Thanks for this video. My dad had this exact system when I was growing up in the 70's and 80's. I remember many nights playing lot's of records on the Michell Transcriptor turn table through four Cerwin Vega 217R speakers. You took me down memory lane to be sure.
Didn't realize how expensive the stuff was till I converted it to todays dollars. Thought SAE was a mid priced brand for some reason. I guess its because of the stuff from the 80s and 90s.
I was lucky enough to fine an SAE system at an estate sale with an Ariston Audio turntable. I love the system! I knew nothing of the company until I found this video the day after buying it. Saw it and just had to have it, money well spent! Thank you SkyFi Audio for confirming my decision. Cheers
I've never seen these 70's components. They're beautiful. I do remember the 90's black SAE system and always thought it was the coolest. I too listen with my eyes as well as my ears. 😎
I understand the Bose as an aesthetic choice but I think a nice walnut ADS pair from the 70s would have matched both the look and the performance potential of the system.
@@SkyFiAudio nothing wrong with the Bose. Properly set up they sounded really good. Don't listen to these Bose haters. I have a set of series 4s that I'm working on refoaming now. The series 2s had the cloth surrounds and they sounded great. Just needed gobs of power. And a subwoofer. So what? Everybody uses a sub on their speakers today.
I owned a few pieces of SAE back in the day. The preamps we're great. My favorite piece was a tape deck that had a transport for the cassette tape that worked exactly like a CDP. I think it was way ahead of it's time!
Thanks for sharing. I’m a little young to remember these pieces in the 70’s as I was around 9 or 10. Your description, restoration, and video is the closest thing to an audio enthusiasts love of preserving audio history. Hope to visit your shop someday.
I am assembling a blackface SAE system right now. I have managed to score a 2100L preamp, which is one of their most celebrated pieces! Looking forward to finding the rest!
A nixie tube is filled with neon and when you put high voltage on the anode it will glow and you can make the anode any shape you want, in this tuner it is in the shape of digits.
Been into SAE for 50 years best explanation I ever heard to know it's similar functionality is also obtained in both Harman Kardon and Phase Linear equipment
The earlier 70s SAE equipment was superior with brushed gold anodized finish....I had an amp at 400 Watts....a preamp and a 20 band equalizer all SAE. I was pushing 15" HD Tannoy Gold monitors wired in // with 15 " Altec Voice of the Theatre horns. I had a Thorens TD125 MKII TT with Shure V15 type III cartridge mounted on the TP16 tone arm. Awesome and mind blowing system! Later I purchased a Tandberg Reel to Reel Tape deck with 15 inch reels.....you could record at 1 and 7/8 with no discernible loss in sound quality....well at least not by my ears....lol!
6.3mm Tape jack on the tuner to facilitate handy direct recording from radio without the need for amplifier? (I believe "Techmoan" Matt has this very tuner, or similar SAE model. He loves the rare combination of the CRT oscilloscope and Nixe tube digital display). Did you describe the 'Tape Monitor' and Tape Copy' selectors on the preamp? Roman numerals (I II III) and *Arabic* numerals (1 2 3). Latin was the official language of the ancient Roman Empire. Is there an occasional alternative description for a very high quality audio system other than "killer" all the time?
I have a pretty limited vocabulary so Im sticking with Killer, lol. Thanks for the tip on the tape jack, makes perfect sense. Ill checkout Techmoans review on it as well as Im sure he's got great info on it.
Not sure why they put "Equaliser" on the back, although the Rotel RQ970BX Preamp also calls itself a "Pre-amp Equaliser" so it must be something they called these units back in the day, although I have no idea why either!
Vintage equipment is so fun, the aesthetic as well as the high level of sound that can be achieved. Great job detailing each piece here. I have a restoration question for you. In your estimation, can it worth it to put new speaker drivers into a pair of Bose 901's? Places like Parts Express offer a drop-in replacement for $35. Is new drivers all it would take to restore a pair of 901's that, other than deteriorating surrounds on the original drivers, are in excellent condition?
It took me two tries to reengineer Original Bose 901. The first try in the 1990s was a failure. The second try took 4 years from 2004 to 2008. It was a complete success overcoming all of its flaws while losing none of its attributes that made it unique and liked by so many people. It wasn't expensive, it was just very hard to get it right. The original and series II which you have there have the same 4 inch midwoofers manufactured by CTS in the same acoustic suspension enclosure. Starting with series III the design changed radically. Series II and the original have different equalization curves, series II having more treble boost, but at their indicated normal settings they are the same. The drivers were sorted into 3 groups so that each enclosure would have the closest match. The original was hand sorted, series II was sorted by a computer. Series II also has the Bose emblem. Unlike series III and higher these speakers had cloth surrounds which didn't deteriorate.
