Paul McGowan "How Good was audio equipment of the 70s"

I don't know where this fits in this thread, or if it fits at all, but I feel a little sad for young people nowadays whose only experience listening to music is earbuds and portable digital devices. More than once have I seen a young person (say, under 40) gasp when I played a familiar tune on a humble Kenwood KA-3500 and some Ascend Acoustic 2-ways. On the other hand, I was in college and grad school between '72 and '79. If I would have been able to listen to my music anywhere, anytime, and carry the equivalent of a hundred LPs in my pocket, I might not have bothered with a component system.

At some point, convenience trumps quality. It all depends on your frame of reference.

I listen to music, not audio. So, I'm not upset when someone says my KA-3500 is inferior to something else. I'm sure it is. But, my experience tells me that, in lots of things, successive improvements become smaller and smaller. Duane Allman's solo on Mountain Jam probably would not move me much more than it already does if I heard it on a $30,000 setup.

[EDITED for grammar & punctuation]

I have a KA 3500 and it is a sweet little amp. I also have a Sony TA F3A, Pioneer SA 7700, Marantz 1060 and even a Fisher CA 800 and they sound very nice as well.

There will always be the snobs that poo poo any mainstream brand......because only really smart people can think of adjectives that have no relation to the item being described.
 
I have a KA 3500 and it is a sweet little amp. I also have a Sony TA F3A, Pioneer SA 7700, Marantz 1060 and even a Fisher CA 800 and they sound very nice as well.

There will always be the snobs that poo poo any mainstream brand......because only really smart people can think of adjectives that have no relation to the item being described.

Don't let the snobs bother you. If their ears and brains hear a difference, then they do. Hike your own hike. :music:

Something I forgot to mention: On another, non-audio, board I follow, someone asked for recommendations for headphones "up to $500." This person is an earbud / laptop user. I suggested he get some $100 Sony MDR-V6 phones, a $100 dac / headphone amp, and pocket the other $300. Or just the phones and pocket $400. I know he will be wowed, either way, in comparison to what he's used to. You should have heard the nitpickers telling him all that was inferior with such a low end setup.
 
Last edited:
Don't let the snobs bother you. If their ears and brains hear a difference, then they do. Hike your own hike. :music:

I understand all the reasons sperates are better and from personal exprenice with really highend old and new vs TOTL restored receivers in the same the system, I preferred all the separates over the receivers. I also love the way the Sansui 350a to KLH-17’s that I gave my daughter sounds. If it’s all I had I would be perfectly happy. But if money was no object and space wasn’t a premium I might go new stupid $$$ stuff that I have heard. JMO

:beerchug:
 
Don't let the snobs bother you. If their ears and brains hear a difference, then they do. Hike your own hike. :music:

Something I forgot to mention: On another, non-audio, board I follow, someone asked for recommendations for headphones "up to $500." This person is an earbud / laptop user. I suggested he get some $100 Sony MDR-V6 phones, a $100 dac / headphone amp, and pocket the other $300. Or just the phones and pocket $400. I know he will be wowed, either way, in comparison to what he's used to. You should have heard the nitpickers telling him all that was inferior with such a low end setup.
I have some Sony MDR V6 (circa 1993).I'm not a big user of headphones so these are just fine.Actually they are pretty good.
 
I have a KA 3500 and it is a sweet little amp. I also have a Sony TA F3A, Pioneer SA 7700, Marantz 1060 and even a Fisher CA 800 and they sound very nice as well.

There will always be the snobs that poo poo any mainstream brand......because only really smart people can think of adjectives that have no relation to the item being described.

poo poo any mainstream brand......because only really smart people can think of adjectives that have no relation to the item being described

Think they can pick better descriptors than poo poo?:biggrin:

Cheers
Mister Pig
 
I don't know where this fits in this thread, or if it fits at all, but I feel a little sad for young people nowadays whose only experience listening to music is earbuds and portable digital devices. More than once have I seen a young person (say, under 40) gasp when I played a familiar tune on a humble Kenwood KA-3500 and some Ascend Acoustic 2-ways. On the other hand, I was in college and grad school between '72 and '79. If I would have been able to listen to my music anywhere, anytime, and carry the equivalent of a hundred LPs in my pocket, I might not have bothered with a component system.

At some point, convenience trumps quality. It all depends on your frame of reference.

I listen to music, not audio. So, I'm not upset when someone says my KA-3500 is inferior to something else. I'm sure it is. But, my experience tells me that, in lots of things, successive improvements become smaller and smaller. Duane Allman's solo on Mountain Jam probably would not move me much more than it already does if I heard it on a $30,000 setup.

[EDITED for grammar & punctuation]


In the sixties we had portable AM radios and a single ear bud, in the nineties we had the Walkman, headphones and chrome tape that could be used to record music we already owned or could borrow. Giving up quality for convenience as the result of consumerism is like going back to the AM radio.
 
#1 the main source for most of these systems back in the day was vinyl.....and for 99%of them the system was limited by the source. So in as far as "crap" is concerned I don't see the extrapolated sense in demanding a Cadillac when the road is gravel.
#2 While PS Audio touts its engineering prowess, the notion of engineering qualifications, and scientific validity seems to take a back seat when the topic of interconnects comes up. That's when I stopped listening.
 
In the sixties we had portable AM radios and a single ear bud, in the nineties we had the Walkman, headphones and chrome tape that could be used to record music we already owned or could borrow. Giving up quality for convenience as the result of consumerism is like going back to the AM radio.

Duh (great prespective), man these little F’ers have it great!!!
 
