What makes a Sunsui AU 919/old stuff worth having ?

[rjharle]

I have squirreled away vintage like the Kenwood KA-6000, Hafler D500, and a Sansui AU-919. There appears to be a market for this vintage stuff. Now I'm not looking to sell them, I just would like to know why they are sort after. Are they superior to today's amps; if so, how? Or is it just another bunch of folks claiming "old is better".

 

[XEagleDriver]

Nostalgia.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[highfigh]

I have squirreled away vintage like the Kenwood KA-6000, Hafler D500, and a Sansui AU-919. There appears to be a market for this vintage stuff. Now I'm not looking to sell them, I just would like to know why they are sort after. Are they superior to today's amps; if so, how? Or is it just another bunch of folks claiming "old it better".

A lot of the stuff was very good, but I reached the point where I don't want any old solid state stuff because so much of it has components that are unavailable and technology that was very short-lived, so almost nobody knows how to service it and even if they did, they couldn't get new parts. I'm not interested in any unicorn tube equipment other than for guitar amps and those are usually easy to maintain because they're relatively simple and replacement parts are incredibly easy to find.

Get what you can.

 

[rjharle]

A lot of the stuff was very good, but I reached the point where I don't want any old solid state stuff because so much of it has components that are unavailable and technology that was very short-lived, so almost nobody knows how to service it and even if they did, they couldn't get new parts. I'm not interested in any unicorn tube equipment other than for guitar amps and those are usually easy to maintain because they're relatively simple and replacement parts are incredibly easy to find.

Get what you can.

So if parts were available, you would be running with older gear?
Do you think the equipment sounded better than the audio equipment of today?

 

[lovinthehd]

I personally don't have anything against older gear, but am glad to have moved on to more capable gear in my own use; my old analog only 2ch gear is my least used/useful. If you're good at repairing such, older gear can be more repairable than newer gear where whole boards must be replaced to effect repairs; if relying on local repair facilities, those are disappearing otoh. I'd see what I could do to put the older gear to use still, but if not it's a great time to sell it as the prices are fairly high.

 

[rjharle]

I personally don't have anything against older gear, but am glad to have moved on to more capable gear in my own use; my old analog only 2ch gear is my least used/useful. If you're good at repairing such, older gear can be more repairable than newer gear where whole boards must be replaced to effect repairs; if relying on local repair facilities, those are disappearing otoh. I'd see what I could do to put the older gear to use still, but if not it's a great time to sell it as the prices are fairly high.

Features over performance?

 

[lovinthehd]

Features over performance?

Not over, but rather with. Nothing special about performance of most of the older stuff IMO.

 

[TLS Guy]

So if parts were available, you would be running with older gear?
Do you think the equipment sounded better than the audio equipment of today?

I have a collection of equipment from many eras. I have the latest wizardry all the way back to units now over 60 years old. So I think I am qualified to make a judgement.

First I think a lot of this is driven by nostalgia, as people want what their father's had. It is also driven by a branch of audiophoolery that says this vintage equipment is superior. In general that is not true. The prices some of these units fetch make no sense to me at all.

Your Sansui unit is respectable but not in my view superior to modern equipment. The Kenwood unit, was a fairly low end to mid end unit, of low power and not compatible with four ohm speakers according to the instructions. I would not give that unit house room.

The Hafler is an early Mosfet amp. Speaker protection is via fuses. Fast blow will blow all the time, and slow blow will not blow before your speakers are fried. So that unit is not worth giving house room to.

So what are valid issues. One is obviously playing and or archiving legacy media. The other is keeping the best of the equipment from our past in good running condition, as a type of a museum if you will, to show what really could be achieved in times now quite long ago. In my view there is only point in preserving the best and most perfectly engineered from the past.

My interest is both of the latter.

Here is a Garrard 301, which were made from 1954 to 1965 by the Queen's jewelers. They are superbly engineered. The pickup dates from 1971, and the 78 head from 1965.

The Quad tube preamp I bought in 1965.

It also plays 78 RPM shellac discs. The Quad preamp has all the different equalizations for pretty much every 78 RPM label.

Here is a picture of some of my equipment from multiple eras.

The two larger machines I bought in 1973. All the reel machines are Swiss Studer/Revox machines, except the one in the third 19" rack. This is a very, very rare British machine, a Brennel MK6 with parabolic tape path. Very few were made and most for the BBC.

The three Revox A77 machines are all restorations that I undertook.

Restoring vintage gear is truly a labor of love and takes hours and hours. Parts are a real treasure hunt, and you have to build up a sizeable war chest of parts.

Finding parts is a world wide hunt.

Of late I have been sourcing parts from France, Germany and Belgium. Today I went to use my 1980 TEAC master cassette deck, to find one of he belts have turned to glue. I managed to source a couple from Portugal. The machine will require significant dismantling since it is a Far Eastern machine.

Vintage European equipment tends to be by far the best and as a rule far more intelligently designed and laid out. This makes it easier to work on and restore.

Japanese reel to reel machines seem to be popular and get a lot of press. In my view none of them were excellent and universally thrown together and a nightmare to work on.

Here are the indards, of my Revox A77 MKIV. I had to go back into it because it blew a motor starting cap. It is beautifully laid out.

Back in action again.

You can just see a part of very rare dbx II and Dolby B encode/decode units.

Basically you need to have an object in view and not swallow BS if you are going to go vintage. If you do, go for the very best and not the junk. As is the case today, junk is prolific, excellence rare.

I think since restorers are now so hard to find, you should have service skills if you are going to get into it, or preserve your own equipment from the past.

Visitors tend to be absolutely enthralled by it, and astounded how this best of the past equipment really stands the comparison of the very best of today.
However be advised, there is work involved. You need a good reason and the interest to go down that road.

 

[davidscott]

I have a collection of equipment from many eras. I have the latest wizardry all the way back to units now over 60 years old. So I think I am qualified to make a judgement.

First I think a lot of this is driven by nostalgia, as people want what their father's had. It is also driven by a branch of audiophoolery that says this vintage equipment is superior. In general that is not true. The prices some of these units fetch make no sense to me at all.

Your Sansui unit is respectable but not in my view superior to modern equipment. The Kenwood unit, was a fairly low end to mid end unit, of low power and not compatible with four ohm speakers according to the instructions. I would not give that unit house room.

The Hafler is an early Mosfet amp. Speaker protection is via fuses. Fast blow will blow all the time, and slow blow will not blow before your speakers are fried. So that unit is not worth giving house room to.

So what are valid issues. One is obviously playing and or archiving legacy media. The other is keeping the best of the equipment from our past in good running condition, as a type of a museum if you will, to show what really could be achieved in times now quite long ago. In my view there is only point in preserving the best and most perfectly engineered from the past.

My interest is both of the latter.

Here is a Garrard 301, which were made from 1954 to 1965 by the Queen's jewelers. They are superbly engineered. The pickup dates from 1971, and the 78 head from 1965.

The Quad tube preamp I bought in 1965.

It also plays 78 RPM shellac discs. The Quad preamp has all the different equalizations for pretty much every 78 RPM label.

Here is a picture of some of my equipment from multiple eras.

The two larger machines I bought in 1973. All the reel machines are Swiss Studer/Revox machines, except the one in the third 19" rack. This is a very, very rare British machine, a Brennel MK6 with parabolic tape path. Very few were made and most for the BBC.

The three Revox A77 machines are all restorations that I undertook.

Restoring vintage gear is truly a labor of love and takes hours and hours. Parts are a real treasure hunt, and you have to build up a sizeable war chest of parts.

Finding parts is a world wide hunt.

Of late I have been sourcing parts from France, Germany and Belgium. Today I went to use my 1980 TEAC master cassette deck, to find one of he belts have turned to glue. I managed to source a couple from Portugal. The machine will require significant dismantling since it is a Far Eastern machine.

