
02-25-2008, 07:29 AM
Very good description, Fangio !

Long live the amps of the classic era ! That's all I collect, currently, to match up with my L100's, L300's, L36's, L40's, etc. !

I have 3 different brand receivers from the classic era currently, and all are rated at 125wpc in to 8 ohms RMS:
Marantz 2325
Sansui 9090DB
Kenwood (i forget the model number, and I'm not at home right now to look :) )

Viking
08-27-2008, 12:27 PM
Hi again,

A cupple of months ago I finaly managed to get a Marantz 2252B - close to mint conditions, all lamps ok and functioning.

Must say its a fine masterpice and you notice right away that its from a decade where things were made to last - almost for ever - a nice companion to the L100´s.

Midrange setting is nice to have, was not on the old amp, since the L100´s thends to have a bid too pronounced vocal.

The 50 Watts is more than sufficent, I never get above 40% of the volumen range.

Next step will be to get a turtable which will mach - anyone have some good sugestions of a suitable turntable from aprox 78 ? Preferable able to mount a 12" SME arm.

Thanks.

Triumph Don
08-27-2008, 12:57 PM
One comes to mind, the Thorens TD-160!

http://search.benl.ebay.be/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=thorens+160&category0=

dllyons
08-27-2008, 02:12 PM
Yo Viking- I bought another vintage receiver this summer too- a Marantz 2270 with wood cabinet. Gorgeous !

So I have 4 complete vintage systems from the late 70's now, and I love it. I'm just too nostalgic I guess. :D

Marantz 2325 with L300's 125wpc system for my stereo/computer room
Sansui 9090DB with L100's & S36AW II 125wpc system for family room & deck
Marantz 2270 with L100's & J2050's 70wpc system for living room & garage
Kenwood KR8010 with L36's 125wpc for my portable, or loaner system. also used as sound for our neighborhood outdoor movie get togethers

Viking
08-30-2008, 11:10 AM
There are sometimes when it would be an absolute advantage to live in the US, like buying stuff. I used 3 months in my search for a 2252B in wooden cabinet - but Denmark is a small country, some even think its part of Greenland which is part of the North Pole...

There a quite some offers on Ebay, but transporting this heavy unit to Europe, and if something is not right ..

Any good advice from the forum on at suitable turntable 78ísh

Thanks

Mr. Widget
08-30-2008, 11:18 AM
There are sometimes when it would be an absolute advantage to live in the US, like buying stuff.Yeah, but then you'd also have to put up with our inferior and very costly healthcare system, poor public educational system, failing infrastructure... well, you get the point.

I'd say high shipping prices are a small price to pay. ;)


Widget

Viking
08-30-2008, 11:20 AM
One comes to mind, the Thorens TD-160!

http://search.benl.ebay.be/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=thorens+160&category0=

Thorens - Hmm, yes ofcause - way back I had the SME 2000 plinth equiped with a Thorens turn table ( think is was a Thorens with the light patterns on the edge for visula speed control ) , and SME 3012 II Tonearm, Ortofon/Stanton EEE. Unfortunaly sold it 20 years ago.

THANKS Triumph Don !

What a lovly piece:

http://cgi.benl.ebay.be/THORENS-TD145-147-160-165-166-MOUNTING-SME-3009_W0QQitemZ190247764559QQihZ009QQcategoryZ48648 QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem#ebayphotohos ting

Viking
08-30-2008, 12:06 PM
Did some surfing - Thorens 160 (II ?) it will be, have a good feeling about this one. Will need to investigate further excatly which version etc.
Wooden non-painted cabinet is preferable - SME II 9" , I suppose a 12" cant fit ? , I can live with the 9" arm. Will propably takes some months to find one. I suppose its a collecters piece.

macaroonie
08-31-2008, 06:45 AM
One comes to mind, the Thorens TD-160!

http://search.benl.ebay.be/search/search.dll?from=R40&_trksid=m37&satitle=thorens+160&category0=

Viking mentions a 12" SME arm. TD 160 series will not accomodate an arm of that length.

He is needing a Garrard 401 on a large plinth ( as an example ) but the Asian market has gobbled them up and the prices are £££££ $$$$$$
If memory serves there is a Luxman TT of that era that will take the 12" arm also.

