New Guy here with some newbie-esque questions..Forte II's and amp "x"

[Audio Flynn]

The Nakamichi is 19 years old and still brings almost half of it's new price. How much will that Denon bring?? Nuff said???

Roger

Probably not. If you have a budget, the last thing you want to do is have someone almost twist your arm to spend more. Regarding the NAD, as has been pointed out, their power ratings are extremely conservative, and you probably won't be disappointed in certain of their models.

Try to find someone close by who has some of this gear and see if you can try it on your own system. It won't matter how good it is rated or how much someone else likes it if you get it and then are second guessing the purchase.

It is his money, and he is the one who will have to descide ultimately, but I listened alot to the NAD, Nakamichi, and Klipsch at the time of my purchase. You obviously Like NAD, but do you have direct experience with the Nakamichi?? The NAD is not even in the same league. The NAD was a good amp then for $600, but there was a reason the PA-7 was almost 4 times the price!! Consevatively rated at 60 watts per channel or not, the NAD does not approach 200 watts per channel either, or spec out as clean at 60 as the Nak does at 200. Have you ever had a PA-7 wired to your stuff??? You will not find a PA-7 for under $900, and I haven't seen one yet that didn't sell for $900, so he could easily unload it if he were to find he disagrees. I also suggest you look at feedback on AudioReview.com on the Nak, or web search and look at articles. I truely don't believe you have ever listened to a Nak if you would suggest that someone would be happy with an NAD, and even if he goes with a PA-5 or PA-5II, it is still alot more amp then the NAD ever was.

Roger

200 watts for Forte IIs is only necessary if your room is an airplane hangar.

Denon is edgy. I like their build quality but all 3 Denon integrateds I have used are edgy and sterile on horns.

NAD is in my bedrrom system and is a real fine piece of equipemnt for musical performance with pretty 2 dimensional soundstage. Great stuff at the price point.

HK, NAD, Marantz and Sansui sound pretty good on horns. Sony, Yamaha, and other commodity brands lack detail and soundstage.

Non tubies say non tubie comments.

Tubies loook at SS as a convenience item.

NOTE: Replace your crossover network capacitors before a major amp search. 92 Forte IIs are not sounding their best with 16 year old commodity stock caps.

[oldtimer]

I like Nak tape decks, even their low end are great. Personally I have a 480 from new and a used lx-5. Never heard their amps, but the quality should be there.

[B.Althaus]

I currently have a RX 303 and I used to have the Nak music bank cd player. I do like their gear.

I have listened to NAD in the past but have never owned any.

At this point in time I think that I will lay low and see what sorts of Nak gear surfaces.

Twisted.. I did do a google on the PA-7 and got a look in from above as well as from a bit of an angle form the side.

http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&rlz=1T4GGIH_enUS220US221&q=nakamichi+pa-7+pictures&start=21&sa=N&ndsp=21

basically a link to audio heritage.

[twistedcrankcammer]

The Nakamichi is 19 years old and still brings almost half of it's new price. How much will that Denon bring?? Nuff said???

Roger

Probably not. If you have a budget, the last thing you want to do is have someone almost twist your arm to spend more. Regarding the NAD, as has been pointed out, their power ratings are extremely conservative, and you probably won't be disappointed in certain of their models.

Try to find someone close by who has some of this gear and see if you can try it on your own system. It won't matter how good it is rated or how much someone else likes it if you get it and then are second guessing the purchase.

It is his money, and he is the one who will have to descide ultimately, but I listened alot to the NAD, Nakamichi, and Klipsch at the time of my purchase. You obviously Like NAD, but do you have direct experience with the Nakamichi?? The NAD is not even in the same league. The NAD was a good amp then for $600, but there was a reason the PA-7 was almost 4 times the price!! Consevatively rated at 60 watts per channel or not, the NAD does not approach 200 watts per channel either, or spec out as clean at 60 as the Nak does at 200. Have you ever had a PA-7 wired to your stuff??? You will not find a PA-7 for under $900, and I haven't seen one yet that didn't sell for $900, so he could easily unload it if he were to find he disagrees. I also suggest you look at feedback on AudioReview.com on the Nak, or web search and look at articles. I truely don't believe you have ever listened to a Nak if you would suggest that someone would be happy with an NAD, and even if he goes with a PA-5 or PA-5II, it is still alot more amp then the NAD ever was.

Roger

200 watts for Forte IIs is only necessary if your room is an airplane hangar.

Denon is edgy. I like their build quality but all 3 Denon integrateds I have used are edgy and sterile on horns.