@@SkyFiAudio Okay, I'll tell you how I did it. I've published it elsewhere so it's no secret. There were many unique ideas in this design but there were flaws too. Unfortunately I can't find Bose's original white paper on this design or find it on line. His thinking was very instructive. Bose was a professor of electrical engineering at MIT. He had a strong background in mathematics. So he should not be dismissed out of hand. Instead his ideas should be critiqued to see what he got right and what he got wrong. I'm an electrical engineer myself but I'm also schooled in many other areas of engineering and science, and of course tons of math. Bose measured the ratio of reflected to direct sound at Boston Symphony Hall, agreed by many to be the best room for listening to live music in the United States and one of the two best in the world. At 16 feet from the stage he measured 11 percent direct and 89 percent reflected. And of course the further you go back from the stage the higher the percentage of reflected sound, he had a graph showing that too. As you double the distance from any source the sound level drops by 6db or 75% but the reflected sound level remains constant throughout the hall. This is well known. So he designed a speaker that radiated its sound 11 percent direct, 89 percent reflected. This was a very naive approach because it does not mean 89 percent of the sound you hear will be reflected and the reflected sound field of Bose 901 has virtually nothing in common with the reflected sound field you'd get in a concert hall. However placing the speaker from 12 to 18 inches away from the wall behind it does give some interesting effects that many non audiophiles like. There is no way any two channel system can recreate the sound of a large space convincingly. It's not in the recordings and the system is not designed to recreate it. Its a very complicated problem (I solved 48 years ago with my own unique mathematical model.) So the best it can do is recreated the sound musicians would make if they were in your room. Bose 901 has the unrealized potential to do that because like real acoustic sound sources it directs most of its energy away from any one listener in the audience. So what is its real problem? Its real problem is that its frequency response stinks. It has three inherent flaws, two in the bass and one in the treble. (no highs no lows.) Bose said that he wanted the system resonance above 180 hz which he said was the point where phase shift would no longer be audible. Making the enclosure as small as he did, he pushed it up to about 250 hz, at least in my room. It has a 7 to 8 db broad peak at that frequency which can be equalized out adding another equalizer. The FR for an acoustic suspension speaker at critical damping drops at 12 db per octave below resonance. Mine crosses the 1 khz output at around 95 db and keeps falling by 12 db per octave but the Bose equalizer only boosts the signal by 6 db per octave, 18 db at 30 hz. So to flatten the frequency response you'd need another 12 db of boost which is can also be done with another equalizer. This flattens the bass response but raises the power requirement from 60 to 200 watts as Bose recommended to 600 to 1000 watts to equal the bass output of my reference from Teledyne AR 9. But each driver only handles 30 watts or 270 per channel so you'd need 3 or 4 in parallel to get to its lowest operational point of 23 hz. The Crown Drive Core 2 model 2502 is ideal for this application. The problem with it reproducing the treble is that it simply can't. As Gordon Holt pointed out the inertial mass of the woofers is much too great no matter how much power you pump into it. Even if it could, it would beam its energy over a very narrow angle. As a tweeter a 4" midwoofer stinks. The solution I used was to make it a bi-amplified system using an array of 6 3/8# polly tweeters, one hanging just below the top lip of the cabinet and just above the front driver. There are three firing horizontally one straight back, one on the left rear panel and one on the right rear panel. There are two in series directed at the ceiling. That's a total of 6 per channel. They cut in at around 9 khz with a single order filter. They are driven by the ridiculously overpowered 100 wpc JVC RX500B receiver. The front tweeter has a low value capacitor across it so that when it plays flat, the others have a boost to compensate for the high frequency loss of the reflections. The crossover network as I recall actually lowers the relative output of the front firing tweeter, the design created to match its position in the room it will always stay in. the JVC receiver has its own 7 band equalizer. The main receiver a Marantz SR930 has a 10 band equalizer and as is my custom each recording is equalized according to its own spectral balance. This is done with a Radio Shack 3 channel DJ mixer that has two separate 7 band equalizers and phono inputs. The bass can be so powerful that it can easily clip the 138 wpc Marantz amplifier and even my well suspended Empire 698 turntable can be driven to acoustic feedback easily. The 40 hz 10 db cut shelf filter on the Bose equalizer is very useful. The rest of the system consists of a Toshiba DVD player with a 192khz 24 bit audio chip. Remember, I'm an engineer, not an audiophile. How does it sound? When properly adjusted excellent for its purpose. Why don't I buy 3 more Bose 901s and a Crown 2502? Because I have a much better experimental system and despite all the audio systems in my very large house for the last 4 or 5 years that's the only one i listen to.
