Antique 1970s-era Marantz receivers and integrated amplifiers

[mhardy6647]

Piece of a 2-page ad from GTE Sylvania, meant to compare their product to, well, everyone else's.
source: https://worldradiohistory.com/hd2/I.../HiFi-Stereo-Review-1972-12-OCR-Page-0023.pdf

2230 in Marantzian context source: https://worldradiohistory.com/hd2/I...X/70s/Stereo-Directory-1975-OCR-Page-0047.pdf

... and ditto.
source: https://worldradiohistory.com/hd2/I...o-IDX/IDX/70s/Audio-1973-09-OCR-Page-0038.pdf

 

[restorer-john]

So a question : Is there an integrated amp today that you like for the phono stage?

Good question.

From my tests on several modern/current Yamaha integrated amplifiers, their phono stages are sadly, dreadful. The only aspect where they are ok is residual noise. Overload is absolutely abominable.

I really wish it wasn't the case, as their products are quite reasonable otherwise.

I don't know who if anyone is implementing a really good phono stage at present. I don't think it's a selling point in 2022, even with the vinyl resurrection.

 

[restorer-john]

At the end of the day, @Chrispy is right, the manufacturers are giving the public what they think they want.

And that isn't quality tuners or phono stages in 2022. It's a pity, but with FM content being as poor as it is, I guess spending tons of money of the tuner section is not a good way to differentiate your product.

The phono stages however, there is room for upping the ante. We've got a ton of people dribbling on about how pure and perfect 'analogue vinyl' is, and yet the turntables and the phono stages aren't even a shadow of their former selves. I doubt it will change, but all my predictions about two channel stereo and vintage classic looks came true. I made all these predictions to anyone who would listen in 1990. And right through into the early 2000s, when I was picking up traded-in gear for nothing or close to it, from the HiFi dealers I serviced in my representative job. They used to save old traded/dead gear out the back to give me. I remember one dealer who told me to drive around the back and put whatever I wanted in my car as it wouldn't be there next time.

When they all pulled out their 2 channel gear, built home theatre rooms and went all-in on HT and 'smart-home', I said stereo will survive as people will tire of the pile of speakers, endless surround formats and annoying effects. 2 channel will be back. They thought I was mad. LOL.

 

[Chrispy]

At the end of the day, @Chrispy is right, the manufacturers are giving the public what they think they want.

And that isn't quality tuners or phono stages in 2022. It's a pity, but with FM content being as poor as it is, I guess spending tons of money of the tuner section is not a good way to differentiate your product.

The phono stages however, there is room for upping the ante. We've got a ton of people dribbling on about how pure and perfect 'analogue vinyl' is, and yet the turntables and the phono stages aren't even a shadow of their former selves. I doubt it will change, but all my predictions about two channel stereo and vintage classic looks came true. I made all these predictions to anyone who would listen in 1990. And right through into the early 2000s, when I was picking up traded-in gear for nothing or close to it, from the HiFi dealers I serviced in my representative job. They used to save old traded/dead gear out the back to give me. I remember one dealer who told me to drive around the back and put whatever I wanted in my car as it wouldn't be there next time.

When they all pulled out their 2 channel gear, built home theatre rooms and went all-in on HT and 'smart-home', I said stereo will survive as people will tire of the pile of speakers, endless surround formats and annoying effects. 2 channel will be back. They thought I was mad. LOL.

So you don't have any measurements to compare between such gear? Just a feeling that the phono stages then were better in receivers? The public tends to want what they want, not what some older "audiophiles" might find interesting

 

[mhardy6647]

I don't know who if anyone is implementing a really good phono stage at present. I don't think it's a selling point in 2022, even with the vinyl resurrection.

QFT, as they say.

 

[restorer-john]

So you don't have any measurements to compare between such gear? Just a feeling that the phono stages then were better in receivers? The public tends to want what they want, not what some older "audiophiles" might find interesting

A few weeks ago, I ran a dozen (12) vintage amplifiers and preamplifiers through MM phono overload testing. That took quite a while and the results are in.

I've got to post up that thread when I get a chance.

