$1500 to spend a Amp/Reciever, What would you get for Classic Rock ?

I've read somewhere here that my Yamaha doesn't make a good pre-amp but they didn't say why.

The preamp section in your Yamaha would be fine. I’m not sure why anyone would say that and leave it unexplained.
With a couple of hundred watts per side the 901’s come alive. Not that they will go too much louder, but will sound much better during peaks and driving rock passages.

I saw a modern Emotiva over at Agon with 600 wpc. What a monster and the 901’s are not afraid of power. If you decide to buy a big vintage power amp, be sure it’s been restored by someone with a good reputation.
 
Here's an interesting quote from someone who actually owned them in an old thread:

I bought mine in the late 1980's (still own them) as replacements for the Cerwin-Vega D-9's which I'd shredded with a pair of bridged Adcom GFA-555's. I hammered those 901's mercilessly for three years, often at a volume just below clipping (that's 600w each with 3db of headroom, mind). I played them so loud indoors that it was difficult to talk outside on the deck. I drove an entire bachelor party of drunk Vermont woodchucks outdoors from a large firehouse hall.

They never skipped a beat. As far as I'm concerned, you could plug them directly into a wall socket without blowing them up. Who cares what they sound like in a limp-wristed "audiophile's" postage-stamp living room? You don't drive a Peterbuilt in an autocross, and you don't play Bose 901's at low volume

When I sold HiFi back in the day, we heard the rumor you COULD plug them into the wall with no damage and on a lark......we tried. We were an authorized Bose servicer.
Guess what......nope......sounded like a gigantic burp, then silence......so don’t plug them into the wall but we did run them regularly with 500 wpc...no problems at all.
 
JoeE SP9...you are operating with very nice high-end equipment! I know nothing about Magnepan. You've clearly invested a lot of money in them. What makes them so special? How did you find them...a friend...a stereo shop? What kind of music do you play on them?

I first heard Magneplanars in 1976 in a store (no longer in existence) in downtown Philadelphia. I immediately sold my two month old B&O S-75's to a buddy and bought a new pair of MG-1's ($500). Interestingly, both pairs were identically priced. Since then I've had nothing but planers or ESL's of one type or another in my room.

As for music. I listen to just about everything except gospel and bluegrass. However, my main interests are Jazz and classical. I regularly attend classical concerts at the Kimmel Center and that is my music reference. I also frequently attend live Jazz concerts being played at various venues and clubs in and around Philadelphia

IMO/E planars, ESL's and many open baffles get the midrange right. That's where the bulk of all music is centered and many box speakers IMO do a mediocre job of reproducing it. Yes, planars, OB's and ESL's are often deficient in the extreme lows and the top end usually isn't as prominent as many speakers, especially those with horn tweeters. However, the IMO all important midrange sounds better on them. FWIW: I dislike the sound of most horns.

My 20+ year old Acoustat Spectra 22's were replaced by Maggie 1.7's only because a transformer in an interface self destructed. I fully iintend getting the interface fixed. Although I "started" with MG-1's I also owned MG-2's and MG-3a's before moving to ESL's (Acoustat Model 3's) in the mid-80's. As for the lack of bass in OB's, planars and ESL's, I use a pair of DIY 12" transmission line subwoofers (EQ'd flat to 18Hz) to augment the low end. I've never felt that my ESL's or Maggies were ever deficient in the top end.

BTW: The Acoustat Model 3's in the room they were in at the time reproduced the 32Hz organ tone in Thus Spake Zerathustra with pants flapping authority. In that room a subwoofer was not needed or even considered with the Model 3's. My current room doesn't natively produce deep bass from panels. Hence the dual TL subs equalized using a DSP.
 
IMO/E planars, ESL's and many open baffles get the midrange right. That's where the bulk of all music is centered and many box speakers IMO do a mediocre job of reproducing it. Yes, planars, OB's and ESL's are often deficient in the extreme lows and the top end usually isn't as prominent as many speakers, especially those with horn tweeters. However, the IMO all important midrange sounds better on them. FWIW: I dislike the sound of most horns.

