[EADGBE]

I am just old enough to fondly recall the days of silver-faced
receivers with
gorgeous "simulated wood" cabinets. I love the sound of some of
these
receivers. They may not qualify as "high end" gear to many people, but
I
like 'em.

Several months ago I found a Technics SA-400 receiver in MINT
condition. Ever
since I found it, I have been listening to it in my workroom. I
really have a
soft spot for these old "wood" cabinet SA series receivers. When I
was a kid,
an SA-303 was the very first piece of "good" audio gear I ever owned.

But now I have also found a Pioneer SX-780 in very near MINT
condition. I have
been listening to it instead of the Technics. I have never been a fan
of Pioneer
stuff, but I have to say that I have been extremely impressed with
this receiver.
It's not quite as crisp sounding as the Technics....some would say
this lack
of crispness was "muddy", but then others would praise that same sound
as
being "warm", so it's all in how you look at it (or should I say
"listen"?).

I really don't need TWO vintage receivers in my workroom, so I am
looking for
opinions. Which one should I keep? Both receivers are in PERFECT
working
order, with all functions, knobs, lights, switches, etc. present and
accounted
for.

I am hoping that there are others who have owned one (or maybe both)
of these
classic receivers and can give me some background information on why
they did or
did not like them.

They both sound very good to my ears, and I'm sure I could make up my
mind based
solely on a comparison listening test, but I am still interested in
hearing what
others might have to say on the subject.

[jakdedert]

EADGBE wrote:
I am just old enough to fondly recall the days of silver-faced
receivers with
gorgeous "simulated wood" cabinets. I love the sound of some of
these
receivers. They may not qualify as "high end" gear to many people, but
I
like 'em.

Several months ago I found a Technics SA-400 receiver in MINT
condition. Ever
since I found it, I have been listening to it in my workroom. I
really have a
soft spot for these old "wood" cabinet SA series receivers. When I
was a kid,
an SA-303 was the very first piece of "good" audio gear I ever owned.

But now I have also found a Pioneer SX-780 in very near MINT
condition. I have
been listening to it instead of the Technics. I have never been a fan
of Pioneer
stuff, but I have to say that I have been extremely impressed with
this receiver.
It's not quite as crisp sounding as the Technics....some would say
this lack
of crispness was "muddy", but then others would praise that same sound
as
being "warm", so it's all in how you look at it (or should I say
"listen"?).

I really don't need TWO vintage receivers in my workroom, so I am
looking for
opinions. Which one should I keep? Both receivers are in PERFECT
working
order, with all functions, knobs, lights, switches, etc. present and
accounted
for.

I am hoping that there are others who have owned one (or maybe both)
of these
classic receivers and can give me some background information on why
they did or
did not like them.

They both sound very good to my ears, and I'm sure I could make up my
mind based
solely on a comparison listening test, but I am still interested in
hearing what
others might have to say on the subject.

I have an SA-500 myself--that I've had to do a bit of work on--and an
SA-5760 that is n/f at the moment. I've owned a few of the 70's
Pioneers--although not lately--and they were very reliable. Both
receivers are exactly the same age, and have the same 45 wpc, with the
Pioneer having a very slight edge in most other spec's. both were at
the very end of the 'silver face' era; 1978-79.

Frankly if you can hear a difference in the sound of these two vintage
receivers, I would chalk that up to a defect (or a potential defect, as
in deteriorating capacitors). You shouldn't be able to hear any, unless
it's a function of one being closer to spec than the other.

On the strength of that, and based on both the old Technics receivers
that I have needing service, I think I'd keep the Pioneer.

YMMV.

