1967 H/K 200 receiver

Discussion in 'Solid State' started by Dwartz, Jul 13, 2010.

  1. Dwartz

    Dwartz Iron Oxide Addict Subscriber

    Got this today. I think it's quite lovely. Other than the knobs, it's cosmetically perfect. The PO said that he sound degrades when you turn up the volume and the bass past about halfway. He had it hooked up to some pretty massive speakers - I wonder if it just wasn't powerful enough. I haven't hooked it up at home yet.

  2. Wazz

    Wazz New Member

    I don't think those pre 70s receivers for the most part, were designed to drive gigantus power hog speakers to window cracking volume anyway. You might be right with your idea, if both channels poop out instead of just one, maybe it does not have the bang to push 15 inch low efficiency plaster smashers. You can determine that well enough yourself. Would be interested to see the specs. Remember in the 60s makers often used inflated ratings like peak power, both channels combined, etc. to get big numbers. Not RMS power per channel at some reasonable distortion level. But you got a classic it looks like so enjoy.
  3. Sandy G

    Sandy G Spiteful Old Cuss Moderator Subscriber

    Ain't NOTHIN' wrong w/anything from 1967...Sez the man w/the Guess-What-Year Lincoln avatar...(grin)
  4. Dwartz

    Dwartz Iron Oxide Addict Subscriber

    The manual says "50 watts IHF." I haven't figured out the abbreviation yet, and that's obviously total power, not per channel.
  5. luckyed

    luckyed New Member

    I like how it looks.
  6. nolan

    nolan Banned

    Classy looking rig ! Keep us posted,very interesting in deed.
  7. ehegwer

    ehegwer New Member

    that's a beaut!
  8. Dwartz

    Dwartz Iron Oxide Addict Subscriber

    Ain't nothin' wrong with a suicide door Continental any day.
  9. N9JCQ

    N9JCQ New Member

    was that the HK that has been on CL for a few weeks?
  10. mrr1

    mrr1 Just Analog

    IHF=Institute of High Fidelity. The old way of measuring power output etc.
  11. Dwartz

    Dwartz Iron Oxide Addict Subscriber

    That's the one!
  12. Brian

    Brian An Old Geezer

    ikely equates to about 20 watts rms per channel. A really nice receiver but back then because of the taper of the volume control, turning it up past 12:00 or there abouts, you end up overdriving the amp.
  13. dspear99ca

    dspear99ca New Member

    ??? Say what? All volume pots are and have always been audio taper, n'est pas? And whether or not you're overdriving the amp will depend on the amplitude of your source... within a receiver you'd think they'd match the output voltage of the tuner with the input sensitivity of the amp so that max volume won't necessarily clip the amp.... or not.
  14. Brian

    Brian An Old Geezer

    Sad to say while the term audio taper is common, there is no standard as to the taper. We were an IRC dealer and there were some 100 wafer assemblies of the same resistance and dimensions all termed audio taper. Also, not all companies used audio tapers but log tapers and these too came in multiple tapers. I agree that provided the input source voltage is within the spec of the amp, the preamp should not overdrive the amp. However, in reality the max point on the volume control for an unclipped output at a specified input voltage is not at max. The reason is to permit sufficient gain to allow for full output with lower than specified input voltages.

    Many makers would peg the max output with a specified input voltage at between 1:00 and 2:00 on the controls.

    If you have a scope, set up a test system and monitor the output waveform as you vary the source voltage and volume control setting.

Share This Page