Vintage sound question

I have a Pioneer AVR from the 1990's and it plays audio in two channel mode very well. So it really depends on the model and the synergy with your speakers and source.
 
My AVR is the TOL Marantz, think it's 165wpc, my HT speakers cost just as much as my 2ch speakers. HT is 9.4.2, yeah it does bass much better, but that is about it. For movies, at times it's better than going to the movies. But for 2ch it's lacking. Just doesn't have the depth, clarity, separation or emotion of my 2ch. The HT has DSP, everything is measured, adjusted, set.

My 2ch is vintage, 200wpc, even vintage speakers. Everything has been reaped/referbed running the same cables in both systems.
Just love sitting in my chair (am as I write this) listing to records, even the radio.

They each have their place. But thing if I only had one system, and one room, I would get a speakers switch, HT receiver, then a 2ch integrated. No multichannel AVR that I have played with has sounded as good as a good stereo setup.
 
topdownsound said:
I love vintage but wonder about the sound and what gives it its character. Speakers all sound different, so that's one component. But does a Pioneer SX-950 produce different sounding output sound than a good AVR?

From a record's perspective, I can understand the sound being influenced by the needle, the preamp, the amp, the speakers (mine are passive). The part of the path that is the receiver - how much does that change the sound quality as opposed to all the other components in the signal path? By the time the signal hits the receiver, it has gone through a lot of processing. The receiver will amplify it, so that's massaging the signal to a degree, and then pass it along to the speakers. I'm thinking that actually very little of the sound that we hear is due to the receiver's part in the process, that the sound that comes out is mostly a function of the speakers and the processing that happens before the receiver adds its contribution.

So the real question - I'm considering a system based on a Pioneer SX-950. Is paying the long dollar to get a vintage receiver going to markedly change the sound I hear as opposed to a good quality AVR?

My system presently is a good AVR, HPM-1100s as fronts, BA A70 S2 as surrounds, SVS SB-2000 Pro sub, Technics TT. When I play music, I use 2 channel stereo as my AVR option. The sub is still in the mix with that option but not the BAs. If I get an SX-950 and use it for listening to music, would I hear a big change in the character of the sound compared to the AVR 2 channel stereo option? I'm on the fence about this, thinking that the contribution of the receiver itself is a relatively smaller percentage contribution to what my ears hear as opposed to the speakers/TT/preamp that I presently have. What do you all think?
Click to expand...
So much discussion here with all the illusions of "vintage", which is often nothing more than "smoke and mirror parlor tricks". "Vintage" is exactly that: OLD. It is full of reliability issues, and often (most often) outdated components and materials. Modern equipment, and there will be many here who will object, is in the vast majority of cases superior to vintage.... You will, however, hear all tropes about "superior reliability" followed by "ease of maintenance", without asking: If it is so reliable, why does it always require maintenance to replace defective items? Then you will hear: Ohhh, charts, graphs, and test results mean NOTHING (unless it supports vintage equipment, which is rarely does). Approach the vintage quagmire on your own peril, as the risks of disappointment and to the wallet are great, while reasonable rewards are sketchy. Who knows, you may hit the jackpot. I still pay MegaMillions, but the most I ever won is $12. :idea:
 
Last edited:
Natasha Bell said:
So much discussion here with all the illusions of "vintage", which is often nothing more than "smoke and mirror parlor tricks". "Vintage" is exactly that: OLD. It is full of reliability issues, and often (most often) outdated components and materials. Modern equipment, and there will be many here who will object, is in the vast majority of cases superior to vintage.... You will, however, hear all tropes about "superior reliability" followed by "ease of maintenance", without asking: If it is so reliable, why does it always require maintenance to replace defective items? Then you will hear: Ohhh, charts, graphs, and test results mean NOTHING (unless it supports vintage equipment, which is rarely does). Approach the vintage quagmire are your on peril, as the risks of disappointment and to the wallet are great, while reasonable rewards are sketchy. Who knows, you may hit the jackpot. I still pay MegaMillions, but the most I ever won is $12. :idea:
Click to expand...
Them's fightin' words...
 
topdownsound said:
I love vintage but wonder about the sound and what gives it its character. Speakers all sound different, so that's one component. But does a Pioneer SX-950 produce different sounding output sound than a good AVR?

