Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 31

Thread: New amplifier for L100A , which one to chose ?

  1. #1
    Junior Member Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    28

    New amplifier for L100A , which one to chose ?

    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 ......
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  2. #2
    Junior Member Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    28
    To narrow it a bit more in - Im thinking of a Marantz 2x2, any advice of specs and models suitable for the L100A ?

  3. #3
    Administrator Mr. Widget's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    9,720
    Quote Originally Posted by Viking View Post
    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

  4. #4
    Junior Member Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Widget View Post
    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 ....

  5. #5
    Moderator hjames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    NoVA - DC 'burbs
    Posts
    8,547
    Quote Originally Posted by Viking View Post

    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) ...
    2ch: WiiM Pro; Topping E30 II DAC; Oppo, Acurus RL-11, Acurus A200, JBL Dynamics Project - Offline: L212-TwinStack, VonSchweikert VR-4
    7: TIVO, Oppo BDP103D, B&K, 2pr UREI 809A, TF600, JBL B460

  6. #6
    Administrator Mr. Widget's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    9,720
    Quote Originally Posted by hjames View Post
    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

  7. #7
    Senior Señor boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    6,142
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Widget View Post
    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...

  8. #8
    Junior Member Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    28
    Just a silly question - when specs on a Marantz 2252B says 52W pr channel, is this in total or 52 pr speaker ?

  9. #9
    Senior Señor boputnam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    northern california
    Posts
    6,142
    Quote Originally Posted by grumpy View Post
    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...

  10. #10
    Senior Member Fangio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    789

    About Saul Marantz and conservative rating

    Quote Originally Posted by Viking View Post
    Just a silly question - when specs on a Marantz 2252B says 52W pr channel, is this in total or 52 pr speaker ?
    FAQ:

    Quote Originally Posted by http://classic-audio.com/marantz/mfaq.html
    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)

  11. #11
    RIP 2021 SEAWOLF97's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    in "managed decline"
    Posts
    10,054
    Quote Originally Posted by hjames View Post
    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.

  12. #12
    Senior Member dllyons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Zanesville, Ohio
    Posts
    104

    what's watts

    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 )
    Dave Lyons - Zanesville, Oh = L300, L36, L40,
    L100a & L100a Century, J2050, S36AWII

  13. #13
    Junior Member Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    28
    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.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Cincinnati Ohio
    Posts
    819
    One comes to mind, the Thorens TD-160!

    http://search.benl.ebay.be/search/se...+160&category0=

  15. #15
    Senior Member dllyons's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Zanesville, Ohio
    Posts
    104

    nother amp ....

    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.

    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
    Dave Lyons - Zanesville, Oh = L300, L36, L40,
    L100a & L100a Century, J2050, S36AWII

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Audio Amplifier Review: PSS 600 Yuri Gutsatz Realisation
    By Ian Mackenzie in forum General Audio Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-08-2005, 11:04 PM
  2. Review of PSS600 amplifier in Australia
    By PSS AUDIO in forum General Audio Discussion
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 03-09-2005, 01:15 PM
  3. Review of PSS1200 amplifier
    By PSS AUDIO in forum General Audio Discussion
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 11-03-2004, 12:38 PM
  4. Amplifiers are more significant than you may think!
    By PSS AUDIO in forum Lansing Product General Information
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: 11-02-2004, 10:16 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •