This followed me home.

2»

Comments

  • Gunther16
    Gunther16 Posts: 243
    Sweet deal and great receiver, My first quality receiver was the SX1050 awesome unit and powerful for the time. Regret selling that piece for nostalgic reason and because I gave it away for a measly $100.00 bucks. Anyone out there got a b--- kicking machine I can borrow?
  • oldrocker
    oldrocker Posts: 2,590
    This being my first vintage Pioneer, I've enjoyed her so far, got about 7 hrs on her pushing my SDA 2's and the ole gal has not hiccup'd yet.

    Granted I've not pushed her much for any extended period in time yet. I had expected it might run a bit on the hot side. Cool as a cucumber so far.

    Gonna give her some more time before I see if she still has any get up and go left in the tank. B)
  • Gunther16
    Gunther16 Posts: 243
    If I remember right the SX1050 had 125W per channel into 8ohm. It had the power back then. Used it to power my Bose 901's and it would get up and go and sound sweet doing it. Should have kept it! :s
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,972
    Gunther16 wrote: »
    If I remember right the SX1050 had 125W per channel into 8ohm. It had the power back then. Used it to power my Bose 901's and it would get up and go and sound sweet doing it. Should have kept it! :s

    120 wpc into 8 ohms according to its own marketing blurb:

    http://www.kallhovde.com/pioneer/sx-1050-b.pdf
  • Gunther16
    Gunther16 Posts: 243
    Memory not what it used to be. I purchased it at the PX in Giessen Germany in1977 and it was the absolute best there was.
  • oldrocker
    oldrocker Posts: 2,590
    I'm at 85 wpc. When I have bumped the volume it seems that 85 is a bit of an under rating on the wattage. Its probably my polks that's helping it sound more.

    Thinking about pulling the 2's and trying a set off 11's.

    I threw an old Yamaha cdp in the mix, popped in some old Tesla, took her to line 4, she hit really good.

    I have a set of 901's been in their boxes with about 10 hrs on them if even that. They didn't sound bad when I ran them just couldn't get the room setup right on them as I only got about a 16 x 16 room I listen in.
  • oldrocker
    oldrocker Posts: 2,590
    I got to read up on the switchable bass and treble cutoff switches.
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,972
    edited April 2016
    Gunther16 wrote: »
    Memory not what it used to be. I purchased it at the PX in Giessen Germany in1977 and it was the absolute best there was.

    Oh, I reckon, e.g., SAE, Audio Research, Threshold and GAS (to name a few) would have disagreed about that ;- )

    Not a bad piece of hardware, though -- and certainly handsome.
    oldrocker wrote: »
    I got to read up on the switchable bass and treble cutoff switches.

    51rli1wruxyq.jpg
    source: http://www.hifiengine.com/hfe_downloads/index.php?pioneer/pioneer_sx-950.pdf
  • oldrocker
    oldrocker Posts: 2,590
    Thanks Mr. Hardy,

    I read through that. I do notice a slight change between the 200 - 400 on the bass but the treble differences are more noticeable, especially on my SDA 2's.

    Sadly I don't know enough about certain frequencies curves/turnover and how they interact with my Polks.

  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,972
    Your former observation (the "slight change" between 200 Hz and 400 Hz turnover frequencies) may say more about your room acoustics than the tone control characteristics, or your ears, or your speakers, for that matter.

    The characteristics of the tone controls shouldn't "interact with" your speakers per se. Of course, that's a bit overly simplistic, since no amplifier is a perfect power source, offering zero distortion, zero nonlinearity of any other kind, nor zero impedance.

  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,972
    edited April 2016
    So -- the tone controls can raise, or lower, the level of a signal above (in the case of the treble) and below (in the case of the bass) the selected "turnover" frequency, relative to the level at a reference frequency (e.g., 1000 Hz, see the graph in the owner manual).

    Remember that the traditional definition of "a barely audible change" in audio engineering is 3 decibels (3 dB). A "golden ears" audiophile can probably easily detect a 1 dB change (and maybe even 0.5 dB)... in other words, the effects of the tone controls can vary from subtle to sledgehammer obvious depending on the settings of the control potentiometers. Generally, setting the turnovers to more extreme levels (e.g., 200 Hz for the bass, and 5k for the treble) will make the controls' effects more audibly subtle, compared to the more-"midrange-y" turnovers (400 Hz/2.5 kHz).

    That said, none of those turnover frequencies is particularly extreme. I'd consider those tone control characteristics pretty "brute force", FWIW... but, then again, I tend to be a "no tone control" kind of guy. YMMV, of course :- )

    My guess is that there are other things going on in your room (or the frequency content of the program material you're listening to) that are more or less swamping out the (relatively) subtle effects of the bass control. Note that most "bass controls" on 1970s hifis are pretty unsubtle!
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,972
    edited April 2016
    ahh, what the heck, as long as I am on a tone control soapbox... ;- )

    I think it's also useful/helpful to consider the "audible"/hifi spectrum (typically defined as 20 Hz to 20 kHz) as to how it corresponds to sounds (fundamentals and harmonics) of music and musical instruments as we usually hear them.

    A couple of handy graphics, from a pretty nonexhaustive web search:

    decibel_fig2.18.jpg
    source: http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1274918

    beaa10ca26756fd115c2ae0814ac4948.jpg
    source: http://www.guitarbuilding.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Instrument-Sound-EQ-Chart.pdf

    Now, don't get me wrong :-P There can certainly be sounds with significant ultrasonic content (ask any dog!) and the correct phase and amplitude of music waveform reproduction is probably every bit as important as amplitude accuracy in terms of making reproduced music sound real... but the impact of traditional "Baxandall" type tone controls on reproduced sound is pretty easy to grok.

    http://www.makearadio.com/tech/tone.htm
  • lightman1
    lightman1 Posts: 10,794
    Effin Hardied up another one.





    ;)
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,972
    edited April 2016
    I'm here for ya, pal.

    6C7013588-tdy-130204-ent-clavin.jpg
  • lightman1
    lightman1 Posts: 10,794
    That's my boy!
    But you are a treasure trove of vintage info, my friend. B)
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,972
    ... or just a treasure trove of useless trivia, in my case -- not unlike Mr. Clavin, proud servant of the USPS.
  • Gunther16
    Gunther16 Posts: 243
    Interesting info and could potentially be very useful in setting room equalization. Have not had the pleasure of seeing this. Thank you Mr Hardy
  • Jhayman
    Jhayman Posts: 1,548
    Congrats nice find and on making a new friend..
    ATC SCM40's,VTL TL 2.5 Preamp,PSB Stratus Goldi's,McCormack DNA 500,McCormack MAP-1 Preamp,Pro-Ject Xtension 10 TT,Ortofon Cadenza Red/Nordost RedDawn LS Speaker cables, Bryston BDP-2, Bryston BDA-2,PS Audio AC-3 power cables
  • oldrocker
    oldrocker Posts: 2,590
    As always Great info M.
    But in all honesty, how about you just relocate to my area, that sure would make things much easier for a dullard like me.... :(
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,972
  • kevhed72
    kevhed72 Posts: 5,066
    Man, I had that Pioneer for awhile and like a bonehead sold it....beautiful piece.
  • oldrocker
    oldrocker Posts: 2,590
    mhardy6647 wrote: »
    got a truck?

    Heck, I'd pay for Mayflower to move you. BUT you'd have to give me access to that brain of yours :D
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 33,972
    I don't use it for much myself.
  • Gunther16
    Gunther16 Posts: 243
    Use it enough to make sense!