unearned snobbery

[Alaric]

There is another audio site (that I am booted off/edited/censored/thread locked/etc...) that proclaims the wonders of 40 year old speakers and receivers , along with the joys of $2 ICs.
My system is modest-especially when compared to some of the gear touted at HTGuide. I still find myself rebelling at the idea of a 35-40 yr. old receiver , pumping out a stunning 28 WPC , @.15% THD , being the equal of my pathetic set-up. I compare my stuff to the stuff I had 25 years ago , and I feel I have better sound now-at 2/3 what I paid then. To equal the cash outlay of my first 'hi-fi' system would now cost me $20,500+. I'm currently under $6500. Is my capitalist self being a snob , or does 30-40 year old stuff sound like 30-40 year old stuff? :huh:

[Kevin P]

A lot of people do say that older gear (70s vintage receivers) do sound better than modern gear. It has to do with the discrete components used back then vs. the ICs that go into modern receivers. That 28 WPC you got in the 70s is probably a more honest spec than the 75 WPC that a modern receiver claims. For example, the 28 WPC may be from 20-20Khz, while the modern receiver may only claim its rated WPC at 1 KHz.

Tuners were definitely better back then. The tuners in modern receivers are mainly an afterthought, that sound like garbage and have garbage sensitivity as well.

On the other hand, speakers have improved since the 70s. If you still have that old receiver, give it a listen on some modern speakers, you might be pleasantly surprised. Of course, it all depends on what gear you had and have. A cheap receiver in the 70s could be outclassed by a high-end modern unit (especially separates). And of course, you aren't going to get multichannel/DD/DTS/surround fun with a vintage receiver...

[Alaric]

I was using a Tandberg stack , I think 3xxx series amp (150wpc) , pre , and tuner. Speakers were a/d/s L1530. It was a nice setup , very good sound. I got a lot of joy from that system. It hammered Black Sabbath and expanded Jeff Beck with the same dexterity. I could rattle windows and not perceive "loud".
My current tuner is a Marantz. http://www.tnt-audio.com/sorgenti/marantz-st6000_e.html I'm content , if not overjoyed.



I just think my current rig is better than my first 'hifi' rig. Other threads will show the Yamaha PX-2 TT , Nak ZX9 cassette deck , the 3bx range expander , etc. that I'm comparing my current setup to.

[Alaric]

I must add , the jury is still out on the TT comparison-so far the Yamaha is ahead...

[Briz vegas]

1970s receivers may be the musical equal of modern ones but that is mostly likely due to cost cutting in the modern product to get all the features and pay all the licensing fees to Dolby etc. They pack alot of channels and other gizmos into a modern product so there are alot of compromises.

I went from a 1970s Nakamichi power amp rated at 100w to a modern American "integrated", admittedly rated at 185w. No comparison really. The modern gear extracted so much more information and was much more musical. Its not a completely fair comparison at the integrated has a passive pre stage, however that 70s power amp directly driven by a cd player with a variable volume control sounded pretty ordinary, it needed the good quality tube preamp (CJ PV14ls2) to sound any good. My current amp is just a power amp with a ladder attenuator on the front and it sounds great.

I wouldn't put too much weight on distortion figures. The Nakamichi rated their amp at 0.001% distortion over 20 to 20, I recall CJ rating the ca200 at less than 1% - ie they are saying "whatever" to distortion as a useful measure of modern amplifier performance.

[Alaric]

Yeah , distortion numbers have lost a lot of meaning over the years. I'm still pretty pleased with my 'lil integrated at 95 wpc , and I know there is really good bang-per-buck ratio out there. Hell , the stuff I had 25 years ago is a steal at current prices. Good stuff is good stuff , even years later. I have no gripe with "vintage" as a category , and I was sent down the treacherous audio path by Pioneer speakers and 70s receivers-mostly because they sounded like crap and I thought the 'yellow brick road' of hi-fi beckoned.

Took me a quarter of a century to recover my love for well reproduced music-and I now have the 21st century equivalent of a nice Pioneer rig from the late 70s! I think I just talked myself through this. Not to my advantage , mind you , unless you consider truth an advantage.

If you'll pardon me , I'm now going to laugh at myself until quite silly. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Johnloudb]

Good stuff is good stuff , even years later.

I think that pretty much sums it up. :agree: I have/had vintage gear that was really good, and still sounds good compared to modern stuff. Analog preamp and amp technology is pretty much the same now as it was 35 years ago. Not that is hasn't improved. A lot of high end gear is more about what sounds good to you, as apposed to what actually is "better". Although, I think some people just think all vintage gear is high end, which isn't the case.

[Glen B]

I have/had vintage gear that was really good, and still sounds good compared to modern stuff. Analog preamp and amp technology is pretty much the same now as it was 35 years ago. Not that is hasn't improved. A lot of high end gear is more about what sounds good to you, as apposed to what actually is "better". Although, I think some people just think all vintage gear is high end, which isn't the case.

Seconded. :T

[bigburner]

Well Lee, I bought a Pioneer SA-8500 in 1975 and it's now doing great service in my 18 year old son's bedroom. My boy is heavily into recording and mixing music. When I go up to his room to listen to his work it sounds great through his system. He uses my old B&W DM610i speakers as monitors.

The SA8500 was right in the middle of Pioneer's integrated amp line. It was rated at 60 watts per channel with 0.1% THD and IMD at rated power. It was a hefty amp weighing nearly 30 pounds.

Nigel.

[Glen B]

That pic brings back fond memories. I too owned an SA8500 (in the late '70s). I also owned a little SA7100 that I sold last year. Unlike today's mass market offerings, these amps were all of heavy gauge metal construction, which accounted for much of the weight.