Older receivers vs. newer ones

[kevinm2]

Is there a major difference in sound, listening in stereo to an older receivers (late 1980s) of about 110W per channel versus the newer model manufactured today with same power rating?

 

[fmw]

Not likely. The difference is in the digital decoders, video processing, multi channel amplification, etc. Amplifers in the 1980's were linear with inaudible distortion just like the ones made today. So were the amplifiers of the 70's and late '60's.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

What about the preamp section? Has that not improved over time either?

 

[fmw]

No, it has just become digital with all the appropriate codecs and channel and input switching. Sonically, the preamps of today are ruler flat with inaudible distortion as they have been for decades.

 

[mtrycrafts]

What about the preamp section? Has that not improved over time either?

If the amp section was designed properly back then, why not the preamp section? How is that more difficult?

 

[fmw]

The advent of digital audio was a monster change in the technology of audio. Today's audio systems are truly digital devices.

However, if you remove digital from the equation, the analog parts of audio haven't changed meaningfully in a long, long time. Yes, we use op amps and other integrated circuits that weren't available in the 1980's but that has only made the design and manufacture of audio componenets easier and cheaper. It hasn't contributed anything to the sound.

Yes, we have better materials for making speaker drivers. The old drivers mostly all disappeared because of rotted foam surrounds as an example. But speakers don't sound any better today than they did 20 or 30 years ago.

Recording engineers still value the sound they acheive with the old tube-amplified Neumann microphones from the 50's and onward. Some say no one has made a better microphone since.

My suggestion is that digital is not only a large technological advance in audio, it is probably the only meaningful one.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

If the amp section was designed properly back then, why not the preamp section? How is that more difficult?

I asked because, while my older Carver is a great-sounding integrated in almost every respect, it has an audibly higher noise floor than my newer Onkyo receiver (I prefer it anyway because it is a real powerhouse and ruler-flat with zero distortion.) I thought that this difference might be due to the preamp.

 

[fmw]

You may want to get your S/N ratio tested to see if it is still in spec.

 

[Joe Schmoe]

You may want to get your S/N ratio tested to see if it is still in spec.

And if it is not, then what? Can it be fixed for a reasonable price (where reasonable=small fraction of replacement cost)?

 

[croseiv]

I can say this, when I went from an analogue receiver to one that could process the digital signals I could tell a huge difference in bass output capabilty with the better output coming from the digital capable receiver. I'm hoping that when I eventually get a new receiver that can process the new HD formats, that I will experience the same effect.

 

[fmw]

And if it is not, then what? Can it be fixed for a reasonable price (where reasonable=small fraction of replacement cost)?

That depends on what is causing the noise. Usually it is capacitors and changing those out is a fairly labor intensive business. But at least get it tested to see what the S/N ratio is.

 

[mtrycrafts]

I thought that this difference might be due to the preamp.

What do the numbers say about the noise floor?

 

[mtrycrafts]

I can say this, when I went from an analogue receiver to one that could process the digital signals I could tell a huge difference in bass output capabilty with the better output coming from the digital capable receiver. .

But what would cause this, you think? Perception? Improper comparison?

If the Fr of the two are similarly good, no reason for this to happen, period. The power capability were also similar?