Are there any young audiophiles out there?

[RamblinE]

The new Yaris vs. Old Mustang argument is interesting. Mainly because the new Yaris costs much less to maintain. That in a nutshell is a great argument in favor of buying new gear.

Like any era before and since good gear and bad gear is available new and for affordable prices. Shoppers just have to be savvy.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[Soren Hammer]

First of all, I hate the term audiophile. Prefer audio enthusiast, because that is what we (mostly) are.

Second of all, I don't understand all the "young" audio enthusiasts out there who think vintage is the only way to go. The new stuff is better IMO. Yes, I know vintage has it's appeal to those who knew what it was back in the day, but most of it is worn out, needs rebuilding to bring up to spec, etc. But it's a nostalgia thing more than anything else.

New gear and new tech should be what defines the young generation getting into this hobby, not the old stuff Grandpa or the Uncle had. Electronics are better now, seriously. Learn class D, find a new path.

I choose vintage because:
- It is a much better run for the money than new
- Do you spot any new affordable high end open-reel and cassette tape decks?
- Particularly vintage Bang & Olufsen has a much nicer design than new stuff, and their amplifier designs were copied way into the 90's.
- I like doing some of the restoration work myself.
- You don't need an awfully high damping factor in an amplifier.

 

[Vistance]

...Are you sure that those people feel vintage is the "only" way to go or did you just stick that in there to make your weak argument sound better? In reality you will find that most all young people, even those who appreciate vintage gear, don't use it exclusively.

I realize it must be convenient for you to summarize everything newer than vintage as "new stuff" but you have to realize how useless that makes your post. "New stuff" could mean anything from something sitting in the clearance bin at the dollar store to something costing $100k in a boutique store. Of course there is almost always "New stuff" that is better. Does that mean anyone who is in a position to acquire a functional vintage piece of gear could instead get something "new" that is "better" without spending 10x the money or more? Probably not...

I would contend that "New gear" and "new tech" already defines the young generation getting into this hobby, which is why the market is now dominated with ipod docking stations and the equivalent of computer speakers. That is what the "young generation" tends to buy, not vintage.

Your post conveniently ignores a key variable; potentially the most important variable of them all that comes into play when people build a vintage system: Money. Young people don't buy Vintage gear out of some mistaken idea that it's better than high-end new gear, any more than they would buy an iPod dock thinking that same thing. They do it because it's what they can afford.

Your argument is basically chastising people for making decisions within their budget. Do you really feel like all the young folks who build vintage systems are in a position to instead go and drop $$$ on high-end new gear? If them building their vintage system was in place of something like an ipod Dock or 2.1 computer speakers, can you really still say that they made the wrong choice?

It's like someone choosing between an old Mustang and a Yaris, and then saying that picking the Mustang was the wrong choice because it's not as fast as a modern sports car.

I am 23 now, and when I started buying stereo gear I was 15 so I'm in the "young" category. Probably what lico is getting at - and I agree - is some vintage equipment costs an insane amount. A Pioneer SX-1250 goes for nearly a grand. Acoustically, it gets stomped all over by gear that costs between half and 2/3rds what it does, is brand new, and needs no restoration and includes a warranty. On another site where people discuss audio gear that has more young people, there are often guys who post "Just got this baby in" and it's some old Marantz or Sansui or Pioneer receiver. It seems like they spend too much time around people who are particularly in love with vintage gear so as to be blinded to alternatives.

I don't think vintage stuff is bad (I just paid a pretty penny for a Threshold Stasis 3 power amplifier which is circa '79), but there's a lot of stuff that's really overrated. The cheapest, easiest to find stereo gear from what I see is Adcom and NAD stuff. There are others, but you can find lots of stuff from those guys for $100-200 second hand. Not new, not vintage - it's the middle area that's "undefined". Either way, it's decent stuff - especially for a starter system (Some people keep on using that stuff for a long time too). If you spend too much time around audio fans who just ooze over vintage and ignore modern gear, if you're still a beginner in the hobby you'll think it's because "vintage is better than modern crap". That blanket statement is used so much and not defined well, mostly because it's assumed all who would read it generally understand that it's not inclusive of all modern gear but mostly the low quality equipment that is sold in some retailers. Honestly these days, despite their unattractive looks I think even the cheap AVRs offer surprising performance and features. I'd challenge even a lot of cheap audio gear today sounds equal to or better than vintage, but lacks the aesthetics (on average).

