• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Vintage amplifiers that could challenge or approach current state of the art amplifiers

Shadrach

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Feb 24, 2019
Messages
664
Likes
948
I see you're a Texan. Do you not think we could get away with it under crimes against humanity.:p
 

Neddy

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Mar 22, 2019
Messages
754
Likes
1,019
Location
Wisconsin
Well, I think the big reason is that the vast, vast majority of us aren't into murder.
Yes, the escalation of hostile behavior is disheartening - only have to watch some of the YT vids on dashcams to witness.
On The Other Hand, I fully confess to - at various times - really wanting to throttle the 'engineer' who invented the darned (same) beepy thing that is in EVERY device out there now.
:eek:
:mad:
 

Dustyc

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2022
Messages
26
Likes
34
Given the decent performance of the preamp I'm surprised the APT Model 1 wasn't mentioned.
For Yamaha, how about the B-1 or B-2?
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
I can't immediately think of any other art form where a person or a group of people can make something glorious and beautiful only to have some so called engineer come along and turn it into a pile of shite.
I can't think of a single case ever where a measuring engineer turned a component into a "pile of shite".
If the manufacturer designed a "pile of shite", the stink comes from them and belongs on them.
The numbers don't lie.
I find I have some sympathy with those who state that they don't care about the science, the measurements and the equipments; they like what they do exactly because it isn't a perfect reproduction of the shite and sounds a little less like shite to their ears.
If they enjoy listening to a "pile of shite", that's their call.
Truth be told, the owners of said POS most often reply to the publishing of garbage results with attacks on the science becasue they're embarased now and need to find a way to justify their choices.. I mean who in their right mind would knowingly spend their hard earned money on a stinker? LOL

Exactly why you never read a bad review in Stereophile or TAS ;)
 

Ken1951

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Sep 28, 2020
Messages
850
Likes
1,775
Location
Blacksburg, VA
I can't think of a single case ever where a measuring engineer turned a component into a "pile of shite".
If the manufacturer designed a "pile of shite", the stink comes from them and belongs on them.
The numbers don't lie.

If they enjoy listening to a "pile of shite", that's their call.
Truth be told, the owners of said POS most often reply to the publishing of garbage results with attacks on the science becasue they're embarased now and need to find a way to justify their choices.. I mean who in their right mind would knowingly spend their hard earned money on a stinker? LOL

Exactly why you never read a bad review in Stereophile or TAS ;)
Yep, I just can't understand why any designing engineer wouldn't design for flat frequency response, with as low a noise and distortion as is possible. If they've done that they're doing as little damage to the signal as possible. But, like Jon Snow, I likely know nothing.
 

EJ3

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Dec 10, 2019
Messages
2,155
Likes
1,665
Location
James Island, SC
start a new thread for these off topic conversations or arguments please

NAD has an xlnt reputation
I believe that my NAD 2200 compares (dividing Ch 1 [93.714] and CH 2 [95.902] puts it at 94.808 SINAD close enough to 95 which is = to the bottom of the EXCELANT category, I believe) Taken from (On This Site by Amirm):

NAD 2200 Vintage Amplifier Review​


NAD 2200 stereo power amplifier power into 4 ohm Peak and Max audio measurements.png



Wow, we have one kilowatt of power coming out of this amp in short duration!

I was surprised that the frequency response was not flat but was relieved to see later in the thread that this is due to insertion of low and high pass filters. So here is the frequency response with Lab input that doesn't have such a filter:

NAD 2200 stereo power amplifier frequency response audio measurements.png



Response now (in green) as it should be, ruler flat to below 10 Hz, and well extending past the 40 kHz limit of this measurement.

I figured the filters may be adding some noise/distortion so re-ran the dashboard again:
NAD 2200 stereo power amplifier Lab Input audio measurements.png



Distortion doesn't change but if you look at the noise floor at 20 Hz, it is down by some 10 dB. That improves SINAD a couple of dBs, making the amplifier stand out even more!
Best vintage stereo amplifier review measurements.png



Zoomed:

1591750335920.png



And signal to noise ratio:

NAD 2200 stereo power amplifier SNR Lab input audio measurements.png



Conclusions
Nice to see innovation like this from equipment that is over 30 years old! Shame on manufacturers that produce amplifiers for much less power, more distortion and higher prices these days. No, you don't get a fancy case here and sheet metal is strictly budget category. But you are not going to sit on the amp. The guts are where it matters and NAD 2200 delivers.

NOTE: the output relay on stock 2200 gets corroded and fails over time. There are videos and DIY threads on how to upgrade the relay there to fix the problem. The unit tested here has that fix. Other than that, there are not reports of many other reliability issues even though NAD products are often said to be less reliable than other brands.

Overall, I am happy to recommend the NAD 2200. I almost gave it the highest honors but given the upgraded nature of the test unit, and the fact that used amps may have issues, I avoided that. But you could have easily pushed me to give it the golfing panther.
 

Sal1950

Grand Contributor
The Chicago Crusher
Forum Donor
Joined
Mar 1, 2016
Messages
14,073
Likes
16,609
Location
Central Fl
Yep, I just can't understand why any designing engineer wouldn't design for flat frequency response, with as low a noise and distortion as is possible. If they've done that they're doing as little damage to the signal as possible. But, like Jon Snow, I likely know nothing.
You take it for granted that a "straight wire with gain" is the designers goal.

But let's take the position that most of what's published in the subjective print and web media about the "sound" of amplifiers is real and not imagined, why would that be?

