obobskivich wrote:

Very clean looking in-walls - is that a vintage woodie receiver I spy there in the pic?

Thanks...I do like having the in-wall setup...Yes that is an old school 'woodie' receiver...good eye 🤣 It's a Pioneer SX-780...kind of a common receiver in it's time, but highly regarded for it's quite high quality to price ratio.

I just picked up this PIONEER SX-780 from a local thrift shop for only $7!!! The wood doesn't even have one scratch on it! It was in such great shape I had to give it a new home.

Here is the rest of my more modern'ish' sony 7.1 surround stereo system complete with VCRs, tape deck, and bluray and DVD players (I also have a Betamax player, SVHS player and Laserdic player. I use the retro receiver for my external MIDI units sound output for some of my retro systems and my digital sony receiver for my modern pc systems with optical audio outputs and AWE64 optical equipped retro systems with optical output.

retrofanatic wrote:

obobskivich wrote:

Very clean looking in-walls - is that a vintage woodie receiver I spy there in the pic?

Thanks...I do like having the in-wall setup...Yes that is an old school 'woodie' receiver...good eye 🤣 It's a Pioneer SX-780...kind of a common receiver in it's time, but highly regarded for it's quite high quality to price ratio.

I just picked up this PIONEER SX-780 from a local thrift shop for only $7!!! The wood doesn't even have one scratch on it! It was in such great shape I had to give it a new home.

SEVEN DOLLARS? 😲

And I thought I had found some good thrift-shop deals... 🤣

That AKAI up in my pics is a similar find, I think I gave $10 for it - the wood looks almost new, the metal on the face is great (but seriously how are you gonna damage a quarter-inch aluminum plate?). The downside is that it plays tapes - not something neato like being a whole receiver or playing some format that actually still exists... 😵 Still hold onto it - I like woodie components (be them machines, headphones, speakers, etc).

Here is the rest of my more modern'ish' sony 7.1 surround stereo system complete with VCRs, tape deck, and bluray and DVD players (I also have a Betamax player, SVHS player and Laserdic player. I use the retro receiver for my external MIDI units sound output for some of my retro systems and my digital sony receiver for my modern pc systems with optical audio outputs and AWE64 optical equipped retro systems with optical output.

Nice!

Want to say those are SLV-700 family VCRs, the rest I can't identify so readily. What do the VAIOs do?

Oh, and which S-VHS? (It isn't by chance an R1000 is it?)

Also, would it be fair to say that you like Sony? 😜

I recently replaced my humble Cambridge SoundWorks 2.1 setup – which I’ve had for over 10 years – with a pair of Audioengine 2’s. The Cambridge’s still work well and I’ve always thought they sounded great, but reading threads like this made me curious as to what a higher powered setup would sound like - I’ve always spent way more on sound cards which is probably arse about. I chose the Audioengines because they’re small, shielded, basic, and they got great reviews. They’re the most expensive speakers I’ve bought by a long shot but still pretty cheap in comparison to really high end stuff. I have a decent amp in the shed so could have spent the same money on actual bookshelf speakers, but I don’t have room on my desk for all that.

Anyway, maybe it’s all the time I spent abusing my ears with live music as a youth but the Audioengine’s don’t sound hugely different to my trusty Cambridge 2.1’s to me. They do sound great, and definitely produce a tighter, more defined sound, but whether or not that’s better for a retro setup is debatable. MT-32 music for example is more detailed, and I’ve noticed things that I haven’t heard previously, but some of the instruments sounds a little more “synthy” too. I guess I just need to get used to them - I’ve heard it can take new speakers a little while to “warm up” so maybe that’s a factor too.

Here they are – there is a white “iDevices look” available but that stark white looks odd next to beige. The mat black looks OK, but still a bit modern perhaps:

@badmojo: AudioEngine is pretty good brand of monitors.

Anyway, anyone ever used tube amplifier for your computer's speakers? Yes, I know tube amplifier is not accurate; it adds even-order harmonics coloration to the signal. But apparently even-order harmonics are pleasing to the ears - the "warmth" and "richness" thing. On the other hand, computer game sound and music may sound "dry" and "sterile" to certain listener, perhaps the most notable example is FM music. I haven't tried this myself - not exactly a tube fan, but it seems tube amplifier would add some warmth and richness to typical computer game sounds.

Anyone ever tried it?

badmojo wrote:

I recently replaced my humble Cambridge SoundWorks 2.1 setup – which I’ve had for over 10 years – with a pair of Audioengine 2’s. The Cambridge’s still work well and I’ve always thought they sounded great, but reading threads like this made me curious as to what a higher powered setup would sound like - I’ve always spent way more on sound cards which is probably arse about. I chose the Audioengines because they’re small, shielded, basic, and they got great reviews. They’re the most expensive speakers I’ve bought by a long shot but still pretty cheap in comparison to really high end stuff. I have a decent amp in the shed so could have spent the same money on actual bookshelf speakers, but I don’t have room on my desk for all that.