Vintage European equipment tends to be by far the best and as a rule far more intelligently designed and laid out. This makes it easier to work on and restore.

Japanese reel to reel machines seem to be popular and get a lot of press. In my view none of them were excellent and universally thrown together and a nightmare to work on.

Here are the indards, of my Revox A77 MKIV. I had to go back into it because it blew a motor starting cap. It is beautifully laid out.

Back in action again.

You can just see a part of very rare dbx II and Dolby B encode/decode units.

Basically you need to have an object in view and not swallow BS if you are going to go vintage. If you do, go for the very best and not the junk. As is the case today, junk is prolific, excellence rare.

I think since restorers are now so hard to find, you should have service skills if you are going to get into it, or preserve your own equipment from the past.

Visitors tend to be absolutely enthralled by it, and astounded how this best of the past equipment really stands the comparison of the very best of today.
However be advised, there is work involved. You need a good reason and the interest to go down that road.

Dude you are truly one of a kind. Way way more involved in restoration than I could ever be. Thanks for sharing.
Awesome looking sound room BTW. You should be writing for one of the high-end audio magazines,

 

[Bucknekked]

I have a collection of equipment from many eras. I have the latest wizardry all the way back to units now over 60 years old. So I think I am qualified to make a judgement.

First I think a lot of this is driven by nostalgia, as people want what their father's had. It is also driven by a branch of audiophoolery that says this vintage equipment is superior. In general that is not true. The prices some of these units fetch make no sense to me at all.

Your Sansui unit is respectable but not in my view superior to modern equipment. The Kenwood unit, was a fairly low end to mid end unit, of low power and not compatible with four ohm speakers according to the instructions. I would not give that unit house room.

The Hafler is an early Mosfet amp. Speaker protection is via fuses. Fast blow will blow all the time, and slow blow will not blow before your speakers are fried. So that unit is not worth giving house room to.

So what are valid issues. One is obviously playing and or archiving legacy media. The other is keeping the best of the equipment from our past in good running condition, as a type of a museum if you will, to show what really could be achieved in times now quite long ago. In my view there is only point in preserving the best and most perfectly engineered from the past.

My interest is both of the latter.

Here is a Garrard 301, which were made from 1954 to 1965 by the Queen's jewelers. They are superbly engineered. The pickup dates from 1971, and the 78 head from 1965.

The Quad tube preamp I bought in 1965.

It also plays 78 RPM shellac discs. The Quad preamp has all the different equalizations for pretty much every 78 RPM label.

Here is a picture of some of my equipment from multiple eras.

The two larger machines I bought in 1973. All the reel machines are Swiss Studer/Revox machines, except the one in the third 19" rack. This is a very, very rare British machine, a Brennel MK6 with parabolic tape path. Very few were made and most for the BBC.

The three Revox A77 machines are all restorations that I undertook.

Restoring vintage gear is truly a labor of love and takes hours and hours. Parts are a real treasure hunt, and you have to build up a sizeable war chest of parts.

Finding parts is a world wide hunt.

Of late I have been sourcing parts from France, Germany and Belgium. Today I went to use my 1980 TEAC master cassette deck, to find one of he belts have turned to glue. I managed to source a couple from Portugal. The machine will require significant dismantling since it is a Far Eastern machine.

Vintage European equipment tends to be by far the best and as a rule far more intelligently designed and laid out. This makes it easier to work on and restore.

Japanese reel to reel machines seem to be popular and get a lot of press. In my view none of them were excellent and universally thrown together and a nightmare to work on.

Here are the indards, of my Revox A77 MKIV. I had to go back into it because it blew a motor starting cap. It is beautifully laid out.

Back in action again.

You can just see a part of very rare dbx II and Dolby B encode/decode units.

Basically you need to have an object in view and not swallow BS if you are going to go vintage. If you do, go for the very best and not the junk. As is the case today, junk is prolific, excellence rare.

