Modern or Vintage?

[DavidZak]

Now your getting it.

We're all at different stages of craziness here, some have completely lost their minds and the rest are on their way lol. The rabbit hole runs deep if you're willing to spelunk it's depths.

Honestly, I'm a Media First, Speakers second and Amp 3rd kinda guy. As long as I have good clean power I'm quite satisfied. But that's another poll. Lol

 

[Grenadeslio]

Honestly, I'm a Media First, Speakers second and Amp 3rd kinda guy. As long as I have good clean power I'm quite satisfied. But that's another poll. Lol

I'm the opposite, music first, video second. But that doesn't mean I haven't a nice surround setup.

Preamp, surround processor, 300watt amp for the center channel, 400watt amp for the front mains, 150watt amp for the surrounds, and twin 250watt 12"subs. Plus all of the typical source equipment, tuner, tape deck, CD/DVD player, turntable, and speakers of course.

 

[DavidZak]

I'm the opposite, music first, video second. But that doesn't mean I haven't a nice surround setup.

Preamp, surround processor, 300watt amp for the center channel, 400watt amp for the front mains, 150watt amp for the surrounds, and twin 250watt 12"subs. Plus all of the typical source equipment, tuner, tape deck, CD/DVD player, turntable, and speakers of course.

I actually was referring to the fact that if the recording was done well you can get by with a set of decent speakers and amp. it will sound great. but a bad recording wont make the most expensive system sound good. I am definitely a Music first guy. Speakers are definitely second most important in line.

 

[DavidZak]

I'm the opposite, music first, video second. But that doesn't mean I haven't a nice surround setup.

Preamp, surround processor, 300watt amp for the center channel, 400watt amp for the front mains, 150watt amp for the surrounds, and twin 250watt 12"subs. Plus all of the typical source equipment, tuner, tape deck, CD/DVD player, turntable, and speakers of course.

Have some watts? Wow

 

[4-2-7]

Avrs were not cheap. The good ones ran about $2000.00 to $3000.00 but you already know that. Because you have owned it all and have special golden ears

My Marantz Pre Pro AV9000, used only as a selector and digital hub on my TV wall. As a preamp it sounds like crap compared to what I have in my main system. I output the Digital signal bypassing the internal DAC because I have better. It's used only to select between the TV and CDP and I then send one coaxial to my main DAC.



The Marantz SACD/DVD DV8400 has a optical to the TV and AV 9000 to play standard CDs and watch DVDs and then that all goes to my main systems DAC, so TV is playing through my main 2ch system. I also have a coaxial going to my main system analog preamp to play SACDs and in that case I use the DV 8400 internal DAC.



This is my McIntosh D100 digital preamp used for DAC duty only. All digital goes through this to my analog preamp other than what was stated. On top of it is a Audioengine 24bit WiFi DAC, used for it's WiFi only, this connects my computers to the system. Below it is a Marantz PMD 580 digital recorder/player/server I can record anything going to the system.

All I asked is what Aker's own and what they prefer to get an idea of some different set ups and the benefits and also what they enjoy there systems for.

The above all plugs into this



I haven't found a Receiver or AVR that sounds better than it, and I'v tried a lot of gear, even **** no one else would bother with.

 

[4-2-7]

My equipment and speakers range from mid-1960 up to just a few years ago. I buy what works for me and what I like listening to. I also like to be frugal, so I often acquire older TOTL rather than newer BOTL or MOTL for about the same bucks.

Bingo winner winner

Another example of something you won't find in your typical AVR, caps the size of soda cans, and transformers that weigh as much as your car's battery lol.
View attachment 1520336

Sorry, those caps are bigger than the can

She's a beauty. No I don't think AVR's sound better for Music but they are not totally inferior to the Vintage for many reasons. All rooms and ears and taste are different. if I had the money I sure would own a Killer vintage set up also. But for now I'll have to stick with my AVR and enjoy the Music and an occasional Movie. As long as I enjoy and I'm happy with what I hear is all that matters.

