View Full Version : Technics SA 500


javajam12
01-12-2006, 10:09 PM
I just purchased a Technics SA 500 for around $40+shipping
and man is it sweet sounding! It really blows out my Denon
amp. I suggest that anyone who sees one of these around
should jump on it.

M Jarve
01-12-2006, 10:21 PM
Welcome Javajam! Technics is not as appreciated as some of the other brands of the 1970's, but they did make some pretty good gear. I have the TOTL quad SA-8500X and am very happy with the sound.

johndoe3
01-12-2006, 11:05 PM
You're right! Technics is really underappreciated gear around here. I for one, haven't got a discouraging thing to say about Technics equipment of that era. I have an SA-700, which I think is a real nice sounding receiver. I also have a couple of the smaller SU integrated amps which are very nicely built units, and to me, are just as good as anything else made back in the late 70's.
The one thing that I don't like about the Technics units, are those attrocious fake woodgrain cases that they all seem to use. They look crappy and rediculously cheap. Even the top of the line SA-1000 has one of those crummy fako cases!

crexrun
01-13-2006, 09:07 AM
Welcome Javajam, and there aren't a "lot" of Technics fans on here, there are a few. Like most other companies, they made some cheaper, less notable stuff, but things like the SA-500 series receivers, IMO, and as far as I know, pretty good stuff, and sounded excellent from what I've heard.

On the other hand, Technics made some real crap.
http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c326/Crexrun/IM002160.jpg

If you see any of this junk, send it to me so I can dispose of it properly! I'll even pay the shipping, just so you don't have to suffer listening to it.

Anything I can do to help, Crexrun

ToTo Man
01-13-2006, 09:27 AM
Welcome to AK javajam :thmbsp:

Not to put a dampener on this thread, but my limited experience of Technics gear (amps and receivers) hasn't really been a favourable one. I owned an SA-400 for a very limited period (bought it one week and sold it the next) and it was the worst sounding receiver I had ever heard, very harsh sound, and when you cranked the volume the harshness got even worse. I also own a TOTL SU-V9, which I thought was good until I got my Yamaha. The sound from the Technics is slightly harsh, and when you close your eyes you can tell that you're listening to the equipment and not the music. Have just been unfortunate with my Technics experience or are they generally regarded as having a harsher sound?

But to end on a positive note, $40 is a bargain in my opinion for any named equipment, so you still got a great deal there javajam :thmbsp:

mhardy6647
01-13-2006, 10:32 AM
My experience with (well, OK, my opinions of) my wife's SA-303 is consistent with Kenwood_Lover's. That being said, the SA-500 is a model year older and two models up the food chain, so it might be noticeably better. I have an SA-500 that I found at our town dump, but I've never listened carefully to it. It DID do yeoman service at our town's Teen Center for almost a year without erupting into flames, though! That's high praise, as erupting into flames is what its predecessor there (a Yamaha, as a matter of fact) had done. The flammulation was probably related to soda spilled into it, though...

:-P

ToTo Man
01-13-2006, 10:54 AM
Yeah the Yamahas do run pretty hot..... its doing a good job of keeping me warm this winter :D

tankdonovan
01-13-2006, 11:23 AM
I have had and still having a completely difference experence with a SA-400. The one I have has none of the problems that Kenwood_lover had with his. As a matter of fact I`m listening to it now. Sweet sounding little receiver.

How many WPS does the SA-500 have?

Tank

crexrun
01-13-2006, 11:42 AM
I've had quite a few pieces of stereo gear, not a lot of vintage, and not any real high end, but I know that the Technics gear that I have, sounds very good, IE, you can't hear it, it doesn't seem to add anything to the music. Ever since I got these Klipsch KP-301 speakers, which are pro Cornwalls, (a speaker that will bring out flaws very quickly, I have heard and learned) I have noticed a HUGE difference in CD quality, something I couldn't tell on other speakers, to this degree. There are about 5 CDs (out of maybe 200) that are unlisteneable, on this setup. They are very harsh, poorly recorded, and flat. On my old gear, they sounded fine, for the most part. I have an older, very well recorded christmas CD of the Glenn Miller orchestra, and you can literally sit down and you are front row center, there is amazing depth, you can hear individual string plucks and horns, you can hear the different background singers voices, etc. Sometimes the problems can be attributed to something else, too. Maybe Kenwood_Lover had a couple Lemons, I'm sure there are people that have had McIntosh that have had problems with them as well, and if they sounded poorly, they would have been happy with a Cheap Sony receiver from Best Buy if it sounded better.

I just picked up a Pioneer SX-650 receiver, ask a lot of people on here, and they'll tell you these little guys sound great, for basic older gear. Mine does sound very good, but when I crank on the volume a little, it breaks up and sounds very poor, at high volume levels, my 80's plastic SX-2300 receiver out does it, but at low volumes, the 650 sounds drastically better, but I beleive it needs to be recapped in the near future, but at work levels, it's fine for now.

What I'm saying is, I think Technics has some excellent gear, all the manufacturers have stuff that is sub-par. The TOTL gear is great, as it should be, but it all needs to be maintained.

A Rolls Royce that stalls at every intersection and needs to be pushed around a corner isn't going to be very enjoyable, and as you push, you'll find yourself jealous of the guy in the Ford Crown Victoria that happily went driving by, watching you push your Rolls!

Anyway, I'm not saying Techics is the best, but I think it's fine, the SA-500 is a good receiver from what I've heard, I'd like one. I think they look nice, minus the wood maybe, but I;ve not had firsthand expeience with that. Anyway, enjoy it, welcome to the site! Crexrun

tentoze
01-13-2006, 11:52 AM
I have had and still having a completely difference experence with a SA-400. The one I have has none of the problems that Kenwood_lover had with his. As a matter of fact I`m listening to it now. Sweet sounding little receiver.

How many WPS does the SA-500 have?

Tank

I'm pretty sure it's a 50 wpc unit. I picked one up last year when I was setting my youngest son up with a small system- it's mated to a pair of Advent/1 speaks witha Tosh 3960 DVD for playing ceedees, and I think it sounds pretty fine.

mhardy6647
01-13-2006, 12:41 PM
55 wpc, sez "Vintage Technics":
http://www.vintagetechnics.com/receivers.htm
http://www.vintagetechnics.com/receivers/sa500.htm

javajam12
01-13-2006, 08:51 PM
Yes, that is correct. 55 wpc. Thanks for all the great feedback. I always
like to hear good and bad comments about gear. Especially with older gear,
each unit is a bit different. I don't get any feeling of harshness from my
SA 500. I do really want to get a nice Yamaha too. I've got my eyes on
a few. That was really what I was after but I couldn't pass up the low $$.
Anyway, I realized that with my Denon gear (Int.Amp) I wasn't enjoying the
music as much anymore because it wasn't sounding "musical." While the
Denon may offer a more crisp sound, it is way too clinical. The SA 500 is
much warmer and makes me what to listen again. That is what is most
important isn't it? I would like the cabinet to be better quality though...

tankdonovan
01-13-2006, 09:52 PM
I have a Pioneer SX-5580 / SX-1500TD / SX-828 / MCS 3125 but I still listen to the SA-400. I have it matched up to a Technics SL-B202 turntable and MCS speakers. Not the best set up in the world but it sounds pretty good.

IT IS ABOUT THE SOUND!

Tank