 

[eddantes]

This discussion got me nostalgic about hanging out at AK ... One of these days I'll have to dustoff the old Eighteen and get it restored (still has a working tuning tube!).

 

[mhardy6647]

So you don't have any measurements to compare between such gear? Just a feeling that the phono stages then were better in receivers? The public tends to want what they want, not what some older "audiophiles" might find interesting

So... howzabout this? Audio magazine did a pretty serious assessment of the performance of the components they tested. I went to 1977 (perhaps arguably at or close to the zenith of "mass market audiophilia") and looked at the tests in the 1977 Annual Index (Dec. '77 issue; https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/70s/Audio-1977-12.pdf ). I sort of non-randomly chose the Pioneer SX-1250 (Pioneers top-end receiver of that era, so not exactly in the same class as the titular marantz 2230) and took a look at the test data for the phono section. As it turns out, they did a "battle of the titans" test with the then-top-end Technics receiver, the SA-5760.
You can find the whole review in https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/70s/Audio-1977-01.pdf
The "Battle of the Titans" test starts on pg. 64.

Here're the manufacturer's specs (at least some of them) for these two receivers.

Here's Audio's assessment of the preamp, and specifically the phono section, of these two rather redoubtable receivers.

 

[mhardy6647]

This discussion got me nostalgic about hanging out at AK ... One of these days I'll have to dustoff the old Eighteen and get it restored (still has a working tuning tube!).

I can point you to any of a dozen recent threads there that should cure you of that nostalgia.

ahem... back to the matter at hand.

Howzabout a test of the HH Scott R-376 of the same era?
Again, unfortunately, a relatively "high-end" product of the era. 1977's test articles were pretty much devoid of entry-level or even midline representation

https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/70s/Audio-1977-06.pdf

and in the same issue, Yamaha's then-TOTL CR2020! Halcyon days for hifi

... and the phono pre?

I've actually got one of these (and an SX-1050, as it happens... no 1250, though). Both rehabbed. I don't use them. They work. They sound respectable enough... but they do look nice!

 

[Joe Smith]

Love my fully-reworked Marantz 2216, bought from a friend here in town who did all of the restoration. 20 wpc but so nice. I chose it over a non-restored 2230. Hope to use for many, many years. It's been my main amp in my study/workroom where I do most of my phono listening.

My very first good piece of equipment back in 1974 was a 2245 - what a champ that was. Stupid of me to sell it off when I went 3,000 miles away to college. Oh well.

 

[eddantes]

I can point you to any of a dozen recent threads there that should cure you of that nostalgia.

ahem... back to the matter at hand.

Howzabout a test of the HH Scott R-376 of the same era?
Again, unfortunately, a relatively "high-end" product of the era. 1977's test articles were pretty much devoid of entry-level or even midline representation

https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/70s/Audio-1977-06.pdf

View attachment 241026

View attachment 241025

and in the same issue, Yamaha's then-TOTL CR2020! Halcyon days for hifi

View attachment 241027

... and the phono pre?

View attachment 241029

I've actually got one of these (and an SX-1050, as it happens... no 1250, though). Both rehabbed. I don't use them. They work. They sound respectable enough... but they do look nice!

I had a 1280 (found the black meters more handsome)... but I swapped it for one of these

Alas it is also collecting dust for nearly a decade... along with it's chamber mate the 3020 *

BTW... do not trigger @mhardy6647 by giving him a reason to ruffle through his extensive audio-archives! They are voluminous!

 

[mhardy6647]

I looked for early/mid-70s Marantz tests in Audio and didn't find any of the receivers ('cept the quad 4400, in 1974).
Here, from 1973, though, is the 1120 integrated @ 60 wpc. Kinda mid-line. Kinda.

https://worldradiohistory.com/Archive-All-Audio/Archive-Audio/70s/Audio-1973-05.pdf

 

[mhardy6647]

here's a lower-end receiver, from the same issue as the marantz integrated above -- the Sherwood S-7200.
(I actually have one of these, too, oddly enough)

unfortunately, not much info on the phono stage performance

 

[mhardy6647]

I had a 1280 (found the black meters more handsome)... but I swapped it for one of these

Alas it is also collecting dust for nearly a decade... along with it's chamber mate the 3020 *

BTW... do not trigger @mhardy6647 by giving him a reason to ruffle through his extensive audio-archives! They are voluminous!

