Older integrated amplifiers

[Kevster]

Hello everyone, thanks for such an informative site and forum, it is refreshing to see!

I've been reading some of the integrated and power-amp reviews on ASR, and it is clear that things have moved on greatly in the years since I bought mine, which is a Marantz PM6010OSE. So of course I'm wondering if it might be time to consider upgrading, but unfortunately I can find no measurements for it, so it is very hard to guess how much of a difference there may or may not be.

Can anyone possibly suggest how amps of this era might compare to ASR rankings (e.g. 'fair' or 'good') today?

Many Thanks,
Kev

 

[GXAlan]

The PM-90 tested here had these specs (THD, dynamic range)

For Class A/B amps, weight relative to power is a resonable proxy for performance. So I would say that it’s a medium tier integrated amp. At low volumes, probably more than adequate but at higher volumes like 96 dB, probably not transparent to CD. Can also see the MM phono comparison and the RIAA accuracy and Line Input SNR comparison.

 

[Kevster]

Thanks, that is very helpful. Yes, being transparent to CD quality is certainly on my wish list; the vast majority of my music is of that quality and there are times when I'm able to enjoy high SPLs. I suppose one could perhaps factor in some possible degradation due to age as well - capacitors and mechanical contacts for instance.

Possibly this should be on my upgrade path, then. I'm also quite intrigued by options like Class-D which weren't at all common (at least in my price range) last time I looked around.

Thanks,
Kev

 

[mhardy6647]

Only if you're unhappy with what you have now, I'd opine.

 

[Kevster]

Ha yes. I'm not specifically into old equipment (it just gets that way if you wait!) but that picture looks glorious.

It isn't that I'm particularly unhappy as such, though I think the noise floor is higher than it was and certainly higher than I'd like (even with the inputs grounded). But I recently bought a new topping combined dac/headphone amp and the improvement over what I had before for headphone use has really surprised me. So of course, it had me wondering if my integrated amp might be similarly behind modern offerings that achieve arguable (audible) transparency.

Also things have changed substantially over the years. These days my only source is a PC with lossless FLAC (or internet radio, with potential for internet streaming I suppose) and there are all manner of affordable DACs about that measure well and can be used as pre-amps (or the PC can be) so I don't necessarily need the 'integrated' any more. I also enjoyed the value of active crossovers a while back (until an even older amp expired), so a couple of budget modern amps might allow a return to that.

So many options and possibilities, but it is a bit challenging to judge audio quality from where I am now, as the current old amp of course hasn't been measured by ASR or (from what i can find) anyone else that I'd trust.

Cheers,
Kev

 

[DVDdoug]

If it's not broken and if you're not hearing noise (or "excessive noise") you're not going to hear an improvement with something newer/better. Noise, distortion, and frequency response ALL you have to worry about when it comes to "sound quality". Frequency response and distortion are almost always better than human hearing (with electronics, not speakers & headphones). If you aren't hearing any obvious defects and you're not hearing any noise between tracks on a CD, you're good to go!

Solid state electronics have always been pretty good. In the analog days it was the records & cassettes were the big limitation on sound quality. (If you go back to the tube days, you have to start worrying about frequency response, and maybe distortion.)

With a modern AVR you'd get room correction (which can improve the sound), remote control, multiple digital inputs (including decoding of all the movie digital formats) and more (surround) channels if you want to use them.

 

[mhardy6647]

Concur with the above. Are you hearing this "noise"?

 

[GXAlan]

It isn't that I'm particularly unhappy as such, though I think the noise floor is higher than it was and certainly higher than I'd like (even with the inputs grounded).

You can go chasing after the latest and greatest but the question is if the noise floor is audible at the listening position?

That SA600 from 1965 sounds incredible and with high efficiency speakers, you get plenty of performance. It will be quiet interesting to see how the SA600 measure on the APx555.

 

[Kevster]

Yes, the noise floor is indeed audible at the listening position, though it is just an annoyance during pauses etc - nowhere near loud enough to actually mask the music, for example. As people think that the amp itself is likely to be decent, then it may be worth trying to clean/replace/bypass switches and contacts etc. I know at least some of them are dodgy so it can't hurt. If that goes well, I'll probably hold off on upgrading.

It might be subjectively nice to have something of known performance, but from what has been said here it doesn't seem like the ASR measurement rankings are particularly meaningful from the perspective of audibility - i.e. if even old amps of this age are likely to sound so similar. So i shall hold off until there is actually a reason to upgrade or replace it.

Thanks very much to everyone, this has been helpful!

 

[anmpr1]

It might be subjectively nice to have something of known performance, but from what has been said here it doesn't seem like the ASR measurement rankings are particularly meaningful from the perspective of audibility - i.e. if even old amps of this age are likely to sound so similar. So i shall hold off until there is actually a reason to upgrade or replace it.

The big difference in legacy SS is that the old gear will usually have features new gear won't. If you listen to digital sources, you can have those features (and more) in software. For analog sources, you're mostly going to be out of luck. Of course the old gear will also need some sort of service, in order to get it back to spec, most likely.

 

[Kevster]

That makes sense, thanks. Yes, when I bought the amp I had numerous sources, all analogue, but now I have only one source, a PC (with a DAC). I don't need an integrated amp at all any more, and in fact the things that cause trouble and would need attention if I were to keep it (like dodgy source-selection switches) are actually redundant.