From a record's perspective, I can understand the sound being influenced by the needle, the preamp, the amp, the speakers (mine are passive). The part of the path that is the receiver - how much does that change the sound quality as opposed to all the other components in the signal path? By the time the signal hits the receiver, it has gone through a lot of processing. The receiver will amplify it, so that's massaging the signal to a degree, and then pass it along to the speakers. I'm thinking that actually very little of the sound that we hear is due to the receiver's part in the process, that the sound that comes out is mostly a function of the speakers and the processing that happens before the receiver adds its contribution.

So the real question - I'm considering a system based on a Pioneer SX-950. Is paying the long dollar to get a vintage receiver going to markedly change the sound I hear as opposed to a good quality AVR?

My system presently is a good AVR, HPM-1100s as fronts, BA A70 S2 as surrounds, SVS SB-2000 Pro sub, Technics TT. When I play music, I use 2 channel stereo as my AVR option. The sub is still in the mix with that option but not the BAs. If I get an SX-950 and use it for listening to music, would I hear a big change in the character of the sound compared to the AVR 2 channel stereo option? I'm on the fence about this, thinking that the contribution of the receiver itself is a relatively smaller percentage contribution to what my ears hear as opposed to the speakers/TT/preamp that I presently have. What do you all think?
Click to expand...
I lot of what set vintage apart from a typical avr is heavy power supplies amps that are full frequency made for when heavy bass notes hit . Avr often cut corners in that dept because their assuming your running an amplified sub so the frequency's that are harder to handle are sent to a sub pre out which the powered sub has its own amp . Also since the older speakers were desighned to carry all the bass has loudness and tone controls to boost bass frequency’s at lower volume levels . Also don’t pass up lesser known brands in vintage , many of the higher end Realistic’s were just as good as pioneer and very serviceable as well . Example the pioneer sx 780 sold for $699 new had 60 wpc and power packs modules that are hard to find compared to the Realistic sta2080 80wpc no modules , 80wpc at .03% also had more inputs midrange control and a 4 gang tuner ! Sold new for $499 and had a nicer build quaility ! I have 2 of these units one I’ve ran since 1981 all original including the lite bulbs ! Also the sta2000 75 wpc or the early digital sta2290 100 wpc still aluminum face plates wood side a very cool receiver ! The concept series a lot of them made by Tandy corp who also built a lot of the Realistic line of receivers !
 
Natasha Bell said:
So much discussion here with all the illusions of "vintage", which is often nothing more than "smoke and mirror parlor tricks". "Vintage" is exactly that: OLD. It is full of reliability issues, and often (most often) outdated components and materials. Modern equipment, and there will be many here who will object, is in the vast majority of cases superior to vintage.... You will, however, hear all tropes about "superior reliability" followed by "ease of maintenance", without asking: If it is so reliable, why does it always require maintenance to replace defective items? Then you will hear: Ohhh, charts, graphs, and test results mean NOTHING (unless it supports vintage equipment, which is rarely does). Approach the vintage quagmire are your on peril, as the risks of disappointment and to the wallet are great, while reasonable rewards are sketchy. Who knows, you may hit the jackpot. I still pay MegaMillions, but the most I ever won is $12. :idea:
Click to expand...
Technically if it's properly restored, it's no longer 'vintage' as most of the parts will be replaced with modern counterparts, then it's just a case of circuit design, which apart from class D, hasn't really changed much in 50 years.
 
Hajidub said:
I mistyped my response, I didn’t mean SS I meant IC (I can’t think of a word to use).
Click to expand...
So called "IC's" still aren't necessarily bad. If you cut open an STK pack, it's simply discrete components mounted in a neat package. Both my Sony STR-6800SD and Yamaha CR-1040 use these packs, and sound great. (Well . . . the Yammy did, 'til they blew.) :confused:
 
I always recommend vintage separates, preferably amps with commercial and professional origins. I've used very little else for over 50-years. If you are really looking for some grunt! A two-hundred-dollar Crown amp will blow any AV receiver away. :dunno:
 
AudioAvarice said:
Technically if it's properly restored, it's no longer 'vintage' as most of the parts will be replaced with modern counterparts, then it's just a case of circuit design, which apart from class D, hasn't really changed much in 50 years.
Click to expand...
I agree with much of that. My "vintage" Adcom GFA-565 mono-blocs are not really what Adcom produced, but the result of a complete rebuild with modern materials and components. It is not so much about "circuit design", but materials and manufacturing processes. Thus, yes, the electronic components have been completely replaced. I am certain, that these amps not only sound better than the ones that left the factory in the early 1990s, but will also last a good bit longer. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom