Jump to content

Sansui 9090 vs Sansui 9090DB


mark heija
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am the original owner of these two receivers. The 9090 (my first stereo purchase) powered a pair of AR11's for years in my studio. The 9090DB has been paired with LaScalas in my living room since day one. Recently both have been totally service by an excellent technician. Cosmetically they are near mint (a small scratch on the 9090DB's wood cover). The covers are interchangeable. Both receivers have taken turns in my living room with the Klipsch and I love the sound of both (recently added an SVS subwoofer and Rega P6 TT) to the system. I'm now retired and brought the 9090 home. I don't have room to use both. Sad to say, I need to let one go. I've read the DB feature can be prone to failure (though it's not something I use). Should the 110watts/channel 9090 vs the 125watts/channel 9090DB be a consideration. The 9090 probably worked a bit harder over the years. Any suggestions? Thanks.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kind of what I was thinking, and the 909DB does even better on the vintage market. There is the .1%THD of the 9090DB vs. .2%THD on the 9090? 

 

Saw this post... "I'd suggest that likely the higher distortion is due to the quasi-complimentary output stage (all NPN devices) design of the 9090, versus the full complimentary design (NPN and PNP outputs) of the 9090db. The positive NPN's on the 9090 provide a nice low impedence signal path to the load, but the negative side of course has to drive the load from the collector, which is a high impedence source. I've never been crazy about this scheme, but sometimes the result is pretty damn good." 

 

Of course, I don't know what this means but perhaps the higher distortion shouldn't be a concern if I keep the 9090... as would it having 15 fewer watts driving the LaScalas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a 9090DB that I bought from a friend of a forum member. Thanks @willland for arranging and delivering. It is a monster as you know and frankly was too much for my Palladium P37s but oh did it sound good.  While I owned it I studied a lot about it. The Dolby boards are known to be very problematic but on some versions (later I think) the design of the boards were improved and thus nowhere nearly as susceptible to the problem. There are pins that connect areas of the board that need to be re-flowed, etc. It's quite a job just getting it out.

 

Mine did not have an issue but many prefer the 9090 for the reason mentioned earlier in this thread. If it were me and everything worked correctly I'd keep the DB.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  A good friend had a 9090 B I thought, purchased around 1975 or 1976. Used it until he passed away.

  He had issues with jacks. Might have been ham fisting the AUX inputs. Seems like he paid a tech to repair several times. This was early CD player times, plus plugging in the TV to listen to MTV. 

  It was impressive. Way better than the junk I had then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, mark heija said:

Any thoughts on driving the efficient LaScalas with lower wattage having any benefits?

not really ,  the only issue would be distortion , but both these amps are quite the distortion free amps - so no worries at all

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/20/2020 at 4:40 PM, mark heija said:

I am the original owner of these two receivers. The 9090 (my first stereo purchase) powered a pair of AR11's for years in my studio. The 9090DB has been paired with LaScalas in my living room since day one. Recently both have been totally service by an excellent technician. Cosmetically they are near mint (a small scratch on the 9090DB's wood cover). The covers are interchangeable. Both receivers have taken turns in my living room with the Klipsch and I love the sound of both (recently added an SVS subwoofer and Rega P6 TT) to the system. I'm now retired and brought the 9090 home. I don't have room to use both. Sad to say, I need to let one go. I've read the DB feature can be prone to failure (though it's not something I use). Should the 110watts/channel 9090 vs the 125watts/channel 9090DB be a consideration. The 9090 probably worked a bit harder over the years. Any suggestions? Thanks.

 

PM SENT -

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...