or Connect
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › 2 Channel Audio › Poll: How much did you spend on amplification?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Poll: How much did you spend on amplification? - Page 4

Poll Results: How much did you spend on your amp? (whatever happens to drive your speakers, interated, avr, separate, etc)

This is a multiple choice poll
  • 9% (10)
    0-300$
  • 14% (15)
    300-500$
  • 14% (15)
    500-750$
  • 17% (18)
    750-1000$
  • 21% (22)
    1000-2000$
  • 26% (28)
    2000- Dont even ask.......
104 Total Votes  
post #91 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by 67jason View Post

i spent $20 on a lepai t-amp.
How have you enjoyed the Lepai? I've seen a handful of comments on the Lepai amps here, some people really like them but I get the impression that once the amp "runs out of juice", the clipping effect is pretty severe.

For myself, although I've had many different receivers and integrated amps in my life over the years, my current amplification in two rooms is pretty modest but quite enjoyable:

1973-74 vintage Marantz 2230 receiver, bought used and meticulously restored by a now-defunct used-audio dealer 12 years ago for $90; and
2001-vintage Sony STR-DE300 receiver, bought used in impeccable condition for $20 from a local Goodwill store (sold for about $150 brand-new), much better sounding than I could have reasonably expected.

My vintage Marantz remains quite a nice piece of gear, wish I had snapped up more vintage Marantz receivers in the past when they were plentiful and cheap on the used market. The slightly newer Marantz receivers from 1977-79 with the gold-finish tuner front instead of the blacked-out front (i.e. 2238B, 2265B, 2285B) apparently have the best-quality tuner sections.
post #92 of 114
Spent $1,200 for a McIntosh MC 2205 amp about 36 years ago. I got precisely what I was looking for (so I wouldn't spend more nor less). It is still going strong after all these years and is currently powering my Maggies. The McIntosh C-28 preamp was around $650 (which I retired about 1-1/2 years ago ... it was/is still working just fine ... and replaced it with a C-48).
post #93 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsrussell View Post

Spent $1,200 for a McIntosh MC 2205 amp about 36 years ago. I got precisely what I was looking for (so I wouldn't spend more nor less). It is still going strong after all these years and is currently powering my Maggies. The McIntosh C-28 preamp was around $650 (which I retired about 1-1/2 years ago ... it was/is still working just fine ... and replaced it with a C-48).

Are you reading my posts? tongue.gif

See here - http://www.avsforum.com/t/1503935/poll-how-much-did-you-spend-on-amplification#post_24039888

In post 10 I answered I bought new in '77 an MC 2205 that is now driving my MMGs, All these years without a hiccup as well. The C28 is just gathering dust on a shelf as the MC is driving the front channels of an avr and Maggies.
post #94 of 114
Emotiva XPA-3, UPA-5, UPA-2 and Behringer EP4000 (for subs). Actively crossover my L/C/R with miniDSPs. Three years now with these amps.
post #95 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizen arcane View Post

Are you reading my posts? tongue.gif

See here - http://www.avsforum.com/t/1503935/poll-how-much-did-you-spend-on-amplification#post_24039888

In post 10 I answered I bought new in '77 an MC 2205 that is now driving my MMGs, All these years without a hiccup as well. The C28 is just gathering dust on a shelf as the MC is driving the front channels of an avr and Maggies.

Wow, small world, citizen arcane. Small world indeed. I just caught this thread for the first time and responded. I'm now going through all the comments. The MC 2205 is the best audio investment that I've made. I bought mine about the same time as you bought yours. I "thought" I paid $1200 for it, but I could be wrong.
post #96 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsrussell View Post

Wow, small world, citizen arcane. Small world indeed. I just caught this thread for the first time and responded. I'm now going through all the comments. The MC 2205 is the best audio investment that I've made. I bought mine about the same time as you bought yours. I "thought" I paid $1200 for it, but I could be wrong.

Yeah my memory is never as good I thought it was wink.gif I kinda took a stab at the price because it was a "package" price MCs, speakers, TT, Nak tape, etc most of which i still own in one system or another. Enjoy your MC, I know I'll continue to.
post #97 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizen arcane View Post

Yeah my memory is never as good I thought it was wink.gif I kinda took a stab at the price because it was a "package" price MCs, speakers, TT, Nak tape, etc most of which i still own in one system or another. Enjoy your MC, I know I'll continue to.

