This was posted 10 years 6 months 3 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Sherwood RX-5502 Dual Stereo Receiver (100Wx2, A/B/C/D Zones) Only $149 @ Factory 2nds World

170
Sherwood RX-5502 Dual Stereo Receiver (100Wx2, A/B/C/D Zones) Only $149 @ Factory 2nds World
Go to Deal
Lthighster on 20/06/2014 - 10:10 2ndsworld.com.au (1136 clicks)

I'm an audio freak and always keeping a close eye on hifi equipment and prices. This discontinued dual stereo receiver from Sherwood is an amazing piece of equipment especially for only $149 in as-new condition. Most other stockists like JB Hi-fi, Ebay or actual specialist Hi-Fi stores stock this item for $380-450.

What sets this piece of equipment apart is the ability two run dual zone stereo with an A/B/C/D configuration. This means there are two 100Wx2 RMS amplifiers (THD 0.2%, 8ohm) built in to the unit that can run up to 4 sets of stereo speakers at 4x35W. So you can have a pair of speakers in your lounge, kitchen, deck and bedroom all from the one receiver playing up to 2 different audio sources. A/B are considered zone 1 (100Wx2 amp #1) and C/D are zone 2 (100Wx2 amp #2).

This unit isn't ideal for movies or blu-ray. It's for stereo music listening, it does that alone and does it well. It also features a phono-input for anyone out there looking to connect up an old (or new) turntable. Obviously you could hook up any stereo source, including mp3, your pc, CD player, tape deck, or even the line out from your main TV/receiver. It's a serious bargain. Reliability is actually fantastic. Go read reviews at Amazon here: http://www.amazon.com/Sherwood-Dual-Zone-Receiver-Discontinu…

I bought one for pick up from my local store, and if you're looking for a cheap and easy entry in to home Hi-Fi or just a separate stereo for your bedroom or what have you, this is the way to go. For real. Happy Friday!

Electrical & Electronics AV Receiver Sherwood

Related Stores

2nds World
2nds World

closed Comments

  • adam149 on 20/06/2014 - 10:33

    THD 0.2%……. more like 0.08%

    • seanbaussie on 20/06/2014 - 10:37
      +8

      Understandability of your comment more like 0.0000%??

      • thighster on 20/06/2014 - 10:48
        +2

        haha… Well, THD in practical terms refers to the amount of distortion you might hear at higher volumes, here between the low-high frequencies (20hz = bass, 20khz = high pitch/treble). So 0.2% is pretty good, 0.08 would be great.

        And FYI Ohms refers to speaker sensitivity. This my favourite analogy stolen from Rickster71 @ Audioholics forum.

        "For sake of discussion you have two 100 gallon / liter water tanks.
        Each tank will represent a 100 watt amplifier.

        One tank has a garden hose attached to it.
        The Other tank has a two inch diameter hose.

        The hoses represent the speakers; garden hose = 8ohm
        The bigger 2 inch hose = 4ohm speaker.

        The 8ohm speaker, like the garden hose, is a resistance to flow.
        The bigger hose, or 4ohm speaker offers 50% less resistance to flow; so it will require more current / water.
        The bigger requirement can only be met by a bigger water tank, or an amplifier that is rated for 4ohm speakers."

    • thighster on 20/06/2014 - 10:43

      Yeah well the reported specs are a bit different depending on where you look… so I decided to write up the lower quality specs. If it turns out to actually be 0.08% then be stoked.

  • seanbaussie on 20/06/2014 - 10:37

    ++ for the description - wish I had the speakers to go with it, but I'm guessing the $5 PC speakers I've got won't make the most of this…

    • thighster on 20/06/2014 - 10:41
      +1

      Thanks! And no not exactly :) However there are a lot of appropriate speakers on the used market eg Gumtree for not much money. Alternatively you can get an alright set of bookshelf speakers from Ebay for around $200-400 (Accusound if you're alright with taking a bit of a risk, and I'd recommend the Q Acoustics 2020i if you want to hear some serious quality)

      Best of luck!
      Edit: splelling

  • [Deactivated] on 20/06/2014 - 10:45

    Just one thing - good buy it may be, those things do not put out 100W RMS, nor do Sherwood claim that (they don't quote RMS in the manual and they don't on their site, either). JB do, but they are wrong.

    Oddly, I read the manual and got a different THD specification (0.7%). Lame how often information sources differ in these things. JB say 0.2%, manufacturer says 100W, 0.7W

    http://www.sherwood-av.com.au/wp-content/uploads/manuals/She…

    • Power output, 8Ω, THD 0.7 %, 20 Hz~20 kHz, only a pair of speakers driven ………………………………… 2 X 100 W
    (• Total harmonic distortion, 8Ω, @ -3dB, 20 Hz~20 kHz …………………………………………………………………….. 0.05 %

    • thighster on 20/06/2014 - 10:54
      +2

      I went with the lower reported THD specification that I could find on the web because there are differing rpeorts on what this is.