NAD is in my bedrrom system and is a real fine piece of equipemnt for musical performance with pretty 2 dimensional soundstage. Great stuff at the price point.

HK, NAD, Marantz and Sansui sound pretty good on horns. Sony, Yamaha, and other commodity brands lack detail and soundstage.

Non tubies say non tubie comments.

Tubies loook at SS as a convenience item.

NOTE: Replace your crossover network capacitors before a major amp search. 92 Forte IIs are not sounding their best with 16 year old commodity stock caps.

200 watts is only required for Forte if your room is an airhanger?? [bs] [bs] [bs]

The Forte is no where near as sensitive as Klipschorns in the first place!!! In the second place, ever hear of headroom?? Keep the system playing at a lower than

distortion area of the amp. I remember Forte as being rated at 100 watts per channel, but what is the peak?? They will handle 500 watts peak output. Do you think

a 100 watt RMS amp is going to be capable of anything near a 500 watt peak, why do you think your speakers are sounding like crap on the big end?? They have no

headroom left. What do you think the headroom is on a 60 watt amp?? If you haven't owned a high end SS amp with alot more power than required, then you really

have no more idea of what you are saying about this than I would talking about tubes wouldn't you agree? The Forte is 98 Db senstive and the Forte II is 99 dB

sensitive, so it takes 4 times as much power to get the same audio output from a Forte as it does from a Corner Horn, and the Forte can only put out 119 DB

compared to a Corner Horns 124 Db. So by comparison, if you are saying that you will never need more thena 100 watt amp to run the Forte, you are in essence

telling everyone hear that owns Corner Horns that they have no buiseness with an amp bigger than 25 watts per channel for their speakers!! Once again I must

call [bs] [bs] [bs]

Roger

[twistedcrankcammer]

I currently have a RX 303 and I used to have the Nak music bank cd player. I do like their gear.

I have listened to NAD in the past but have never owned any.

At this point in time I think that I will lay low and see what sorts of Nak gear surfaces.

Twisted.. I did do a google on the PA-7 and got a look in from above as well as from a bit of an angle form the side.

http://images.google.com/images?um=1&hl=en&rlz=1T4GGIH_enUS220US221&q=nakamichi+pa-7+pictures&start=21&sa=N&ndsp=21

basically a link to audio heritage.

B.Athaus,

I also found this link for you www.pbase.com/ingor/nakamichi You will note the 4 large capcitors under the board, the gold screws and connections inside where they cannot be seen.

I further found a PA-5 on Audiogon, but the guy also has the ST-7 tunner and CA-5 control amp. If you are willing to wait on the PA-7, I would wait on a CA-7 control amp, but you could considder seeing if he would sell you the ST-7 tunner if you are planning on oldfashion FM capability on your 2 channel settup..

Roger

[Marvel]

You obviously Like NAD, but do you have direct experience with the Nakamichi?

Neither in most respects. I used a Nak cassette deck in the past (long time ago) and it was one of the best I have ever used. My son has a NAD, that he purchased on the cheap, and the amp portion requires some work, but the pre is pretty nice.

Just trying to be reasonable. Money is money and one doesn't need to spend more than he needs to. OR, he spends a lot, and thinks he has what he needs because he spent a lot. I like tubes and I like ss. I am not going to get bent out of shape wondering if I have the best of if the money I spent was worth it. However, it is still money that comes out of his pocket, so he has to be satisfied.

[twistedcrankcammer]

You obviously Like NAD, but do you have direct experience with the Nakamichi?

Neither in most respects. I used a Nak cassette deck in the past (long time ago) and it was one of the best I have ever used. My son has a NAD, that he purchased on the cheap, and the amp portion requires some work, but the pre is pretty nice.

Just trying to be reasonable. Money is money and one doesn't need to spend more than he needs to. OR, he spends a lot, and thinks he has what he needs because he spent a lot. I like tubes and I like ss. I am not going to get bent out of shape wondering if I have the best of if the money I spent was worth it. However, it is still money that comes out of his pocket, so he has to be satisfied.

Marvel,

Agreed!! I just think that 4 the bang 4 the buck, if he can spend $800, why not push for the extra $100 and get something truely wonderful. You could easily spend many thousands to get close in something new. Most have not listened to Nak when they made fine equipement as it was never an average consumer product, like Yamaha, Dennon, NAD, etc. All Nakamichi casette decks were better than most anything available at the time. To say that people are paying $900 for a Dragon cassette, $3500 for a Dragon CD, or $10,000 for a Dragon Turn Table that are 19 years old speaks volumes in and of itself!! Hey, I don't set the prices on this older stuff, but I will forever be a Nak head! I feel just a strongly about the Nakamichi gear as I do about Klipsch and old school Electro Voice speakers, and encourage anyone with Heritage or extended heritage to take a listen for themselves. Just like an old pair of Fortes, a PA-7 is a bargain in my book, even at $900.