Memory is a fleeting thing ... I know mine is smile.gif. BTW, I replaced a TEAC 450 with a Nak (small world continues ...).
post #98 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsrussell View Post

Memory is a fleeting thing ... I know mine is smile.gif. BTW, I replaced a TEAC 450 with a Nak (small world continues ...).

Well didja buy the Norman Lab speakers?
post #99 of 114
^^ Small world stops. Don't remember that brand.
post #100 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsrussell View Post

^^ Small world stops. Don't remember that brand.

Norman Labs as in Norman Oklahoma home of he University of Oklahoma.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-1970s-Norman-Laboratories-Model-8-Speakers-Excellent-Sound/291097025341
post #101 of 114
Norman Laboratories speakers were indeed manufactured in Norman OK. These are Model 10s I bought in '77 and still are seeing duty in another system (not mine, mine are exactly like these). These are 4 ohm acoustic suspension w/ 10" woofers (also butyl surrounds that I never had to replace) and I believe Philips tweets. I had the flagship of the time as well - Model 9s - that had three 10" woofers (one rear mounted) and three tweets. Normans were known for their ability to handle lots of clean power - I once drove my 10s w/ 350 watts and they sounded great, no strain just pure sound. Mine also have a breaker for the tweeter just in case you drove them to clipping As you can tell from the picture they were a beautiful furniture grade finish and are very heavy like most 70s stuff.
Edited by citizen arcane - 3/28/14 at 6:58pm
post #102 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post

I have the Audio Research LS-26 preamp ($6000), and the Musical Fidelity M6PRX power amplifier ($3500).

It don't get much better at any price.

The new Arcam A19 integrated amplifier is only $999 and looks like a winner if that is your price range. Arcam makes very good-sounding stuff for the discerning buyer with a modest budget.

Is there a difference in sound quality between your Musical Fidelity M6PRX and the Musical Fidelity M3i integrated amplifier you have for sale?

post #103 of 114
Think of the people who paid millions for a Stradivarius violin, which failed to meet the standards of a well made modern instrument costing a fraction of the old instrument:

http://www.livescience.com/44651-new-violins-beat-stradivarius.html

This is an audio myth that predates electronics but a myth nonetheless.
post #104 of 114
That is a truly interesting blind test. Amazing that people weren't able to match the old classic Italian instruments because the match was chasing a myth. I'm not surprised by the result.
post #105 of 114
Wow, the amount of money people have been spending on equipment here is really high. I can't imagine spending $199 on a 2-channel amp, that's ridiculous. I've got an old $35.00 Pioneer receiver from 1978 that I got for $17.50 at a 2-hour 50% off sale at a local second-hand thrift store. It works great. And as far as the sound goes that doesn't matter anyway because in a properly administered DBT, you wouldn't be able to hear the difference between the $199 2-channel amp and my Pioneer receiver. $199 is an amount that I would spend back in my subjective audiophoole days. It's really a good feeling when you save money and you know you can't hear the difference. Thank you DBT.
post #106 of 114
^ What are you talking about? What nonsense? Are you denying the accuracy of a DBT?

I am very confident that you would not be able to differentiate any sonic differences between your $199 2-channel amp and my receiver in a properly administered DBT, it's as simple as that. You can deny all you want.
post #107 of 114
My amplification consists as follows:

-RX-A3000 (Surrounds, Rear Surrrounds, and Presence)
-BASH 300 (X2)
-Emotiva XPA-3

The 300's power my THTLP's. The XPA-3 takes over LCR duties from the AVR because it sounds better. And by "sounds better", I mean strictly, "doesn't go into overload protection during reference levels, as the RX-A3000 does".
post #108 of 114
I'm running one HT and 3 stereo systems.