Anyway, maybe it’s all the time I spent abusing my ears with live music as a youth but the Audioengine’s don’t sound hugely different to my trusty Cambridge 2.1’s to me. They do sound great, and definitely produce a tighter, more defined sound, but whether or not that’s better for a retro setup is debatable. MT-32 music for example is more detailed, and I’ve noticed things that I haven’t heard previously, but some of the instruments sounds a little more “synthy” too. I guess I just need to get used to them - I’ve heard it can take new speakers a little while to “warm up” so maybe that’s a factor too.

They look very nice. They fit with the rest of your desktop very well too - matte black never goes out of style I guess.

Regarding their sound - my understanding is (and they certainly look like) they are studio monitors; I have not heard that specific brand/model, but most studio monitors I've heard over the years pretty much fulfill what you're describing - accurate and detailed but not "fun." That's kind of their purpose in life though - they're supposed to let you hear everything. That doesn't mean they're bad for musical enjoyment though - just like very accurate monitors can make for a good gaming or movie-watching experience. But it's a different experience than the typical over-bright and over-saturated HDTV with lots of post-processing provides. I would guess that compared to a 2.1 setup they're probably a little light on the bottom-end, and perhaps adding a subwoofer and playing around with how they're positioned around your desk could influence the "synthy" sound you're hearing (but keep in mind that they *are* a different speaker from the Cambridge speakers, and will sound accordingly different at the end of the day).

From experience, I wouldn't worry a whole lot about "warm up."

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman: I think it would depend on how you define "tube amplifier" - do you mean modern kinds of devices that have a lot of tubes sticking out of them, and may or may not also have solid-state electronics under the hood (so the tube is just acting as an input buffer or gain stage), and the tubes are generally run single-ended and in some cases over-driven to load gobs of distortion onto the signal to create "flavor" or what have you? Or do you mean more traditional (or "vintage") equipment that uses tubes because that's what was available, and still tries to be as accurate and clean as possible despite the limitations of the technology?

I've personally tried the later in the form of a couple of McIntosh pieces, and generally there isn't much to say - it's an amplifier, or a preamplifier, or a CD player, or what-have-you, and it does its job. It gets hot, it uses a lot of power, and it weighs a ton due to being based around tubes, it also needs the tubes replaced periodically as they age or if they fail. Still, they're good components if you can forgive the bulk and power draw, and deal with the heat and replacement parts. Sound-wise they're like any other well put together component - you don't hear the component. And that's how it should be imho - if you want to add "flavor" or "effects" there are devices that can deliberately provide that functionality and give you more control over what you're doing (and I don't just mean "get an equalizer" - there's a lot of different kinds of devices out there that do a lot of different kinds of things).

My view on the former is that they're kind of like guitar amps - except guitar amps have a purpose, and they're supposed to have a unique sound, because they're part of the instrument. But my amplifier at home is supposed to be predictable and consistent - Clapton should sound like Clapton, and Slash should sound like Slash.

Specifically regarding the "warmth" or "richness" - and this is an educated guess more than anything else - what you're probably hearing is the result of the interaction between the amplifier's output impedance and the speaker (or headphone)'s impedance. Often a tube amplifier will have a relatively high output impedance, which means that unless it's plugged into a purely resistive load (like a magnetostatic driver) the interaction will result in a change to the frequency response of the overall system. Usually this will occur lower in the frequency spectrum, where a speaker's impedance will rise due to resonance and/or its crossover network. As a simple example, one of the SF-2 magazine pages I have shows their impedance (albeit its a tiny little graph) - see the "bump" right beyond 100Hz where the impedance rises? With an amplifier providing a high output impedance, you will get a "bump" in the frequency response too (the higher the output impedance, the bigger the reaction).

obobskivich wrote:

Regarding their sound - my understanding is (and they certainly look like) they are studio monitors; I have not heard that specific brand/model, but most studio monitors I've heard over the years pretty much fulfill what you're describing - accurate and detailed but not "fun." That's kind of their purpose in life though - they're supposed to let you hear everything. That doesn't mean they're bad for musical enjoyment though - just like very accurate monitors can make for a good gaming or movie-watching experience. But it's a different experience than the typical over-bright and over-saturated HDTV with lots of post-processing provides. I would guess that compared to a 2.1 setup they're probably a little light on the bottom-end, and perhaps adding a subwoofer and playing around with how they're positioned around your desk could influence the "synthy" sound you're hearing (but keep in mind that they *are* a different speaker from the Cambridge speakers, and will sound accordingly different at the end of the day).