      As for the RMS thing, that surprises me. You may of course be right, however just because it doesn't say it's RMS output, it doesn't mean it isn't. It's sure as hell not PMPO.

      Anyway, when I get the thing this weekend and hook it up we'll see how it really looks :) For $149 I'll be happy if it doesn't blow up haha

      • [Deactivated] on 20/06/2014 - 10:58

        I'm right.

        If it doesn't say RMS, it doesn't put out RMS.

        • jimmej on 20/06/2014 - 11:47
          +1

          You sir are hilarious. I assume you have some evidence to back up your "I'm right" claim. I would side with thighster that it is highly unlikely to be peak power. RMS or not it looks like a nice amp and most users are unlikely to push an amp beyond 10-20WRMS anyway. In fact most speakers would not appreciate 100WRMS put through them.

        • retiredfeline on 20/06/2014 - 11:57
          +1

          In fact most speakers would not appreciate 100WRMS put through them.

          Nor nearby ears. :)

        • [Deactivated] on 20/06/2014 - 12:14

          No audio company will opt to not quote RMS on their output if it really is RMS. Quoted RMS power increases the product value by a great margin IF it is truly the correct amount. Nobody who understands audio specifications would disagree with this. If they don't say it, they're telling you they don't make it in RMS. Fact.

          Also, peak power has absolutely no specified definition and conjecture on what is or is not peak power is pointless, there is no hard and fast rule for peak power. They can literally claim whatever they feel like. I've seen three or four subs go by in the last few days on here, with RMS multiplied by 2,3,4 (quoted RMS, aswell as a peak power designation, right next to it).

          I reiterate, one is a spurious "number from the sky" and the other is something they are accountable for. If you have any knowledge of manufacturing, you will know you do not claim what you cannot do. Hence peak power.

          I am sorry for just posting "I'm right", but right now I'm supposed to be doing what I'm paid to do and these ozbargain threads are a constant stream of people who lack experience in bs claims by audio companies.

          Doesn't diminish the fact that if it is truly 35W RMS or thereabouts, it's still a great price

        • jimmej on 20/06/2014 - 12:53
          +1

          You forgot to start your post with "I'm right"…

        • alvian on 20/06/2014 - 14:20
          +1

          (RMS) is something they are accountable for. If you have any knowledge of manufacturing, you will know you do not claim what you cannot do

          LordRichington, please explain this spec from a major global electronics manufacturer, Sony. How is this RMS not "a spurious number from the sky" too?

          Sony Mini Hi-Fi System (Model SHAKE99)
          Power Output: Total RMS 4800W
          Power Consumption (page 47): 700W

        • [Deactivated] on 20/06/2014 - 15:02

          That is quite clearly a peak music power output, mistakenly claimed as RMS power.

          (Sony always claim ridiculous PMPO values - typically with 1khz 10%THD)

        • alvian on 20/06/2014 - 16:35

          That is quite clearly a peak music power output, mistakenly claimed as RMS power

          Where is the evidence that backs up your assertion? Did you even care to read the spec I linked to? If you have any knowledge, you will know you do not claim what you cannot back up.

          Power Output
          P.M.P.O. 52800W
          Total RMS 4800W

          Claimed PMPO is 52,800W. Sony has not mistakenly claimed an incorrect RMS power.

        • [Deactivated] on 20/06/2014 - 19:15

          If you could be as kind as to point me to the page number in which the PMPO value is in the linked spec, that'd be great. I do seem to find it difficult to read these days and you would have a point if there is PMPO value that I am missing in the spec that you've have suggested I have failed to have read.

          RMS Power is continuous, sustained power. Sony are quoting instantaneous, incorrect values. You know that, or you'd have not posted the power consumption, knowing full well it is impossible to render a continuous 4.8kW from a system consuming 700W

          I will concede that they are irresponsibly using RMS for something that is not, but I will not concede the original point that if a company does not quote their usage in RMS, the power they quote is not RMS power and should not be taken and quoted as. That's something I do not need evidence to back up - I'm the one telling others to not believe anything that is not written in the spec

        • alvian on 20/06/2014 - 19:45

          Power output figures for both RMS & PMPO are on Sony's product web page under "Specifications" tab. I have provided the link in my first reply, but for your benefit here it is again: http://www.sony.com.au/product/shake-99

          Power consumption figure for the system is on page 47 of the product user manual. I have provided the link in my first reply, but for your benefit here it is again: http://support.sony-asia.com.edgesuite.net/consumer/IM/44875…

          Of course it is impossible to deliver 4800W of continuous sonic power from 700W of electrical power (without using a supplementary energy storage). This just shows that RMS power figures are not to be trusted without us reading and understanding the methods of measurement and calculation. I wasn't going to respond in the first place but I was annoyed by your blanket statement that:

          (PMPO) is a spurious "number from the sky" and (RMS) is something they are accountable for. If you have any knowledge of manufacturing, you will know you do not claim what you cannot do.