On reflection it might be worth changing anyway then, rather than renovating - the amp was decent enough in its time but nothing very special to warrant lots of TLC and isn't in great shape. In effect, I only need a power amp now, and more attention should probably be paid to the PC (in tandem with the DAC) for pre-amp duties.

Though the relative lack of audible difference that has been described in this thread is still very useful. I'm quite keen to move into active (possibly even software) crossovers, so less expensive (but more) power amps or multi-channel amps could well be the best path to embark upon. Or maybe AVRs but likely the PC could duplicate most of their features.

Thanks again,
Kev

 

[GXAlan]

I would say that if you have audible noise in between tracks, then it IS worth changing your amp from the standpoint that it's going to improve your sighted bias and subjective experience "knowing" that it's quiet between tracks. A good example is listening to vinyl, if it's clean between the tracks it certainly sounds better while playing the tracks but it may be your psychology and bias in effect.

Nothing wrong with enhancing your bias. This famous optical illusion is illustrative. A and B are the same color. 121/121/121 RGB value. They don't look like the same color no matter how many times you tell yourself it's an optical illusion.

This isn't snake oil. It's the way we perceive external stimuli. If you want something to be darker, you surround it with lighter objects. If you want something to look lighter, you surround it with darker objects. (*note there are a handful of these examples where the colors really are different)

 

[Kevster]

Thanks, yes the background noise is probably more annoying than it deserves to be, but (psychologically speaking) it subjectively and continually says something is perceptibly deficient and (at least for me) distracts from enjoying the music.. It doesn't help that it it is likely worsening over time and so suggesting degradation.

So i would need to solve it (at least to become near inaudible from the listening position) to be reasonably happy with the amp. But maybe that might be more effort, with uncertain outcome, than is really warranted by it - or my current requirements for it.

What a useful thread, it is really helping to define what i think about things.

Cheers,
Kev

 

[Zek]

Your PM6010OSE is a pretty good amp and shouldn't have any noise.
What kind of noise is it?
What speakers do you own?
Which devices are connected in the audio chain and how?

 

[Kevster]

Sorry for the slow reply; i've been away.

I don't really want to dwell on the noise aspect; my post was really aimed at understanding the (audio) quality of the amp relative to others - so I'm glad that you think it is decent. This, along with the rest of the thread, helps to put things in very useful perspective.

But for general interest: the noise sounds like white noise (not mains or ground hum). It is independent of any source (even with the inputs shorted), and also independent of different speakers. It generally increases with the volume knob, but is still there (at the listening position) even turned down to zero volume, which to me doesn't seem good.

However, the amp doesn't owe me anything at all by this point, and there are other issues (such as the source selector switch loosing the left channel unless jiggled about). If it suited my needs still I might be inclined to tinker, but in reality something smaller and/or without the 'integrated' aspects are more appropriate for what i would use now. Thanks to ASR, I also know that it isn't necessary to spend loads of money for a more suitable modern offering.

Cheers
Kev

 

[Kevster]

Just for completeness, i wanted to mention that I've discovered an issue with the volume control, in addition to the input selection switch. Either can cause loss of the left channel, until wiggled back and forth, but wiggling the volume knob also affects the noise so could be part of the cause.

I suppose the amp is about 23years old, so not unexpected to need some TLC. Though not yet sure if I shall bother to mend it, the volume control has more to it than a simple dual pot, and I'd be wanting to convert the amp to a single balanced type input if I kept it. It might be better to just get something more appropriate to current needs, like a behringer a500 or a800, though rather overkill in terms of power so perhaps instead a second-hand power-amp (with no wipers or switches) off ebay.

 

[sngreen]

The PM-90 tested here had these specs (THD, dynamic range)


View attachment 221658


For Class A/B amps, weight relative to power is a resonable proxy for performance. So I would say that it’s a medium tier integrated amp. At low volumes, probably more than adequate but at higher volumes like 96 dB, probably not transparent to CD. Can also see the MM phono comparison and the RIAA accuracy and Line Input SNR comparison.

View attachment 221656

PM65 did sound quite nice as I remember.

 

[sngreen]

Hello everyone, thanks for such an informative site and forum, it is refreshing to see!

I've been reading some of the integrated and power-amp reviews on ASR, and it is clear that things have moved on greatly in the years since I bought mine, which is a Marantz PM6010OSE. So of course I'm wondering if it might be time to consider upgrading, but unfortunately I can find no measurements for it, so it is very hard to guess how much of a difference there may or may not be.

Can anyone possibly suggest how amps of this era might compare to ASR rankings (e.g. 'fair' or 'good') today?

Many Thanks,
Kev

Measurements do not always paint the best picture, it's what kind of a sound you are after. I do like Marantz receivers from the 70's, they sound full, warm and rounded, easy to work on and seem to last forever. Also look great. From the latest series, I don't think I would even buy Marantz.

Few from my collection

 

[mhardy6647]

so many knobs and buttons!
PS none of those is, technically, an integrated amplifier. I mean, they are [integrated amplifiers], but the on-board radios make them receivers in the parlance of their era.

 

[Doodski]

Measurements do not always paint the best picture, it's what kind of a sound you are after. I do like Marantz receivers from the 70's, they sound full, warm and rounded, easy to work on and seem to last forever. Also look great. From the latest series, I don't think I would even buy Marantz.

Few from my collection
View attachment 232196

View attachment 232193View attachment 232194View attachment 232195

Hmmmz... I like those 2275 units. I had one and I made a power amp out of it from the amp modules.