Vintage vs Modern Audio Gear: Which is better?

Which type of audio gear is better?

  • Vintage (before all the techy home theater stuff)

    Votes: 4 8.5%
  • Modern

    Votes: 42 89.4%
  • Neither give me an iPod and Beats to crank out the Bieber tunes.

    Votes: 1 2.1%

  • Total voters
    47
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
A question for some of the "old timers" (I promise that is a term of respect ;)),

How was the "snake oil audio industry" back in the day? Was it as prevalent and as in your face as we see today?
There was none of it in the fifties or sixties that I remember. It got going in the seventies with the tube versus solid state debate, which morphed into funny cables and useless devices.

I think the digital revolution really pushed it along, as understanding how it works was ans still very much is beyond peoples understanding. So this made bogus claims easier to fly and run with.
 
J

John Sully

Enthusiast
I think there are a lot of good vintage amps. Leak, Armstrong, Rogers and especially Sugden come to mind.

In the US Dyanco certainly comes to mind.

I put this vintage Dynaco system together for my eldest grandson. The electronics was "inherited' from my friend Phil. I did service work on the power amp over the years.

There were many other good US amps form the likes of Marantz and Fisher prior to the corporate wrecking balls and many others.

If you think good analog FM can not be high fidelity, then you have not owned a really good FM tuner. I doubt there is one made now. Designing good FM tuners was another of Peter Walker's specialties. I really doubt there is a better tuner than his FM4.
That looks a lot like my first good system: PAT-5, FM-5, Stereo 120. Substitute Dynaco A35s for the speakers and it is my first good system. These days it is reasonably impossible to get an FM tuner as good as the FM-5. Absolutely every receiver I have ever owned had a mediocre or worse tuner section and I am not aware of any separate tuners which are widely available. It is sad to say, but most often the tuner section in your car radio is better.
 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
If you think good analog FM can not be high fidelity, then you have not owned a really good FM tuner. I doubt there is one made now. Designing good FM tuners was another of Peter Walker's specialties. I really doubt there is a better tuner than his FM4.


Yes, I have, such as the Marantz 2110 I currently own. I've also owned two other high-end tuners, including the original Sequerra. Most FM stations cut off bass below 50Hz, and by the time 99% of FM stations and transmitters get done with all of the necessary processing it sounds terrible on a good system. Yes, FM can be acceptable, but in practical reality it very seldom is.
 
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Seriously, I have no life.
I don't know what fraction of the total sales those electronic kits represented at their hey day. I suspect it was always small.

I believe snake oil became more prevalent because the audio market, as a whole, was shrinking. The manufacturers and dealers were looking for any way they could to boost sales and/or profits. They also had significant help from a few audio magazines and writers who promoted the overpriced and mysteriously performing 'high end' audio products.

Compare audio to TVs or automobiles. Those products certainly are at least as complex as audio, but their sales didn't shrink like audio. If anything, during the 50s & 60s, cars were much less complex, and many more people did their own tune up/maintenance/repair work. Now with computer controlled fuel and ignition systems, much fewer DIY mechanics are around. But I don't see car snake oil products. The same goes for TV repair.
In the UK scene DIY was very big in the fifties and sixties.

I wrote this post on my experience not long ago. I think you will remember it.

When Gilbert Briggs was at the helm of Wharfedale the bulk of the sales were in raw drivers. This was true in the early days of KEF. When Raymond Cook was at the helm DIY was a big part of the business, and he had his renowned Constructor Series. Goodmans Industries also sold more drivers than complete speakers. Raw drivers have always been a significant part of Lowther sales. When I was associated with Jordan Watts, the bulk of the business was raw drivers.

Dynaudio also had a significant raw driver business and were very helpful to the home constructor. They abruptly cancelled that business in the late eighties which was a pity.

As I said in my first post in the tube hey day amplifier construction was very popular.

You could also build a tape recorder in the fifties. This was a big task and this phase as I remember it was brief, but extended to some limited extent into the sixties. My early 70s Brenell deck was bespoke and I built the case and wired it all up.

Turntables for the Hi-Fi enthusiast were pretty much all DIY to an extent.

In the fifties and most of the sixties there were virtually no plinths. You bought your turntable less arm and cartridge. You purchased your pickup arm and cartridge and mounted the lot. The Decca ffss was integrated arm cartridge combo, but you had to buy the turntable and mount it all.