If you have the equipment, I'd put both of them through their paces;
distortion, power output etc...or do whatever tests of which you're
capable, then keep the best one (or both).

jak

[jamesgangnc[_3_]]

I'd check the resale prices as part of deciding. Try completed auctions on
ebay as on those you will know what it really sold for. I haven't paid any
attention to the technics resales but I've noticed some of the older pioneer
gear does pretty well on ebay. I'm holding on to a pioneer sx-1250 myself
:-)

"EADGBE" wrote in message
...
I am just old enough to fondly recall the days of silver-faced
receivers with
gorgeous "simulated wood" cabinets. I love the sound of some of
these
receivers. They may not qualify as "high end" gear to many people, but
I
like 'em.

Several months ago I found a Technics SA-400 receiver in MINT
condition. Ever
since I found it, I have been listening to it in my workroom. I
really have a
soft spot for these old "wood" cabinet SA series receivers. When I
was a kid,
an SA-303 was the very first piece of "good" audio gear I ever owned.

But now I have also found a Pioneer SX-780 in very near MINT
condition. I have
been listening to it instead of the Technics. I have never been a fan
of Pioneer
stuff, but I have to say that I have been extremely impressed with
this receiver.
It's not quite as crisp sounding as the Technics....some would say
this lack
of crispness was "muddy", but then others would praise that same sound
as
being "warm", so it's all in how you look at it (or should I say
"listen"?).

I really don't need TWO vintage receivers in my workroom, so I am
looking for
opinions. Which one should I keep? Both receivers are in PERFECT
working
order, with all functions, knobs, lights, switches, etc. present and
accounted
for.

I am hoping that there are others who have owned one (or maybe both)
of these
classic receivers and can give me some background information on why
they did or
did not like them.

They both sound very good to my ears, and I'm sure I could make up my
mind based
solely on a comparison listening test, but I am still interested in
hearing what
others might have to say on the subject.

[[email protected]]

On Mar 19, 1:15 am, jakdedert wrote:
If you have the equipment, I'd put both of them through their paces;
distortion, power output etc...or do whatever tests of which you're
capable, then keep the best one (or both).

If, by "keep", you mean "use", my choice would be
whichever one is less likely to require service or parts.
That may mean some combination of internal appearance,
age, use of generic vs proprietary parts, and so on. What
state are the switches and control pots in? Which LOOKS
like it's going to last longer?

It's not very useful if one has 1000 times less distortion
if it doesn't work.

Next, I'd consider utility. Both, presumably, have tuner
sections. How important is radio? Does the RF behavior
of one vs the other work better for you in your situation?
How about a phone preamp? How important is that?
How about power? number of speakers driven? Can it
handle the speakers you intend to use? Enough
inputs and outputs? How about tone controls (assuming
you care about such things)? What about size and
appearance? Which do you like?

Onlt after I explore these issue would I would consider
actual measured performance. Contrary to what you
might hear or read, these two are NOT going to be
remarkably different in terms of audible performance,
assuming both are in working order and both meet
your criteria above.

[jakdedert]

wrote:
On Mar 19, 1:15 am, jakdedert wrote:
If you have the equipment, I'd put both of them through their paces;
distortion, power output etc...or do whatever tests of which you're
capable, then keep the best one (or both).

If, by "keep", you mean "use", my choice would be
whichever one is less likely to require service or parts.
That may mean some combination of internal appearance,
age, use of generic vs proprietary parts, and so on. What
state are the switches and control pots in? Which LOOKS
like it's going to last longer?

It's not very useful if one has 1000 times less distortion
if it doesn't work.

Next, I'd consider utility. Both, presumably, have tuner
sections. How important is radio? Does the RF behavior
of one vs the other work better for you in your situation?
How about a phone preamp? How important is that?
How about power? number of speakers driven? Can it
handle the speakers you intend to use? Enough
inputs and outputs? How about tone controls (assuming
you care about such things)? What about size and
appearance? Which do you like?

Onlt after I explore these issue would I would consider
actual measured performance. Contrary to what you
might hear or read, these two are NOT going to be
remarkably different in terms of audible performance,
assuming both are in working order and both meet
your criteria above.