It's also just a case of them sounding different to what I'm used to I think - I've started to get used to them now and am appreciating them a bit more. I played Dune 2 last night and the introduction - using SB for digital sounds and MT-32 for music score - sounded really good. I guess the other factor here is that you only get out of a speaker what you put in, and in my case I'm sending in a pretty lo-fi signal from a 20 year old computer. The reviews were using lossless music files which is a whole other thing.

I'm happy with them overall though.

obobskivich wrote:

SEVEN DOLLARS? 😲

Now that's definitely what would people on Audiokarma call a "scroe". 😉

obobskivich wrote:

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman: I think it would depend on how you define "tube amplifier" - do you mean modern kinds of devices that have a lot of tubes sticking out of them, and may or may not also have solid-state electronics under the hood (so the tube is just acting as an input buffer or gain stage), and the tubes are generally run single-ended and in some cases over-driven to load gobs of distortion onto the signal to create "flavor" or what have you? Or do you mean more traditional (or "vintage") equipment that uses tubes because that's what was available, and still tries to be as accurate and clean as possible despite the limitations of the technology?

Well what I meant is "tube sound". You know, the warm, second-order harmonics distorted sound. Wonder if such "warmth' is actually good for "sterile" FM music.

obobskivich wrote:

SEVEN DOLLARS? 😲

And I thought I had found some good thrift-shop deals... 🤣

I know...it was one of those situations where the thrift store didn't know what they had and I just had I guess....I did get lucky...I am spending a bit more time checking out that same thrift store now. 🤣 you never know what else might show up there.

obobskivich wrote:

That AKAI up in my pics is a similar find, I think I gave $10 for it - the wood looks almost new, the metal on the face is great (but seriously how are you gonna damage a quarter-inch aluminum plate?). The downside is that it plays tapes - not something neato like being a whole receiver or playing some format that actually still exists... 😵 Still hold onto it - I like woodie components (be them machines, headphones, speakers, etc).

I love that AKAI tape deck....$10 is a great deal for that (as long as it is fully functional)...I have a couple tape decks as well and don't really use them much, but it is nice to have....I have actually been on a quest for a while now to have a stereo component for every type of popular media. The less popular components I own include a Betamax, MiniDisc, and 8 track player...pretty old school.

obobskivich wrote:

Nice! […]
Show full quote

Nice!

Want to say those are SLV-700 family VCRs, the rest I can't identify so readily. What do the VAIOs do?

Oh, and which S-VHS? (It isn't by chance an R1000 is it?)

Also, would it be fair to say that you like Sony? 😜

Good eye spotting the SLV-700 series VCRs! My VCR's are actually the SLV-798HF and the SLV-798HF
I also have 2 X SLV-778HF's and 2 X 779HF's as well.

I am very impressed....Very good eye spotting the Sony VAIOS as well!!!! 🤣 My Sony VAIO systems are RB-40 cases (3 of them) are made by FoxConn actually and are a very high quality tower case. I have spent 5 years looking for three of them to fit nicely in my stereo unit, and finally have all 3. I was lucky to find all locally at a really good price (one was free)...they are reserved for my more modern systems (Windows 7, 2XWindows XP systems). I keep them close to my sony stereo since I use the optical output to connect to my digital receiver and they are also connected to my 40" sony TV's HDMI and VGA inputs and my LCD monitor. My retro rigs are all in beige desktop cases that I will eventually place close to my stereo system as well that should all connect to my receiver as well, but I have not figured out how to fit my CRT in my setup yet.

My SVHS sony deck is actually the SVT-S3100 which I picked up for $5 from a local scrap yard that used it as part of their surveillance system...it was in great shape actually and it's the only affordable SVHS I could find locally without spending $100 or more. I wish I had the R1000 you mentioned, which is of course a much better unit suited to a home stereo.

🤣 yes, I actually love Sony...I tend to like to have matching components and Sony seems to be readily available in thrift shops around here. Also, they have kept a similar look throughout the 80's and 90's and even into the 2000's. I really like that they have stayed away from all the "fake chrome and rounded eges look" and stayed with a similar design profile for most of their black stereo components. A lot of the Sony components I have match up really nice even though they are all from different eras....for example, my sony tape deck from 1995 has the same design as my VCR's from 1989 and my digital receiver from 2003. It's just nice to know that if my VCR breaks down, I can just go to a local thrift store or pawn shop and buy one for $10 and it would match my other components.

Besides, I find Sony stuff is a good balance between quality and value and I also have one SONY remote that controls everything (even one of my VAIOs I use as an HTPC).

Today I bought another Sony receiver from the thrift shop. A stereo STR-AV320. Nothing too special, but at least it was in mint shape and paid $12. Another great deal I guess.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Well what I meant is "tube sound". You know, the warm, second-order harmonics distorted sound. Wonder if such "warmth' is actually good for "sterile" FM music.

Honestly I'd say it depends heavily on the amplifier in question - a guitar amplifier, for example, will impart a lot of "flavor" to the sound (and that's by design in many cases). Whereas high performing McIntosh tube amplifiers attempt to be as clean as possible, and in my experience are more or less indistinguishable from good solid-state devices. 😐

retrofanatic wrote:

I know...it was one of those situations where the thrift store didn't know what they had and I just had I guess....I did get lucky...I am spending a bit more time checking out that same thrift store now. 🤣 you never know what else might show up there.

Had a similar shop near me for a while - they now charge for donations (not kidding), and the selection has gone to the birds; don't think I've been in there in almost a year. 😒

I love that AKAI tape deck....$10 is a great deal for that (as long as it is fully functional)...I have a couple tape decks as well and don't really use them much, but it is nice to have....I have actually been on a quest for a while now to have a stereo component for every type of popular media. The less popular components I own include a Betamax, MiniDisc, and 8 track player...pretty old school.

As far as I'm aware it works fine - it's played the one or two tapes I have to test it with. It isn't the quietest deck ever made - I don't know if that's just how it is, that my specific example has aged (I read somewhere that it was "new" in something like 1976), or that something isn't perfect about either the tapes I have (they probably aren't too new either) or something needs help on the deck. I have a ~decade newer Pioneer (that has a lot more noise reduction stuff) that's probably a little bit quieter sounding, but both seem to play fine (no weird distortion/etc) so I'm assuming the AKAI is just older and less fancy (I don't know what "average" was for 1970s tape decks; guessing probably not great though).

I used to be on such a quest to support video formats - stopped after getting into Laserdisc and HD-DVD. 😊

My current "setup" can do anything mainstream, plus HD-DVD, but is otherwise pretty slimmed down - I will admit that I got tired of having something like 25 machines all hooked up just to watch TV or something. 😲

Good eye spotting the SLV-700 series VCRs! My VCR's are actually the SLV-798HF and the SLV-798HF
I also have 2 X SLV-778HF's and 2 X 779HF's as well.

I have two SLV-775HFs - one is in much better condition than the other. The first one was bought brand new in whatever 1997. The second one is probably the holy grail of find stories:

I was looking for a VCR that'd give me stereo RCA out a few years ago - I didn't want the VCR component, I just wanted to integrate stereo speakers to a TV that didn't have an audio output jack. I figured for laughs I'd check for a 775HF on eBay. I found one at $0.99 no reserve and entered a max bid of around $10 - a week later the auction closed at $0.99. Oh yeah, and it guaranteed free shipping. I actually contacted the seller (it was some mom & pop electronics shop in Pennsylvania) and offered to cover all or part of the shipping - got a response "don't worry about it" and a few days later received a very well packaged and padded, fully functioning, Sony SLV-775HF. You read that right: for less than a dollar.

It has probably half of the Sony logo rubbed off (I don't really mind that), and it appears the internal battery reserves are pretty much gone - the one I've had since day one can survive hours without power, the one I grabbed used will reset itself if it doesn't have power for 10-15 minutes; enough for a quick blackout, but if the power is lost to the house for a while (I unplug it to move it) I probably have to reset it. Haven't bothered opening it up to see if the batteries can be replaced or not - currently it's being stored in a closet and the "good" (they both work 100% for their intended purpose) one is hooked up; I got sick of having two VCRs and two rooms with (different) stacks of tapes spread out - so everything got moved into one location with one VCR (which took some doing - I think in total there's a few hundred tapes). I figure if anything happens to the one in-use, I can pull spares off the one in the closet, or if I ever need another VCR (like for dubbing), it's also there. 😀

I am very impressed....Very good eye spotting the Sony VAIOS as well!!!! 🤣 My Sony VAIO systems are RB-40 cases (3 of them) are made by FoxConn actually and are a very high quality tower case. I have spent 5 years looking for three of them to fit nicely in my stereo unit, and finally have all 3. I was lucky to find all locally at a really good price (one was free)...they are reserved for my more modern systems (Windows 7, 2XWindows XP systems). I keep them close to my sony stereo since I use the optical output to connect to my digital receiver and they are also connected to my 40" sony TV's HDMI and VGA inputs and my LCD monitor. My retro rigs are all in beige desktop cases that I will eventually place close to my stereo system as well that should all connect to my receiver as well, but I have not figured out how to fit my CRT in my setup yet.

Very nice. Quick look for some more pictures of the RB-40 online and they do look like very good, and simple, enclosures. 😀 I remember a few years ago seeing a Sony VAIO in a store that had a "gap" between parts of the case - you could stick your hand through it. No idea what model it was...years later I have a Silverstone case that's fairly similar, guessing that finding the original Sony would probably have been cheaper though... 🤣

My SVHS sony deck is actually the SVT-S3100 which I picked up for $5 from a local scrap yard that used it as part of their surveillance system...it was in great shape actually and it's the only affordable SVHS I could find locally without spending $100 or more. I wish I had the R1000 you mentioned, which is of course a much better unit suited to a home stereo.

I don't know a whole ton about SVHS in general - I've played around with a Panasonic here and there, and actually had a chance to buy an R1000 for around $15 from a salvage dealer. Problem was - we turned it on, and it blew up like the robot in the first Star Wars movie. And I also didn't get R2-D2 as a consolation prize. 🤣

They're very nice units, but after a while I kind of lost of interest in tracking a working one down - I don't have anything on S-VHS, and found a DVD-RAM/DVD-RW recorder a few years ago in an electronics shop - they had probably half a dozen of them on consignment for $13.99 each; in retrospect I should've bought the others too. It's a Panasonic DMR-T3030. It behaves almost exactly like a VCR, except it takes DVDs and CDs instead.

🤣 yes, I actually love Sony...I tend to like to have matching components and Sony seems to be readily available in thrift shops around here. Also, they have kept a similar look throughout the 80's and 90's and even into the 2000's. I really like that they have stayed away from all the "fake chrome and rounded eges look" and stayed with a similar design profile for most of their black stereo components. A lot of the Sony components I have match up really nice even though they are all from different eras....for example, my sony tape deck from 1995 has the same design as my VCR's from 1989 and my digital receiver from 2003. It's just nice to know that if my VCR breaks down, I can just go to a local thrift store or pawn shop and buy one for $10 and it would match my other components.

Indeed - I think only Sony and McIntosh have maintained such a consistent look over the decades. McIntosh is kind of "hate it or love it" though - they will stand out no matter where you install them. Of all the various Sony equipment I've ever seen, I like the look of the receivers and CD players from a few years ago the best, where it has the angled face:

There's actually some computer cases from Silverstone that match that look pretty closely:
http://www.silverstonetek.com/product.php?pid=227&area=en

Although I've never pursued putting together such a system.

But you're right that across all eras it's pretty much consistent - my CDP-211 wouldn't look entirely of place with that receiver, or with your receiver, or with a brand new one, etc. Yamaha was doing pretty well up until a few years ago, and then gave-in to the gloss plastic and fake chrome look, backed up by tons of bright blue VFDs and LEDs... 😵

What always got me though - if you look at my pictures, the two gleaming silver metal headphones are the Sony offerings from the mid to late 1990s. They stand out like a sore thumb, but especially so if set beside Sony components... 😖 Why couldn't they just be BLACK? 😒

Besides, I find Sony stuff is a good balance between quality and value and I also have one SONY remote that controls everything (even one of my VAIOs I use as an HTPC).

You ever used one of their big-un Remote Commander units that look like they have a keyboard? I've always been curious how those work...

I also vaguely remember about a decade ago they tried "gesture control" on a few receivers - never saw anything about that again though.

I really want to reply to this thread... but there's just sooo much to read and reply to 🤣

I can add some more though: today I replaced the ancient electrolytic caps in my Svenska speaker crossovers with new polypropylene film caps.. can't say I notice any difference. But perhaps that's a good thing after all.

obobskivich wrote:

Sony

Ah, Japanese high-end audio. A thing of the past. It seems everything stopped since the yendaka crisis in mid-80s. But I still remember when Sony made such legendary loudspeakers.

JBL came out with titanium dome tweeters in 1984, but Yamaha already had beryllium dome tweeters in 1975. But then Sony beat them all with bio-cellulose tweeters. Whoa!

From the page:

The most high-tech element of the SS-A series is... natural : the Bio-Cellulose tweeter is threaded by acetobacteriae aceti, giving in the end a driver which is stiffer than anything although thinner and lighter than anything, with a resonance peak which is way above that of Beryllium for instance.

The raw bio-cellulose "pad" is then pressed to become the actual diaphragm, bonded with thermosetting epoxy adhesive to the pure aluminium voice coils.
The thickness of the bio-cellulose diaphragm is 1/1000 that of paper and 1/300 that of silk ; its weight is 1/2 of a silk diaphragm.

Bio-Cellulose was a joint development between Sony and Ajinomoto Co., Inc. and three corporations of the Agency of Industrial Science and Technology Research Institute for Polymers & Textiles in Japan.

The rest of the SS-A5 naturally is on par otherwise it wouldn't be as musical and supremely coherent as it is : little pieces of felt and rubber placed here and there, real wood enclosure, isolated filter made of strictly high-end components, time-aligned drivers, layout of the 18dB/octave filter, respective Qs of the components etc.

The result is a supremely distinguished sound, somewhat reminiscent of the V-FET units and especially the TA-N7 masterpiece : pure musical bliss, with a soundstage as wide as the Grand Canyon, precise and stable and very energetic.

So, these legendary loudspeakers were developed by Ajinomoto's biotech:

Ironically, in Indonesia, Ajinomoto is mostly associated with el-cheapo meatballs from street vendors:

jwt27 wrote:

I really want to reply to this thread... but there's just sooo much to read and reply to 🤣

Just jump on in. 😀

I can add some more though: today I replaced the ancient electrolytic caps in my Svenska speaker crossovers with new polypropylene film caps.. can't say I notice any difference. But perhaps that's a good thing after all.

Probably will improve their longevity though - so that's a good thing too. 😀

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

obobskivich wrote:

Sony

Ah, Japanese high-end audio. A thing of the past. It seems everything stopped since the yendaka crisis in mid-80s. But I still remember when Sony made such legendary loudspeakers.

Aye.

JBL came out with titanium dome tweeters in 1984, but Yamaha already had beryllium dome tweeters in 1975. But then Sony beat them all with bio-cellulose tweeters. Whoa!

Technics had a few speakers with beryllium compression horns, most notably the SB-10000:

I want to say those woofers are 21" - but I don't remember exactly. I know those cabinets are *massive* though. Sadly have never heard them (have heard a few of their little brothers though).

They had a matching monster of an amplifier too:

(350wpc, over 100 lbs - very rare)

From the page: […]
Show full quote

From the page:

The most high-tech element of the SS-A series is... natural : the Bio-Cellulose tweeter is threaded by acetobacteriae aceti, giving in the end a driver which is stiffer than anything although thinner and lighter than anything, with a resonance peak which is way above that of Beryllium for instance.

The raw bio-cellulose "pad" is then pressed to become the actual diaphragm, bonded with thermosetting epoxy adhesive to the pure aluminium voice coils.
The thickness of the bio-cellulose diaphragm is 1/1000 that of paper and 1/300 that of silk ; its weight is 1/2 of a silk diaphragm.

Bio-Cellulose was a joint development between Sony and Ajinomoto Co., Inc. and three corporations of the Agency of Industrial Science and Technology Research Institute for Polymers & Textiles in Japan.

The rest of the SS-A5 naturally is on par otherwise it wouldn't be as musical and supremely coherent as it is : little pieces of felt and rubber placed here and there, real wood enclosure, isolated filter made of strictly high-end components, time-aligned drivers, layout of the 18dB/octave filter, respective Qs of the components etc.

The result is a supremely distinguished sound, somewhat reminiscent of the V-FET units and especially the TA-N7 masterpiece : pure musical bliss, with a soundstage as wide as the Grand Canyon, precise and stable and very energetic.

I've read about biocellulose based headphones from Sony in the past - wasn't aware they'd put it into speakers too. The headphones are supposed to be pretty rad, but last I heard, individual pairs had a used resale value approaching $10,000 US. 😵

I've never heard the biocellulose speakers or headphones, but I've heard some of Sony's later "nano composite" offerings - the MDR-SA5000 shown above were supposed to be the state of the art of that technology when they were released (with a claimed treble response as high as 100kHz if I remember right... 🤣). I've read in the past that the material is derived from glass (it looked sort of like spun sugar or fiberglass when I opened them up). The sound, however, was not as good as I had hoped. 😢 Best I've still yet heard from a normal dynamic driver would be from a fairly standard looking Audio-Technica.

obobskivich wrote:

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Well what I meant is "tube sound". You know, the warm, second-order harmonics distorted sound. Wonder if such "warmth' is actually good for "sterile" FM music.

Honestly I'd say it depends heavily on the amplifier in question - a guitar amplifier, for example, will impart a lot of "flavor" to the sound (and that's by design in many cases). Whereas high performing McIntosh tube amplifiers attempt to be as clean as possible, and in my experience are more or less indistinguishable from good solid-state devices. 😐

Well what I mean is something in-between. Not exactly guitar amp, but not exactly McIntosh either. I mean your typical tube amp; the one enthusiast use to add "tube color" to their sound.

On the other hand, tube buffer preamp doesn't seem to be very expensive. Maybe I would try it myself to play some DOS games. 😀

obobskivich wrote:

Technics had a few speakers with beryllium compression horns, most notably the SB-10000: http://www.stereomanuals.com/vintagetec […]
Show full quote

Technics had a few speakers with beryllium compression horns, most notably the SB-10000:

Haven't seen them on ebay, haven't seen them on hi-fi do either. It seems they're very rare.

The shape is interesting. The problem with Yamaha NS-1000 - or so I've read - is imaging. The imaging isn't really good, which is too bad for such speakers that do everything else right. 🙁

So far I'm satisfied with the 120Ti. Probably their titanium dome tweeters are not as accurate as the NS-1000's beryllium dome tweeter, and the Yammies probably surpass the Tis in midrange department either (the Tis' crossover directs most of the mids to the heavy aquaplas woofer, which is of course slow compared to the Yammies' beryllium dome midrange). Yet, the imaging is excellent. I haven't auditioned the NS-1000s either, but I'm afraid their imaging is not as good as the Tis'.

The Technics SB-10000s seem to have excellent imaging by using smaller baffles for tweeters and squawkers. It's horn though. Maybe I'm over-generalizing, but after auditioning a pair of Klipschorn, I decidedly don't like it. 🙁

obobskivich wrote:

I want to say those woofers are 21" - but I don't remember exactly. I know those cabinets are *massive* though. Sadly have never […]
Show full quote

I want to say those woofers are 21" - but I don't remember exactly. I know those cabinets are *massive* though. Sadly have never heard them (have heard a few of their little brothers though).

They had a matching monster of an amplifier too:

(350wpc, over 100 lbs - very rare)

Whoa, is that pure class A?

obobskivich wrote:

From the page: […]
Show full quote

From the page:

The most high-tech element of the SS-A series is... natural : the Bio-Cellulose tweeter is threaded by acetobacteriae aceti, giving in the end a driver which is stiffer than anything although thinner and lighter than anything, with a resonance peak which is way above that of Beryllium for instance.

The raw bio-cellulose "pad" is then pressed to become the actual diaphragm, bonded with thermosetting epoxy adhesive to the pure aluminium voice coils.
The thickness of the bio-cellulose diaphragm is 1/1000 that of paper and 1/300 that of silk ; its weight is 1/2 of a silk diaphragm.

Bio-Cellulose was a joint development between Sony and Ajinomoto Co., Inc. and three corporations of the Agency of Industrial Science and Technology Research Institute for Polymers & Textiles in Japan.

The rest of the SS-A5 naturally is on par otherwise it wouldn't be as musical and supremely coherent as it is : little pieces of felt and rubber placed here and there, real wood enclosure, isolated filter made of strictly high-end components, time-aligned drivers, layout of the 18dB/octave filter, respective Qs of the components etc.

The result is a supremely distinguished sound, somewhat reminiscent of the V-FET units and especially the TA-N7 masterpiece : pure musical bliss, with a soundstage as wide as the Grand Canyon, precise and stable and very energetic.

I've read about biocellulose based headphones from Sony in the past - wasn't aware they'd put it into speakers too. The headphones are supposed to be pretty rad, but last I heard, individual pairs had a used resale value approaching $10,000 US. 😵

Me neither. The Sony SS-A5 seems to be very rare. At least you can still find Yamaha NS-1000s or JBL 240Tis on ebay sometimes.

obobskivich wrote:

I've never heard the biocellulose speakers or headphones, but I've heard some of Sony's later "nano composite" offerings - the MDR-SA5000 shown above were supposed to be the state of the art of that technology when they were released (with a claimed treble response as high as 100kHz if I remember right... 🤣). I've read in the past that the material is derived from glass (it looked sort of like spun sugar or fiberglass when I opened them up). The sound, however, was not as good as I had hoped. 😢 Best I've still yet heard from a normal dynamic driver would be from a fairly standard looking Audio-Technica.

I see.

Well then it's true; it's not the concept, but the implementation.

Anyway, while we're at it, I wonder: what do you want from a loudspeaker?

To some people, sound stage is everything, so they choose open baffle. Some others - like typical AR owners - prefer bass extension. Some prefer the tonality (vocality?) of single-driver, full-range speakers - usually driven by tube amp. Some would prefer horns. Rock fans would prefer fake-but-fun, "west coast" sound. As for myself, the HF cleanliness of exotic material tweeters is the most important, although I also love good imaging.

I wish I could have it all, but loudspeaker design is always a trade-off. Open baffles are "airy" and disappear very well, but some would argue that their sound is not accurate compared to "boxy" speakers. Single-driver speakers have excellent tonality, but their lows and highs are not as good as that of multi-driver speakers. Horns are efficient, but they also have uneven frequency response.

So, all else being equal, which aspect is the most important to you? Is it tonality? Imaging? Accuracy? Efficiency? Warmth?

A loudspeaker model that incorporates both single-driver and open baffle design. IIRC Nelson Pass really loves this kind of speaker.

Klipschorn. There are quite many people who love horn sound.

Based from what I read, the Yamaha NS 1000 does everything right - except imaging.

The most legendary "fake but fun" loudspeakers. My late old man actually loved such sound, although he wasn't a rock fan.

"No subwoofer can match AR's bass quality", an AR owner told me. But there are reasons why I prefer JBL Ti, and this is one of them. 😉

I haven't got much to say on this topic. Seems I prefer accuracy; I am no audiophile and didn't compare many of sound systems.