My dad had most of that system minus the EQ and the preamp with meters. He had the model without them. The digital tuner was so space age. However he so had the hybrid electrostatic speakers. Have you had GAS components?
Most people into hifi are in their 60's, you'll be hard to press to find more than a handful that are in their 40's,let alone the young,I dont blame them, crazy products at insane prices sold through a handful of stores that few can even find, then thrown in all the snake oil stuff(CD demagnetizers????),and you have a perfect storm for a dead industry,
@@SkyFiAudio Cables don't need to be expensive and overpriced to be good. My nephew is a musician and has been involved with pro audio since the 80s. He's even done some studio mastering work. You know what brand of interconnects he uses for his own system? General Electric, "GE."
@@SkyFiAudio guy which made bose is great businessman and he knew in that time how to build cheep and loud maybe effective speaker. but that 901 device is shame and small baby shoes box kef coda 7 or 8 is hi end device compared to bose 901 any model.
The SAE 1B was a preamp/equalizer combo, Mark IM. Same as Mark IB except has no tone controls but features two high -accuracy VU meters instead which display the unit's output in volts. Has meter -range switch $600.00 (1975) MK III CM Series D output; dir. rdg. pwr. mfrs. in rms; $850 (1973) Mk IIIC same but w/o pwr. mfrs., $750.00 (1973)
@@SkyFiAudio Mark IB Preamp-Equalizer Can serve as complete control center. Has a professional 7-band equalizer instead of conventional controls. Response (high-level inputs) 10-100,000 Hz +0.25 dB; (phono inputs) 20-20,000 Hz +0.5 dB. Equalizers have dual range of +8 dB or +16 dB with 12 dB/octave slope. Features include stepped volume control, EQ Line/EQ Tape switch for equalized recordings; volume control range extender; tape copy control with provision for three tape recorders (six possible positions); two headphone output jacks; scope outputs for testing phase, stereo separation, or balance or level measurements; gain switch; four phono circuits for four separate phono preamps. 17" W x 10'/2" D x 53/6"H $750.00 (1975)
The good old days
Thanks for this video. My dad had this exact system when I was growing up in the 70's and 80's. I remember many nights playing lot's of records on the Michell Transcriptor turn table through four Cerwin Vega 217R speakers. You took me down memory lane to be sure.
and ran it with a phase linear 700B which i still have.
I could be completely wrong about this but it seems like some of the SAE guys started Phase Linear. Anyone know about that?
I worked for Ed Miller at SAE back in the day. I tested most of the tuners. Cheers!!
Cool job, thanks for writing mate.
Cool!
I remember going into our local Team Electronics store in the early '70's and wishing I could afford a SAE system.
Ditto
Didn't realize how expensive the stuff was till I converted it to todays dollars. Thought SAE was a mid priced brand for some reason. I guess its because of the stuff from the 80s and 90s.
I was a service technician for team Electronics in the late seventies
We drove to rapid city south dakota to team electronics in the late 70's
I was lucky enough to fine an SAE system at an estate sale with an Ariston Audio turntable. I love the system! I knew nothing of the company until I found this video the day after buying it. Saw it and just had to have it, money well spent! Thank you SkyFi Audio for confirming my decision. Cheers
I've never seen these 70's components. They're beautiful. I do remember the 90's black SAE system and always thought it was the coolest. I too listen with my eyes as well as my ears. 😎
Review on the SAE system from the 80's coming next week, stay tuned.
My Pioneer SC-3000 pre and SM-3000 power amp also have 5 way binding posts. I agree, it is very nice to have these on vintage equipment.
right? those bare wire terminals are all terrible.
I understand the Bose as an aesthetic choice but I think a nice walnut ADS pair from the 70s would have matched both the look and the performance potential of the system.
Good call. Wish I had some kicking around. I guess I could have used a set of Rogers studio monitors in walnut instead.
@@SkyFiAudio nothing wrong with the Bose. Properly set up they sounded really good. Don't listen to these Bose haters. I have a set of series 4s that I'm working on refoaming now. The series 2s had the cloth surrounds and they sounded great. Just needed gobs of power. And a subwoofer. So what? Everybody uses a sub on their speakers today.