That's all that any of us would want anyone to do. However your post was to try and self validate your standing in the audio world. Don't trip, get in where you fit in, there is always better out there and no one has the best of anything.

some have completely lost their minds

Hey I resemble that remark

 

[Grenadeslio]

I actually was referring to the fact that if the recording was done well you can get by with a set of decent speakers and amp. it will sound great. but a bad recording wont make the most expensive system sound good. I am definitely a Music first guy. Speakers are definitely second most important in line.

No, but the most expensive system will let you hear whatever the recording has to offer, warts and all, and that's really all we can ask of it. Anything less and we won't be able to hear all that the great recordings have to offer, and that would be sad.

We have another poster here attempting to convince the horde that using inferior equipment to mask the warts is the end all be all of sonic nirvana, went over like lead balloon lol.

 

[4-2-7]

No, but the most expensive system will let you hear whatever the recording has to offer, warts and all, and that's really all we can ask of it. Anything less and we won't be able to hear all that the great recordings have to offer, and that would be sad.

We have another poster here attempting to convince the horde that using inferior equipment to mask the warts is the end all be all of sonic nirvana, went over like lead balloon lol.

Some don't understand the word system, for a system to sound great all steps need to do their part in making it great, including the media. Buying the best media doesn't make an inferior system sound great, conversely having a great system and playing inferior media doesn't sound good either.

When I got to a point that my equipment was out classing the room, I started to work on my media collection. There is only so much we can do in our spaces and mine right now is not all that great. It's also one of the reasons I haven't went and bought very high end speakers, they would totally be a wast in my space.

 

[Harvestor]

Above not mine...but So beautiful.
And

My new to me
AU-717 Dual Mono...


The kind of Quality from the middle of the road 1970's gear isn't found today unless you are spending many thousands of dollars.

I'm not rich I can't afford anything being laid off and looking for work, so finding and obtaining gear from the 1970s era built with quality is a dream come true...

 

[Guest140]

I have reached the stage where I have purchased too many receivers/amps over the years and some of it has to go, and it looks like the more modern pieces are the first choice for sale, the vintage stuff has so much more character and in some cases irreplaceable.

 

[Guest140]

View attachment 1520405
Above not mine...but So beautiful.
And

My new to me
AU-717 Dual Mono...
View attachment 1520407
View attachment 1520408
The kind of Quality from the middle of the road 1970's gear isn't found today unless you are spending many thousands of dollars.

I'm not rich I can't afford anything being laid off and looking for work, so finding and obtaining gear from the 1970s era built with quality is a dream come true...

That is amazing equipment and in such fantastic condition.

 

[432HzBob]

Both

 

[Dude111]

I want whatever produces the nicest analogue sound

 

[Isaac C.]

I prefer 1970s equipment because it offered the greatest advances in analog equipment prior to the advent of the digital equipment of the 80s. I also prefer the aesthetic of 1970s stereo equipment, most everything was built like a tank out of metal and wood.

Of course you can spend thousands upon thousands today for newer analog equipment, but vintage equipment offers the best price to performance in my experience.

 

[stereofanboy]

No receivers in my current setups.

One preamp is from the late '80s and is digital. The other is a current model with several digital inputs to be routed through the onboard dac and a few strictly analog inputs. Both have remote controls.

Between these two I'd keep the new one. I have an early '80s Yamaha receiving the Avionic treatment. When it gets back to me I'll have to compare it to the others before deciding how to vote.

 

[winters860]

 

[RT Fan]

I am in the both camp as well, Old Pioneer SX series receivers, EPI speakers, SAE stack, 40 year old McIntosh beauties, right on up to a Rotel Integrated amp with a built in DAC and Toslink inputs, as well as an OPPO Blu ray. It is all good in my book, I don't discriminate. If I like it, it stays.

 

[Mystic]

I didn't vote because you don't have a spot for me

Likewise for me.

 

[Mystic]

I always vote for the underdogs.

 

[twiiii]

Both. Just want the best performance, no matter the format. Vinyl, tape, Beta Hifi, cassette, streaming, CD. DVD-A, SACD. Used them all, which ever is best for that performance... I do prefer digital for classical works with the large dynamic range a very quiet passages.