I think since restorers are now so hard to find, you should have service skills if you are going to get into it, or preserve your own equipment from the past.

Visitors tend to be absolutely enthralled by it, and astounded how this best of the past equipment really stands the comparison of the very best of today.
However be advised, there is work involved. You need a good reason and the interest to go down that road.

I will second that vote for one of a kind. @TLS Guy you are indeed a gem. Unique.
Your answers are second to none in completeness. I would love to hear your systems some day.

I have been pondering and mulling over buying a vintage receiver or integrated amp simply because of the looks and nostalgia factor. I have done my homework and the problem today is that this old stuff has been "discovered". That means the prices are completely out of line with value, even for a nostalgic collector with deep pockets. Example, this week a Marantz RX 2275 (a classic receiver from the 1970s) in working order is now averaging over $3,000. The Sansui line, which I used to own several pieces, was never a top-of-the-line performer but more of a suburbanite's entryway into great looking audio pieces. Many of those pieces now exceed the Marantz.

The horse has left the barn on getting good prices on vintage audio. If one is looking to buy something today with that 1970's cachet to it, the price is pretty steep. At the end of the purchase what will you have? Something that looks good.

 

[rjharle]

I have a collection of equipment from many eras. I have the latest wizardry all the way back to units now over 60 years old. So I think I am qualified to make a judgement.

First I think a lot of this is driven by nostalgia, as people want what their father's had. It is also driven by a branch of audiophoolery that says this vintage equipment is superior. In general that is not true. The prices some of these units fetch make no sense to me at all.

Your Sansui unit is respectable but not in my view superior to modern equipment. The Kenwood unit, was a fairly low end to mid end unit, of low power and not compatible with four ohm speakers according to the instructions. I would not give that unit house room.

The Hafler is an early Mosfet amp. Speaker protection is via fuses. Fast blow will blow all the time, and slow blow will not blow before your speakers are fried. So that unit is not worth giving house room to.

So what are valid issues. One is obviously playing and or archiving legacy media. The other is keeping the best of the equipment from our past in good running condition, as a type of a museum if you will, to show what really could be achieved in times now quite long ago. In my view there is only point in preserving the best and most perfectly engineered from the past.

My interest is both of the latter.

Here is a Garrard 301, which were made from 1954 to 1965 by the Queen's jewelers. They are superbly engineered. The pickup dates from 1971, and the 78 head from 1965.

The Quad tube preamp I bought in 1965.

It also plays 78 RPM shellac discs. The Quad preamp has all the different equalizations for pretty much every 78 RPM label.

Here is a picture of some of my equipment from multiple eras.

The two larger machines I bought in 1973. All the reel machines are Swiss Studer/Revox machines, except the one in the third 19" rack. This is a very, very rare British machine, a Brennel MK6 with parabolic tape path. Very few were made and most for the BBC.

The three Revox A77 machines are all restorations that I undertook.

Restoring vintage gear is truly a labor of love and takes hours and hours. Parts are a real treasure hunt, and you have to build up a sizeable war chest of parts.

Finding parts is a world wide hunt.

Of late I have been sourcing parts from France, Germany and Belgium. Today I went to use my 1980 TEAC master cassette deck, to find one of he belts have turned to glue. I managed to source a couple from Portugal. The machine will require significant dismantling since it is a Far Eastern machine.

Vintage European equipment tends to be by far the best and as a rule far more intelligently designed and laid out. This makes it easier to work on and restore.

Japanese reel to reel machines seem to be popular and get a lot of press. In my view none of them were excellent and universally thrown together and a nightmare to work on.

Here are the indards, of my Revox A77 MKIV. I had to go back into it because it blew a motor starting cap. It is beautifully laid out.

Back in action again.

You can just see a part of very rare dbx II and Dolby B encode/decode units.

Basically you need to have an object in view and not swallow BS if you are going to go vintage. If you do, go for the very best and not the junk. As is the case today, junk is prolific, excellence rare.