As far as I remember Garrard made no plinths for their turntables until the 401 and Lab 80 series, although others did.

SME sold only pickup arms for many years and still do sell arms only as well as complete turntables.

I remember Shure demonstrating a turntable at the Audio Fair at Hotel Russell circa 1960. It was a terrible contraption and received much ridicule. So they contracted for Garrard 301 and latterly 401 branded as Shure and combined them in a plinth with SME arms branded as Shure/SME.

These come up periodically on eBay and go for a small fortune.

I think the lack of good turntable in the US made tape recorders much more popular than the UK.

The US had tape machines at least on a par, with the best European machines. Pre recorded reel to reel tape sales were a significant part of the market. In the UK that market was tiny. The tape decks were for off air recording.

In the early fifties are lot of commercial gear was pretty crude and the route to good sound was though DIY, which were then usually the best systems. But of course results varied with the knowledge and skills of the DIY constructor.

When Cecil E Watts published his research showing that a playing force of 3 GM or less resulted in largely non permanent groove deformation, the best commercial offerings tracked at 10 GM! As I child I built my own moving coil mono cartridges with the stylus suspended on a nylon thread. I also constructed my own arms. I did achieve stable tracking at 3 GM

Complete advanced systems were confined to the very wealthy, with firms like Largs of Holborn catering to this market.

The customer would specify his system and Large would build into massive cabinets that were really beautiful pieces of furniture.

A typical system would be Quad or Leak electronics usually with a Garrard or Thorens turntable with DECCA FFS arm cartridge, or SME Ortofon. A tape deck was usually included from either Ferrograph, Brenell, Vortexion or Clark and Smith.

These systems cost a small fortune.

In those days, the DIY audio enthusiast, which was most, at least in the UK, could get as good or better results with sweat equity at a fraction of the cost.

I think this latter was the big driver, as the cost savings of DIY were far greater than they are now.

I know there was DIY activity in the States especially form Heathkit, but if course I have little knowledge of the scene here.

I should point out that the Hi-Fi market in the UK catered pretty much exclusively to the classical end of the market. I think to a significant degree this is still true.
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
The reason I asked was just a coinident of you being the 11th post in (not counting the topic starter) and at the time, the count was 11 and my impression of your post is that you favoured vintage and saw no vote for it.
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
Are the glowing memories of vintage audio gear and vintage automobiles justified, or were they just mediocre machines whose performance has somehow "improved" over the decades?

Read this old-timer's assessment of both vintage muscle cars and vintage audio, based upon hands-on experience with both.



Read: Is Vintage Better than Modern for Audio Equipment?

Let us know in the discussion thread below if your still running vintage gear or if you ditched it to embrace the new. Don't forget to vote in our poll.
Your not really offering a 3rd choice with an Iphone and Beats and worst of all, associating digitial media with Justin Bieber o_Oo_Oo_Oo_Oo_Oo_O Really??? ;)

If I felt that there wasn't a choice, I wouldn't be caught dead with tick for Bieber. :p
 
Last edited:
Montucky

Montucky

Full Audioholic
Alright. Who's the wise guy who voted for the Bieber option?
 
Paul Scarpelli

Paul Scarpelli

Audio Pragmatist
I would be remiss if I didn't thank all of you for participating in this thread. You are a bright, thoughtful, entertaining bunch. I really expected a few unreasonable arguments over old speakers as well as old muscle cars. Anywho...
 
gene

gene

Audioholics Master Chief
Administrator
Your not really offering a 3rd choice with an Iphone and Beats and worst of all, associating digitial media with Justin Bieber o_Oo_Oo_Oo_Oo_Oo_O Really??? ;)

If I felt that there wasn't a choice, I wouldn't be caught dead with tick for Bieber. :p
I think we know who voted for option 3 now ;)
 
Johnny2Bad

Johnny2Bad

Audioholic Chief
In their defence, the Voice of the Theatre speaker systems worked well ... in theatres. Horses for Courses, as they wisely say.

I think people have to realize that so-called Vintage audio gear being offered today comprises the *entire audio marketplace* of the 1980's and earlier.