Roger

[mbajner]

I have Forte II

using Anthem MCA50 amp with Yamaha RXV2095 as a pre-pro, sounds GREAT

so check out the Anthem MCA series of amps, great value for the money

[fenderbender]

Vintage SS and Tube are nice but buyer beware...most older gear WILL need to be serviced.....the Sansui pieces mentioned sound great once fully serviced but beware that the meters (as well as other parts)are not available and once they fail you are SOL...

A fantastic performer in your price range is a NEW Outlaw Audio RR2150 Stereo Receiver MSRP $699....This is one sweet Receiver that can deliver the goods...and if your interested in HT they have other multichannel ones as well

If I could only have one piece of gear and my budget was $700...the Outlaw would be it...... but thats me and opinions are like a$$holes, everybody's got one....

[B.Althaus]

Fenderbender brings up a good point, that i did mention in the original post. I am concerned about the availability of repair/maintainance parts and whatever i get i will more than likely try to get at least some replacement caps and transistors.

I have already looked at the Outlaw equipment and the RR2150 is an interesting piece. I like the USB option but i already use an i-pod dock on the "B" system anyway.

Although the mono amps could be used with a Denon DAP preamp that i have my eye on.

decisions...decisions

[twistedcrankcammer]

Fenderbender brings up a good point, that i did mention in the original post. I am concerned about the availability of repair/maintainance parts and whatever i get i will more than likely try to get at least some replacement caps and transistors.

I have already looked at the Outlaw equipment and the RR2150 is an interesting piece. I like the USB option but i already use an i-pod dock on the "B" system anyway.

Although the mono amps could be used with a Denon DAP preamp that i have my eye on.

decisions...decisions

There are no meters on old Nakamichi Amps to go bad, but there are plenty of places that specialize in working on older Nakamichi gear if you were to have a problem.

If you want mon blocks, I'll tag on a little site 4 you www.mjraudio.com He has upgrades for the Adcom GFA-565 mono blocks going up to $2500 each.

My point is that you can get anything serviced, you just have to be willing to actually look. My sister now owns my old Nakamichi TA4A receiver and had to recently have it serviced. I run early 1950s woofers that I have had fully reconditioned in my 1998 and other Klipschorns.

Roger

[fenderbender]

Did not mean to POo Poo vintage....thats about all I own...Just addressing that specific sansui BA/CA ...I have 4 Vintage sansui Intergrated and a couple of Mac that once serviced are marvelous ...same goes for many brands Like Twistedcrankcamer mentioned....

It's like going to the fruit market...lots of delicious choices....just got to figure out what "flavor " your in the mood for.....best is to try to impose yourself (I do) on people that have a system that you think you may like and listen to many different sources

[Audio Flynn]

The Nakamichi is 19 years old and still brings almost half of it's new price. How much will that Denon bring?? Nuff said???

Roger

Probably not. If you have a budget, the last thing you want to do is have someone almost twist your arm to spend more. Regarding the NAD, as has been pointed out, their power ratings are extremely conservative, and you probably won't be disappointed in certain of their models.

Try to find someone close by who has some of this gear and see if you can try it on your own system. It won't matter how good it is rated or how much someone else likes it if you get it and then are second guessing the purchase.

It is his money, and he is the one who will have to descide ultimately, but I listened alot to the NAD, Nakamichi, and Klipsch at the time of my purchase. You obviously Like NAD, but do you have direct experience with the Nakamichi?? The NAD is not even in the same league. The NAD was a good amp then for $600, but there was a reason the PA-7 was almost 4 times the price!! Consevatively rated at 60 watts per channel or not, the NAD does not approach 200 watts per channel either, or spec out as clean at 60 as the Nak does at 200. Have you ever had a PA-7 wired to your stuff??? You will not find a PA-7 for under $900, and I haven't seen one yet that didn't sell for $900, so he could easily unload it if he were to find he disagrees. I also suggest you look at feedback on AudioReview.com on the Nak, or web search and look at articles. I truely don't believe you have ever listened to a Nak if you would suggest that someone would be happy with an NAD, and even if he goes with a PA-5 or PA-5II, it is still alot more amp then the NAD ever was.

Roger

200 watts for Forte IIs is only necessary if your room is an airplane hangar.

Denon is edgy. I like their build quality but all 3 Denon integrateds I have used are edgy and sterile on horns.