Young people buy vintage because it's the stuff that might end up at a thrift store, or at a flea market, or someone's yard sale. That said, a few years ago I picked up a little 80 wpc Adcom, a nice little NAD preamp, and a pair of Polk Monitor 7 speakers all for $150. So I both agree and disagree with some of what you say.

In the end, there's great vintage and overrated and downright bad vintage (*Ahem* Soundesign rack system I'm looking at you...) and then there's great modern and overrated modern and downright bad modern (Looking at you various receivers in the '90s). Around here though, people will hear more about vintage than modern just because the community around here is more pointed that direction. The guys I knew in school who were into audio did have nothing but vintage, but I think bought it for the wrong reasons (A bunch of them were closet hipsters, no offense to them).

 

[Chris Brown]

some vintage equipment costs an insane amount. A Pioneer SX-1250 goes for nearly a grand. Acoustically, it gets stomped all over by gear that costs between half and 2/3rds what it does, is brand new, and needs no restoration and includes a warranty.

Seems you've taken an outlier in terms of price and used that as the basis of a generalization about vintage gear being expensive. A Pioneer SX-1250 certainly does NOT cost nor is it worth a grand. That doesn't mean someone who restored one can't try to sell it for that price to someone gullible.

 

[Vistance]

I wish it were less true, but they're listed on that auction site all the time for near a grand and have had no restoration done. I really pointed it out since those are the coveted models that people who don't know any better will aspire to one day own. They're decent vintage pieces, but not worth the cash they bring if purely factoring performance. There are multiple examples from other brands, Marantz, McIntosh, Sansui, etc. I just picked the Pioneer because someone recently posted an unrestored one for sale for $800.

By comparison, there's a Sumo Andromeda III power amp listed at $650. For a little more than the price of the Pioneer (Factor in buying a preamp - Adcom and NAD both have some that go for around $100-200), you'd have something way more versatile and better sounding - just wouldn't have the silver, wood, and nostalgia. Which for the record, are really cool - just not worth that price considering the performance.

 

[RamblinE]

No qualms with my $100 t-amp. 25 clean wpc is enough for my near field setup. The enclosure is ALL metal with a brushed aluminum face and the components are quality.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[frankxbe]

Are there any young audiophiles out there?

Yea me ! 61 yrs young
Although I started about your age ,built a ~40 WPC tube amp ( 2 pp 6l6 GT outputs per ch. ) in high school electronic class for sr. year project . used it for some years . Bought some University speakers to play it on and a Garrard model 50 with a Stanton 500e!
and a used Lafayette FM tuner.
ofc I worked after school and on weekends that paid for the stereo and the 57 Chevy bel air, the 305 Honda scrambler and all the parts and upgrades that went into to those also. Lots of systems since then mostly new stuff in the studio now .


You don't have to spend a fortune for good sound contrary to what the magazines will have you believe just get some decent
not real expensive passive 8" 2 way studio monitors and a modest powered Sub ,an inexpensive pro amp Behringer A500 or Crown xls 1000/1500 or a QSC GX3 amp) ,Your PC or whatever and an USB/DAC maybe an inexpensive but very good Schitt Modi.
You will need a pre amp if you spin vinyl (maybe one of the ART DJ's phono pre amps) you can build a decent *New killer system like this for around ~ $625.00-$725.00 add in $79.00 for the preamp + whatever $$ for the turntable if you spin Vinyl . You won't be able to approach the sound at BB,BB /Magnolia .Amazon or wherever for anything close to that money. You might get an HTIB or sound bar and a sub for that .... it's almost criminal I tell ya!