I think since restorers are now so hard to find, you should have service skills if you are going to get into it, or preserve your own equipment from the past.

Visitors tend to be absolutely enthralled by it, and astounded how this best of the past equipment really stands the comparison of the very best of today.
However be advised, there is work involved. You need a good reason and the interest to go down that road.

Great post. I can see you're truly passionate about audio. I would love to come over and listen to your setup.
BTW, You did mention European equipment, so I happen to have in one of my closets a Tandberg 64X 4 track stereo reel to reel. Always sounded great. Anyone for "Cross Field Head"

 

[rjharle]

I will second that vote for one of a kind. @TLS Guy you are indeed a gem. Unique.
Your answers are second to none in completeness. I would love to hear your systems some day.

I have been pondering and mulling over buying a vintage receiver or integrated amp simply because of the looks and nostalgia factor. I have done my homework and the problem today is that this old stuff has been "discovered". That means the prices are completely out of line with value, even for a nostalgic collector with deep pockets. Example, this week a Marantz RX 2275 (a classic receiver from the 1970s) in working order is now averaging over $3,000. The Sansui line, which I used to own several pieces, was never a top-of-the-line performer but more of a suburbanite's entryway into great looking audio pieces. Many of those pieces now exceed the Marantz.

The horse has left the barn on getting good prices on vintage audio. If one is looking to buy something today with that 1970's cachet to it, the price is pretty steep. At the end of the purchase what will you have? Something that looks good.

I think you hit the nail on the head. It's not superior, just cool to have. I have a Nakamichi 680 ZX cassette that still plays like new. I was looking around once and show this site that repaired/tuned them up. I asked what the cost of a tuneup was ... $750.00 plus postage. Too much disposable income.

 

[TLS Guy]

Great post. I can see you're truly passionate about audio. I would love to come over and listen to your setup.
BTW, You did mention European equipment, so I happen to have in one of my closets a Tandberg 64X 4 track stereo reel to reel. Always sounded great. Anyone for "Cross Field Head"

Tandberg made some quite good recorders, but they were no Revox. Willi Studer's designs were quite a big cut above the rest. He was the only guy who could design a tape head with a response to 20 Hz. The Far Eastern machines were done by 30 Hz.

 

[TLS Guy]

I think you hit the nail on the head. It's not superior, just cool to have. I have a Nakamichi 680 ZX cassette that still plays like new. I was looking around once and show this site that repaired/tuned them up. I asked what the cost of a tuneup was ... $750.00 plus postage. Too much disposable income.

Naks are really the top end of cassette decks. I have a rack mounted MR-1 in the third rack. By the way there is hours of work in calibrating and aligning a tape machine.
It takes a lot of expensive gear and extensive alignment tapes from a certified lab. That was not an unreasonable price.

This is about half of the equipment involved.

 

[rjharle]

Tandberg made some quite good recorders, but they were no Revox. Willi Studer's designs were quite a big cut above the rest. He was the only guy who could design a tape head with a response to 20 Hz. The Far Eastern machines were done by 30 Hz.

It wasn't my intent to compare Tandberg to Revox. I just wanted to show some of Tandberg's design was ahead of it's time.

 

[rjharle]

Naks are really the top end of cassette decks. I have a rack mounted MR-1 in the third rack. By the way there is hours of work in calibrating and aligning a tape machine.
It takes a lot of expensive gear and extensive alignment tapes from a certified lab. That was not an unreasonable price.

This is about half of the equipment involved.

That is, if he would be as meticulous as you with his repairs/tuneup.

 

[highfigh]

So if parts were available, you would be running with older gear?
Do you think the equipment sounded better than the audio equipment of today?

Not if I can't find someone who can repair it. Fortunately, I do know people who can repair most AV equipment but that doesn't mean I want to deal with component failures in equipment that would cause a long wait until the parts can be found or arrive from a vendor. Some models just can't be repaired because the parts can't be found or they're too expensive.