NAD is in my bedrrom system and is a real fine piece of equipemnt for musical performance with pretty 2 dimensional soundstage. Great stuff at the price point.

HK, NAD, Marantz and Sansui sound pretty good on horns. Sony, Yamaha, and other commodity brands lack detail and soundstage.

Non tubies say non tubie comments.

Tubies loook at SS as a convenience item.

NOTE: Replace your crossover network capacitors before a major amp search. 92 Forte IIs are not sounding their best with 16 year old commodity stock caps.

200 watts is only required for Forte if your room is an airhanger??

The Forte is no where near as sensitive as Klipschorns in the first place!!! In the second place, ever hear of headroom?? Keep the system playing at a lower than

distortion area of the amp. I remember Forte as being rated at 100 watts per channel, but what is the peak?? They will handle 500 watts peak output. Do you think

a 100 watt RMS amp is going to be capable of anything near a 500 watt peak, why do you think your speakers are sounding like crap on the big end?? They have no

headroom left. What do you think the headroom is on a 60 watt amp?? If you haven't owned a high end SS amp with alot more power than required, then you really

have no more idea of what you are saying about this than I would talking about tubes wouldn't you agree? The Forte is 98 Db senstive and the Forte II is 99 dB

sensitive, so it takes 4 times as much power to get the same audio output from a Forte as it does from a Corner Horn, and the Forte can only put out 119 DB

compared to a Corner Horns 124 Db. So by comparison, if you are saying that you will never need more thena 100 watt amp to run the Forte, you are in essence

telling everyone hear that owns Corner Horns that they have no buiseness with an amp bigger than 25 watts per channel for their speakers!! Once again I must

call

Roger

I know a bit about head room but far more about headcases.

Your bold is unnecessary.

SPL has nothing to do with music.

[Hifi jim]

Thanks for all of the input so far, as well as trying to stay on topic.

I also love my Forte' IIs and will more than likely buy another pair when I get around to finishing the basement and  the re-setting up the full HT (which wil be soon I hope).

Twisted....thanks for the heads-up on the Sony and Nak suggestion.

As for budget i am thinking somewhere in the $800.00 ish range. I am also thinking about selling my Mcintosh C26 in order to help offset the cost.....and keep my wife from ......well i dont really have to explain that part do i?

As for the availibility of repair / maintenance parts.. Caps, Transistors etc... any thoughts on the mid 80's - early 90's gear? I know about Mouser, MCM, Digikey etc....thought someone might have some other sources.

 

After rediscovering my Klipsch kg4's recently with the acquisition of an H/K 930, and then a series of 70's era SS receivers, only to rediscover my old Mac amp sitting idle and eventually force the purchase of the C26. I am now the happiest I've ever been with a system. The C26 is a wonderful match to the MC2505 and the best preamp I've ever mated to it. Both sound very nice on Klipsch. I'd suggest picking up an MC2505 or 2105 to match with your existing C26 and feel confident that you have a very good SS setup. And service and parts availability doesn't get any better than McIntosh. Did you form any impressions of the C26 on the Forte's?

Jim

[veloceleste]

.

[B.Althaus]

HiFiJim.. Believe it or not I have never even heard the C26...since I got it I have not had an amp to hook it up to. A music library was upgrading and throwing some of this stuff away!! I know one of the curators and asked if anything was available. The C26 and a Thorens TD125 mkII were. The Thorens works well...it is missing the cover though. I just cleaned the C26. I opened it up and was shocked!!! It was pristine looking even after sitting around the house for a couple of years.

[Hifi jim]

HiFiJim.. Believe it or not I have never even heard the C26...since I got it I have not had an amp to hook it up to. A music library was upgrading and throwing some of this stuff away!! I know one of the curators and asked if anything was available. The C26 and a Thorens TD125 mkII were. The Thorens works well...it is missing the cover though. I just cleaned the C26. I opened it up and was shocked!!! It was pristine looking even after sitting around the house for a couple of years.

Wow, both are a great score. I'd buy a McIntosh MC2505 for about $500-600, keep the Thorens and the C26 and you'll have a mighty fine system for minimum investment. The C26 has a very nice phono stage, the best I've owned but that is not saying much, and really sounds beautiful on Klipsch. Maybe some of the other members running Macs will chime in. Macs and Klipsch have long been a popular combo, and after owning and listening I understand why. You are only a Mac amp short of musical bliss.

[oldtimer]

The Nakamichi is 19 years old and still brings almost half of it's new price. How much will that Denon bring?? Nuff said???

