My point is that if an AVR manufacturer is making up numbers they are in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act.  The fact that they all do it doesn't absolve anyone. 

Given that Onkyo, Devon, Yamaha, etc. are all showing numbers I have to believe that in the recesses of their labs they can produce some scenario where their numbers are correct since, under the Act, they have to be able to back up their claims.  Whether they've submitted this data to the FTC is a matter of speculation. If they have, all one has to do is file a request under the Freedom of Information Act and request the data from the FTC.  If they haven't, then all one has to do is file a claim with the FTC and wait (I doubt it'll be a high priority for the FTC).

Yes, I'm happy with my AVR and my decision to buy the one I bought was based mostly on reviews like the one we both quoted (the other consideration was price).  I should note that I didn't evaluate the numbers but went with the opinions of the experts.

I'd love to have a beer!

Jason,

I dug through some of my archives and came across something I think you might find interesting regarding your Pioneer receiver.  The following appraisal of your SX-1050 is from the November 1977 edition of Stereo/Hi-FI Equipment published by Service Communications Ltd, a member of the IHF (Institute of High fidelity…a well-respected organization back then). 

Sorry I can’t reprint the picture, but here we go:

Pioneer SX-1050      $700

Amp: Pwr: 120W; 0.1% THD; 0.1% IM; Ph. Sens. 2.5 mv; 75db S/N

Tuner: 1.5uV IHF Sens.; 0.1% THD; 74dB S/N S/N; 83dB Sel.; 1.0db CR; 50 dB Sep. @ 1 kHz

Pioneer’s penultimate receiver, the SX-1050 is designed to eliminate the need for separate components.  Offering a combination of power, performance and flexibility that rivals the finest separate components, the $700 price tag of the SX-1050 must be considered low.  Of interest to the serious audiophile are the tone controls that provide separate adjustments for 50 and 100 Hz in the bass, and 10 and 20 kHz in the treble, with a separate defeat switch.  Outputs are provided for three sets speakers.

As a side note, your two-channel Pioneer weighs 50 lbs, and most of that is probably in the power supply which is why  it could (and likely continues to) deliver an honest 120 Watts RMS per channel simultaneously.  If I were you I’d hold on to that dinosaur; the only model available that was higher up in Pioneer’s food-chain (in 1977) was the SX-1250 ($900), essentially the same but offering 160 WRMS.   You own a very high-quality (and collectible) piece of vintage audio equipment….and I can understand why you continue to enjoy it so much.

If you’re interested in a little more about audio equipment, then visit www.classic-audio.com.  This is an incredible site for old (pre-1980) Pioneer, Technics and Marantz equipment.  I believe you’ll enjoy this.

Fred

Hey Fred,

Thanks so much for the note. I didn't know about classic-audio but I had found the following website: http://www.silverpioneer.netfirms.com/SX-1050.htm

It has a nice photo of the guts. It is amazing that the 1050 weighs the same as the onkyo 805 that I have and it has no video chips...etc. After comparing I wonder if the sound differences can be attributed to the fact that the pioneer has a toroidal transformer whereas the onkyo does not. Not sure if that gives in an advantage with power as my physics background is weak.  In any case I think that if people are into a 2 channel setup... these old pioneer's sound simply amazing (especially with the aperions) and can be had for much much less than a comparable "new" receiver. I am putting together an outline for a second two-channel setup for our weekend house and was looking into either a pioneer sx-1250 or the 1080 with some Pioneer HPM-100's. Possibly another pioneer direct drive turntable and looking into an equalizer from the 70's era. Anyway I'm a but worried about the outputs from the -80's since they are unavailable these days so if it dies it's impossible to fix hence the -50 series is much safer!

The only difference between the the onkyo and the pioneer is that the pioneer's walnut case needs to be oiled occasionally and the outputs need to be thoroughly cleaned before you use it if you get one, but its all a small price to pay for the sound. 

Jason 

Jason,

Glad to hear you enjoyed the classic-audio site.  That guy has done an amazing job and he’s always adding to the database.  Talk about the passion!

I can’t address the parts-availability aspect you mention about the Pioneers but equipment made in the mid-to-late ‘70s offer, IMO, some of the finest performance ever available in terms of amplification (I don’t feel the same about speakers of that era…I think today’s stuff is much better).  The early ‘80s also had some great equipment but by then integrated circuits were becoming more common and beginning to replace transistors in many of the pre-amp stages (phono, tuner, tone, etc.).  There was nothing wrong with this but I mention it because some of those ICs were very specialized and had a short shelf-life in terms of availability, and if something goes wrong with an IC today it may be impossible to replace.  Same concerns could also apply to transistors but there are lots of generic replacements still available so I think the odds of keeping it alive are much better if something does happen.

The ‘70s were a hey-day for the mfgs because solid-state technology had really matured and they were able to offer some staggering amounts of power.  Many of the mfgs were heavily into the one-upmanship game and competing for the consumers’ attention.  I liken this era to the late ‘60s in Detroit when the horsepower wars were raging.  If you were an enthusiast in either market, then you had just found heaven.  By the mid ‘70s I was out of college, both my wife and I were working, no kids, and we finally had some disposable income…so I was like a kid in a candy store!

A few mfgs that had nice stuff that I liked were Pioneer, Marantz, Heathkit, Sansui and a few of the Kenwoods.  You might want to check them out.  I don’t remember the model number but Marantz had a receiver popping 250 WRMS/channel, and I’d love to know what that rascal weighs! 

If you’re into separates (I was, and was running a Macintosh C-27 and Marantz 510M until a few years ago…”bitchin’, man!”) all of the above mfgs had some beautiful stuff available.

Since this is an Emotiva thread, I checked them out and they’ve got some really nice stuff that seems pretty affordable (so does NAD but you’ve got to dig more deeply into your bank account).  I’d be very interested if I was still addicted and into this stuff but, thank God, the birth of my boys began my introduction into rehab (not to mention my hearing ain’t what it used to be…damn)!

Anyway, I hope you continue to enjoy that old Pioneer and best wishes in your quest for excellence.

Fred