Treat the room with some sound absorbents and bass traps *(you can make those inexpensively ) it will sound better or at least as good than a lot of new 5 ++ K off the shelf systems or most vintage gear (been there done both several times )in a modest sized room certainly better than any receiver I've heard including the Sony ES in my HT set up . ofc there may be some exceptions I haven't heard them all.

Some of the decent vintage gear *can cost as much or more for just a decent restored receiver or amp in *some cases .
ofc OTOH if you choose vintage there are always the lucky bargains here at AK in $$ and sense and Barter town .
Some of the Black plastic (if still working ) 90's early 2000's AVRs were not bad and they are cheap on the used market .



Disclaimer ( I have 3 vintage Pioneer receivers SX 980,1050,3900 so I know how they sound (decent ) with the right speakers . but they have limitations. The best ones are the (very good ) the SX 1050 and SX1250 fageett about an SX1980 you need at least 6 or 7 bit coins (at today's price for one of them if you can find one and 2 guys to move it!) you will extremely lucky to find a decent serviced SX1050 for less than a grand an SX1250 even more . Modern electronics have come a long way including the class D type switching amps they use a lot now.
OTOH if you find some working phat McIntosh gear at a bargain meaning any working McIntosh gear (not likely) jump on it!

 

[Old HiFi Guy]

305 Honda, now there is a motorcycle that I have not heard mentioned in years.

 

[frankxbe]

305 Honda, now there is a motorcycle that I have not heard mentioned in years.

Had a 305 (CL77) just like this one pictured same color and all except my cylinders and heads were pained in flat black hi temp and the engine cases were
Polished to almost chrome luster. (semi chrome and jewelers rouge )

Photo Web/ Google

Rebuilt the motor in the 305 with .050" over pistons put a chicken hawk
(305 /CB77) cam / cam drive /tach cable + 66 Black bomber CB 450 /tach/speedo /headlight assy on it
changed to the CB77 sprockets also for street riding had a lot of fun on that. even took some long rides .
Photo Web/ Google

Then went on to quite a few bigger bikes including a K5 CB750 (mostly stock except a Vetter fairing ),

903 Kawi Z-1 ( put on S/W air shocks, American made Diamond ½ pitch chain and better sprockets ,16" rear wheel and tire added gussets between the top tubes + added swing arm bearings + boxed swing arms + S/ W rear shocks ,1173 Yoshimura big bore kit + cams+ better clutch ,re jetted carbs ofc.and vetter fairing thing was bloody fast!

It had the occasional 120mph + scary speed wobble but much tamer after the modifications.

Then a mostly stock (other than custom seat,soft leather bags and fairing) GL 1100 Gold wing.

 

[Old HiFi Guy]

One friend of mine had a CB 750 the other had a 500 in '76. I was the the one who drove the support vehicle(a '76 Chevrolet van with a 6 cyl 3 speed OD which got 28 mpg overall on the trip) on a trip from Portland,OR to Reno NV. It was a fun trip, the bikes and the van were new, the weather was good and everyone had fun. Of course nowadays you couldn't get away with our old MPB mileage of calculating trips.

 

[the_danger]

19 here, I thought I was one of the younger ones but I guess there's a few here who beat me for that qualification

I started with my dad's 80s Technics stuff, which worked well, but I've started upgrading slowly but surely

got myself a NAD amp, looking into some Paradigm monitors, and trying to get a solid system, but as a university student, my parents don't really like to see me spend money on audio gear when we're already spending $20k a year for school

 

[frankxbe]

19 here, I thought I was one of the younger ones but I guess there's a few here who beat me for that qualification

I started with my dad's 80s Technics stuff, which worked well, but I've started upgrading slowly but surely

got myself a NAD amp, looking into some Paradigm monitors, and trying to get a solid system, but as a university student, my parents don't really like to see me spend money on audio gear when we're already spending $20k a year for school

That's some pretty nice starter gear there save some money for beer,babes and Pizza (within reason) that's an interesting part of life! plenty of time for audio later :thmbsp:

 

[lico]

Your argument is basically chastising people for making decisions within their budget. Do you really feel like all the young folks who build vintage systems are in a position to instead go and drop $$$ on high-end new gear? If them building their vintage system was in place of something like an ipod Dock or 2.1 computer speakers, can you really still say that they made the wrong choice?

