How can 30-year-old receivers sound better than new ones?

[dr*audio]

In today's market at what price would Pioneer have to sell a new SX-1980 at?

I also wonder how many of the vintage crowd would shell out the money for a new SX-1980 if it was ever brought back into production?

You are missing the point. You can't buy a modern receiver at any price that has a tuner in it equal to the SX1980, in fact they are very poor in that regard. If someone wanted a receiver with a good tuner in it and it had to be new, they would pay whatever it cost. But the fact is it does not exist. Now if you don't listen to the radio at all there is no point in buying a receiver and you could buy an integrated amp, and there are plenty of wonderful examples available today. But this thread started discussing receivers.

 

[Vintagear]

Threads like this are so tiresome. I've only been a member here for a couple of years and it's mind boggling how many vintage vs. new threads I've seen and participated in. It's always the same people with the same verbal spew. I'm bored with them.

I'm done with these vintage vs. new arguments. They're just mental masturbation with no happy ending. You guys knock yourselves out. This chimp is going to find some other form of entertainment.

I think the reason these types of threads come up often is because this is a real question on the minds of many enthusiasts. It's not just "trolls" as some would have you believe.

At the 2014 New York Audio Show one of the breakout sessions/seminars was entitled "The Virtues of Vintage II". It was moderated by Art Dudley. On the panel were Herb Reichert, Jonathan Halpern, Joe Roberts, Steve Rowell & Michael Trei. The large room was packed, there were not enough seats for the crowd that the session drew. Why would the NY Audio Show waste the time of their affluent and knowledgable attendee base with "mental masturbation"? Attendees to this show do not fit the stereotype of the luddite vintage lover that is all too often portrayed around here.

It was refreshing to see that even with all those people and opinions in the room the conversation was informative and civil.

 

[Bigerik]

I think the reason these types of threads come up often is because this is a real question on the minds of many enthusiasts. It's not just "trolls" as some would have you believe.

At the 2014 New York Audio Show one of the breakout sessions/seminars was entitled "The Virtues of Vintage II". It was moderated by Art Dudley. On the panel were Herb Reichert, Jonathan Halpern, Joe Roberts, Steve Rowell & Michael Trei. The large room was packed, there were not enough seats for the crowd that the session drew. Why would the NY Audio Show waste the time of their affluent and knowledgable attendee base with "mental masturbation"? Attendees to this show do not fit the stereotype of the luddite vintage lover that is all too often portrayed around here.

It was refreshing to see that even with all those people and opinions in the room the conversation was informative and civil.

To clarify, the vintage that Art Dudley refers to are not vintage receivers.

 

[Vintagear]

To clarify, the vintage that Art Dudley refers to are not vintage receivers.

Various unit types were discussed in that session by the panel and attendees, along with many of the points that Steve Guttenburg (who was also in the audience) brought up in the article posted by the OP. I was standing in the back, sorry I missed you. It would have been nice to meet.

Either way, I was specifically referring Dr. Morbius' "vintage vs new threads" and "vintage vs new arguments" statements. I don't think he's only bothered by receiver comparisons.

 

[Kneedeepinit]

I would love to buy new but cannot afford it. This is a hobby for me. I buy / sell / upgrade. I am keeping only the ones that meet my own level of performance.

The opportunities to buy newer used equipment at a deeply discounted price just does not happen. I am always coming accross decent used stuff so that is what I buy.

 

[JimPA]

You are missing the point. You can't buy a modern receiver at any price that has a tuner in it equal to the SX1980, .

I get poor am and fm reception where I live and prefer the clarity of cd or lp's over radio on my main system.

 

[Boozehound]

You are missing the point. You can't buy a modern receiver at any price that has a tuner in it equal to the SX1980, in fact they are very poor in that regard. If someone wanted a receiver with a good tuner in it and it had to be new, they would pay whatever it cost. But the fact is it does not exist. Now if you don't listen to the radio at all there is no point in buying a receiver and you could buy an integrated amp, and there are plenty of wonderful examples available today. But this thread started discussing receivers.

Ok so do you think your Chop-suey, has a better TUNER then a SX-1050
closer to 38 years old.

I find mine to be strong. Or is that Suey you rave about the end all be all.

 

[dr*audio]

Ok so do you think your Chop-suey, has a better TUNER then a SX-1050
closer to 38 years old.

I find mine to be strong. Or is that Suey you rave about the end all be all.