Think about it ... 30 years from now the "vintage" audio gear would consist of every single audio device, from cellphones and $9 ear buds, bluetooth speakers in enclosures that are 3" across, to the gear with mortgage-sized price tags that the manufacturer expects to sell to 6 doctors worldwide, and most importantly, everything in between.

It's very much a situation where just being dusty and boasting time spent in an attic isn't enough. There are vintage examples that punch well above their weight, but it's a mistake to assume they comprise anything greater than a significant minority of what was offered for sale in the past. You really do need to know the gear and perform due diligence on any prospective vintage component.
 
Johnny2Bad

Johnny2Bad

Audioholic Chief
A question for some of the "old timers" (I promise that is a term of respect ;)),

How was the "snake oil audio industry" back in the day? Was it as prevalent and as in your face as we see today?
It was alive and well, and possibly could be described as worse than today. People who think otherwise have poor memories.

Dubious claims abounded during the transition from vacuum tube to solid state gear during the 1960's (prior to that, the transistor amp sounded so bad nobody seriously expected solid state to compete with tube gear); which followed other dubious claims about stereo gear when the transition from mono, which didn't get enough traction until the stereo FM broadcast became an option.

Any minor advantage in specification (output transformer-less transistor amps had low output impedance, thus for years it was proposed that damping factor was the most important specification of any power amplifier).

Depending on what year you choose, there were arguments proposing other factors as "the most important aspect" of sound quality ... slew rate and "slew induced distortion", five years of selling 4-channel reproduction and phase-based pseudo-4 channel reproduction (Dynaco) ... I could go on.

Get your hands on an audio magazine from the 1960's and read it cover to cover ... you will find your share of "facts" that we would laugh at today.

Amplifier specifications were pure Science Fiction to the point where in the US, the Federal Trade Commission had to pass a law regulating how amplifier specifications (applies to home component style audio only) could legally be cited and advertised.

Unfortunately today we are seeing a return to those kind of numbers, as manufacturers have convinced regulators that multichannel sound systems are exempt from the 1974 FTC law which unfortunately specifies, for example, mono and stereo configurations, in the text.
 
J

John Ruppert

Audiophyte
As a teenager in the 60's and as an avid car buff and audiophile during that time and subsequent decades I can completely agree with this article. While many of us have fond memories of both the cars and the audio equipment of those years, the real truth is that modern cars and modern audio equipment is far superior in all respects. I owned a pair of Infinity Servostatic speakers back in the early 70's. Yes they sounded wonderful in regard to other lesser equipment, but they servo amp and crossover spent more time in California being serviced than in my audio system! I owned a Dynaco 400, if it wasn't perfectly grounded... Look out.. The hum could blow out your speakers! I could go on and on with stories and bore everyone who isn't familiar with older equipment, but it is the truth! PS. Same can be said for muscle cars of the era, but that's a topic for another forum! Bottom line.. Enjoy the memories of vintage audio equipment and vintage cars.. But appreciate the superiority of modern equipment and cars!
 
S

seank

Audiophyte
The Accuphase E-202 integrated amp and the Accuphase
C200 preamp and P300 amp still hold up well today.
 
R

RHSmith

Enthusiast
I still use several (4) Accuphase P-300's in my theater.. driven by a upper end Yamaha 7.2 AV unit.. They are wonderful amplifiers...

As to Altec VoT speakers.. gosh they were awful.. Efficiently awful.. I have a friend who owns a pair in very good condition.. and from time to time he drags them out for big yard parties down at the local airstrip... and I shudder at the sound... No bass and no high end (thankfully as it would add to the pain of listening to the tortuously harsh mid-range). These were the standards for movie theaters everywhere but that did not make them right by any means.. The key need was acoustic power from very low power amplifiers (typically 30-60 watts) of the day to fill a very large room.. that they did.. but by no stretch did they offer anything that resembled fidelity.. It was not until the early 70's when the movie Earthquake came along with the big BGW 500/750 watt amplifier stacks and the huge Cerwin Vega sub-woofers placed into the theaters for the movie did the movie houses realize that they really needed to up the game and fix the sound systems of the day..
 
Paul Scarpelli

Paul Scarpelli

Audio Pragmatist
The Accuphase E-202 integrated amp and the Accuphase
C200 preamp and P300 amp still hold up well today.
Yes, there were components that perform well against today's better pieces, and Accuphase comes to mind. Good point.
 