          RMS can be as much fairy-tale fiction as PMPO. Without a standardised methodology, it all depends on the honesty of the manufacturers and the knowledge of the well-informed consumers.

  • ozscharfschutze on 20/06/2014 - 11:06

    noob question - would this be ok to use with an AKG Q701?

    • thighster on 20/06/2014 - 11:13

      Well, yes. However all that requires is a simple headphone output. This is a full on amplifier for Hi-Fi purposes.

      If you're mainly on you computer or similar with the headphones you're best off buying a headphone amp/dac combo… look in to Fiio E7?

      • bogardan on 20/06/2014 - 11:42

        I'm thinking of using this as headphone amplifier too (on top of hi-fi use). I'm wondering if this can perform as well as/better than basic entry level headphone amp such as Fiio/Schiit Magni/o2?

        If any audio freak out there that use both speakers and headphones have experience of using hi-fi receiver as amp, please share your experiences? Pros / cons / recommendation? Thanks

        • thighster on 20/06/2014 - 11:49
          +1

          See krisspy's comment below for some good advice.

          But to be pragmatic about it, the real difference is size. This is a 9kg box designed to power speakers. A headphone DAC/Amp is designed to power headphones, so that's probably where you'll get the better performance. Having a huge receiver on your desk next to your computer isn't exactly aesthetically pleasing (and this is a pretty ugly receiver to be fair)

          However, if you have or would like to start building up a nice stereo system with some passive speakers (ie that require an amp) or have an old record collection or something, check this out. You can definitely plug your computer in to this via a 3.5mm to RCA cable.

        • krisspy on 22/06/2014 - 13:14

          I own a yamaha rx-a2000 and a matrix rip amp/dac. They're both using TI/Burr brown dac chipsets, they sound the same, extension is the same both ways, no flabby bass and they are both relatively neutral (compared to my S4 which is warm). The receiver has higher max volume but thats irrelevant since the matrix is already unlistenably loud at 70%. The yamaha cost me $1600 and the matrix was $100 2nd hand. Using dt880 250ohms.

          If you can get a receiver for ~$200 then go for it.

          pro receivers:
          - tone controls
          - doubles as speaker amp
          - remote control
          - more inputs, easy switching between inputs

          pro headphone amp:
          - smaller footprint, less power
          - cheaper if you're buying a model just right for your headphones
          - less complicated circuitry (if you're into the whole separates vs receiver debate)

    • krisspy on 20/06/2014 - 11:38
      +1

      should be fine, but as mentioned above - you can just get a fiio e7/e17 for less. Takes less room, uses less power.

      Q701's are about 60ohms iirc, portable dac/amps are fine for that

      • ozscharfschutze on 20/06/2014 - 11:55
        +2

        I've read that portables like the E7 are a bit underpowered for the q701?
        i agree that the sherwood is overkill just for a headphone amp, but ag least price wise it is cheaper than most desktop headphone amps :)

        • thighster on 20/06/2014 - 14:21
          +1

          It's certainly not underpowered.. I think you'd be hard-pressed to notice a difference 99% of the time. Desktop amps are specifically designed for headphones. And there's a bunch out there! Maybe read through a few reviews on amazon?

        • ozscharfschutze on 20/06/2014 - 23:28

          Thanks thighster. Had a closer look at the specs of the Q701 vs the Fiio portables after you comment, agree with you on them not underpowered. I'm now leaning towards the Fiio X3 for a portable all-in-one unit.

    • alvian on 20/06/2014 - 14:31

      A pair of high end sensitive headphones will more likely reveal faults with the amp's cheap headphone circuit than reveal musical detail. A quote from a review published in SMH on Perreaux SXH2 headphone amp by Greg Borrowman, Editor Australian Hi-Fi Magazine

      Most headphone amplifiers are hidden inside amplifiers and receivers, so all you ever see of them is the headphone socket itself. This means manufacturers tend to skimp on quality. Internal headphone amplifiers usually share a power supply with the front panel display and digital signal processors. Often the amplifier is little more than a low-cost, multi-purpose integrated circuit, prone to distortion and overload, and quite noisy as well, adding unwanted background hiss.

      If you want the best performance from a pair of headphones, you should use a dedicated headphone amplifier, which is a miniature version of a standard hi-fi amplifier except that its circuitry is optimised to drive stereo headphones with impedances of between 32 and 600 ohms rather than speakers, whose impedance is typically about four to eight ohms.

  • bibendum73au on 20/06/2014 - 13:56

    No Optical input? Interesting.

    • thighster on 20/06/2014 - 14:19

      Well, it's a model from around 2004 (I think) and it's never sat at the premium end of the market.

      But for $149 there really isn't much to complain about. I for one am stoked to pick it up!

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join