Pioneer's SX line

[bdc]

How good, on average, are the receivers in Pioneer's old SX line? And also, how do they compare with the HK x30s? I've hooked up a Pioneer SX 750 to my Fortes and it sounds nice. It does indeed sound different, but I can't tell whether it is 'better' or not.

[Piranha]

My SX-1280 sounds pretty good on my CW's, but certainly no where near the quality of a tube amp. But the tuner section is what I mainly use it for now anyway. And it sure provides a lot of bass slam that seems to be typical of SS amplification.

[HDBRbuilder]

Overall, I prefer the H/K "X"30 series OVER the Pioneer SX series. The Pioneers of that series have pretty good tuner sections and decent MM phono sections, but I have never HEARD them beat out the same sections on the H/K series. Both are built like tanks, both are manufactured in Japan. The SX series was the series available from Pioneer back when I first bought my equipment in 1975-76. The thing I did NOT like about the Pioneer SX series was the backround "hiss" that I heard from all of that series when testing equipment before I made my purchases. The speakers I tested equipment through at the time were JBL 4311WX Monitors. Those speakers are not as efficient as Klipsch Heritage models from that time, but even with the less efficent JBL's, the backround hiss came through on the Pioneers and didn't come through on the H/K's.

In today's used market, those "SX" Pioneers generally go for twice or more of what the equivalently-rated H/K "X"30 would go for...so, if cash lay-out is a factor in a purchase, the H/K would be the way to go, IMHO...and the H/K's are EXTREMELY quiet in backround noise. Both series supply ample power for bass and such given their respective power ratings.

One advantage the H/K's have is twin-powering, which allows for more headroom than some of the similarly-rated Pioneers can muster up. It helps H/K in the fact that they CONSERVATIVELY-rated their amplifier sections. Generally speaking, the H/K's (in good condition), when bench-tested, will give a bit higher wattage power outputs than their factory ratings say they have.

One other factor that is important is that the H/K's carried on the H/K tradition of having ultra-wide-band frequency response...which ensures no roll-off of very high and very low frequencied musical transients when that factor and the twin-powering are combined in the H/K's.

For example, in factory-given specs for comparable 1976 models, the H/K 430 gives the following factory specs: 25 WPC RMS into 8 ohms (20-20,000 Hz) @ 0.5% THD; Frequency response of 4-140,000 Hz @ 0.5% THD into 8 ohms with both channels driven @ 1 WPC RMS; IM distortion 0.12% @ rated power output(25 WPC);hum & noise -65dB at rated power output (25 WPC, unweighted); damping factor 40; FM sensitivity 1.9mV: S/N 77dB; capture ratio 1.7dB; image rejection 60dB; spurious response rejection 82dB; alternate channel selectivity 50dB; stereo separation 39dB(again, all of these are conservatively-rated by the factory).

Pioneer SX-636 factory-given specs from the same source are as follows: 25 WPC continuous power into 8 ohms (20-20,000 Hz); 27 WPC into 8 ohms @ 1,000 Hz; HD & IM distortion 0.5%; power bandwidth 5-60,000 Hz; FM sensitivity (IHF) 1.9mV; capture ratio 1dB; S/N 70dB; image rejection 60dB; i.f. rejection 90dB; spurious rejection 75dB; HD 0.4% stereo; response 20-15,000 Hz +0.2dB, -2.0dB; 50-10,000 Hz +0.2dB, -0.5dB; stereo separation 40dB(1,000 Hz), 30dB (50-10,000 Hz).

Japanese companies were not well-known for giving CONSERVATIVE specs on their products, whereas H/K WAS WELL-KNOWN for doing so. Compare the two, specification-wise, then listen to each of them in a side by side, and let your ears be the judge. THEN...look at how much you have to shell out for either one of them...I will bet the H/K comes out the winner, even before the current used price comparison.

The same thing goes for any of the comparable models from the two series!

For Japanese-made equipment from Japanese companies of that era, I would likely go with Sansui for SOME, but NOT all of its models of that time. Even then, however, the comparable H/K's would be a better choice IMHO! There was a REASON why the H/K 430 was the best-selling 25 WPC receiver in the world for the two years it was in manufacture, and it WAS NOT just because its suggested list price in 1976 was 30 dollars LESS than either the Pioneer SX-636 OR the Sansui 661 (which had an additional 5WPC at 30 WPC)! Hearing is believing!

[Piranha]

I have never heard the HK430 so I cannot make an accurate comparison.

[Luuz0r]

i believe the ka-994 will own the hk430 and that silly pioneer sx series

[HDBRbuilder]

What does the ka994 have to do with his question???

[NOSValves]

I have a SX-780 and I have never had a background Hiss what so ever. I hardly ever listen to the output section anymore tough. I do however use the tuner section all the time. These receivers sound okay and seem to last 3 life times !

Craig

[artto]

Ive said this before & Ill say again. Im not sure what the fascination with the early/mid 70s solid state receivers is, particularly makes like Pioneer & Onkyo. The Pioneer SX series was single-handedly responsible for my going back to tubes. A good friend of mine had a pair, initially used with 4 JBLs & then with Khorns. The things sounded noisy & miserable compared to the Fisher tube receiver he traded in. IMHO the majority of the SS gear of that era, especially mid-fi stuff like Pioneer, was some of the worse sounding crap ever made. But they sure looked pretty.

Ive heard Andys HK with a pair of Heresys at the Klipsch tour ice beaker last year & it seemed to sound much more unobtrusive & smoother than I remember the Pioneer sounding. I also like the new HK AVR130 I got recently for the video system (I wouldn't call it a home theater, that term is so loosely used nowadays). But again, its no match for the tube gear Im currently using (& well shouldnt be considering the price, but it is a bargain IMO)

On the other hand..to each his own