When the smarter choice is actually a step down

[rkgren1]

No need to spend a lot of money on gear.
I really enjoy my Sansui 771 and a Realistic STA-90.
They cost $20 and $5 respectively.
I recapped them both; to fix noise on the 771 and simply because I plan to keep the STA-90.

All my speakers are used as well.

My all-time favorite receiver was a Realistic STA-430, which I dragged out of a buy-the-pound bin at a local Goodwill store.
It cost $4 and I only had to replace dial lights to put it into service.
It was very simple on the inside, compared to the more sophisticated gear I have had, but it sounded fantastic!

Very good things are said about the Sansui 221 and 331 on this forum, as well as many other lower-end receivers.

It's not all about complexity, though. Design plays a part.
I have recapped 4 receivers, and the hardest by far was the STA-90 because everything other than the tuner hardware was on one board and components were difficult to reach.
My Pioneer SX-950, though was far more modular, and the boards were easy to unmount for replacing components.
Recapping the 950 was more expensive in parts (more of them), but was easier work by far.

 

[Pauln]

Maybe "stepping down" can be a positive decision with respect to preferring the matching of a "lessor" amp to a pair of speakers?

TOTL Sansui AU-9500 has 18 switches, 7 pots, and 4 output transistors per channel in the signal path
BOTL Sansui AU-6500 has 9 switches, 4 pots, and 2 output transistor per channel in the signal path

Amps further up the model line hierarchy tend to include more features that pass the signal through more switches and pots, some of those individual switches involving multiple contacts in the signal path. These may include features one may never use.

Assuming the power is adequate for the speakers, as already mentioned, there is a nice thing happening in amps that only use one pair of output transistors per channel (those in about the 30W range) compared to more powerful amps that use two, three, or more pairs to produce higher output.

TOTL is not always the best solution... just there if one needs it.

 

[kydog]

I picked up the rather rare Yamaha CR 3020 receiver that came up for less than the asking price a year ago but firmly in my budget of $400.
On the other hand I had a chance to buy the 1000m speakers in absolute mint condition for $1000. Just couldn't do it, my mind wouldn't take me there when I have some marvelous speakers that fill my need. They will pop up soon again down the road at some weird location with a $100 price tag is my dream.

 

[Old Guy8]

Wish I had the room for that sort of stuff. Gots to have a tabletop or two for listening to the ball games though!

My latest ...

Very classy classic! Thanks for sharing.

Interesting discussion also. I was thinking of less expensive turntables/cartridges being easier to deal with. Also, might be less inclined to highlight rest of system and recording weaknesses.

 

[JoeESP9]

To support the OP's main question I present the thought that many people consider the GFA-535 to be the best sounding of the GFA series.

 

[Roypercy]

I've always been really lucky to find good gear for cheap, and the difference between what I spend and its value (to me) is part of the pleasure I feel in acquiring gear. I have a SS Scott 460A integrated and 530T tuner in my office at work; it's a nice-sounding setup, and very pretty to look at, but one of the things that puts a smile on my face when it's playing is the fact that I got both pieces for 30 bucks. I think I enjoy it more than I would a better setup that had cost me serious money.

 

[Mazeppa]

I've posted this in multiple other threads, because I have been down this "rabbit hole"--I spent years and thousands of dollars building up my "main" system to a certain level of resolution that rendered a lot of my favorite music virtually unlistenable. I listen to a lot of 60's-80's music--of which, a lot of is not notoriously well-recorded/well-engineered. I sold off most of that gear and dialed it back a notch or two, so I could actually listen to the music, rather than get trapped in listening to the flaws. Don't get me wrong--great recordings sounded amazing, but most of it--not so much, so I actually ended up "downgrading" to get back to where I was happy again. It only matters if YOUR system sounds good to YOU--regardless of price.

I agree with savatage1973 entirely.
Starting point is the source material (music and media it's recorded on) to build a system for reproduction to your satisfaction..
Only very recently came to the same conclusion and scaled my equipment back to better match the source material (late 60's-early 70-'s on CD) I prefer and am very happy to have done so.

How did I know I had overshot the mark? When I tried a few of those costly Audio Fidelity cd's that were a transcendent experience to listen to on my 3.1. active crossover system on which my "everyday" cd's of artists I really liked sounded like a** , but I could enjoy them on my car audio. Hmmmmmm

I am a listener, not a collector that has an ingrained "most bang for the buck" imperative that started out in the hobby trying to emulate my long gone 1970's system; Pioneer QX 9900, Pioneer RL 700 speakers, Dual 1229 turntable, Hitachi cassette deck.

My journey down the "rabbit hole" taught me that vintage equipment can be very good, but is not cost effective if repair is required and you are not able to effect them yourself.
My present system consists of components that were manufactured from 1970 to 2015; Soundcraftsman A-2502 Amp, Wharfedale Diamond 10.1 speakers, Paradigm PDR-12 subwoofer,TubeDac 09, Late 90's Yamaha DVD player.

 

[spicer]

I think the term used was "step down" not "fall off a cliff."

I was thinking back up a bit for step down. Kind of means the same thing but void of any attitude. I'm also hearing simplify, as in, do I really need all this stuff to do what I really want to do... and that is to simply enjoy listening to the music without making equipment a quest. I've got a bunch of stuff and sometimes it occurs to me I'd be just as happy with a decent two channel system that, if called upon, can play rather loud... a stereo... vintage, but not necessarily so.

 

[melofelo]

You don't need a billion pixels to take a good photograph... sometimes less resolution makes for a better picture. Same with some musical recordings.

 

[mjw21a]

Hmmmm, I prefer to go vintage on the speakers and my sources . My amplifiers and phono stages are exclusively new valve amps of Chinese manufacture. I've found these offer the best sound quality for the money after upgrading coupling caps, volume pots, tube rolling etc.

Its just the case of doing your research prior to a purchase is all. No different to buying vintage gear. Then again, the used market in the US is much better and you could do the same with some nice vintage tube amps. Simple circuits so always worth repairing vs SS gear unless you have a transformer failure

Where and when did I write anything suggesting one get rid of their poor recordings? Suggesting one listen to better recordings does not translate into "get rid of what you listen to".

I don't understand the concept of "dumbing down" a system to accommodate poor recordings. With 3500+ LP's and 1600+ CD's (90% jazz and classical) I have some bad ones. If I were to "dumb down" my system for poor recordings what do I do with the good ones? Do I not play them because the system isn't good enough to reproduce them at their best? Besides, most of my poor recordings are of music (rock/pop/punk/alternative/metal) I don't particularly like. So even if they were better recordings I'd still not play them. Yes, I have some jazz and classical recordings that don't sound very good. Most of them are old/mono. I don't expect them to sound all that good anyway. I should mention that I bought several LP collections when people were dumping their LP's for "perfect sound forever". A lot of the stuff that sounds bad or I don't like was acquired through those bulk purchases.

I have one (IMO) good system. Making it sound better is what I'm about.

Why dumb down any system . Just have multiple systems for different purposes. Both my systems perform very nicely , though one is far more forgiving than the other