Bronze Member Username: Pingo76Slovenia Post Number: 24 Registered: May-04 | Im looking for basic specification and what exactly does the power amp direct button do. This is the best i got so far: http://cgi.ebay.ch/Technics-SU-VX500-Vollverstaerker_W0QQitemZ7546277729QQcatego ryZ28933QQcmdZViewItem Im interested also what are the two monitoring leds for. Regards, Gregor |
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 374 Registered: Mar-04 | i THINK that the "power amp direct" button is the same thing as a bypass switch. other manufacturers at least use the term "direct" eg. denon in this way. basically, it bypasses the tone controls, loudness etc. for a more pure signal to the amp. the only thing in the preamp chain would then be switching for components, preamp gain stages and volume/balance controls. it's a way to simplify your circuit and get the things you don't need out. that's about as far as i can help. |
Bronze Member Username: Pingo76Slovenia Post Number: 25 Registered: May-04 | This is what i found on denon: Power Amp Direct: On the back panel there is a power amp direct switch which bypasses all preamp functions of this unit (bass, treble, volume, etc). Engage this switch when a separate preamp is used with this amp. The AUX-2 input is used with the power amp direct feature and the headphone output is disabled. When any input other than AUX-2 is selected, the unit operates just as if the power amp direct function were turned off. If i got it right then when this thing is enabled it will act like a poweramp. |
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 375 Registered: Mar-04 | if that's how it works... then yes it's a total preamp bypass for using the unit as a power amp only. i've never heard of an amp working quite that way before though. usually you just bypass all of the tone controls etc. but not the volume/balance/switching controls or use pre-out/main in jacks to seperate the preamp section from the power amp. what you're describing sounds like a cross between these two approaches. |
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 376 Registered: Mar-04 | being a technics unit, maybe the feature has something to do with using the amp in a DJ setup and using the DJ mixer as the preamp section. technics does make the most popular DJ turntables in the world after all. my best guess is that the bypass is there to get maximum fidelity when using an external mixer without an extra distortion adding second preamp stage. either that, or the unit was designed to be modular to add new amps and preamps down the road. |
Bronze Member Username: Pingo76Slovenia Post Number: 26 Registered: May-04 | thanks for the reply mr. budget I never heard some1 saying anything about how technics amps sounds like. This unit will replace my yamaha surround reciever for the time i need to get rid of it and get myself a nad c352. I bought this technics for a few six packs anyway in perfect conditions (owner says). I shuld have it in a day. Its rated 2x 100W @ 8 ohm. I guess it is 60+ on 8 ohm load (B&W 601 s3). Enough fot a month or perhaps two. If only the unit had a single preamp out (for my sub) i would be very very happy. I guess ill need to make a wire mess . |
Bronze Member Username: Pingo76Slovenia Post Number: 27 Registered: May-04 | To correct myself its 2x 100 on 4 ohm load. silly me . |
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 377 Registered: Mar-04 | well technics is a decent manufacturer if not quite the most popular one. if memory serves me right, it's a side company of panasonic which has one of the very best reliability ratings the last time i checked. technics sould at least be solidly engineered. yamaha makes nice sounding gear, but they tend to push their specs to the max where other companies (especially NAD) leave more room to fudge with. is there something that's particuarly wrong with the gear you already have sonically? if you want more treble, i'd recommend against NAD wholeheartedly. i already own an NAD reciever which sounds just as muffled as a sony on my soft dome tweetered NHT superzeros and bought a "bright" onkyo reciever to liven them up. to my ears, the 5 channel onkyo totally kicks the more expensive 2 channel NAD's but for clarity and imaging in stereo. the NAD might be better in the bass though and can safely handle challenging 4 ohm loads which the onkyo can't. i've never thought of technics as "high end" but have always considered it a reliable brand unlike say JVC. instead of asking others what they think of your gear, what do YOU think of it? what do you want to improve on? i have a hard time recommending gear, because i'm a bass hating treble freak, so my tastes are usually at odds with the majority who seem to prefer a more warm and forgiving sound. if you want to upgrade, it helps if you already know where you want to go. the wrong upgrade for YOU could be a step in the wrong direction. everyone has different sonic priorities. if there were any piece of gear that really makes a difference when upgrading, i'd say it's speakers 90% of the time. speakers sound alot more varied than amps etc. |
Bronze Member Username: Pingo76Slovenia Post Number: 28 Registered: May-04 | Wow quite a post. What I think/like? Well the treble is actually as i like it. The bass is lacking not sounding good, can't describe it well. Also i would like to improve clarity if possible. I can't listen to any amp in my area and i can only buy one blindly. The majority are favorable to nad c352 and B&W 601 S3. Thats why im leaning toward the nad in the first place. Many would hate pairing them with a marantz 7200 and think of it as a terrible mistake. Never heard any of those on B&W 601. If i only knew my ears are tuned like the majority i would go for the nad and nuff said. I love clear highs, maybe a little more bright that most ppl like to listen to but not much (again i guess from what i've read so far since i can't compare). But im mostly unhappy with the bass reproduction. I had the opportunity to listen the same sub hooked to a totally different gear but sounded way better as currently does. I tried to place it around in my room but found very little improvement from where i have it now. If i try to describe it it is less accurate and tend to become boomy instead to more cleaner and fast. The equipment it was hooked on had a weird CD player (dont recall the brand) a musical fidelity oval shaped amp and a pair of great sounding bookshelves sized like the 601 but probably another high end thing like the rest of the gear the guy had. Also, the integrated should have a preamp out so i can attach my sub there easily (don't wanna run my speaker cable from the sub). A more powerfull amp section is also desired as i like to have some good power "reserve" and not to push the amp over its capabilities. My choosen level i like to listen to some music is often at the limit of what my yammy can do (little before sound qualty starts to degrade). Tomorrow i should have that technics unit and im really eager to listen what does to music differently comapred to my yamaha. Thats why i asked how it sounds. Then i should have a better idea of what i really want. If i only can get a hold of the terminology used here. Doh! I never thought that finding a setup i really like is that hard. It is fun actually but its really hard as your delaers can't demo mostly anything you like to have a try on. Also i "believe" in the minimalistic approaches for better sound quality. I don't use any particular option the yamaha DSP can provide except maybe the timed power off rarely. Also the bass and treble are both on 0 as they do more bad than good. On the yamaha there is a shi*load of useless functions which could be cut out and spent better everywhere else. I should get better stereo sound for a same priced multichannel reciever right? I can choose mostly anything in current production from brands like Yamaha, Pioneer, Sony, Nad, Marantz, Harman Kardon, Onkyo and Rotel (althrough tooo expensive). I bought the yamaha (cheapest option) time ago to use it for surround gaming and cheapish home cinema. Tried with cheap spekers. didnt work. Listened to some mission, tannoy, and another brand possibly dali on a midrange yamaha reciever. Got B&W DM 303 (later added the 601) after hearing all available and paid them gladly. With time i learned that music has greater priority than movies so im trying to improve on that side. As far concerns movies i was happy enough with. I believe the speakers are fine enough for my taste. Thanks for your time mr. Budget |
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 379 Registered: Mar-04 | no problem. if you're a treble freak like me, you might not like NAD then. NAD is more of a warm-dark brand. ALOT of people love that kind of sound, otherwise, people wouldn't put ported 15" subs in their cars or listen to tubes. my ears hate warm. i DO respect B&W treble extension, but that's the only thing i like about the brand. i can't stand boomy one note ported speaker bass at all. if you want treble speed and detail without going broke, i'd recommend harmon kardon which beat out sony, jvc, NAD, pioneer and yamaha when i listened to ALL 6 brands side by side around 1990. the order i listed was the treble extension with sony being the most polite and harmon kardon being the most detailed. if you REALLY want to hear details... try to listen to magnepans. i tell you, i like $1000 maggies better than $20,000 B&W. i like my $200 acoustic suspension NHT superzeros better than $1000 B&W too. the B&Ws have better treble speed and extension, but the zeros have much better imaging and mid bass speed and neutrality if no bass whatsoever. i'm about to buy a cheap panasonic sa-xr55 or sa-xr-70 100wpc surround reciever which has gotten great reviews and is loved by maggie owners. maggies have the treble speed and detail of B&W but just a little more polite, but the midrange is way faster and "unspeakerlike". they just sound more natural. their bass is the fastest and most detailed you'll ever hear, but not as deep in the gut massage range. personally, i'll unplug my subwoofer as soon as i get MMGs. if you do go with NAD, you'll get very good bass response for sure. NAD kicks butt in the bass. my 25wpc (50wpc equivilent) NAD reciever can rattle my walls with my 12" sub, i just can't stand it's treble with soft domes. i love my 55wpc onkyo with zeros. it's treble is several times more extended and detailed than NAD. denon is also considered a "bright" reciever brand. one other budget possibilty that you didn't mention is marantz which always gets good reviews for their CD players at least. if you want affordable detail and reality, i'd recommend a $240 (delivered) panasonic sa-xr55 reciever and $550 magnepan MMGs. maggies will only work with amps that can handle 4 ohms, and you can try them and return them if you don't like them. they're factory direct only. read this review to see if maybe you might be interested in trying planars. i was prepared to NOT like them, and they blew my mind with their speed and super realism. i'm no longer an imaging freak. http://www.goodsound.com/equipment/magnepan_mmg.htm for panasonic recievers, all models that start with sa-xr are class-d which is a new tech that gets great reviews almost every time. i've read claims of users getting rid of $1,000 recievers and switching to panasonic. in a week or two, i'll be posting a review of the unit i buy. http://www.cnet.com/Panasonic_SA_XR70S/4505-6466_7-31290106-2.html?tag =top (available for $300 street price) http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=806&page_nu mber=1 http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/article.asp?print_page=y§ion_id=3&article_i d=514&page_number=3&preview= http://www.hifichoice.co.uk/review_print.asp?ID=2334 and for a review of the synergy between the 2 read http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-7922.html or http://www.audioasylum.com/forums/MUG/messages/87285.html where i get to pick the owners brain for a minute. before i found the maggie/panny review, i'd encountered a few mentions here and there of the audio underground loving panny class-d. if you absolutely need tons of bass... just hook a sub up to the panny. i'm thinking about using the panny to biamp my MMGs eventually (when i get them) using a behringer digital room equalizer/crossover. i'd read about the combo somewhere and the crossover is the weakest part of maggies. it sounds like your audio priorities are similar to mine. i'd say that you can't get more bang for your buck than MMGs which actually have 2k more treble extension than their $1000 big brothers (MG12s) which blew my mind. if you want female vocalists to sound like they're in your room... you might become a maggie convert too. LOL p.s. you don't have to call me mr., budget is fine with me. i'm not a formal kind of guy. glad to help any way i can, but don't take my opinions as gospel. EVERYONE has different priorities. mine are speed and detail. back to NAD, alot of people love maggies on NAD which is the cheapest "high current" amplification you can buy. i bet that 100wpc NAD reciever would drive maggies better in the bass, but the panny would do treble better. i'm a booming bass hating ruthless treble freak. those are MY priorities, that's where i'm coming from. |
Bronze Member Username: Pingo76Slovenia Post Number: 29 Registered: May-04 | Budget Minded, Im very gratefully for help and dedication. Oh my. Well, new speakers are out of the question for now. Also a decent panasonic "dealer" is yet to be found in my surroundings. Upon discussing with a few selected friends ill borrow for a day or two some different amps from them. As a surprise one have a nad 372 which would rappresent well for the nad front. There is a sony of the famous ES series. A midrange yamaha (older) but no HK around unfortunately. Possibly a maranz to get the idea why they shouldnt be paired with my speakers. I stumbled around another possibility though. Cambridnge Audio 540A. This thing had splendid reviews... so lets hear it. Ill try to get the dealer let me return it if i don't like the sound. Another thing that puzzles me. The sub hookup! My sub have line level, speaker level and the lfe input. Atm i have it hooked on the lfe out from my yamaha. Im trying to figure out how to hook it in the future. I would really not want to use speaker level variant as i dislike cables laying around. Whats wrong (if anything) if i hook up my sub on pre-outs on lets say NAD 352(372) or CA 540A using line level imputs on the sub? I read somewhere that doing so on the CA 540A it would prevent me to have the sub gain going up when i up my volume. True or bs? If true why in the wourld one would use the CA 540A pre-outs then?!? How about the NAD pre-out? Same thing? Thanks in advance. Regards, Gregor |
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 387 Registered: Mar-04 | if an output is labeled pre/out, it should be exactly what it says, an output that follows the preamplifier. it sounds like you're getting pre/out confused with a tape loop. if an amp doesn't have pre/outs and you want to hook a sub up at line level, you have to use the tape loop (tape out) which is a fixed level signal. any dedicated subwoofer output should track the volume of your preamp. if you want to read up on some reciever reviews, check this link out. http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/reviews/review.pl?Action=FindCat&CategoryID=Rec eiver you don't necessarily have to buy from a store. i live in a small town where my only reciever choices are sony/jvc at the mall and $$$marantz at the high end store. i'll be buying mail order. if you shop around when buying through the mail, you can save up to 40% or