Classic Hifi Care

Please share your thoughts on how advertised power output ratings on two top-of-the-line models changed.
The biggest change (IMHO) is the lack of variety in furniture styles. The minimal, clean Scandinavian style is gone!!! Apologies about the resolution.

Your first photo, Dave, is from the era of what I have in Zenith. Mine is a 1969 only in Early American, and not an attractive Early American. It's kind of way over the top. What's under the hood is what counts. TOTL everything. Big powerful separate amp, great tuner/preamp with lots of controls, and 8 speakers. 15" woofers with big magnets, horn mids, and 4 tweeters. This thing has so much bass that it literally shakes the cabinet so bad that I'm afraid it will fall apart. But to your question, the total watts I'm sure is overrated. It's kind of in the same time frame when horsepower in cars changed. And it is a time in America where cabinet tastes changed dramatically and not necessarily for the better. I have the full brochure of console stereos from 1969. There are actually lots of cabinets styles to pick from in lots of different price ranges but not in the styles of the late 50's into the early 60's.

Bill

I wish we had a area to post this stuff... I enjoy looking at the ephemera of the day

Tech alert : I probably have a schematic for both units, so I will post on what I see as major solid state console qualities; power supply voltage-silicon/germanium outputs-speaker impedance and other differences. I cannot wait to find out how these seemingly well-engineered units were watered down besides the obvious Zenith punt, changing from VM and their own belt-driven to BSR record changers

I have the former unit advertised, a very dark-dungeon-y Z966 "Molino" purchased for $50 over 6 years ago working sort of but in need of everything, sits in my Pontiac 's rented garage.

Next to it is a TOTL Sylvania Maestro (rated at 320) and an RCA Finlandia VJT-76 (rated at 500 ), both picked up locally but never really investigated. Consoles having SS outputs from 1964 are both the otherwise-tube Fisher Warwick W-59 and Ambassador A-69 rated at 75 watts, only a tiniest bit more believable. I will someday find an empty space where I can both restore (if possible) and compare these beasts without limits. I have an SS Zenith X940 and a RCA VLT51W, that I need to fix/sell or donate to make room.

Just a quick diversion into advertised ratings on horsepower, my first car was a 1973 model ex-police Fury II, advertising the 400-2bbl engine at 190 NET horsepower* when a 383 in regular 2bbl version two model years before was rated at 290 engine-only. Where did that 100 horsepower go?

*regarding the power-mileage quest, I visited my local auto parts store inquiring how to get better than 12 mpg, without driving like a little old lady. I was shocked when I saw disparity in these ratings in a Chilton book showing manufacturer's advertised specs. I noticed a 1-2 point drop in compression ratios and a supposed "detuning" of cam timing, but could this be a total deal breaker when NET ratings were concurrently used to disrupt the horsepower one-upmanship. Everyone else at the time blamed a bit too much on emissions controls, insurance rates and unleaded gas, which led to further "investigations and experiments of improvements" on the B-block by this former mopar .