My advice, which you mostly snipped, had to do with this exact fact:
there should be little or no audible difference. The receivers, as I
stated (and you snipped) are exactly the same power output. No ins or
outs, beyond a phono, two tapes, and an aux, on either one. FM specs
are slightly better on the Pioneer, as are the amp specs...but not
enough to make a significant 'real world' difference.

Given the fact that the OP expresses some preference for the 'sound' of
the Pioneer, I suggested he keep that one. That advice was based on his
statement, which I suspect means there's something *wrong* with the
Technics.

*It shouldn't sound any different--at least not much--unless there is a
problem with it.*

jak

[Mark D. Zacharias[_2_]]

"jakdedert" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Mar 19, 1:15 am, jakdedert wrote:
If you have the equipment, I'd put both of them through their paces;
distortion, power output etc...or do whatever tests of which you're
capable, then keep the best one (or both).

If, by "keep", you mean "use", my choice would be
whichever one is less likely to require service or parts.
That may mean some combination of internal appearance,
age, use of generic vs proprietary parts, and so on. What
state are the switches and control pots in? Which LOOKS
like it's going to last longer?

It's not very useful if one has 1000 times less distortion
if it doesn't work.

Next, I'd consider utility. Both, presumably, have tuner
sections. How important is radio? Does the RF behavior
of one vs the other work better for you in your situation?
How about a phone preamp? How important is that?
How about power? number of speakers driven? Can it
handle the speakers you intend to use? Enough
inputs and outputs? How about tone controls (assuming
you care about such things)? What about size and
appearance? Which do you like?

Onlt after I explore these issue would I would consider
actual measured performance. Contrary to what you
might hear or read, these two are NOT going to be
remarkably different in terms of audible performance,
assuming both are in working order and both meet
your criteria above.

My advice, which you mostly snipped, had to do with this exact fact: there
should be little or no audible difference. The receivers, as I stated
(and you snipped) are exactly the same power output. No ins or outs,
beyond a phono, two tapes, and an aux, on either one. FM specs are
slightly better on the Pioneer, as are the amp specs...but not enough to
make a significant 'real world' difference.

Given the fact that the OP expresses some preference for the 'sound' of
the Pioneer, I suggested he keep that one. That advice was based on his
statement, which I suspect means there's something *wrong* with the
Technics.

*It shouldn't sound any different--at least not much--unless there is a
problem with it.*

jak

I'd go for the Pioneer personally. Even better to get a somewhat higher end
model. The Pioneer does use STK output modules, and I prefer discrete
transistors, which were used in the SX-850, 950, 880, etc.
The SX-780 is fine, though, and the output modules are so common that they
should be available, if somewhat overpriced.

Mark Z.

[EADGBE]

Thanks so much for all of the helpful and informative replies so far!

I believe someone said that there shouldn't be much of a difference in
the sound between the two, but I do hear a difference.

The Pioneer seems to sound more "well rounded" -- there is a warmth in
its sound that I think might be lacking in the Technics. One other
thing I have noticed about the Pioneer's sound is that it seems a bit
more up front and "in your face". I can't really put it into words,
but it sounds more "live" than the Technics. It makes my vintage KLH
speakers sound bigger than they are.

Having said that, the Technics has an extremely nice sound that never
fatigues my ears. It's a crisper sound, with more attention paid to
the high-midrange frequencies, it seems. Great for tapes!

The Technics FM tuner seems to be a bit more sensitive than the
Pioneer. The Technics can lock in stations a bit better than the
Pioneer. When I first acquired the Technics, the VCO had drifted off-
spec and none of my FM stations would be in stereo (and the "FM
Stereo" LED would never come on). But once I adjusted the VCO, the
Technics has been working just fine; excellent, in fact.

The Pioneer's tuner is a very good one, but it seems to be more
susceptible to atmospheric/environmental fluctuations. My classical
station can drift in and out, depending upon the weather--and one
time, it drifted in and out depending upon where I stood in front of
it. But this doesn't happen very often.