Could not have said it better myself Joe.
 
WOPL1000 if you want the power to make those Bose scream. The WOPL FC amps are dead quiet so preamp choice is paramount and would have to at least meet the black hole s/n ratio of the amp
 
Does anyone know much about the Adcom GFA-555ms power amp? Wonder how that would work with my Yamaha as a pre?
 
I see I can get the matching pre-amp for $500 new. That might be the way to go.

What's the worse that can happen? You sell them for the same thing you paid for them? If you get the pre-amp through an approved vendor you can probably return it if it doesn't float your boat and maybe pay a restock fee? I'd do that.
 
OK...Bose guys...let it go. You guys love the Bose 901. You like them more than I do. So what!!!

Is it mandatory that I like them the same way you do? If I remember, you guys felt free to crap all over Cerwin Vega and JBL, two brands that I happen to like very much. Am I offended??? No...it's all personal taste. One man's food...

So guys...lighten up. There's hundreds of brands of speaker and millions of people like all of them for different reasons. You guys don't have monopoly on what the right speakers are for others. So relax if others share with you why Bose 901s or any other Bose may not work for them.

I like the sound of speaker systems that have 12 inch woofers. I really love the sound of very heavy bass. Bose has nothing to offer to me and that's OK. So I like other brands, as do many other people. Guys let's leave it at that.

Oh and for the record, some 901s do have a driver in the rear:

View attachment 1018427

The problem with riding on a high horse is that it's so easy to have your ego crushed when you fall off!

Hi, that small speaker is really mounted in the front! The v shaped part of the Bose with all the speakers is really the back. It was designed to face the wall behind the speaker and use bounce to spread the sound out. Just in case folks don’t know this. We now return you to the thread!
 
Hi, that small speaker is really mounted in the front! The v shaped part of the Bose with all the speakers is really the back. It was designed to face the wall behind the speaker and use bounce to spread the sound out. Just in case folks don’t know this. We now return you to the thread!


Dude is clueless.
 
I first heard Magneplanars in 1976 in a store (no longer in existence) in downtown Philadelphia. I immediately sold my two month old B&O S-75's to a buddy and bought a new pair of MG-1's ($500). Interestingly, both pairs were identically priced. Since then I've had nothing but planers or ESL's of one type or another in my room.

As for music. I listen to just about everything except gospel and bluegrass. However, my main interests are Jazz and classical. I regularly attend classical concerts at the Kimmel Center and that is my music reference. I also frequently attend live Jazz concerts being played at various venues and clubs in and around Philadelphia

IMO/E planars, ESL's and many open baffles get the midrange right. That's where the bulk of all music is centered and many box speakers IMO do a mediocre job of reproducing it. Yes, planars, OB's and ESL's are often deficient in the extreme lows and the top end usually isn't as prominent as many speakers, especially those with horn tweeters. However, the IMO all important midrange sounds better on them. FWIW: I dislike the sound of most horns.

My 20+ year old Acoustat Spectra 22's were replaced by Maggie 1.7's only because a transformer in an interface self destructed. I fully iintend getting the interface fixed. Although I "started" with MG-1's I also owned MG-2's and MG-3a's before moving to ESL's (Acoustat Model 3's) in the mid-80's. As for the lack of bass in OB's, planars and ESL's, I use a pair of DIY 12" transmission line subwoofers (EQ'd flat to 18Hz) to augment the low end. I've never felt that my ESL's or Maggies were ever deficient in the top end.

BTW: The Acoustat Model 3's in the room they were in at the time reproduced the 32Hz organ tone in Thus Spake Zerathustra with pants flapping authority. In that room a subwoofer was not needed or even considered with the Model 3's. My current room doesn't natively produce deep bass from panels. Hence the dual TL subs equalized using a DSP.