Too late.
Alreay triggered.
(but it's easier to search WRH online than pore through the archives here!)

 

[fordiebianco]

The simple reason is they were so much better in every regard. The view you have arrived at, is sadly, misguided.

I bow to your experience and expertise in these matters. I have a few late sixties/early seventies Rotels, 2 Tandberg from that era and my pièce de résistance, a JVC SR-J600. I am aware that in the THD+N department they are likely lacking compared to my Allo+ or my active TV5s, but I couldn't care less: I enjoy their looks, their peerless FM Tuner (still plenty of FM around where I live) and they are driving 50 year old KEF 105.1s. If I want to listen to an all digital signal chain, I can do that in a different room, but for pure interior design joy, my vintage receivers are there to stay (until they are so obsolete that I can't get anymore parts), and at mid - fifties I am not sure whether I can hear a difference anyway.

 

[polmuaddib]

The simple reason is they were so much better in every regard.

Really? You make that broad statement without objective proof? Forget where you are?

I do respect the knowledge and skill you possess with electronics, don't get me wrong, but be specific and provide us with proof.

I also get that circuits were more complex, components durable and all that, but does all that automatically translate to better product?
And by better, what do you mean? More power, higher SINAD, reliability? Maybe repairability...
In the end, I am not defending modern Hi-Fi equipment, but there are so many devices made today, out there, that it is hard to judge.

IMO, those vintage recievers are valuable as their looks look the part of what a 70's reciever should look, whatever that is... but that's me...

 

[ronniebear]

As a new member, I've honestly wondered whether recently "restored" 1970s antique electronics can successfully restored to their original performance specifications. My own experience with getting my own vintage gear (receivers, amps, tape decks, turntables) not just "fixed" but "restored" has been disappointing. Many of the original parts are difficult to obtain, substitute parts may not meet same specifications in real-world usage, and while there are many sources of owner's manuals and service manuals available online for the "do-it-yourself" repair person, there are vanishingly few skilled techs still in business or even still alive with real mastery of fixing those Marantz/Pioneer/Sansui/Kenwood/Onkyo/Yamaha/JVC products. Unlike the case 15 years back when I acquired a lot of these things (Nakamichi 480, Akai GX-365D, Sansui 881) there's a rather aggressive second-hand market and rising prices for gear that is truly aging and which may be difficult to bring back to their original performance glory.

Thanks to all for contributing to this dialogue.

 

[MaxwellsEq]

Many of the original parts are difficult to obtain, substitute parts may not meet same specifications in real-world usage

It's worth considering a piece of electronic kit as a moment in time that can never be replicated exactly. Even if a product appears to be purchasable over several years, the 2022 version may be different from the 2019 version, even if the model number is unchanged. The 2019 version uses capacitors from manufacturer X, but by 2022, manufacturer Y is used (for cost or reliability or performance reasons). There may be some slight PCB mods as well.

So if I was to refurbish a 2021 unit, what should I do? This is like restoring a building built in 1547, but lived in continuously since, do I go Jacobean or Regency?

I don't subscribe to the view that 1970s components were better. They simply were not. Almost all modern electronic parts outperform their predecessors.

 

[SeshatCZ]

I like my Luxman R1050 receiver a lot. I have not done any measurements of it, but when used as an preamp for my Nakamichi DR10 tape deck (my analogue sources etalon), it holds against a vintage standalone preamp Primare 201, which I use in my setup right now instead of it. I was shocked, that there is NO Audible difference between these two. As for datasheets, the 90's high-end Primare should be way better then mid 70's Luxman. It is possible, that compared with modern digital tech with digital HD sources are both Loosers... Nevertheless, I prefer analogue sources including FM...

 

[mhardy6647]

I have/had a Luxman R-1040. It's currently on long-term loan to a friend who needed a replacement receiver for their kitchen.
"Japan's McIntosh", as some would have it.



I love the aesthetics of the mid/late 1970s Luxman hardware in particular.