what does 'MKII' mean, in reference to audio equipment?

[OS]

I'm looking for another vintage onkyo to replace my current one, but I don't know what the 'MKII' designation means. I think it means like a second version, but I'm not sure. Is it better to get one with or without the 'MKII' label?

 

[DaveSimmons]

"Mark II" is indeed a second version, though depending on the brand it may actually be a "reimagining" with nothing much in common with the old model (just like the Planet of the Apes and Rollerball "mark IIs")

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
"Mark II" is indeed a second version, though depending on the brand it may actually be a "reimagining" with nothing much in common with the old model (just like the Planet of the Apes and Rollerball "mark IIs")

thx that helps. I did a search on audioasylum.com and atleast one person has said the first versions for Onkyos are all better sounding than the MK IIs. That's interesting because I have an onkyo MKII and I think it sounds fantastic, better than anything my friends have. Now I have to get a first build to compare.


this is really calling my name

 

[Muadib]

Originally posted by: OuterSquare

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
"Mark II" is indeed a second version, though depending on the brand it may actually be a "reimagining" with nothing much in common with the old model (just like the Planet of the Apes and Rollerball "mark IIs")

thx that helps. I did a search on audioasylum.com and atleast one person has said the first versions for Onkyos are all better sounding than the MK IIs. That's interesting because I have an onkyo MKII and I think it sounds fantastic, better than anything my friends have. Now I have to get a first build to compare.


this is really calling my name

That thing is at least 20 years old. Tell it to shut up already.

 

[DaveSimmons]

At that price you can't go too wrong if you're looking for just clean stereo instead of home theater. It's free of all the digital processing, and probably has a better FM tuner than anything you can buy now for under $1K.

 

[DigDug]

Mortal Kombat.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
At that price you can't go too wrong if you're looking for just clean stereo instead of home theater. It's free of all the digital processing, and probably has a better FM tuner than anything you can buy now for under $1K.

Yeah I don't really do HT, I use these just for music, and they're really incredible for that.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: Muadib


That thing is at least 20 years old. Tell it to shut up already.

Yeah it's a late 1970s model, but it sounds much, much better than anything you can buy for $125 dollars new today.

 

[Muadib]

Originally posted by: OuterSquare

Originally posted by: Muadib


That thing is at least 20 years old. Tell it to shut up already.

Yeah it's a late 1970s model, but it sounds much, much better than anything you can buy for $125 dollars new today.

Maybe, but I doubt it. Even if it were in perfect condition, it's still 20 years old. Amplifiers have improved quite a bit in that time. Your $125 would better serve you if you got something like this, and used it with your current receiver. You should pay your local pawn shop a visit. You should have no problem finding a similar piece that you can listen to.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: Muadib

Originally posted by: OuterSquare

Originally posted by: Muadib


That thing is at least 20 years old. Tell it to shut up already.

Yeah it's a late 1970s model, but it sounds much, much better than anything you can buy for $125 dollars new today.

Maybe, but I doubt it. Even if it were in perfect condition, it's still 20 years old. Amplifiers have improved quite a bit in that time. Your $125 would better serve you if you got something like this, and used it with your current receiver. You should pay your local pawn shop a visit. You should have no problem finding a similar piece that you can listen to.

Hmm, I'll consider it, thx for the heads up. The thing is standalone amps are harder to find locally and stereo equipment is something I won't even look at unless I have an idea how it sounds first.

I should mention though that I have pitted my current reciever against a new, top of line Onkyo stereo receiver and I still like the sound of what I'm using more.

 

[Muadib]

What is you current model, and how did it surpass the top Onkyo?
Oh, and where are you? You don't have a profile.

 

[OS]

Originally posted by: Muadib
What is you current model, and how did it surpass the top Onkyo?
Oh, and where are you? You don't have a profile.

It's an TX-4500 mkII

I went to CC a couple months ago and got a TX8511 and put it on top of the 4500. The TX8511 is Onkyo's current best stereo (not surround/HT) reciever, costs 300 dollars at CC. Zeroed the tone and loudness settings on both stereos and tried both out using a favorite song of mine (Macross Plus-Myung's Theme). I played it out of my computer. The 4500 seemed to produce a richer sound. I didn't touch/move the speakers during the comparison. I am using a set of JBL bookshelf speakers, which is probably the limiting factor.

The specs on the 4500 are

60 WPC RMS, 20 Hz to 20 KHz
.1% THD @ rated power
.08% THD @ 1 watt output

which is worse than the standalone amp you linked to, but that spec makes no mention of what wattage it was rated at.

These are the specs for the TX8511
100 x 2 @ 8 Ohms
THD% at Rated Power .08

So it's actually not too far off when you consider this is a 20 year old receiver.

I am in southern CA.

 

[Muadib]

California has many hi-fi stores. Stop by a bookstore and take a look in the back of a Stereophile, or some other hifl mag.

That Rotel is rated at 50 watts.