All time greatest amplifiers

[Blacksabbath25]

Arcam alpha 10

I liked the Arcam alpha series I had a Arcam 7 with matching CD player 7SE that’s back in the day when Arcam was probably a UK company

 

[Macspur]

Gryphon Diablo 300 Intigrated

McIntosh MA2275 tube Intigrated

Mac

www.realmusicnet.wordpress.com

 

[lindsayt]

The Sony TA-1120 amplifier. The first all silicon amplifier, from 1965. I'd love to try one of these. Some people say they sound very good.

https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F302549180088

found a mint one on eBay starting bid £550

That is a 1967 TA-1120A, which has a different pre-amp and power amp circuit to the 1965 TA-1120

I did wonder but see it so I thought I would show you anyway it’s a lot of money the TA-1120A

Yes, 50 year old 50 watt Sony integrated amps do sell for rather more than NAD 3020's.

Is that because they are relatively good sounding amps? Or is it because of their historical value; first all silicon series of amps? Or both?

 

[Gray]

NAD 3020, which, at the time, allowed non-elites to own a bit of quality (many for the first time).

 

[Infiniteloop]

The Sony TA-1120 amplifier. The first all silicon amplifier, from 1965. I'd love to try one of these. Some people say they sound very good.

https://rover.ebay.com/rover/0/0/0?mpre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.co.uk%2Fulk%2Fitm%2F302549180088

found a mint one on eBay starting bid £550

That is a 1967 TA-1120A, which has a different pre-amp and power amp circuit to the 1965 TA-1120

I did wonder but see it so I thought I would show you anyway it’s a lot of money the TA-1120A

Yes, 50 year old 50 watt Sony integrated amps do sell for rather more than NAD 3020's.

Is that because they are relatively good sounding amps? Or is it because of their historical value; first all silicon series of amps? Or both?

It's undoubtedly because it looks nicer and has more knobs to twiddle.

 

[insider9]

Or is it because people who don't know about it seen it mentioned a few times on a forum like this and think it's better than it actually is...?

 

[Vladimir]

I've owned the NAD 3020 and Pioneer A400, the NAD is terrible in every aspect, the A400 is much better. My current underdog the Technics SU-7700 is even better IMO.

Like Dave mentioned earlier, people had Amstrads before buying NAD 3020, so the step up was mind blowing to them. For the first time the audiophile chakras were tingling with spatial, fat, resolving sound. Doesn't have to be NAD or the Pio, some other mentiones did the same effect, like budget Arcam Alphas, Rega Brios etc.

 

[chebby]

I've owned the NAD 3020 and Pioneer A400, the NAD is terrible in every aspect, the A400 is much better.

Of course the Pioneer didn’t launch until 12 years after the NAD first appeared, so they are - effectively - from different eras. The NAD was conceived with LPs and FM and cassettes in mind and the Pioneer was designed - primarily - for CD replay.

Most Amstrad buyers at that time were little old couples, with fixed low incomes, who were gulled by the ‘made in Britain’ stickers (and Alan Sugar wrapping himself in the Union Flag) into parting with pension money for tat that would blow up shortly after purchase! (About 1 out of three of their receivers - cloned from Goodmans Module 90s - failed straight of the box.)

As a student working part-time in a hi-fi shop, I tried my level best to persuade people to avoid Amstrad but old ladies trusted Alan Sugar’s straight talking East End ‘barrer boy’ image and ‘i’m backing Britain’ spiel.

 

[Vladimir]

I've owned the NAD 3020 and Pioneer A400, the NAD is terrible in every aspect, the A400 is much better.

Of course the Pioneer didn’t launch until 12 years after the NAD first appeared, so they are - effectively - from different eras. The NAD was conceived with LPs and FM and cassettes in mind and the Pioneer was designed - primarily - for CD replay.

The Technics SU-7300 was of the same vintage (77/78) and also a cheapy, but it doesn't sound as muddy as the 3020. Maybe I had a dud (and my friend too), considering so many years have passed.

 

[Al ears]

I've owned the NAD 3020 and Pioneer A400, the NAD is terrible in every aspect, the A400 is much better.

Of course the Pioneer didn’t launch until 12 years after the NAD first appeared, so they are - effectively - from different eras. The NAD was conceived with LPs and FM and cassettes in mind and the Pioneer was designed - primarily - for CD replay.

Most Amstrad buyers at that time were little old couples, with fixed low incomes, who were gulled by the ‘made in Britain’ stickers (and Alan Sugar wrapping himself in the Union Flag) into parting with pension money for tat that would blow up shortly after purchase! (About 1 out of three of their receivers - cloned from Goodmans Module 90s - failed straight of the box.)

As a student working part-time in a hi-fi shop, I tried my level best to persuade people to avoid Amstrad but old ladies trusted Alan Sugar’s straight talking East End ‘barrer boy’ image and ‘i’m backing Britain’ spiel.

You are quite correct, I got my A400 back in 1991 and, for once, it was a Marantz that was rather let down by its mediocre phono stage. It didn't take me long before I forked out for an external phono preamp.

 

[lindsayt]

Or is it because people who don't know about it seen it mentioned a few times on a forum like this and think it's better than it actually is...?

No. This forum will have had minimal global impact on the pricing of 1960's Japanese solid state amps.

And, I'm not aware of TA-1120's being over-hyped on any other forums.

One thing to bear in mind is that most amps from this era were designed with 8 ohm speakers in mind. Therefore they may not be the most synergistic match with 4 ohm speakers.