I spent quite some time with Maggies also in the mid 70's, when we used to pass the time going to hi fi stores , While I agree that they do the midrange quite well, they just never had the impact that I desired . At low volumes, they reminded me sometimes of having your hands cupped over one's mouth. But back then, my choice of speaker was a JBL L100, which performed admirably playing rock and jazz. I was yet to appreciate or investigate classical music, so I was not at a loss.

As I had mentioned previously, I have found my Definitive Technologies BP10 bi polar design to give the most life like reproduction of program material. They do not sound like a boxed speaker. These speakers appear to get very little appreciation from some others , and I admit that the top end may get a bit out of control on some recordings. But even at lower volumes, I find their musicality and flexibility admirable. I can hear more precise sound in other speakers, but that life like expression of space is hard to beat.

Putting on a CD of Camille St Saens , Organ symphony # 3. is a thrill. On this CD, the strings and piano across the entire CD is so balanced, so fluid, you don't want to touch a thing.

But the listening experience we all cherish is complicated. Mood and emotion rule the day, as does the environment The other evening, I was happy to sit out on my outdoor deck, facing a glorious sunset, listening to Mountain Jam , on SACD by the Allman Brothers. And the system ? A $ 100 KLH Home theatre receiver , fed by an OPPO DVD player , playing an outdoor pair of $ 75.000 bargain KLH " rock " speakers, weatherproof of course, and a 10 " Sony sub , $ 5.00 at a tag sale ( powered by an 0ld Yamaha CR620, purchased for $ 20.00 ) !. Placed under the deck. Solid plastic with a port for the base. It has been under there for 10 years, all weather conditions.
And what I can never get over is how good it all sounds.
 
I guess this thread is showing how differently we perceive what we hear. L100;s have always made me want to cut off my ears and run away.

The Def Techs I heard (model # unknown) were underwhelming to me. They reminded me of any number of "monkey coffins" I've heard over the years. That is, boxy with a truncated soundstage.

Perhaps I should mention that I'm especially sensitive to any accentuation in the treble area. To whit: any excess treble or harshness exacerbates my tinnitus.
 
You know...It's very interesting reading all the different opinions on the JBL-L100s. I guess in the wake of today's technology, the L100s are considered old-school and there are much "better" speakers out there. But this debate reminds me of another debate that I keep bumping into, which I'll try to explain in a second.

I think one of the reasons why L100s keep on being mentioned is because they have a very distinctive sound that was all the rage in the 70s. Back then, JBL was the acoustic monster in the room. If JBLs generally, and the L100s specifically, were a part of your stereo, then you were considered smart, intelligent and part of the audio "in" crowd. Put another way...if you didn't have the L100s...you were nothing!!!

I do have a lot of respect for the L100s and what they achieved historically. If you listen to any CDs that were originally recorded in the 70's, there is a 80% chance (don't quote me) that they were mixed with JBL-L100 "reference monitors." I believe that the most common power amp pushing the L100s was the Crown XXX. Crown guys, please fill in the blank here or tell me if I have this wrong.

So the funny part is, I hear so many people say that they want their stereo sound to be pure...and sound the way that the recording sounded when it was first mixed. Well, if that's the goal, then they need to buy and own a Crown amp and JBL-L100 speakers. That's it. It's just that simple. Yet, I hear these same folks say that the L100 is definitely not their favorite speaker and they don't own a Crown amp! This comment is not in response to anyone in this thread. It's just that the debate in this thread reminds me of the many conversations that I've had where this apparent contradiction keeps on coming up.

I don't own them, but I like the sound of the L100s. But, I agree with JoeESP9 that the tweeters can be a little harsh. Fortunately there is a control that allows you to turn them down so that the harshness is better contained. The only thing about the L100s that I'm not crazy about is their performance at very high volume levels. I mean, they still sound great but it seems to me that the bass response does not keep up with the increased volume of the mid-range and tweeter drivers. Other than that, I like them and would keep them if I owned them! I guess I still would like to be a member of the old-school "in" crowd!!! :)
 
Last edited:
You know...It's kind of funny reading all the different opinions on the JBL-L100s. I guess in the wake of today's technology, the L100s are considered old-school and there are much "better" speakers out there. But this debate reminds me of another issue that I keep bumping into, which I'll try to explain in a second.