[jakdedert]

EADGBE wrote:
Thanks so much for all of the helpful and informative replies so far!

I believe someone said that there shouldn't be much of a difference in
the sound between the two, but I do hear a difference.

The Pioneer seems to sound more "well rounded" -- there is a warmth in
its sound that I think might be lacking in the Technics. One other
thing I have noticed about the Pioneer's sound is that it seems a bit
more up front and "in your face". I can't really put it into words,
but it sounds more "live" than the Technics. It makes my vintage KLH
speakers sound bigger than they are.

Unless you are pushing one or both amps into distortion, you shouldn't
hear any difference which you could describe in the terms above or below
(regardless of what you read in the magazines).

Flat is flat. That said, 45 watts into an old set of inefficient
speakers (I have a set of KLH Model Seventeens--I like them, but they
take some juice to get reasonably loud) might not translate into enough
volume for you. All this depends on a lot of variables not in evidence,
but you might be clipping one or the other (or both) in your listening
tests. Amplifiers do differ in their behavior--and consequently their
sound--when pushed even slightly beyond their rating.

Perhaps what you hear is distortion. If you have access to one, hook an
oscilloscope to the speaker output during your tests. You may be
surprised to see that your listening appetite occasionally, or even
regularly, exceeds the undistorted capability of your amplifier.

The only cure for that is more power...and 45 wpc is not a 'lot' of
power. If you hear (see) clipping, the only cure is to at least double
it...or turn it down.

Having said that, the Technics has an extremely nice sound that never
fatigues my ears. It's a crisper sound, with more attention paid to
the high-midrange frequencies, it seems. Great for tapes!

The Technics FM tuner seems to be a bit more sensitive than the
Pioneer. The Technics can lock in stations a bit better than the
Pioneer. When I first acquired the Technics, the VCO had drifted off-
spec and none of my FM stations would be in stereo (and the "FM
Stereo" LED would never come on). But once I adjusted the VCO, the
Technics has been working just fine; excellent, in fact.

The Pioneer's tuner is a very good one, but it seems to be more
susceptible to atmospheric/environmental fluctuations. My classical
station can drift in and out, depending upon the weather--and one
time, it drifted in and out depending upon where I stood in front of
it. But this doesn't happen very often.

Specs are much more objective with respect to tuners. The Pioneer has a
measurable edge in FM specifications. That should translate into
somewhat better performance. Assuming both units are up to snuff, it
should be superior in pulling in and holding stations...unless there is
some degradation from spec.

This is much harder to measure...or correct. The equipment and
procedures for measuring and optimizing tuner performance are much more
complex than for the audio chain. However, the fact that the position
of your body in the room has any effect at all, causes me to wonder what
you're using for an antenna. If you regularly listen to marginal
stations, you need an outside antenna connected with coaxial cable.
That will effectively isolate the receiver from any effects of your body
(or anything else) in the room.

jak

[[email protected]]

EADGBE wrote:
: The Pioneer's tuner is a very good one, but it seems to be more
: susceptible to atmospheric/environmental fluctuations. My classical
: station can drift in and out, depending upon the weather--and one
: time, it drifted in and out depending upon where I stood in front of
: it. But this doesn't happen very often.

I know this is a stupid question, but are you using the same antenna(s)
with each amplifier?

[jakdedert]

wrote:
EADGBE wrote:
: The Pioneer's tuner is a very good one, but it seems to be more
: susceptible to atmospheric/environmental fluctuations. My classical
: station can drift in and out, depending upon the weather--and one
: time, it drifted in and out depending upon where I stood in front of
: it. But this doesn't happen very often.

I know this is a stupid question, but are you using the same antenna(s)
with each amplifier?

My question as well...and further, just what is that antenna? If it's a
simple twinlead 'T' (folded dipole), then it's not really something on
which any firm conclusions can be based.

jak

[EADGBE]

I am using a powered FM antenna made by Terk, a well-known antenna
brand here in the USA. It's not an expensive antenna by any
measurment. Probably their basic model.