Roger

Probably not. If you have a budget, the last thing you want to do is have someone almost twist your arm to spend more. Regarding the NAD, as has been pointed out, their power ratings are extremely conservative, and you probably won't be disappointed in certain of their models.

Try to find someone close by who has some of this gear and see if you can try it on your own system. It won't matter how good it is rated or how much someone else likes it if you get it and then are second guessing the purchase.

It is his money, and he is the one who will have to descide ultimately, but I listened alot to the NAD, Nakamichi, and Klipsch at the time of my purchase. You obviously Like NAD, but do you have direct experience with the Nakamichi?? The NAD is not even in the same league. The NAD was a good amp then for $600, but there was a reason the PA-7 was almost 4 times the price!! Consevatively rated at 60 watts per channel or not, the NAD does not approach 200 watts per channel either, or spec out as clean at 60 as the Nak does at 200. Have you ever had a PA-7 wired to your stuff??? You will not find a PA-7 for under $900, and I haven't seen one yet that didn't sell for $900, so he could easily unload it if he were to find he disagrees. I also suggest you look at feedback on AudioReview.com on the Nak, or web search and look at articles. I truely don't believe you have ever listened to a Nak if you would suggest that someone would be happy with an NAD, and even if he goes with a PA-5 or PA-5II, it is still alot more amp then the NAD ever was.

Roger

200 watts for Forte IIs is only necessary if your room is an airplane hangar.

Denon is edgy. I like their build quality but all 3 Denon integrateds I have used are edgy and sterile on horns.

NAD is in my bedrrom system and is a real fine piece of equipemnt for musical performance with pretty 2 dimensional soundstage. Great stuff at the price point.

HK, NAD, Marantz and Sansui sound pretty good on horns. Sony, Yamaha, and other commodity brands lack detail and soundstage.

Non tubies say non tubie comments.

Tubies loook at SS as a convenience item.

NOTE: Replace your crossover network capacitors before a major amp search. 92 Forte IIs are not sounding their best with 16 year old commodity stock caps.

200 watts is only required for Forte if your room is an airhanger??

The Forte is no where near as sensitive as Klipschorns in the first place!!! In the second place, ever hear of headroom?? Keep the system playing at a lower than

distortion area of the amp. I remember Forte as being rated at 100 watts per channel, but what is the peak?? They will handle 500 watts peak output. Do you think

a 100 watt RMS amp is going to be capable of anything near a 500 watt peak, why do you think your speakers are sounding like crap on the big end?? They have no

headroom left. What do you think the headroom is on a 60 watt amp?? If you haven't owned a high end SS amp with alot more power than required, then you really

have no more idea of what you are saying about this than I would talking about tubes wouldn't you agree? The Forte is 98 Db senstive and the Forte II is 99 dB

sensitive, so it takes 4 times as much power to get the same audio output from a Forte as it does from a Corner Horn, and the Forte can only put out 119 DB

compared to a Corner Horns 124 Db. So by comparison, if you are saying that you will never need more thena 100 watt amp to run the Forte, you are in essence

telling everyone hear that owns Corner Horns that they have no buiseness with an amp bigger than 25 watts per channel for their speakers!! Once again I must

call

Roger

I know a bit about head room but far more about headcases.

Your bold is unnecessary.

SPL has nothing to do with music.

I used 100 watt receivers for many years in my smallish 15x15 room, albeit with vaulted ceiling and open on one side by maybe five feet. That was plenty for spl levels. Recently went to 200 watts and separates and it sounds better at lower levels and astonishing when cranked. Very clean, crisp, and louder than you would want for an extended time, but definitely better. Decidedly not an aircraft hangar, and decidedly not overkill. Also enough for a larger room if that ever becomes an option.

[Audio Flynn]

I used 100 watt receivers for many years in my smallish 15x15 room,
albeit with vaulted ceiling and open on one side by maybe five
feet. That was plenty for spl levels. Recently went to 200 watts and
separates and it sounds better at lower levels and astonishing when
cranked. Very clean, crisp, and louder than you would want for an
extended time, but definitely better. Decidedly not an aircraft
hangar, and decidedly not overkill. Also enough for a larger room if
that ever becomes an option.

=======================

My inference is you experiencing quality rather than quantity.

I see this is not a discussion about soundstage and realism of instruments.

[oldtimer]

There is definitely a quality difference. However the extra headroom of more power is also evident. As far as I knew when I posted this discussion was not about soundstage and realism of instruments. The realism now that you ask is still the same, it was always quite real with Forte II's. Mostly i was responding to twistedcranks comments as evidenced by my use of quote as the software allows, without any modification on my part.