Many of the TOTL receivers from the 1970's had excellent tuners. I just picked the Model 8 because I know about it, and could readily find the specs to back it up. I don't have a Model 8. As I recall, the SX-1050 has a very good tuner. I haven't worked on one in years. Sort of like the old Maytag Repairman.

 

[Boozehound]

Many of the TOTL receivers from the 1970's had excellent tuners. I just picked the Model 8 because I know about it, and could readily find the specs to back it up. I don't have a Model 8. As I recall, the SX-1050 has a very good tuner. I haven't worked on one in years. Sort of like the old Maytag Repairman.

Cool I was just trolling, time for me to check my hair in the mirror.LMAO

 

[noogies]

Threads like this are so tiresome. I've only been a member here for a couple of years and it's mind boggling how many vintage vs. new threads I've seen and participated in. It's always the same people with the same verbal spew. I'm bored with them.

I'm done with these vintage vs. new arguments. They're just mental masturbation with no happy ending. You guys knock yourselves out. This chimp is going to find some other form of entertainment.

"Don't knock masturbation -- it's sex with somebody I love!"

 

[4-2-7]

"Don't knock masturbation -- it's sex with somebody I love!"

LMAO:thmbsp:

 

[BadassBob]

I would love to buy new but cannot afford it. This is a hobby for me. I buy / sell / upgrade.

That's exactly how I purchased new gear. Buy and sell vintage, then upgrade . Many on AK have gone down that road. Hell, you could read through posts from years ago, and see how many very well respected members here went from vintage to modern following that same formula. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but that's the easiest way to get new gear on your rack without reverting to a steady diet of ramen and Vienna sausages :yes:

 

[cubdog]

That's exactly how I purchased new gear. Buy and sell vintage, then upgrade . Many on AK have gone down that road. Hell, you could read through posts from years ago, and see how many very well respected members here went from vintage to modern following that same formula. I'm not saying one is better than the other, but that's the easiest way to get new gear on your rack without reverting to a steady diet of ramen and Vienna sausages :yes:

I have to laugh while I read about the guy bemoaning the high cost of modern gear. This is the same fellow with 30 speaker pairs, 10 TT, and 8 TOTL receivers.

cubdog

 

[just dave]

I think the reason these types of threads come up often is because this is a real question on the minds of many enthusiasts. It's not just "trolls" as some would have you believe.

At the 2014 New York Audio Show one of the breakout sessions/seminars was entitled "The Virtues of Vintage II". It was moderated by Art Dudley. On the panel were Herb Reichert, Jonathan Halpern, Joe Roberts, Steve Rowell & Michael Trei. The large room was packed, there were not enough seats for the crowd that the session drew. Why would the NY Audio Show waste the time of their affluent and knowledgable attendee base with "mental masturbation"? Attendees to this show do not fit the stereotype of the luddite vintage lover that is all too often portrayed around here.

It was refreshing to see that even with all those people and opinions in the room the conversation was informative and civil.

Tell us more about what was said,I wish I could have been there.

 

[Vintagear]

Tell us more about what was said,I wish I could have been there.

Well, a lot was covered. Of course, this wasn't a bash modern gathering. After all it was held at a show full of vendors promoting their latest wares. Unfortunately, I left the seminar before it was over because it was almost closing time and I hadn't been to every listening room. It paid off though, if I hadn't left when I did I would have never made it to the GamuT room and listened to the RS5's that made the day for me.

Back to the seminar, the talk quickly went to vinyl and the recent NY Times article about increased sales. One attendee mentioned that he thought young people don't care about this stuff as much as we did when we were their age. He said that he has an $80,000 system and that his teenaged daughter is allowed to use it. Yet when she has friends over they go to her room and listen to music on a portable unit. He just shrugged. Others pointed out that most of the vinyl is being purchased by younger people. My son, who get's it, almost jumped into the conversation.

At the 2013 Show Art Dudley said that "It's like we gained the world and lost our souls." "Some of the newer gear [sounds like] a skeleton without any meat on it's bones." This theme was touched on in the '14 show when as I said earlier, a panelist said "Maybe we need a little more distortion." (paraphrasing). I think some of this may coincide with the sound quality issue Mr. Guttenburg was getting at in the article posted in the OP.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/ny-audio-show-2014-vintage-seminar

BTW, there's actually a mistake in the '14 article, it wasn't all men. There was one lady sitting in the back of the room right next to where I was standing.