I think one of the reasons why L100s keep on being mentioned is because they have a very distinctive sound that was all the rage in the 70s. Back then, JBL was the acoustic monster in the room. If JBLs generally, and the L100s specifically, were a part of your stereo, then you were considered smart, intelligent and part of the audio "in" crowd. Put another way...if you didn't have the L100s...you were nothing!!!

I do have a lot of respect for the L100s and what they achieved historically. If you listen to any CDs that were originally recorded in the 70's, there is a 80% chance (don't quote me) that they were mixed with JBL-L100 "reference monitors." I believe that the most common power amp pushing the L100s was the Crown XXX. Crown guys, please fill in the blank here or tell me if have this wrong.

So the funny part is, I hear so many people say that they want their stereo sound to be pure...and sound the way that the recording sounded when it was first mixed. Well, if that's the goal, then they need to buy and own a Crown amp and JBL-L100 speakers. That's it. It's just that simple. Yet, I hear these same folks say that the L100 is definitely not their favorite speaker and they don't own a Crown amp! This comment is not in response to anyone in this thread. It's just that the debate in this thread reminds me of the many conversations that I've had where this apparent contradiction keeps on coming up.

I don't own them, but I like the sound of the L100s. But, I agree with JoeESP9 that the tweeters can be a little harsh. Fortunately there is a control that allows you to turn them down so that the harshness is better contained. The only thing about the L100s that I'm not crazy about is their performance at very high volume levels. I mean, they still sound great but it seems to me that the bass response does not keep up with the increased volume of the mid-range and tweeter drivers. Other than that, I like them and would keep them if I owned them! I guess I still would like to be a member of the old-school "in" crowd!!! :)
What CD's were recorded in the 70's? Please do tell.
 
I first heard Magneplanars in 1976 in a store (no longer in existence) in downtown Philadelphia. I immediately sold my two month old B&O S-75's to a buddy and bought a new pair of MG-1's ($500). Interestingly, both pairs were identically priced. Since then I've had nothing but planers or ESL's of one type or another in my room.

As for music. I listen to just about everything except gospel and bluegrass. However, my main interests are Jazz and classical. I regularly attend classical concerts at the Kimmel Center and that is my music reference. I also frequently attend live Jazz concerts being played at various venues and clubs in and around Philadelphia

JoeESP9, thanks for sharing your story. Clearly I have a significant gap in my planar knowledge. At some point I need to spend some time and hear them. The Acoustat Model 3 at 32Hz sounds like one of the "must hear" speakers! :)
 
What CD's were recorded in the 70's? Please do tell.

I said, "any CDs that were originally recorded in the 70's"...in other words, the CDs you have now...that were originally recorded in the 70's. Perhaps I should have mentioned originally recorded in the 70's on tape. But I think most understood what I meant.
 
I spent quite some time with Maggies also in the mid 70's, when we used to pass the time going to hi fi stores , While I agree that they do the midrange quite well, they just never had the impact that I desired . At low volumes, they reminded me sometimes of having your hands cupped over one's mouth. But back then, my choice of speaker was a JBL L100, which performed admirably playing rock and jazz. I was yet to appreciate or investigate classical music, so I was not at a loss.

As I had mentioned previously, I have found my Definitive Technologies BP10 bi polar design to give the most life like reproduction of program material. They do not sound like a boxed speaker. These speakers appear to get very little appreciation from some others , and I admit that the top end may get a bit out of control on some recordings. But even at lower volumes, I find their musicality and flexibility admirable. I can hear more precise sound in other speakers, but that life like expression of space is hard to beat.

Putting on a CD of Camille St Saens , Organ symphony # 3. is a thrill. On this CD, the strings and piano across the entire CD is so balanced, so fluid, you don't want to touch a thing.