so off list price, especially at closeout time when new models come out. the downside is that you don't get to audition first and that it costs to return ship with a possible restocking fee if you aren't happy. i've never been a fan of sony sound on recievers. (never heard ES though). sony makes some of the most treble polite recievers and CD players out there. my onkyo DVD player trounced the daylights out of my sony CD player in the treble/imaging department. it probably isn't a fair comparison though because the sony used 16/44 bitstream DACs and the onkyo has 24/96DACs. every time i've ever listened to sony, it sounds like it's trying to be polite and inoffensive. i prefer treble that's ruthlessly revealing. if a CD is too bright and harsh... it should sound that way eg. talking heads: more songs about buildings and food. then, when you have a truly reference quality disc, nothing holds it back. eg. badi assad: rhythms. cambridge has gotten good reviews, (i was looking into that brand myself at one point) but one review that i read stated a little bit of treble hardness and grain. then again, i've read similar comments about rotel amps rated in the same class as NAD. it could be possible that the reviewers really meant dry sound as they like warm better. even if you're not considering a specific brand... browse through the many reciever reviews in ecoustics editorial reviews section. you'll learn alot about which brands have which "house sounds" and which aren't worth considering. there probably aren't many technics reviews. it isn't as popular a consumer brand as it was back in the 80s. that's probably in part due to sony muscling in on the "mall store" front. pioneer, which always sounded better to my ears, if not looked better than sony seems to have gotten pushed off the map too. |
Bronze Member Username: Pingo76Slovenia Post Number: 30 Registered: May-04 | Got the technics amp and surprisingly it is alive and working. Listening White Owl - Keiko Matsui with the unit. A little different sounding than yamaha but i like it. Still prefer the little clearer highs of the yamaha. Maybe im a treble fetishist too If i got it right the pre-out output does the same as the other pre-amp that is hooked by default on the power amp inside the unit. So if i change gain on the master volume level so should the other pre-out follow right? Please check this discussion: http://www.cambridgeaudio.com/forums/view_messages.php?CID=4&TID=1390&Title=Azur +340A Why is the guy giving advice proposing speaker level connections instead of the pre-out? // You can't use rca plug except if you use rec out but this output does'nt follow volume of amp and you need to use level of your sub everytime. But if your sub have a hi-level input it's ok . // Does CA use a funky pre-out on the unit? o.O If i got it all wrong please correct me. The CA 540A have a pre-out so does the nad c352. Whats the downside (if any) if i connect my sub there istead of using speaker level inputs? http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.audiocamp.net/data/review/1103 852969/review_50_393_1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://webzine.sorishop.com/board/review/bo ard_view.html%3Fno%3D393%26page%3D%26category%3D50&h=412&w=748&sz=33&tbnid=7yvr9 T0OU8sJ:&tbnh=77&tbnw=140&hl=en&start=14&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcambridge%2Baudio%2B 640A%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26hs%3Dgu0%26lr%3D%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg. mozilla:en-US:official_s%26sa%3DN The above page shows that the unit have a pre-out. It is the 640A but the two are the same thing cept that the 640 have a tad more power. Can't find the nad pic but i saw it once and the pre-out is there. Im in heavy learning mode, please feed me with correct technical knowledge As for reading reviews well i had enough of those for now. |
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 394 Registered: Mar-04 | no problem, everyone starts their hi-fi obsession at square one. ;) i really don't know why they recommended using speaker level outs. my best guess is that they just don't know what a pre/out is. pre-amp out is just what is says, it's the output of the preamp. i think they were confusing pre/out with line out. even though a line out won't follow the volume of your preamp, that still might be a better way to hook up a sub. i seem to remember reading a long time ago that line level feeds to a subwoofer offer better fidelity. if you used speaker level, you have to add a step down transformer to the signal chain as well as the less than perfect amplifier signal itself. pre/outs and sub outs (even line outs if you don't mind constantly adjusting the sub's volume) offer a purer signal to the sub's amplifier. when i first subbed my NAD, i pulled the u shaped pre/out amp/in jumper and hooked up a pair of Y shaped rca cables. the two male plugs reconnected the preamp and amp, and the female jack at the other end let me send a line level signal to my crossover which went into an integrated amp. i honestly think that the person that said don't use pre outs was saying it because they don't have them and don't understand how they work. MOST recievers don't have the feature. even if you didn't have a sub that will accept speaker level inputs, there's a cheap workaround... there are step down transformers (most car stereo shops probably sell them) that turn speaker level into line level. i bought a pair in fact so that i could record off of my reciever's surround channels as my onkyo doesn't have pre/outs either, but it does have a sub out. if you're sure that the unit has a pre/out, then that is your subwoofer driver or whoever made the unit is an idiot that doesn't know what a pre/out is and mislabeled it... i don't think that's likely. give your new reciever some time to break in. it's sound will relax some with use. if you like the yamaha better, then i'd suggest avoiding NAD. onkyo, denon and harmon kardon might be more to your liking. the panasonic is a little bright too from what i've read, but takes an extra long time to break in. before you go headlong into another upgrade, get used to what you already have. whenever you upgrade, it helps to have a fixed goal in mind. i would have guessed that the yamaha sounded better. yamaha isn't bad at all. my little yamaha BOOMBOX made better tape recordings than the deicated aiwa home tape deck i bought after the box's skateboard incident... don't ask. LOL |
Bronze Member Username: Pingo76Slovenia Post Number: 31 Registered: May-04 | Thanks. No further querys atm. For now since i have all the time i need for this ill listen to every integrated i can get a hold on. Thank you kindly for the answers and dedication. Regards, Gregor |
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 399 Registered: Mar-04 | no problem. getting used to the gear and training your ears to what you want to improve on is definately a good idea. after getting tired with my NAD reciever's overly polite treble with my soft domed superzeros, i wen't out and bought an onkyo because it has been called "bright" and onkyo made a point of advertising it's 100KHz treble extension which gave me just what i was looking for... more detailed highs. when you know what you don't like with ANY piece of gear, finding what you DO like is easier. even if you're not buying gear, it's a good idea to drop in stores and listen to as much gear as you can to see what other stuff does that yours doesn't. having already heard big full range speakers at shops several times, the first speaker that blew my mind was a friend's tiny little infinity speakers which imaged like crazy. you never know what you like until you hear it. |
richard blake Unregistered guest | I own a technics suv500 integrated amp (pretty cheap) amplifier discontinued a couple of yrs ago. Don't know the suvx500 but mine is ok. Still, I have this old 70's all in one record player with tin can speakers and it blows the hell out of all the 600usd amps my pals have (which includes some raved about names paired with equal quality speakers). Friends and I are not sure how this is possible. The all in one radio/vinyl player and speakers are from a brand called murphy and were v budget back in the day. One it dosent go a loud. Two, true detail is not great, but three, it sounds out sonics I (and friends of today are happy to admit) have never heard expensive amps of today delivering and detail can take a hike in comparison to what this murphy delivers. It looks like an utter piece of rubbish and has a broken balance knob...everytime you turn it it makes unsociable noise but kind of tubes up the sound in a new way, theyre are a variety of different sound qualities you can go through with this broken blance knob (whatever it is doing). I know nothing about electronics but it's like someone genius has modified it, largely breaking it in the process you might say.. Anyone had similar experience or able to offer light? thanks all the best |
Silver Member Username: CheapskatePost Number: 417 Registered: Mar-04 | 1970s japanese gear was alot better made. just pick an old reciever up... it weighs a ton. the older gear has better power supplies while today's gear is aimed more at getting decent sound as cheap as possible. those old recievers weren't "consumer units" like todays versions... they were "top of the line" hi-fi units. there was no such thing as mark levinson back then. if you go back even further... many people still pay top dollar for macintosh and marantz amps and certain JBL speakers and quads. just because gear is old, doesn't mean it's bad. it's just more likely to be broken. i had a "midfi" 1970s pioneer reciever that i picked up out of the trash (wish i still had it for my sub). it had one blown channel. i gave it to a roomate who had one large 3 way speaker... that reciever put more high quality sound out than someone elses 400wpc DJ amp. the walls rattled with no distortion. if you don't mind the retro looks (silver is coming back though) or the possibility that all of your switches are trashed (like my realistic integrated) then old gear can be great, and an awesome bargain. |
Guppy Unregistered guest | I'm thinking of buying the Technics SU-VX500 from an auction site. I want to play music through it from my PC. I also want to hook up my TV to it. I note that there is only one set of auxiliary jacks on the back? Do you think it would be OK to connect the TV sound output to say the CD or Phono jacks? |