I owned a few pieces of SAE back in the day. The preamps we're great. My favorite piece was a tape deck that had a transport for the cassette tape that worked exactly like a CDP. I think it was way ahead of it's time!
Are you referring to the cassette that had a drawer? I have one of those, super cool.
@@SkyFiAudio Yes, that's the one. I can't remember the model but it was a cool cassette deck!
Thanks for sharing. I’m a little young to remember these pieces in the 70’s as I was around 9 or 10. Your description, restoration, and video is the closest thing to an audio enthusiasts love of preserving audio history. Hope to visit your shop someday.
Please visit, would love to show you around and thanks for watching.
I am assembling a blackface SAE system right now. I have managed to score a 2100L preamp, which is one of their most celebrated pieces! Looking forward to finding the rest!
Never had a 2100L but its on the list for sure. Pls do send a pic when you get it completed. Well feature it in our weekly blast.
you are not wrong about the Mark 1M...I bought one new in 1974.
Gee that was a lot of $$ in 1974.
Fernando : it's going to be about a 25 minute video.
Me: Yummy!
haha, its a long one.. thanks for hangin in!
A nixie tube is filled with neon and when you put high voltage on the anode it will glow and you can make the anode any shape you want, in this tuner it is in the shape of digits.
Fun video. Man, I can’t believe how pricey those were
Been into SAE for 50 years best explanation I ever heard to know it's similar functionality is also obtained in both Harman Kardon and Phase Linear equipment
Any thoughts on their 1980s integrated amps?
Yes gorgeous, makes you want to to play Pink Floyd Wish You Were Here while enjoying your favorite drink.
An LP12 with that would be beautiful
Spot on, a wood plinth LP12 would be a great addition.
I run the wicked sansui AU 717. driving 4 leak sandwich 600s speakers. Garrard 401 turner. Beautiful 🌚
Very nice!
The earlier 70s SAE equipment was superior with brushed gold anodized finish....I had an amp at 400 Watts....a preamp and a 20 band equalizer all SAE. I was pushing 15" HD Tannoy Gold monitors wired in // with 15 " Altec Voice of the Theatre horns. I had a Thorens TD125 MKII TT with Shure V15 type III cartridge mounted on the TP16 tone arm. Awesome and mind blowing system! Later I purchased a Tandberg Reel to Reel Tape deck with 15 inch reels.....you could record at 1 and 7/8 with no discernible loss in sound quality....well at least not by my ears....lol!
Beautiful rig. I’d love to have a couple weeks with it at my house!
The quarter inch jack that’s in the front of the receiver is probably for headphones
Yes the ones for on the receiver are def headphones but the one on the tuner is odd.
@@SkyFiAudio I believe it's for connecting a tape deck to record from broadcasts.
I believe that is for monitoring with headphone for recording purposes.
TIME FOR RECAPPLNG ! WHERE DOES ONE GET A REPLACEMENT CRT FOR THE SCOPE OR THE DISPLAY TUBES ????
Nice old Visla!
Old??? She's only 12!!
6.3mm Tape jack on the tuner to facilitate handy direct recording from radio without the need for amplifier? (I believe "Techmoan" Matt has this very tuner, or similar SAE model. He loves the rare combination of the CRT oscilloscope and Nixe tube digital display). Did you describe the 'Tape Monitor' and Tape Copy' selectors on the preamp? Roman numerals (I II III) and *Arabic* numerals (1 2 3). Latin was the official language of the ancient Roman Empire. Is there an occasional alternative description for a very high quality audio system other than "killer" all the time?
are you smart in real life?
@@user-ex9zm7bg3x Evidently not, as I don't understand your point.
I have a pretty limited vocabulary so Im sticking with Killer, lol. Thanks for the tip on the tape jack, makes perfect sense. Ill checkout Techmoans review on it as well as Im sure he's got great info on it.
@@SkyFiAudio Techmoan "Retro-Tech: SAE Mk6 FM Tuner - My Vintage HiFi holy grail" (September 2016): ruclips.net/video/ZkCIdufSGS8/видео.html
@@SkyFiAudio geez Fernando no need to kowtow to one of the internet's many Shakespeares
Not sure why they put "Equaliser" on the back, although the Rotel RQ970BX Preamp also calls itself a "Pre-amp Equaliser" so it must be something they called these units back in the day, although I have no idea why either!