It's like someone choosing between an old Mustang and a Yaris, and then saying that picking the Mustang was the wrong choice because it's not as fast as a modern sports car.

Sorry Chris Brown I tend to drop into a room make a statement and leave, I apologize.

But for for $14 on Ebay you can buy a class D amp board that makes just about every piece of vintage gear sound muddy in comparison, and it's "green". Doesn't require a recap, Deoxit, or fiddling. I'm not talking about digital sources, I'm talking about amps, which sound very bit as good and are every bit as cheap as a thrift store find.

 

[GoldSounds]

Age 25 here. I've considered myself an audiophile for about 10 years of so, about the time I started seriously collecting vinyl. Like others have stated in this thread, I hold the concept of being an audiophile in more rooted in mindset than an actual equipment setup. I remember in high school I didn't have much money for gear, so I mostly listened to my parents neglected 80s Kenwood setup. My first real "audiophile" product that I got was a pair of Grado SR-80 headphones, that really let me know that there was something more out there.

As for this whole vintage vs modern nonsense, I implore everyone to not view audio gear in absolutes like this. They both have their merits and there are all sorts of debates about price, longevity, etc. Although my current set up is decidedly vintage (most of my gear is 10+ years older than me), I wouldn't say that I -or most 'audiophiles' of my generation- are not open to newer gear. There are plenty of opportunities to buy good used gear, or new class-D gear cheaply. My best advice is to let your ears do the deciding within whatever budget you choose, pick out some good tunes and enjoy.

Glad to see so many folks around my age on here. The world needs more folks that care about quality.

 

[30hz MAGIC]

24 and still new here. Have had exactly 11 different sound systems so far and I can recite most of all of them. Started when I was 9 and have not stopped. Collected and hoarded speakers in the past and still do. Some things will never change.

I know I will die an old man still listening to speakers that weigh more than a small motor cycle and that's the way i want it.

I'm not married yet either = NO WIFE FACTOR FOR ME!

 

[AlTinkster92]

Wish I still had my Honda Super 90..:scratch2:

 

[moejr]

I wish it were less true, but they're listed on that auction site all the time for near a grand and have had no restoration done. I really pointed it out since those are the coveted models that people who don't know any better will aspire to one day own. They're decent vintage pieces, but not worth the cash they bring if purely factoring performance. There are multiple examples from other brands, Marantz, McIntosh, Sansui, etc. I just picked the Pioneer because someone recently posted an unrestored one for sale for $800.

By comparison, there's a Sumo Andromeda III power amp listed at $650. For a little more than the price of the Pioneer (Factor in buying a preamp - Adcom and NAD both have some that go for around $100-200), you'd have something way more versatile and better sounding - just wouldn't have the silver, wood, and nostalgia. Which for the record, are really cool - just not worth that price considering the performance.

"Better Sounding" is subjective. One person may feel the 1250 sounds better to them and another might prefer the new class d amp he just heard. There is no garantee that the either piece will sound better than the other.

 

[moejr]

Sorry Chris Brown I tend to drop into a room make a statement and leave, I apologize.

But for for $14 on Ebay you can buy a class D amp board that makes just about every piece of vintage gear sound muddy in comparison, and it's "green". Doesn't require a recap, Deoxit, or fiddling. I'm not talking about digital sources, I'm talking about amps, which sound very bit as good and are every bit as cheap as a thrift store find.

I will bet you that there are plenty of amps from the 70's 80's and 90's that will sound better than a $14 Class D from Ebay. To say something new will make just about any older unit sound muddy shows ignorance on your part.