I don't think anyone's memory is so good that they can accurately compare the sound if a long period of time has passed because our mind has a great amount of influence on our memory. If bad things were happening when we heard something, I doubt the memory of anything surrounding that time will be good. I don't think I have heard anyone say "My life sucked but music sounded great!".

I sold an old Sony integrated amp (mid-'70s vintage) a few years ago and after cleaning the controls & switches, I fired it up so I could make sure everything worked as it should. While I did this work, I listened to some music through my old Fischer receiver- when I connected the Sony and listened, I suddenly remembered how great it sounded, but that was because the Fischer just doesn't sound as good. Without a comparison, I don't have a problem with it but I don't listen for sound quality when it's in use. However, that integrated amp really did sound good and if someone were to use the specs to decide anything, they're better than most of the equipment available now and with inflation, the retail price would be in the $3000 range.

If it works, it should sound very good- Sansui was one of the first companies to make slew rate a priority, although their use of direct-coupled circuits was also one of their worst enemies because if a component failed, it was like a wildfire, inside- the damage was extensive. You can look online for info about the Kenwood & Hafler pieces- I'm not sure I would recommend looking on Audio Karma- they think Sanyo receivers and anything from the early-70s through 1983 was the golden era but they do have some people who know about certain brands/models/technology, so that makes them useful. Their valuations are ridiculous, though.

If I were to do anything with those, it would have to do with checking the largest electrolytic caps, to prevent them failing. However, there's no guarantee that these failing would cause a catastrophic failure if the protection circuitry was designed properly. That Sony integrated had a couple of component failures that didn't cause any further damage.

 

[highfigh]

Naks are really the top end of cassette decks. I have a rack mounted MR-1 in the third rack. By the way there is hours of work in calibrating and aligning a tape machine.
It takes a lot of expensive gear and extensive alignment tapes from a certified lab. That was not an unreasonable price.

This is about half of the equipment involved.

If I had a nickel for every time I heard a tape that was recorded on one machine and played on a different machine when one of them had head alignment problems, I could have retired years ago.

 

[highfigh]

Tandberg made some quite good recorders, but they were no Revox. Willi Studer's designs were quite a big cut above the rest. He was the only guy who could design a tape head with a response to 20 Hz. The Far Eastern machines were done by 30 Hz.

You're referring to cassette? I saw more than one $400 Sony cassette deck that did 20Hz-18,500Hz on real diagnostic equipment (after being tweaked by the Sony engineer who designed those models) even though that model was spec'd for 30Hz-17KHz +/- 3dB. However, the price for the Asian models should tell you they weren't designed for the same market/use as the Nak, Revox, etc.

 

[PENG]

I have squirreled away vintage like the Kenwood KA-6000, Hafler D500, and a Sansui AU-919. There appears to be a market for this vintage stuff. Now I'm not looking to sell them, I just would like to know why they are sort after. Are they superior to today's amps; if so, how? Or is it just another bunch of folks claiming "old is better".

I believe for older people who have had invested in such kind of gear in the past, may want to acquire some of them back for, as others mentioned, nostalgia reason. I used to own some of those heavy vintage stuff such as integrated amps but have only kept a pair of vintage Marantz amps and a CD player.

For "sound quality", people are going to claim all kinds of things but with the advance in technology it you put them through a bunch of bench tests you will find nothing or little to show why such vintage gear could/would "sound better". The AU-919's specs are in line with the Denon AVRs measured on ASR, but not better but I am sure just by looking at them and feeling the weight, the AU-919 will sound much better. The fact that the AU-919, presumably made >40 years ago, have audio specs comparable to today's amps, is truly amazing. The digital version such as the AU-X911DG, that is more than 10 years newer and expectedly lighter, have even better specs.

I have been comparing my 43 years old Marantz pair with my newest amp (a little light weight Purifi amp) and I honest can't say which one sounds better except the Purifi amp is definitely quieter only only noticeable if I am within a few mm to the drivers and max out the volume with no signal. So no, "old is better" is not a given in my opinion/experience.