Gorgeous, is the word. Gorgoeus is a Japanese monster movie from the 50’s. 🤣
Vintage equipment is so fun, the aesthetic as well as the high level of sound that can be achieved. Great job detailing each piece here. I have a restoration question for you. In your estimation, can it worth it to put new speaker drivers into a pair of Bose 901's? Places like Parts Express offer a drop-in replacement for $35. Is new drivers all it would take to restore a pair of 901's that, other than deteriorating surrounds on the original drivers, are in excellent condition?
thx for the video
was a fun one to make.
It took me two tries to reengineer Original Bose 901. The first try in the 1990s was a failure. The second try took 4 years from 2004 to 2008. It was a complete success overcoming all of its flaws while losing none of its attributes that made it unique and liked by so many people. It wasn't expensive, it was just very hard to get it right.
The original and series II which you have there have the same 4 inch midwoofers manufactured by CTS in the same acoustic suspension enclosure. Starting with series III the design changed radically. Series II and the original have different equalization curves, series II having more treble boost, but at their indicated normal settings they are the same. The drivers were sorted into 3 groups so that each enclosure would have the closest match. The original was hand sorted, series II was sorted by a computer. Series II also has the Bose emblem. Unlike series III and higher these speakers had cloth surrounds which didn't deteriorate.
Wow, great info Mark. Thanks for sharing.
@@SkyFiAudio Okay, I'll tell you how I did it. I've published it elsewhere so it's no secret. There were many unique ideas in this design but there were flaws too. Unfortunately I can't find Bose's original white paper on this design or find it on line. His thinking was very instructive. Bose was a professor of electrical engineering at MIT. He had a strong background in mathematics. So he should not be dismissed out of hand. Instead his ideas should be critiqued to see what he got right and what he got wrong. I'm an electrical engineer myself but I'm also schooled in many other areas of engineering and science, and of course tons of math.
Bose measured the ratio of reflected to direct sound at Boston Symphony Hall, agreed by many to be the best room for listening to live music in the United States and one of the two best in the world. At 16 feet from the stage he measured 11 percent direct and 89 percent reflected. And of course the further you go back from the stage the higher the percentage of reflected sound, he had a graph showing that too. As you double the distance from any source the sound level drops by 6db or 75% but the reflected sound level remains constant throughout the hall. This is well known. So he designed a speaker that radiated its sound 11 percent direct, 89 percent reflected. This was a very naive approach because it does not mean 89 percent of the sound you hear will be reflected and the reflected sound field of Bose 901 has virtually nothing in common with the reflected sound field you'd get in a concert hall.
However placing the speaker from 12 to 18 inches away from the wall behind it does give some interesting effects that many non audiophiles like. There is no way any two channel system can recreate the sound of a large space convincingly. It's not in the recordings and the system is not designed to recreate it. Its a very complicated problem (I solved 48 years ago with my own unique mathematical model.) So the best it can do is recreated the sound musicians would make if they were in your room. Bose 901 has the unrealized potential to do that because like real acoustic sound sources it directs most of its energy away from any one listener in the audience.
So what is its real problem? Its real problem is that its frequency response stinks. It has three inherent flaws, two in the bass and one in the treble. (no highs no lows.) Bose said that he wanted the system resonance above 180 hz which he said was the point where phase shift would no longer be audible. Making the enclosure as small as he did, he pushed it up to about 250 hz, at least in my room. It has a 7 to 8 db broad peak at that frequency which can be equalized out adding another equalizer. The FR for an acoustic suspension speaker at critical damping drops at 12 db per octave below resonance. Mine crosses the 1 khz output at around 95 db and keeps falling by 12 db per octave but the Bose equalizer only boosts the signal by 6 db per octave, 18 db at 30 hz. So to flatten the frequency response you'd need another 12 db of boost which is can also be done with another equalizer. This flattens the bass response but raises the power requirement from 60 to 200 watts as Bose recommended to 600 to 1000 watts to equal the bass output of my reference from Teledyne AR 9. But each driver only handles 30 watts or 270 per channel so you'd need 3 or 4 in parallel to get to its lowest operational point of 23 hz. The Crown Drive Core 2 model 2502 is ideal for this application.