Facts are that amp design has been a solved problem for a number of decades now and designing fully transparent amplifiers is fairly straight forward..
So outside of good snake-oil marketing advertisement, how does a designer make his amp stand out in the crowd of transparent amps? He purposely designs the amp not to be fully transparent, but to introduce distortions in certain places or non-linearity in FR or power band, etc; whatever.
Not throwing stones but Nelson Pass is a perfect example of this in solid state design, he often explains the details of this in his more radical or DIY designs .
Or the designer can use obsolete tech design & components in the circuit such as tubes/transformers in general or SET's in particular, limited or no feedback, lots more.
He just doesn't want his gear to sound like everyone else.
Yep, I just can't understand why any designing engineer wouldn't design for flat frequency response, with as low a noise and distortion as is possible.
Sales period. How many times have you read statements along the lines of,
"Ignore the measurements" "it sounds more real " "numbers mean nothing" "trust your ears only"
 

SirPaulGerman

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2021
Messages
63
Likes
24
Found a review by John

A luck would also have it, I've also own/ed plenty of L07ms (9 of them), the TAN55es and a pair of TAN77es,along with many of the big ES integrateds (333esr/444esxii/730es etc). We also have a pair of NS1000Ms.

The TAN55es is a pretender in my opinion. It really never deserved the ES moniker. It uses an IC pack voltage stage which is difficult to replace should it fail and in mono, it barely makes spec.I would always pick them up at the right price, but that would be to move on for the profit.

Realistically, it was only produced for use with the TAE1000/2000esd preamplifier, because Sony knew people wouldn't line up in droves to buy 3xTAN77es or 3xTAN80es amplifiers for DSP (5ch) surround. It was a low cost centre or rear amplifier to be paired with a N77 or N80 doing main work. That's the reason for the bridge option to give relatively equal power across the front (L,C,R) and another N55 for the rears.

If you like the big Sonys (and I do), get one or two TAN77es or TAN80es. The Kenwood L07ms were extremely good, but I had to let some gear go a while back and sold them all off (the kenwoods) except one pair. After storing that pair for over a decade, I sold them too. I don't regret it. I currently run a single TAN77es for daily duty. Bridging the pair is fun, but completely unnecessary so one is stored.
 

clearnfc

Active Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Messages
236
Likes
72
Krell FPB series... One of the best amps of its time. Still is exceptional today. Some krell fans still prefer the old FPB compared to newer ones
 

clearnfc

Active Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Messages
236
Likes
72
The best by measurements?

I have no idea. But i can safely say it definitely one of the most powerful amps ever measured... Very very few amps hit 700w for 8ohm and 2800w on 2ohm and its in class A .. max of ~6000w. Would need a dedicated socket for it.

You will be hard pressed to find something that powerful even today.
 

Inner Space

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
1,285
Likes
2,938
I have no idea. But i can safely say it definitely one of the most powerful amps ever measured... Very very few amps hit 700w for 8ohm and 2800w on 2ohm and its in class A .. max of ~6000w. Would need a dedicated socket for it.

You will be hard pressed to find something that powerful even today.
McIntosh MC2KW - 2000 watts continuous, 8000 watts peak into 2 ohms, way better numbers all around. Plus a big blue meter. Now that's an amp.
 

retro

Active Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2019
Messages
164
Likes
296
I have fond memories of the Krell FPB-line. Had a FPB300 for many years.

The FPB600(700) had, if I recall correctly, a mains transformer of 7KVa..!! The FPB650/750 monos had one 7KVa each..!
Don't think any amp has ever had a bigger mains transformer..?

Driven on a toneburst equivalent to peak program duty at 8 ohms, it reached to touch the 1kW line, while at 4 ohms it attained 1.85kW, and for 2 ohms 3.53kW. And for 1 ohm—wait for it—an amazing 6kW! These are single-channel results, but, measured as short-term ratings, they should be available from both channels simultaneously.

These are insane numbers!

I wonder if they're a safe buy today? They're old, can they be renovated up to factory specs again..?

Too bad Dan D'agostino went on to make worse(?) amps with ridicoulos pricetags..
 

krabapple

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
3,169
Likes
3,717
I like this post.
I can't immediately think of any other art form where a person or a group of people can make something glorious and beautiful only to have some so called engineer come along and turn it into a pile of shite.
Why, if we are music lovers, rather than low level technology enthusiasts, we are not hanging so called recording engineers by the neck until dead is beyond me.
To add insult to injury the audio enthusiasts then spend thousands of pounds and countless hours of pointless arguments on trying to make the shite as true a representation of shite as possible. I find I have some sympathy with those who state that they don't care about the science, the measurements and the equipments; they like what they do exactly because it isn't a perfect reproduction of the shite and sounds a little less like shite to their ears.

You sound unhinged.
 

i_build_stuff

Member
Joined
May 12, 2022
Messages
12
Likes
22
How about the sumo nine?

I have to admit that I haven't heard one myself, but having built a few of my own solid state circlotrons, I can only assume that their design is what people say it is. There are some fundamental characteristics to that design that take issues like crossover distortion entirely off the table, although it does have special needs on the power supply side.

I'm actually working on a modernized tube version now (it's a tube signal path with solid state in supporting roles, like voltage regulators). According to my simulations, it's going to be incredibly clean for a tube amp.

The original McIntosh "unity coupled" design (which is really an equivalent design to the circlotron, with bifilar windings instead of dual supplies) is also worth mentioning. For something developed in 1949, its performance was shockingly good. It culminated in the MC3500, which was the amp of Woodstock and (I believe) the Grateful Dead's "wall of sound".
 

MaxBuck

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
May 22, 2021
Messages
1,515
Likes
2,118
Location
SoCal, Baby!
It would be very entertaining to see an Ampzilla run through its paces by Audio Precision.
 
Top Bottom