HT Onkyo TX-SR702 ($150 used) driving Infinity IL-60/36C and surrounds
Stereo 1 Adcom GTP 500II preamp ($75 used) and Carver M-1.5t power amplifier (Free used) driving Infinity Overture 3
Stereo 2 Denon TX-8222 receiver ($100 refurbished) driving Original Large Advent
Stereo 3 Technics SU-V76 integrated amplifier ($75 used) driving Harman EPI 100s

Looks like $400 total. I do so love the looks of High End equipment, but as long as the sounds I hear continue to satisfy me and mine...
post #109 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by SubObjective99 View Post

 price is never a guarantee of sound quality.

So true

post #110 of 114
my budget has always been between $1k and $2k - thoughj modern receivers give me pause as the last two I bought I had issues with. Top of the model line ones too (they were on sale as 'newer' models were coming and/or store closeout).

Just purchased a NAD C375BEE that I have powering my Anthony Gallo 3.1 Nucleus Reference. Also have a tube amp (less than $1k) and an H/K 520/PA2000 in the same setup (that combo was more than 1k but less then 2k and IIRC less than the NAD i just bought, but not by much)
post #111 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizen arcane View Post

Norman Laboratories speakers were indeed manufactured in Norman OK. These are Model 10s I bought in '77 and still are seeing duty in another system (not mine, mine are exactly like these). These are 4 ohm acoustic suspension w/ 10" woofers (also butyl surrounds that I never had to replace) and I believe Philips tweets. I had the flagship of the time as well - Model 9s - that had three 10" woofers (one rear mounted) and three tweets. Normans were known for their ability to handle lots of clean power - I once drove my 10s w/ 350 watts and they sounded great, no strain just pure sound. Mine also have a breaker for the tweeter just in case you drove them to clipping As you can tell from the picture they were a beautiful furniture grade finish and are very heavy like most 70s stuff.

There is sure nothing wrong with vintage 70's speakers. Many will just re-edge or re-cone when necessary. The Norman looks fantastic.
post #112 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsrussell View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by citizen arcane View Post

Norman Laboratories speakers were indeed manufactured in Norman OK. These are Model 10s I bought in '77 and still are seeing duty in another system (not mine, mine are exactly like these). These are 4 ohm acoustic suspension w/ 10" woofers (also butyl surrounds that I never had to replace) and I believe Philips tweets. I had the flagship of the time as well - Model 9s - that had three 10" woofers (one rear mounted) and three tweets. Normans were known for their ability to handle lots of clean power - I once drove my 10s w/ 350 watts and they sounded great, no strain just pure sound. Mine also have a breaker for the tweeter just in case you drove them to clipping As you can tell from the picture they were a beautiful furniture grade finish and are very heavy like most 70s stuff.

There is sure nothing wrong with vintage 70's speakers. Many will just re-edge or re-cone when necessary. The Norman looks fantastic.

I disagree. They may look the same but a lot of progress is hidden inside the drivers where you can't see it. Since the 1970s the average Xmax of woofers of a given diameter has probably tripled. These days a lot of savvy designers pay a lot more attention to the area around the tweeter domes. The 70s were generally before Linkwitz-Riley crossovers and related technology.

For example:

http://www.troelsgravesen.dk/JBL_L100.htm

Original L100 crossover versus modernized crossover:



The original JBL 4311/L100 crossover was pretty typical for the day. By modern standards it was a mess!


The worst part of the original L100's performance is not shown - it was in the off-axis response which made the speaker less tolerant of real world listening rooms.
post #113 of 114
^^ Of course you disagree, Arnyk smile.gif. And thank you for taking the time to show everyone this info. Yes, I agree, incremental improvements in many areas have been made throughout the last 40 years. A well-designed speaker today SHOULD outperform a well-designed speaker of yesteryear by a fair margin. However, one can get their vintage speaker to sound as good as it did when new for a fraction of the cost of a new speaker. Many people choose the re-edging / re-coning route simply because they love the sound of their original speaker (and it keeps money in their wallet).

I had the opportunity to either repair my old speakers or buy new. I bought new (then again, I went from conventional box speakers to dipole).
post #114 of 114
Over 2K for both new and used together. AVR and two amps new, one amp used. Two XPA-2's used as mono blocks, the XPA-3 drives the center and rears, the AVR provides power to the surrounds.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: 2 Channel Audio
AVS › AVS Forum › Audio › 2 Channel Audio › Poll: How much did you spend on amplification?