 

[Vistance]

"Better Sounding" is subjective. One person may feel the 1250 sounds better to them and another might prefer the new class d amp he just heard. There is no garantee that the either piece will sound better than the other.

I said mostly that cheaper priced amps will sound better or the same because most of the time it is true. The 1250 was a well-made design from its time, but lots of newer amp technologies allowed the same sounds to be produced from components that cost less. I'm not an Adcom fan, but I'd wager a GFA-5500 will sound equal to or better than a 1250 and it's more powerful and affordable. But being a big black rectangle of no notable visual design, it doesn't have a following for anything but performance and value.

I compared a nice little SMSL T-amp with a Tripath 2020 amp chip to a Sansui 5050 and a few low wattage but highly rated Marantz receivers (Which I thought were great, btw). Couldn't tell the difference between any of those. The SMSL was $50 new, second-hand the Sansui 5050 was the cheapest all the Marantz stuff cost a lot more. Ignoring obvious feature differences, the acoustic performance was largely the same.

I don't like the idea of what lico says, since I too value nice looking well built stereo gear from various years, but must admit if you just acoustically compare it's quite surprising many times. My little SMSL T-amp sounded on par with a Marantz 2220b and a 2230, and relative to when they were available the Marantz stuff was pricey and my SMSL really cheap.

But I guess performance shouldn't be the only deciding factor honestly. Much like with cars, people don't always buy what performs best - some people just buy stuff because they like the look, feel, and overall design. The same can be said for most vintage stereo gear, and I don't think there's any fault to that. The difference is you do have some people who will have something that doesn't perform as well as something newer and cheaper try to defend it by saying it does sound different, when in an ABX blind test I'll almost guarantee you it'll be 50/50 and they won't be able to consistently identify one over the other. As wicked as a classic GTO is for example, the revised GTO from 2006 would handily beat it if talking purely on performance. But a '65 Tempest GTO with a 389 performs on par with the modern GTO. Definitely not a blanket rule that all old amps aren't as good or not as good. But even with cars, how many Tempest GTOs were sold vs. all the other cars back in the day? Most didn't perform like the Tempest GTO.

 

[frankxbe]

As wicked as a classic GTO is for example, the revised GTO from 2006 would handily beat it if talking purely on performance. But a '65 Tempest GTO with a 389 performs on par with the modern GTO. Definitely not a blanket rule that all old amps aren't as good or not as good. But even with cars, how many Tempest GTOs were sold vs. all the other cars back in the day? Most didn't perform like the Tempest GTO.

a '65 Tempest GTO with a 389 performs on par with the modern GTO.

UR kidding right ?


Modern muscle cars and even many daily drivers routinely outperform even the best '60's/70's muscle cars
except for a few specially prepared ringers or special factory optioned cars they had then .....and that's only in a straight line!


ofc that does not diminish their collector value......or coolness factor .


For example The 2005 LS2 Holden/GTO
with 4.6 seconds 0-60 mph and 13.0 ¼ mile times exceeded all but some of the specially optioned cars mentioned above
and they do it without all the drama and broken parts!

The 68-72 GTO had much better sterering and brakes
than the 64-67 builds but still not up to par with the '04'06 builds .

I worked on 60-70's muscle cars in the'70's and owned a few.

I owned a 64 A body Tempest/GTO 389/348hp 4sp matching #s tri carb . The tri carb optioned cars were very temperamental .It had slow steering and ineffective drum brakes and couldn't corner . It could never perform on par with the '04 '06 GTO builds on it's best day ! The quadrajet cars were munch better drivers than tri carbs especially the 68-72 cars .
I had a 58 Impala tri carb 348 temperamental also.

Truth is most of the muscle cars made back then were scary as hell when you got on it ,they went everywhere but where they were pointed and couldn't corner and couldn't stop! You want to drive something scary ? Try a 60's or 70's Vette,Porche ,or Benz SL at the limit and break the IRS ass end loose (they gave no warning) ! trust me on that you land where you land !