DD66000

DD66000

Senior Audioholic
If we could find some miraculous way of restoring the characteristics of vintage loudspeakers to new it might be interesting to hear them. If older vacuum tubes didn't suffer from corrosion we might be able to make valid comparisons of amplifiers. It's just not practical to expect older equipment to be anything more than increasingly unreliable and overly influencing of sound reproduction.
Actually that can and has been done.
The speakers to the left are custom upgrades of the 1977 JBL L212 system. One starts with the XOs. Caps are the notorious bad boys of distortion. Building biased XOs gets rid of that problem.
Replacing old worn out tweeters with new is a big upgrade.
Changing the box design (in the case of the L212, a huge improvement in the sound stage) can bring the reproduction into the 21st century.
 
D

Dan Panzica

Audiophyte
Love this article on the Vintage Gear!
Improvements in manufacturing workmanship, materials, and quality are indeed significant.
Quick Question:
My 42 year old Philips GA 212 Turntable died - should I repair it or purchase a new turntable?
The price/performance spec for the Philips Turntable was at the sweet-spot back in the day.
I liked the belt drive, quietness, and simplicity.
Are turntables of today better than vintage?
Can you recommend a modern turntable with similar specs that could replace the Philips??
Thanks!!
 
Paul Scarpelli

Paul Scarpelli

Audio Pragmatist
Love this article on the Vintage Gear!
Improvements in manufacturing workmanship, materials, and quality are indeed significant.
Quick Question:
My 42 year old Philips GA 212 Turntable died - should I repair it or purchase a new turntable?
The price/performance spec for the Philips Turntable was at the sweet-spot back in the day.
I liked the belt drive, quietness, and simplicity.
Are turntables of today better than vintage?
Can you recommend a modern turntable with similar specs that could replace the Philips??
Thanks!!
Regardless of if you're buying a new turntable, repair and keep the Phillips. The 212 was a classic with excellent isolation due to the sprung suspension and belt drive. The sketchy part of that package at this point is the tonearm, which isn't especially low-friction.

If you're looking into a new turntable at a reasonable price, I would look at Rega, Pro-Ject, or Music Hall, at least as first choices. If you can get one with a decent cartridge factory-installed and aligned, that will benefit you. Most enthusiasts don't pay enough attention to matching the cartridge to the tonearm. The biggest mistakes I see are high compliance cartridges being arbitrarily installed (and not aligned) into high mass tonearms. The resulting low combined resonant frequency can be 8 Hz or lower, and can cause tracking problems as well as pulsate your woofers uncontrollably. On most audio forums, when someone asks what cartridge they should buy, fanboys blurt out their favorite brand without even asking the poor guy what tonearm he has. That's like recommending a set of wheels for someone when you have no idea what kind of car it is. :rolleyes:

While I have always preferred belt-drive turntables, there have been good direct drive 'tables. A direct drive turntable has to have fairly high mass to achieve even a small percentage of the immunity from acoustical feedback that a modest belt drive turntable has. And although speed accuracy is a selling point for DD turntables, record eccentricities (warps, off-center holes, etc.) account for far more speed variation than any turntable mechanics can contribute. Isolation and freedom from acoustical feedback are more important.

There were many excellent vintage turntables, and I have owned a few; a Thorens TD-125, and Oracle Delphi MkII, and presently I am using a 30-year old Micro-Seiki-built Luxman PD-277, a heavy direct drive. I'm using a low mass ADC arm and vintage Adcom MM cartridge through the astonishing Jim Fosgate Signature tube phono preamp. I tend to change gear all the time, but this combo is really good. The high-compliance cartridge is a great match for the low-mass arm.

If you buy a separate cartridge, make sure you have a protractor to align it correctly in the headshell. I still have a classic Dennison Soundtractor METAL alignment tool (NOT the plastic version!) and it really makes a difference. It's especially important with a line contact stylus. Also buy a stylus pressure gauge and set the pressure a bit higher than average. If 1.25 to 2.25 grams is recommended, 1.75 to 2.00 will generally be best. Mistracking accelerates record wear.

I could keep blathering about turntables, but I am now officially off topic, plus I should put this all into an article so Gene has to pay me for it. :p
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top