Well unfortunately this specification tells very little about how an amplifier handles music reproduction. With global negative feedback or feed forward correction you can push that THD number extremely low. This was the crux of the spec wars between the Japanese manufacturers in the 80's and 90's. Components had THD numbers that were vanishingly low, however these pieces often did not sound exceptional. Nor did they sound as powerful as lower powered American or European amplifiers that had lower rated power, but did not have current limiting designs in the power supplies.

Don't get me wrong, I do think specs are important, especially ones like noise floor, dampening factor, slew rate, and amps of current output. But using specs, especially THD in isolation, to try to predict how a component will handle the subtleties of music reproduction is chasing a will o wisp.

Cheers
Mister Pig

You make good points, and some parts of me understood that although I change slowly evidently.

The thing about the video was the broad generalizations, particularly describing Kenwood and pioneer as dreadful sounding trash. Pretty sure he hasn't heard my amplifier, he may have at least said something like with exceptions. But to broadly paint entire manufacturers lines like that causes me to lose respect for him and whatever he is selling.
 
poo poo any mainstream brand......because only really smart people can think of adjectives that have no relation to the item being described

Think they can pick better descriptors than poo poo?:biggrin:

Cheers
Mister Pig

Only if it makes them look smart to those with big wallets.
 
I've pretty much been able to parse the lingo of reviewers since the 1970s, knowing their individual style, priorities, and likes/dislikes helps greatly to sort things out as well as being aware of the audio community circular firing squad that ruins it for everyone.
 
I'd say the best audio names of the 70's were of excellent quality; Many of those examples are still operational today. Sound quality.....that may still be a topic of debate; Much the same as to the amplifiers and speakers of today vs. the 1970's.
 
I have owned many receivers in my day and to me the Yamaha CR2040 was the best of them which I enjoyed for many years. My current Yamaha C70/Acurus A200 combo in the vintage rig is much better driving the same NS690MkI speakers. As I moved through my audio journey in my main rig I ended up moving to separates then into a Quad amped system with active crossovers that well surpassed anything that preceded it. To call that elitist is what I call reverse snobbery which has raised it's ugly head in this thread. At the end of the day it is only about music enjoyment, and that is all this hobby is about, why make it anything else other than to justify your position?
Regards,
Jim
 
At some point, convenience trumps quality. It all depends on your frame of reference.

It really does I totally bought a chromecast audio on clearance to use on my amp when I just want to be lazy and listen to random stuff via my phone. Though I think in a weird way the convenience of streaming services has actually been a major part of the resurgence of vinyl and the renewed interest in vintage gear. I bought a lot of albums on vinyl after listening to them with streaming services. The stuff I want to own I buy on a tangible format and that one happens to be a pleasant inconvenience. It also inevitably caused me to build a better system after a lot of research. I think where things fall short with really getting into the hobby is there's a lack of easily available information starting out.

I really think it would be great if someone or a group of capable writers sat down and wrote a proper getting started guide for dummies with photos and explanations of various connections and how things go together. Like the diagrams that are found in older operators manuals but more easily found by people searching for how to get started. Also I think the industry has a problem with marketing itself. Other than Yamaha lately it seems like the major companies just go through the motions. Meanwhile, the smaller ones don't have a particular interest in or resources for entry or mid range gear so they're out of reach for someone getting started. I feel like the bar for entry gradually got set too high. Plus I think there should be more of a focus towards building hifi network tuners/media players with quality and less conventional interfaces in the realm of audio gear than there is. I want to see a hifi maker that can put out great sounding gear backed with some ambitious software engineering.
 
I have owned many receivers in my day and to me the Yamaha CR2040 was the best of them which I enjoyed for many years. My current Yamaha C70/Acurus A200 combo in the vintage rig is much better driving the same NS690MkI speakers. As I moved through my audio journey in my main rig I ended up moving to separates then into a Quad amped system with active crossovers that well surpassed anything that preceded it. To call that elitist is what I call reverse snobbery which has raised it's ugly head in this thread. At the end of the day it is only about music enjoyment, and that is all this hobby is about, why make it anything else other than to justify your position?
Regards,
Jim

Huh? Where exactly has anyone "run" anyone off? Sure there are strong opinions, on both sides, but hardly anybody being threatening.

My position is this: The guy in the podcast is an arrogant boob that said something rather stupid and inflammatory to generate clicks and some spare cash. Nobody has called what you do with your system elitist nor has anybody said that vintage receivers are the best thing ever.

A tempest in a teacup.
 
It was one of those magical little amplifiers you don't expect much from and it floored me with a lovely sound. It was so nice, I took it down to my Dad's place for him to 'audition' and tell me what he thought. That was 4 or 5 years ago....

It is a rather surprisingly nice little receiver. It easily holds its own with the more powerful Sony Ta F3A and Pioneer 7700 that I have.
 
I really think it would be great if someone or a group of capable writers sat down and wrote a proper getting started guide for dummies with photos and explanations of various connections and how things go together. Like the diagrams that are found in older operators manuals but more easily found by people searching for how to get started.
This thread kind of points out why such a generalized tutorial is tough to do. Once you get past “put this jack in this hole..”. Everything becomes subjective. Is “honey dripping sound” better or worse than “sounds like the singer was in the room with me!” ? How do you point people toward receivers or components or even point out the differences when people in the hobby for half a century can’t agree? And where would you even start trying to explain the audio differences in speaker designs - vintage, modern, big, small, ported, acoustic suspension, horns, titanium tweeters, panels, etc, etc.? This thread shows that there are almost an infinite number of arrangements of the variables in an audio system - equipment, speakers, cables, sources, listening spaces - and there is absolutely no agreement on how to arrive at the perfect sound, because no one agrees on what perfect sound is.
I’m with those above who say find the sound you like in a budget you can afford and enjoy it. And be happy for others who find that pot of gold through a different route.
 
Back
Top Bottom