However, I have tried the comparison using a dipole "T" antenna, and
got pretty much the same results.

Actually, in one direct comparison, I connected the dipole to the
Pioneer whilst the Technics had an improvised homemade "dipole" made
from a 5-foot length of old lamp cord. Both receivers were tuned to
the same FM station -- a relatively low-power classical station on the
far left end of the dial.

The Technics was still able to grab and hold the station a bit better
than the Pioneer.

[jakdedert]

EADGBE wrote:
I am using a powered FM antenna made by Terk, a well-known antenna
brand here in the USA. It's not an expensive antenna by any
measurment. Probably their basic model.

However, I have tried the comparison using a dipole "T" antenna, and
got pretty much the same results.

Actually, in one direct comparison, I connected the dipole to the
Pioneer whilst the Technics had an improvised homemade "dipole" made
from a 5-foot length of old lamp cord. Both receivers were tuned to
the same FM station -- a relatively low-power classical station on the
far left end of the dial.

The Technics was still able to grab and hold the station a bit better
than the Pioneer.

I know you're just doing informal tests, but you're drawing conclusions
based on the comparison. To be even somewhat valid, you need to test
both in the same fashion. Eliminating the effects of having the antenna
in the same room would seem to be in order.

BTW, the Terk antennas are not highly regarded, but I have no direct
experience with them. The difference you experience could be explained
by a lot of variables, that don't relate to one receiver being better
than the other.

jak

[EADGBE]

On Mar 21, 1:00 pm, jakdedert wrote:

BTW, the Terk antennas are not highly regarded, but I have no direct
experience with them. The difference you experience could be explained
by a lot of variables, that don't relate to one receiver being better
than the other.

Oh, yes, I'm well aware of that, and I'm taking that into account.
But
thanks for reminding me!

One thing that I have considered is that the VCO in the Pioneer may
have
drifted off-spec over time. I know the Technics had this problem when
I
first acquired it. Once I adjusted the VCO on the Technics, it was
rock-solid, and has been ever since. I need to check this on the
Pioneer.

[jakdedert]

EADGBE wrote:
On Mar 21, 1:00 pm, jakdedert wrote:
BTW, the Terk antennas are not highly regarded, but I have no direct
experience with them. The difference you experience could be explained
by a lot of variables, that don't relate to one receiver being better
than the other.

Oh, yes, I'm well aware of that, and I'm taking that into account.
But
thanks for reminding me!

One thing that I have considered is that the VCO in the Pioneer may
have
drifted off-spec over time. I know the Technics had this problem when
I
first acquired it. Once I adjusted the VCO on the Technics, it was
rock-solid, and has been ever since. I need to check this on the
Pioneer.

If it's not broke, don't fix it!

jak

[EADGBE]

No, I won't "fix"anything that isn't broken.

I was just going to check the VCO setting by
measuring the frequency. I should get 19kHz.

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

jakdedert wrote:

Given the fact that the OP expresses some preference for the 'sound'
of the Pioneer, I suggested he keep that one. That advice was based
on his statement, which I suspect means there's something *wrong*
with the Technics.

Or perhaps his threshold for "different" is different from yours.

*It shouldn't sound any different--at least not much--unless there is
a problem with it.*

Occasionally I wonder whether measuring can be a cause of listening - mind
you, I didn't say hearing - impairment .... O;-) ... I'd say listen for
contact, potentiometer and switch issues and keep the one with the best
mechanical parts because those are the parts that are most likely to wear
out and hardest to get as spareparts.

jak


Kind regards

Peter Larsen

[Peter Larsen[_3_]]

jakdedert wrote:

EADGBE wrote:

Thanks so much for all of the helpful and informative replies so far!

I believe someone said that there shouldn't be much of a difference
in the sound between the two, but I do hear a difference.