But the listening experience we all cherish is complicated. Mood and emotion rule the day, as does the environment The other evening, I was happy to sit out on my outdoor deck, facing a glorious sunset, listening to Mountain Jam , on SACD by the Allman Brothers. And the system ? A $ 100 KLH Home theatre receiver , fed by an OPPO DVD player , playing an outdoor pair of $ 75.000 bargain KLH " rock " speakers, weatherproof of course, and a 10 " Sony sub , $ 5.00 at a tag sale ( powered by an 0ld Yamaha CR620, purchased for $ 20.00 ) !. Placed under the deck. Solid plastic with a port for the base. It has been under there for 10 years, all weather conditions.
And what I can never get over is how good it all sounds.

I had a pair of Definitive Technology BP 7006s which I believe are similar to your BP10s. I agree with you...Definitive Technology really doesn't get the respect that they should. IMO, they are a very very good speaker! The other thing I loved about them was their look. To me...they just simply looked awesome!!! Here are a few pictures of my BP 7006s. I hope you like them!!! :)

DSC_0051.JPG DSC_0076.JPG DSC_0086.JPG
 
You know...It's very interesting reading all the different opinions on the JBL-L100s. I guess in the wake of today's technology, the L100s are considered old-school and there are much "better" speakers out there. But this debate reminds me of another debate that I keep bumping into, which I'll try to explain in a second.

I think one of the reasons why L100s keep on being mentioned is because they have a very distinctive sound that was all the rage in the 70s. Back then, JBL was the acoustic monster in the room. If JBLs generally, and the L100s specifically, were a part of your stereo, then you were considered smart, intelligent and part of the audio "in" crowd. Put another way...if you didn't have the L100s...you were nothing!!!

I do have a lot of respect for the L100s and what they achieved historically. If you listen to any CDs that were originally recorded in the 70's, there is a 80% chance (don't quote me) that they were mixed with JBL-L100 "reference monitors." I believe that the most common power amp pushing the L100s was the Crown XXX. Crown guys, please fill in the blank here or tell me if I have this wrong.

So the funny part is, I hear so many people say that they want their stereo sound to be pure...and sound the way that the recording sounded when it was first mixed. Well, if that's the goal, then they need to buy and own a Crown amp and JBL-L100 speakers. That's it. It's just that simple. Yet, I hear these same folks say that the L100 is definitely not their favorite speaker and they don't own a Crown amp! This comment is not in response to anyone in this thread. It's just that the debate in this thread reminds me of the many conversations that I've had where this apparent contradiction keeps on coming up.

I don't own them, but I like the sound of the L100s. But, I agree with JoeESP9 that the tweeters can be a little harsh. Fortunately there is a control that allows you to turn them down so that the harshness is better contained. The only thing about the L100s that I'm not crazy about is their performance at very high volume levels. I mean, they still sound great but it seems to me that the bass response does not keep up with the increased volume of the mid-range and tweeter drivers. Other than that, I like them and would keep them if I owned them! I guess I still would like to be a member of the old-school "in" crowd!!! :)

You have a lot to say.

And I must add, your post have kept it interesting, to say the least. I read the entire thread in a large part to see what you had to offer to the thread,
 
Last edited:
As for some good rock speakers, Infinity made a nice little box with a 12 inch driver, a mid, and an EMIT, that in my opinion is far better sounding. It will play loud, bass is great as the bass driver is a dual voice coil, which provides far lower frequencies than the other speakers your comparing it to. The mid range is very musical, and the hi's are quite extended compared to all the others with their less capable paper tweeters. They are found often for a reasonable rate and they have really nice veneer as well. I like the TOTL models better but for your application it would fit your requirements.

Infinity Quantum Jr.
I have a pair but these are not mine but just picture off the net. I own a Yamaha CR2040 receiver that rocks quite well with these speakers, and both can be found for far less than many other brands of gear.

cool+3:4.jpg
 
Back
Top Bottom