Re: Pioneer vs Yamaha


"Robert Morein" <nowhere@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:qrmdnf9zpPEb_57eRVn-oA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "arny krueger" <arnyk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:lKKdnZ2dnZ1Wudf1nZ2dnXBhn96dnZ2dRVn-yZ2dnZ0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> Nice post.

You've got me fooled!

> The situation is complicated enough that everything you say is true some
> percentage of the time.

Try almost all of the time. First you say nice post and you damn it with
faint praise like this Robert?

> However, you apparently believe that QSC amplifiers
> are good sounding. They are robust, but they do not sound good, at least
> to
> these ears.

Noting your gratuitous slam of QSC elsewhere on the group, I'd say you have
a thing about QSC, Robert.

> Part of my advice is based on what I consider a fact, which is
> that although many amplifiers do sound similar, there are significant
> variations between classes of amplifier designs, and these differences are
> significant to sound quality.

There's enough hedge words in there to make any response a bad risk.

> You make the point that the preamp and tuner circuitry of a modern
> receiver
> consume negligible power. This is also true. However, I did not use that
> in
> support of my statement that separates tend to beat receivers.

OK.

> Rather, it appears that, perhaps because of where they are made, or who
> they
> are made for, the vast majority of receivers do not have the heat
> dissipation, and the iron, required to use high bias techniques.

Where is it written in stone that an amp must use high bias techniques to
sound good?

> For those
> of us who believe that amplifier designs make a substantial contribution
> to
> sound quality, this is unacceptable.

I thought I was writing for the benefit of a person who was interested in
getting a job done, not joining a techno-religious group.

> Almost every receiver I've ever seen was designed for rapid assembly
> techniques with minimum mechanical complexity.

The same can be said of most modern power amps, even your deified Haflers,
Robert.

> This means that heatsinks are
> internal, and usually positioned close to other parts, many of them heat
> sensitive.

No.

>More often than not, they abut the electrolytic filter
> capacitors, which are the most heat sensitive components in electronics --
> besides thermal fuses ;). In order to get a decent average lifetime out
> of
> a receiver, this requires that the heatsinks not be constantly scalding.

If the heatsinks of *anything* are scalding, that would be a sign of bad
design.

> One could take a well made two channel amplifier, with external heatsinks,
> slap a control faceplate on it with a tuner and preamp, and have a no -
> compromise product. Conversely, I would have to agree with you that many
> basic power amps, such as low end offerings of Rotel and Sony, have all
> the
> bad characteristics of receivers.

Believe it or not, a system of the scale described by the Restaurant system
OP is likely just for background music. We're not talking a system for a DJ,
we're talking background music.

> As I said to Steve, my advice was simplified in order to be useful to a
> person unfamiliar with the marketplace. Perhaps it was not complete enough
> to save him from all the pitfalls. I hope he reads all of this.

I suspect that the biggest pitfall in the proposed system is how the
speakers are hooked up. I keep having these bad dreams about eight 8 ohm
speakers connected in parallel.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Pioneer vs Yamaha
    ... I don't like the way they sound. ... There are lots of amplifiers I dislike for the same, ... >> Almost every receiver I've ever seen was designed for rapid assembly ... but the heatsinks on the convection cooled Haflers point outwards. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: Pioneer vs Yamaha
    ... You make the point that the preamp and tuner circuitry of a modern receiver ... of us who believe that amplifier designs make a substantial contribution to ... sound quality, this is unacceptable. ... this requires that the heatsinks not be constantly scalding. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: PIONEER RECEIVERS: Which One Do I Keep?
    ... > And maybe, just maybe, it's not about "features" but about sound? ... The sound. ... > I don't think anybody would buy a 70's or 80's receiver like the Pioneer ... and any amplifier that performs to modern standards will sound indistinguishable from any other provided that the load is within design parameters. ...
    (rec.audio.tech)
  • Re: Longevity of electrolytics
    ... amplifier, Vector Research tuner, both somewhere between 15-20 years old), and the receiver I use for sound on my computer. ...
    (sci.electronics.repair)
  • Re: ABXers as ostriches
    ... This receiver is considered by many purists to be ... The amplifier section is a Nelson ... >>> I wonder what an ABXer would say, if he were present, sans test gear. ... that the rest, i.e., most others does not sound quite as good as that. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)