Have a wander around the Vinyl Engine website. :)

macaroonie
08-31-2008, 06:51 AM
Here it is

macaroonie
08-31-2008, 06:57 AM
These are rare too

Viking
11-11-2008, 01:25 AM
Nice plinths !

Now after some time researching, I changed my mind to a Technics SL-1200 MK2 , for now - they still produce them, so looking deep into the savings - will return later.

Viking
11-26-2008, 03:06 PM
Just to return a feed back - ordered a new 1200 for playing my old LP´s. I must say, few things which were designed in the 70´ties are still produced today - one of those is the Technics 1200. Incredible that such quality can be baught from brand new, at such a price, in the year of 2008. Set-up should now be complete, the set of L100 are now finally well matched with gear from same period. Considered to put a SME 3009 II early on, but after listening using an AT-120E PU, I´m quite content with the original 1200 arm.


http://www.minhembio.com/forum/uploads/monthly_11_2008/post-145556-1226578750.jpg

dllyons
11-26-2008, 04:41 PM
Nice score Viking ! I love the outfit !
Uh....... how much are those 1200's going for today ? And I didn't catch the cartridge you got with it.

I've got an old Sony PS-X7 that acts a little silly sometimes when it hasn't been used for months, but it seems to always come back to its old self. Maybe I'll have to replace it someday, but I hope not !!

SMKSoundPro
11-29-2008, 04:27 PM
Technics 1200 are a dime a dozen in my experience.

I have four of them here at the nightclub that are not being used for quite a few years.

I use one of them as a speaker reconing lazy susan. Its got glue and stuff all over it. Yet, It would play just fine when needed.

They are a good solid heavy turntable with all of the wear parts available, easily. You can even get different color parts to go with your decor!

If anyone wants one, pm me.

Viking
01-25-2009, 11:53 PM
Nice score Viking ! I love the outfit !
Uh....... how much are those 1200's going for today ? And I didn't catch the cartridge you got with it.

I've got an old Sony PS-X7 that acts a little silly sometimes when it hasn't been used for months, but it seems to always come back to its old self. Maybe I'll have to replace it someday, but I hope not !!

Im back - sorry for the delay.

SL-1200 MK2 is about 427 Euro in a web shob - when I saw it could still be baught brand new, I baught one right away while they still produce them. Like - JBL still manufactuer the L100 Century, or Marantz still produce the 2252B receiver, at prices equal to the price back in 78, like buing a brand new 87 Merzedes for the price of a Fiat Uno.

Settled for the AT-120E cartridge, since this seems to be the gereral choice on the net. Had problems with subsonic rummel on the L100´s, so put a sock in the ports to damp the port - that helped.

Comparing my 70íes records with same CD, there are a substantiel difference, some CD´s sound like they were recorded from a casette, or from an LP. If you listen to music from the 60 and 70íes, there is quite an improvement to go vinyl. Comparing the LP with the CD on Grand Funk, Closer to Home, the track "Closer to Home", the CD sounds like a transistorradio in comparison to the LP.

stephane RAME
01-26-2009, 04:02 AM
My old record player turntables:
Thorens TD126Mk2 + SME 3009 Improved + Denon DL103
Denon DP-3000 based DIY + Rek-o-kut model 160 + Denon DL103
Good sound.
Stéphane

hjames
01-26-2009, 05:20 AM
My old record player turntables:
Thorens TD126Mk2 + SME 3009 Improved + Denon DL103
Denon DP-3000 based DIY + Rek-o-kut model 160 + Denon DL103
Good sound.
Stéphane

Gorgeous setup - thanks for sharing!

SEAWOLF97
01-26-2009, 12:57 PM
My old record player turntables:
Thorens TD126Mk2 + SME 3009 Improved + Denon DL103
Denon DP-3000 based DIY + Rek-o-kut model 160 + Denon DL103
Good sound.
Stéphane

S-

I'm a DL-103 believer too , courtesy of Mac's experience...love it :D

Stereophile mag rated it as one of the best 500 products of 2008 , and it was first sold in 1962 .

Viking
01-26-2009, 01:37 PM
My humble set-up, JBL L100A + Marantz 2252B + Technics SL-1200 MK2 ( granite not needed ) - good analog sound :)