 

[insider9]

Or is it because people who don't know about it seen it mentioned a few times on a forum like this and think it's better than it actually is...?

No. This forum will have had minimal global impact on the pricing of 1960's Japanese solid state amps.

And, I'm not aware of TA-1120's being over-hyped on any other forums.

 

One thing to bear in mind is that most amps from this era were designed with 8 ohm speakers in mind. Therefore they may not be the most synergistic match with 4 ohm speakers.

In which case I might fancy one

 

[Blacksabbath25]

I would of love to of brought a true classic amplifier myself something like an old luxman or Mclntosh or a classic Yamaha , Marantz amplifier but couldn’t use the amplifier with my Dali’s which are 4ohm speakers .

But if you buy a classic amplifier you do not really no what the condition is like inside so it would cost you to have it looked at and then anything that would need replacing inside to restore the amplifier to its former glory .

 

[Diamond Joe]

I hardly think I'm qualified to say what the greatest amp is or was, but the Leema Tucana 2 has long been one of my favourites.

 

[insider9]

A mate of mine just got a Marantz PM-7200. Switchable Class A-A/B. He only runs it in Class A and loves it.

 

[Gray]

I've owned the NAD 3020..... terrible in every aspect.

Maybe you got it free, otherwise what made you buy it?

 

[Vladimir]

I've owned the NAD 3020..... terrible in every aspect.

Maybe you got it free, otherwise what made you buy it?

I read a TNT Audio article on legendary amps. I already had the Pio A400 so I thought I'd try the famous 3020. Got it cheap in good condition,didn't like it so I sold it soon after. A friend also has one, I've heard the same muddy sound signature with his as well.

 

[Gray]

I've owned the NAD 3020..... terrible in every aspect.

Maybe you got it free, otherwise what made you buy it?

I read a TNT Audio article on legendary amps. I already had the Pio A400 so I thought I'd try the famous 3020. Got it cheap in good condition,didn't like it so I sold it soon after. A friend also has one, I've heard the same muddy sound signature with his as well.

There's always the rose-tinted spectacles argument. I dare say if I were to hear the 3020 three decades later, compared to current amps (or the A400 which I've never heard), it would sound muddy - especially since I've become accustomed to the Cyrus sound.

 

[Vladimir]

I've owned the NAD 3020..... terrible in every aspect.

Maybe you got it free, otherwise what made you buy it?

I read a TNT Audio article on legendary amps. I already had the Pio A400 so I thought I'd try the famous 3020. Got it cheap in good condition,didn't like it so I sold it soon after. A friend also has one, I've heard the same muddy sound signature with his as well.

There's always the rose-tinted spectacles argument. I dare say if I were to hear the 3020 three decades later, compared to current amps (or the A400 which I've never heard), it would sound muddy - especially since I've become accustomed to the Cyrus sound.

My current amp is from 1977, definitely not muddy, and sounds comparable to anything new I've heard.

 

[stereoman]

Cyrus 8vs of course

I am totally with you Drummerman. Cyrus 8vs and 8vs2 are simply wonderful. Really glad with mine so far. It's the second time I bought it. With Leema or without Leema it kicks ass in so many areas...

 

[Alberich]

Having the 8VS / 8VS2 Cyrus in a greasest of all time amplifier list is stretching it a bit Have owned the 8VS2 matched with many different speakers and personally love it but 'one of greatest of all time' ? I don't think so.

 

[drummerman]

Having the 8VS / 8VS2 Cyrus in a greasest of all time amplifier list is stretching it a bit  Have owned the 8VS2  matched with many different speakers and personally love it but 'one of greatest of all time' ? I don't think so.

Me neither, was having a little fun

Mind, there are so many criteria by which to judge an amplifier, which if any is the 'greatest'.

Each may score in one or two areas, none shine in all.

 

[Alberich]

Having the 8VS / 8VS2 Cyrus in a greasest of all time amplifier list is stretching it a bit Have owned the 8VS2 matched with many different speakers and personally love it but 'one of greatest of all time' ? I don't think so.

Me neither, was having a little fun

Mind, there are so many criteria by which to judge an amplifier, which if any is the 'greatest'.

Each may score in one or two areas, none shine in all.

Indeed.

Have had the 8VS2 and Alpha10 at the same time, used to swap between the two fairly regularly and always craved an amp with a marriage of the two presentations. The speed, resolution and excitement of the Cyrus with the weight and texture of the Alpha.

 

[drummerman]

Having the 8VS / 8VS2 Cyrus in a greasest of all time amplifier list is stretching it a bit  Have owned the 8VS2  matched with many different speakers and personally love it but 'one of greatest of all time' ? I don't think so.

Me neither, was having a little fun

Mind, there are so many criteria by which to judge an amplifier, which if any is the 'greatest'.

Each may score in one or two areas, none shine in all.

Indeed.

Have had the 8VS2 and Alpha10 at the same time, used to swap between the two fairly regularly and always craved an amp with a marriage of the two presentations. The speed, resolution and excitement of the Cyrus with the weight and texture of the Alpha. 

I like the Cyrus sound and, importantly, look and build.
That's not to say I'm not open to alternatives. I will try a Hegel next and like the new Brio looks. AE1a's on horizon too.

 

[mond]

I would suggest the Audiolab 8000A amp. I know that some here don't agree but I thought it was a good amp for the money, certainly worked well in the system I had at the time and still pop up for sale at a reasonable price.....