I am surely fan of bass; thus I dislike both small speakers with no bass at all and midsize speakers (5" for example) which overemphasize available bass frequencies.

bristlehog wrote:

I haven't got much to say on this topic. Seems I prefer accuracy; I am no audiophile and didn't compare many of sound systems.

I am surely fan of bass; thus I dislike both small speakers with no bass at all and midsize speakers (5" for example) which overemphasize available bass frequencies.

Then I guess you would enjoy vintage AR loudspeakers, while hating the "west coast sound" of vintage JBL speakers. Most 1970s JBL speakers overemphasize their mid bass. Fun, but definitely not flat.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Well what I mean is something in-between. Not exactly guitar amp, but not exactly McIntosh either. I mean your typical tube amp; the one enthusiast use to add "tube color" to their sound.

On the other hand, tube buffer preamp doesn't seem to be very expensive. Maybe I would try it myself to play some DOS games. 😀

Never tried a "buffer" (most of them are SET followers from what I understand) - in theory they shouldn't do a whole lot, but potentially bring in more noise (especially if they create a ground loop with your components); but that's theory - practice can be a whole 'nother thing. If you go this route I'd be curious what you think of it.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Haven't seen them on ebay, haven't seen them on hi-fi do either. It seems they're very rare.

My understanding is that within Japan they're less rare (I've heard they sometimes pop-up in local shops), but they tend not to go that far outside of Japan (or wherever they were originally sold for that matter) because they're very big and heavy (I think they weigh something like 200-300lbs per cabinet). Not practical to ship internationally.

The shape is interesting. The problem with Yamaha NS-1000 - or so I've read - is imaging. The imaging isn't really good, which is too bad for such speakers that do everything else right. 🙁

I only know the NS-1000 by reputation - as a fairly common/standard studio monitor from years ago. I would assume imaging is not a high priority. In general Yamaha speakers that I have owned or heard tend to concentrate on their on-axis performance, and not worry too much about off-axis. The EF speakers I pictured above are a great example - move too far out of their "sweet spot" and they're not very spectacular.

The Technics SB-10000s seem to have excellent imaging by using smaller baffles for tweeters and squawkers. It's horn though. Maybe I'm over-generalizing, but after auditioning a pair of Klipschorn, I decidedly don't like it. 🙁

In my experience with horns there's Klipsch, and then there's everyone else. Klipsch speakers generally sound bright (bordering on harsh), very direct, and very "loud" (like they're yelling at you all the time); other horns aren't always so aggressively tuned. I've never heard the SB-10000 but based on other Technics speakers, I'd assume they're much more tame by comparison. Imaging with horns is usually dictated by the horn throat - the bigger and wider it is, the bigger and wider the speaker's dispersion pattern.

Whoa, is that pure class A?

Claims to be. Don't know if it truly is - 350wpc from a pure Class A amplifier would be...spectacular. Most modern designs that offer that much power and advertise Class A operation will switch over to AB after a certain threshold, in order to increase output - usually you'll get like 10-20W in Class A (which is the vast majority of most people's continuous power needs covered), and it'll switch to AB to cover peaks up to whatever its rated to (200-300W or something).

Well then it's true; it's not the concept, but the implementation.

Most decidedly. 😀

In my experience, simple and elegant will win out over complex and new-fangled any day.

Kreshna Aryaguna Nurzaman wrote:

Anyway, while we're at it, I wonder: what do you want from a loudspeaker?

Tonality. Hands-down. If voices don't sound real, if brass doesn't pop, and if basses don't groove - what's the point? 😊

What I want from my speakers and setup is :

1. Surround Sound setup (even for music with something like the stereo surround option seen in Creative Labs CMSS)

2. Crystal clear instrument sounds.

3. And Deep Bass.

If I have all these three, I'm happy.

Of course, for all these, the source of the audio (original composition and recording) must be good in the first place.

I think I am getting a musical nerd/geek orgasm. Cause I love to look at loudspeakers. Such as those I can see. But seriously though, what am I looking for in speakers and sound ? Well to be quite honest. I think the focus point for me, how I do like the sound of it. If they sound good, then they have a chance of having my interest. I got my Dali speakers cheap. And some people have actually been envious of them. Because they are in fine nick, and well to be frank I was just extremely lucky getting them as cheap as I got them.
I personally like a versatile speaker. Not really only one kind of speaker. And the Dali speakers I have are pretty versatile, and that includes anything from classical music to techno, and heavy metal. And the sound is pretty damn good. And since I like everything from classical music to heavy metal. Then for me, the choice of speakers was a lucky and good choice. My JBL PC speakers, I bought them. Because I knew they were good, a friend of mine, has a pair (just as old and the same series). And his still works, and kicks actually some serious arse. And guess what ? My own pair works just as well. So even if they are full tone units (not that I have looked). Then they are a great buy 😀