Can anyone tell me what receiver this is? Guy is selling what he calls a Bose system. I am only interested in the receiver if it is worth it. Any ideas what it is? Does not look familiar to me.

Thanks for any help,

Ed

uh.. pictures?

oops.

Bose 901 speakers with the equalizer. Not sure about the receiver.

That looks like a Pioneer SX-535 or 525


Edit:
but its not.

Looks like Pioneer to me though.

Looks like Pioneer to me though.

yup...

A better pic would be helpful.

Not as sure it is a Pioneer. The Pioneers of those generation I seem to remember as having the tuning knob on the extreme right. The photo has additional switches or controls out of place for the SX525. I had one and not it.

Looking at the knobs and the faceplate doesn't quite look like Pioneer. Bose had 2 receivers, the big boy with the flip down panel and the 901 equalizer built in and another smaller or lower end model. Can not remember its looks but mabe it is that receiver as the knobs sort of remind me of the larger receiver.

Really hard to clearly make out the details so I may be off base.

Why not contact the seller and ask.

Thanks for the help. I do not have a better pic, it is from an online ad. I have contacted the seller, he was not home and did not know the model or make, it was his parents and he said he would call back. At first he said it was all Bose and then he was not sure. What are the Bose receivers like? As good as the speakers?

It's not a Pioneer 525 -- I have one and the tuning knob is at the far right and the knobs are silver -- those knobs appear to be black. The wood case, however, does look "Pioneerish."

What are the Bose receivers like? As good as the speakers?
If that's the case, I'd pass on all of it:thumbsdn:

http://www.vintageaudio.com.au/tuner-reciever/Bose/BOSE%20Spatial%20Receiver.htm

Here is a photo of the unit with the built-in equalizer. Actually back then Bose made some decent electronics. While I'd pass by any Bose speakers but, not as quick to discount their receivers, the preamp and power amp. I would leave the power amp where it lies, though. No, not b/c it is junk but at my age, I can not afford an injury from lifting something as heavy as the amp.

Oh, I think the one in the ad is the lesser model not the one in the url. That blind I ain't yet.

I saw that ad. I do not need, or want , the speakers but I could use a more powerful receiver. It is hard for me to pass up a deal. Thanks for the help.

If that's the same reciever in that ad I would buy it just for the cool factor if it wasn't too expensive.

It does not look the same to me.

Could be a Realistic. Looks to be one. Not a bad receiver. Not great, but almost bulletproof. Don't sell them short, just because they were sold at Radio Shack. I have a couple in my collection. I'm not ashamed at all to say that I own them. Good clean power.

Bob

IMO that Bose receiver is UGLY!





If you are just wanting a better receiver, why not just wait until there is one selling that you can identify as something you would want, and maybe one that isn't packaged with something you don't want. :scratch2:

I have a SX-1500TD that looks sorta close. I don't have any pics of mine but here it is on classic-audio.

http://www.classic-audio.com/pioneer/sx1500td.html

I have a SX-1500TD that looks sorta close. I don't have any pics of mine but here it is on classic-audio.

http://www.classic-audio.com/pioneer/sx1500td.html

Nope. That has two large knobs on the right where as the one in question has one knob on the right with three buttons or switches to its right.

Right... that's why I said sorta close.

You guys are good, I talked to the guy again and he was out again. He could only recall that it is a Pioneer receiver. I am going to meet and take a look in an hour or so. Sir Byrd I do want to wait but if this is a good deal I will take the entire package, he is not interested in splitting the set. I would like a more powerful receiver than the 45 watt Pioneer I have. Anyone have info on how I can tell the output of a Pioneer? Are the Bose worth $50?

Thanks,

Ed


Sorry if this is a duplicate post, I posted this once and it did not show up.

The 901's are, IMO, well worth $50...
They look like Series I or II, both of which I think sound pretty nice, although the active EQ is a must. It'll probably need a recap and service though. The early 901's are to my ears better than the newer ones.

They can handle one hell of a lot of power quite happily, and tend to be good for non critical listening where you're moving around the room.

I think the Series I and II had cloth surrounds whereas the III had foam (someone correct me if I'm wrong!). You might want to check because if they are a series III, they will need foam and refoaming 18 drivers is a fairly time consuming task to say to the least!

Mystery solved, the receiver is a Pioneer sx-2500, about 70 watts. It is more than the 45 watt receiver I have so I bought it. I had to take the Bose speakers too but I will try to sell them. He offered them to me for less anyway. Here is a poor quality photo as I was loading it in my trunk to take it home. I will put other photos up later when I get back. The guy also said he has his parents old tt and their friend may have a vinyl collection to get rid of.

Thanks for the help and feedback.

Ed

It is not in the Pioneer database. You may have picked up a rare unit on the cheap. Yous should query the Pioneer board. Anyway congrats on the pickup. Give the 901s a try before dumping them and then you can be the object jokes or can make fun of persons inquiring about them. I'm not a Bose 901 lover but setup correctly they can deliver some interesting presentations.

It is not in the Pioneer database. You may have picked up a rare unit on the cheap. Yous should query the Pioneer board. Anyway congrats on the pickup. Give the 901s a try before dumping them and then you can be the object jokes or can make fun of persons inquiring about them. I'm not a Bose 901 lover but setup correctly they can deliver some interesting presentations.

I own (6)901's and do agree that they are overrated. But, as said set up correctly, they can present some dynamic sound. The earlier versions are better than the newer versions, in my opinion.

Bob

That's not 70 "RMS" (continuous per FTC specification, per channel) watts.
It's probably 70 "stereo IHF" watts; probably roughly 25 wpc, if so. It might be a 70 "stereo watts" continuous (35 wpc).

I found this in the database, I think it is for this unit. I do not know what the "tube?" part means.

1970 Q 1974 U SX-2500 SX-100S 550 $ Stereo, FM, MW 58w Uses AKM-003 (speaker Plugs), w/RC (wired) Tube?


I saw somewhere in my search for information 70 or 72w and other places 58w. I am using a Pioneer sx-3700 and this sx-2500 sounds like it has more power. The sx-3700 is listed as 45w in the database and the sx-2500 as 58w. No matter what the watts, it sounds good so far. I still need to clean it.

If I am in a thrift store or yard sale is there a way to find out the RMS watts on a receiver by the information located on it?

Ed

If I am in a thrift store or yard sale is there a way to find out the RMS watts on a receiver by the information located on it?



I use 'about of 30% of the total power consumption', which will be given somewhere on the back. In other words, a receiver that draws 100 watts will produce about 30 wpc RMS. No guarantees, some receivers are more efficient than others, but that's my rule of thumb.

If I am in a thrift store or yard sale is there a way to find out the RMS watts on a receiver by the information located on it?

Ed
Fancy cracking it open and posting some pics of the insides? It's possible to make an educated guess going on the size of transformer and heatsink.

That looks like one I picked up years ago -- the rectangular panel being a preset or scan function for the tuner. The most interesting thing about the one I had was that there was a location for (optional and not on mine, alas) moving coil transformers to be plugged in. If yours is what I think it was, and it has the transformers, they'd be worth the price you paid.

That looks like one I picked up years ago -- the rectangular panel being a preset or scan function for the tuner. The most interesting thing about the one I had was that there was a location for (optional and not on mine, alas) moving coil transformers to be plugged in. If yours is what I think it was, and it has the transformers, they'd be worth the price you paid.

I do not know what a moving coil transfomer is or what it is for. Is it for a turntable? There is an open area on the right side of the receiver with two sockets is what I would call them. They look like they are for tubes to be plugged in. I read that one of these is to be used for a remote. One of these sockets does have something plugged into it. Is this what you are talking about? Why are these so important? I will post a photo later.

You did well on that -- the 901s are worth a bunch more than whatever you paid for them. I'd flog them, and invest the cash back into your rig. :thmbsp: Just MHO, of course.

Your description sounds exactly like my memory of the description in the user manual that came with mine (long gone, by the way). If its a sort of tin can, rather than simply a shorting plug, you may have the transformers. Not sure what the module would have printed on it, but probably something with MC (moving coil) somewhere, and possibly some specs -- input and output voltages or ratios or the like.
Moving coil cartridges wag a coil in a magnetic field rather than the more common wagging a magnet between coils. They have a much lower output, so they usually need to be stepped up, either with transformers or with an active stage, before they can be run into a standard phono amp. Transformers are an elegant solution since they are passive and can be small, since the voltages are small, but making transformers that cover the whole frequency range is not cheap. So good transformers (either MC or microphone ones, which have the same sorts of issues) have real value.
People differ in their opinions about whether MCs justify the hassle, but there is a large group of true believers (I'd be among them), so even if the reciever doesn't please you, don't just toss the transformers along with the reciever -- the socket arrangement can't be used elsewhere but the transformers certainly can.

Your description sounds exactly like my memory of the description in the user manual that came with mine (long gone, by the way). If its a sort of tin can, rather than simply a shorting plug, you may have the transformers. Not sure what the module would have printed on it, but probably something with MC (moving coil) somewhere, and possibly some specs -- input and output voltages or ratios or the like.

Here is a photo of the side and what I unplugged from the left side. It says lamp unit on it. The other plug looks like it has wires, maybe those are shorting plugs? Note: the photo of the right side is rotated 180 degrees, ie. it is upside down, sorry about that.


Titanstats - What do you mean by flog?

Ed

That's not 70 "RMS" (continuous per FTC specification, per channel) watts.
It's probably 70 "stereo IHF" watts; probably roughly 25 wpc, if so. It might be a 70 "stereo watts" continuous (35 wpc).

Here are the specs in post #5. How does that translate to RMS?

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=201636

Here are some better photos.

Here's a thread with some answers:

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=121211

Thanks, I saw that thread before I bought this. The moving cartridge comment did not click then. So it plugs in on the right, guess I do not have one.

CdS stands for Cadmuim Sulphide, which is a photoresistive material used in light meters and sensors, so I guess that its part of the remote control system, but how and what else you need is not obvious.
The other plug seems to me to be just a pair of jumpers -- if you had the MC transformer plug it would replace the jumper plug.
I think you are limited right now to moving magnets, but that's by far the most common type of cartridge.