The problem with it reproducing the treble is that it simply can't. As Gordon Holt pointed out the inertial mass of the woofers is much too great no matter how much power you pump into it. Even if it could, it would beam its energy over a very narrow angle. As a tweeter a 4" midwoofer stinks. The solution I used was to make it a bi-amplified system using an array of 6 3/8# polly tweeters, one hanging just below the top lip of the cabinet and just above the front driver. There are three firing horizontally one straight back, one on the left rear panel and one on the right rear panel. There are two in series directed at the ceiling. That's a total of 6 per channel. They cut in at around 9 khz with a single order filter. They are driven by the ridiculously overpowered 100 wpc JVC RX500B receiver. The front tweeter has a low value capacitor across it so that when it plays flat, the others have a boost to compensate for the high frequency loss of the reflections. The crossover network as I recall actually lowers the relative output of the front firing tweeter, the design created to match its position in the room it will always stay in. the JVC receiver has its own 7 band equalizer. The main receiver a Marantz SR930 has a 10 band equalizer and as is my custom each recording is equalized according to its own spectral balance. This is done with a Radio Shack 3 channel DJ mixer that has two separate 7 band equalizers and phono inputs. The bass can be so powerful that it can easily clip the 138 wpc Marantz amplifier and even my well suspended Empire 698 turntable can be driven to acoustic feedback easily. The 40 hz 10 db cut shelf filter on the Bose equalizer is very useful. The rest of the system consists of a Toshiba DVD player with a 192khz 24 bit audio chip. Remember, I'm an engineer, not an audiophile.
How does it sound? When properly adjusted excellent for its purpose. Why don't I buy 3 more Bose 901s and a Crown 2502? Because I have a much better experimental system and despite all the audio systems in my very large house for the last 4 or 5 years that's the only one i listen to.
My dad had most of that system minus the EQ and the preamp with meters. He had the model without them. The digital tuner was so space age. However he so had the hybrid electrostatic speakers. Have you had GAS components?
As a small SAE collector ,you lower me even more
Soundcraftsmen also made great equipment
I’m curious if the younger generation is embracing this high end audio? My son had no interest.
There seems to be some interest and growing steadily.
Most people into hifi are in their 60's, you'll be hard to press to find more than a handful that are in their 40's,let alone the young,I dont blame them, crazy products at insane prices sold through a handful of stores that few can even find, then thrown in all the snake oil stuff(CD demagnetizers????),and you have a perfect storm for a dead industry,
🤘👌👍
👍👍😎🤟✌️
What brand of RCA interconnects is that?
They are just cheap amazon branded ones we keep around the shop for quick connections.
@@SkyFiAudio Cables don't need to be expensive and overpriced to be good. My nephew is a musician and has been involved with pro audio since the 80s. He's even done some studio mastering work. You know what brand of interconnects he uses for his own system? General Electric, "GE."
bose 901 ha ha ha
Right! We have mixed opinions here at the shop over the 901's. They do sound odd but they are so cool and where so revolutionary back in the day.
@@SkyFiAudio guy which made bose is great businessman and he knew in that time how to build cheep and loud maybe effective speaker. but that 901 device is shame and small baby shoes box kef coda 7 or 8 is hi end device compared to bose 901 any model.
ruclips.net/video/1BnVvZCYUAA/видео.html
Aapko Hindi bolna aata hai
Bose speakers are trash, always have been.
really badly designed box and small ugly middle tone... peace of s...
LOL!
unless you know how to use them... ruclips.net/video/1BnVvZCYUAA/видео.html
The SAE 1B was a preamp/equalizer combo, Mark IM. Same as Mark IB except has no tone controls but features two high -accuracy VU meters instead which display the unit's output in volts. Has meter -range switch $600.00 (1975)
MK III CM Series D output; dir. rdg. pwr. mfrs. in rms; $850 (1973) Mk IIIC same but w/o pwr. mfrs., $750.00 (1973)
So the IB included a pre AND EQ?
@@SkyFiAudio Mark IB Preamp-Equalizer
Can serve as complete control center. Has a professional 7-band equalizer instead of conventional controls. Response (high-level inputs) 10-100,000 Hz +0.25 dB; (phono inputs) 20-20,000 Hz +0.5 dB. Equalizers have dual range of +8 dB or +16 dB with 12 dB/octave slope. Features include stepped volume control, EQ Line/EQ Tape switch for equalized recordings; volume control range extender; tape copy control with provision for three tape recorders (six possible positions); two headphone output jacks; scope outputs for testing phase, stereo separation, or balance or level measurements; gain switch; four phono circuits for four separate phono preamps. 17" W x 10'/2" D x 53/6"H
$750.00 (1975)
@@SkyFiAudio I believe SAE means phono eq. or phono stage which is an equalizer of sorts.