Makes sense.

The Pioneer seems to sound more "well rounded" -- there is a warmth
in its sound that I think might be lacking in the Technics. One
other thing I have noticed about the Pioneer's sound is that it
seems a bit more up front and "in your face". I can't really put it
into words, but it sounds more "live" than the Technics. It makes
my vintage KLH speakers sound bigger than they are.


Makes sense.

Unless you are pushing one or both amps into distortion, you shouldn't
hear any difference which you could describe in the terms above or
below (regardless of what you read in the magazines).

Falls short of the testbench ....

Flat is flat. That said, 45 watts into an old set of inefficient
speakers (I have a set of KLH Model Seventeens--I like them, but they
take some juice to get reasonably loud) might not translate into
enough volume for you. All this depends on a lot of variables not in
evidence, but you might be clipping one or the other (or both) in
your listening tests. Amplifiers do differ in their behavior--and
consequently their sound--when pushed even slightly beyond their
rating.

Perhaps what you hear is distortion. If you have access to one, hook
an oscilloscope to the speaker output during your tests. You may be
surprised to see that your listening appetite occasionally, or even
regularly, exceeds the undistorted capability of your amplifier.

The only cure for that is more power...and 45 wpc is not a 'lot' of
power. If you hear (see) clipping, the only cure is to at least
double it...or turn it down.

Dick made an excellent comment using the wording "handle your speakers", the
comment from the OP is to the effect that the actual pioneer specimen in its
actual state fits the speakers better than the actual technics specimen in
its actual state.

Having said that, the Technics has an extremely nice sound that never
fatigues my ears. It's a crisper sound, with more attention paid to
the high-midrange frequencies, it seems. Great for tapes!

How about ambience, reverb and perspective?

The Technics FM tuner seems to be a bit more sensitive than the
Pioneer. The Technics can lock in stations a bit better than the
Pioneer. When I first acquired the Technics, the VCO had drifted
off- spec and none of my FM stations would be in stereo (and the "FM
Stereo" LED would never come on). But once I adjusted the VCO, the
Technics has been working just fine; excellent, in fact.

The Pioneer's tuner is a very good one, but it seems to be more
susceptible to atmospheric/environmental fluctuations. My classical
station can drift in and out, depending upon the weather--and one
time, it drifted in and out depending upon where I stood in front of
it. But this doesn't happen very often.


Having at least 2 FM tuners is helpful, but having two receivers may be
wasteful.

Specs are much more objective with respect to tuners. The Pioneer
has a measurable edge in FM specifications. That should translate
into somewhat better performance. Assuming both units are up to
snuff, it should be superior in pulling in and holding
stations...unless there is some degradation from spec.

Jak, this gets us a lot closer at agreeing, because it is when equipment is
stressed that sonic differences become very blatantly obvious and really
matter rather than just being differences. A measurable difference could be
frequency response, FM tuners do have a frequency response correcting
circuit and some of the time sonic differences between them boil down to
frequency response issues. I have three stand alone tuners and one of them -
the one that really is sonically different - has a 2.5 kHz boost with
moderate Q, this based on signal analysis and on comparing with the other
two. Seems to me that it is by design, just as the 50 Hz shelving boost of
some RIAA stages ...

This is much harder to measure...or correct. The equipment and
procedures for measuring and optimizing tuner performance are much
more complex than for the audio chain. However, the fact that the
position of your body in the room has any effect at all, causes me to
wonder what you're using for an antenna. If you regularly listen to
marginal stations, you need an outside antenna connected with coaxial
cable. That will effectively isolate the receiver from any effects of
your body (or anything else) in the room.

Great sense! - if not possible then get a decent antenna - or a pair, one
for each preferred station and a combiner - and use them as ceiling
decoration in non-critical rooms. That is sonic cleanup by the bucketload
rathen than by the spoonful.

jak

Kind regards

Peter Larsen