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue66/ny2.htm

It is my understanding that these Virtues of Vintage type seminars have taken place at several Audio Shows around the country and always seem to be well attended. There is interest and merit in the discussion. It shouldn't annoy anyone where another chooses to see value. Both modern and vintage can coexist as many here on AK already know.

 

[yaya97]

Almost sold my mac stuff ( have under 2k in the whole system (mc2300 6100 Thornen td 150 and speakerlab 7s). I am very open to modern but when I listened ..fantastic detail but it just didn't sell to me . I am keeping my stuff ( all has been overhauled ). Something was just missing . Again I would have no issue to go modern )

 

[superdog]

I usually don't get into the vintage vs modern debates but I have heard some hi dollar modern setups and for the most part I prefer my vintage.Nothing against modern as I am sure there are new setups I would enjoy if they didn't cost an arm and a leg.I like my Yamaha RX V800(2002) for the more modern sound I perceive it gives.

 

[uenjoymyself]

I think it's interesting that people get so up-in-arms about articles like this.
Do they affect your enjoyment of your current system in any way?

It's like the doorknobs who go into convulsions when "their team" doesn't win the big game.
In the big picture, why give that much of a sh*t?

This /\

 

[bd1886]

I long ago realized what the merits of a more modern sound can mean when even just solid MOTL tech is used. (Every time I turn modern on I immediately appreciate the definition and clarity of separation.) Still....my better analog has an element with the sonics being something that borders on a physical presence that is felt, and it doesn't even have to be TOTL equipment either. The courser blending of sonics is something that is readily appreciated (for this "moving through you" reason alone) and it is not only me but by many.

Still again,it will never be used for HT because my MOTL Onkyo will mop up the floor with it. I will never compare it to truly nice modern 2ch anything when it is pushing the killer modern speaks available these days....it's smooth, and even though it doesn't have that vintage thing,those drivers do what they are supposed to do and if someone can't hear that....poor you!

If audiophilia means I should never appreciate "so called lesser" once I've grown past something within sonics (?)....I find that mindset utterly ridiculous for myself and all this posturing (about something so individual) as to be only answerable with "Why"? Music is fricken' music and "always being correct" is something I love to get away from frequently. JMHO

 

[just dave]

Well, a lot was covered. Of course, this wasn't a bash modern gathering. After all it was held at a show full of vendors promoting their latest wares. Unfortunately, I left the seminar before it was over because it was almost closing time and I hadn't been to every listening room. It paid off though, if I hadn't left when I did I would have never made it to the GamuT room and listened to the RS5's that made the day for me.

Back to the seminar, the talk quickly went to vinyl and the recent NY Times article about increased sales. One attendee mentioned that he thought young people don't care about this stuff as much as we did when we were their age. He said that he has an $80,000 system and that his teenaged daughter is allowed to use it. Yet when she has friends over they go to her room and listen to music on a portable unit. He just shrugged. Others pointed out that most of the vinyl is being purchased by younger people. My son, who get's it, almost jumped into the conversation.

At the 2013 Show Art Dudley said that "It's like we gained the world and lost our souls." "Some of the newer gear [sounds like] a skeleton without any meat on it's bones." This theme was touched on in the '14 show when as I said earlier, a panelist said "Maybe we need a little more distortion." (paraphrasing). I think some of this may coincide with the sound quality issue Mr. Guttenburg was getting at in the article posted in the OP.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/ny-audio-show-2014-vintage-seminar

BTW, there's actually a mistake in the '14 article, it wasn't all men. There was one lady sitting in the back of the room right next to where I was standing.

http://www.positive-feedback.com/Issue66/ny2.htm

It is my understanding that these Virtues of Vintage type seminars have taken place at several Audio Shows around the country and always seem to be well attended. There is interest and merit in the discussion. It shouldn't annoy anyone where another chooses to see value. Both modern and vintage can coexist as many here on AK already know.

Thanks for that. Here was and interesting quote from the comments:

I mentioned that I
Submitted by JROB on September 29, 2014 - 7:26am

I mentioned that I demonstrated a Western Electric snail horn system from 1926 at this years Munich HighEnd Show. This was the FIRST arguably high fidelity speaker and this stone age implement not only earned the majority of "Best in Show" reports but the music it produced made numerous people cry in ecstasy! This was a profound experience for me and a telling indictment of conventional notions of technological progress.