Designed for their time?

[Thompsonuxb]

Amps/speakers are they designed for their time.

Some talk of synergy is it time related i.e in many threads when people 'upgrade' we read about their dissatisfaction with the sound, even though the magazines have just done a review on how good these speakers/amps/source sound in the latest group test.

So is it that equ is designed to work well with their own 'generation' and crossing generations ref upgrades is destined to dissappoint - i.e a 2013 amp with 2003 speakers etc?

 

[the record spot]

No. IMO. Seeing as I've used a 1970s amp with 1990s speakers and a 2009 CD player, I wouldn't go along with that.

 

[chebby]

Nope.

I have used 1997 speakers with a (current version) Naim Nait 5i and 1991 JPW Sonata speakers with a Marantz M-CR603. Both sounded fine.

Quad are still making the same valve amps they made in the 1950s. They don't intend you to partner them with 1950s loudspeakers!

Despite the veneer of 'cutting edge' technology in hi-fi (hah!), very little actually changes over the decades because the basic principles of physics and electronics don't change.

 

[davedotco]

Amps/speakers are they designed for their time. Some talk of synergy is it time related i.e in many threads when people 'upgrade' we read about their dissatisfaction with the sound, even though the magazines have just done a review on how good these speakers/amps/source sound in the latest group test. So is it that equ is designed to work well with their own 'generation' and crossing generations ref upgrades is destined to dissappoint - i.e a 2013 amp with 2003 speakers etc?

A very interesting post, many people are dissatisfied with their system or upgrade irrespective of the age of the equipment.

Reread your own post, particularly the highlighted bit, then have a think about what you have just said.

 

[plastic penguin]

Yes they are designed to work with equipement of that particular era. But all components, regardless of when made, can be matched to fit into a particular system. Before I purchased the RS6 I had a 1970s pair of Wharfedales and had a 2004 amp connected to them. Sounded fine. And up until recently I had a 40 year old FM tuner used with my Leema and RS6s. No sound issues at all.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Amps/speakers are they designed for their time. Some talk of synergy is it time related i.e in many threads when people 'upgrade' we read about their dissatisfaction with the sound, even though the magazines have just done a review on how good these speakers/amps/source sound in the latest group test. So is it that equ is designed to work well with their own 'generation' and crossing generations ref upgrades is destined to dissappoint - i.e a 2013 amp with 2003 speakers etc?

A very interesting post, many people are dissatisfied with their system or upgrade irrespective of the age of the equipment.

Reread your own post, particularly the highlighted bit, then have a think about what you have just said.

What?

 

[BigH]

I think the problem is in reviews new products are hyped up, to be honest not a lot has changed over the years.

 

[chebby]

I think the problem is in reviews new products are hyped up, to be honest not a lot has changed over the years.

Indeed. About twice a year we are led to believe that yet another amp or speaker has 'raised the bar' when in fact it's much the same as the one before (or worse because they are now charging more for cheaper materials, components and build).

There is also fashion to keep up with. This can mean hobbling the ideal dimensions for a speaker cabinet to make it appear smaller from the front just for the sake of WAFiness and looking good in brochures. A trend that only seems to get more extreme every year until we now see speakers that are almost twice as deep as they are wide and where even a 5" bass driver is too big to cram in! (Cabinets of the same internal volume used to easily take bigger mid/bass drivers and didn't leave everyone thinking they needed a subwoofer.)

 

[plastic penguin]

So are we saying that the hi-fi world is less than honest?

 

[chebby]

So are we saying that the hi-fi world is less than honest?

Of course. Why would anyone expect 'the hi-fi world' to be the only honest capitalistic enterprise out there?

 

[Thompsonuxb]

I think the problem is in reviews new products are hyped up, to be honest not a lot has changed over the years.

I have to agree with this, and its what kinda prompted this post

In the latest issue of WHF I see 3 five star speakers have suddenly dropped a star with the introduction of the new Q accoustic 2020..how do great speakers become good speakers - are the New Q 2020's that much better?

And would they seriously work better with 5 year old amps or would they reveal issues that the likes of the RX2's or DC4's would not?

 

[busb]

Amps/speakers are they designed for their time. Some talk of synergy is it time related i.e in many threads when people 'upgrade' we read about their dissatisfaction with the sound, even though the magazines have just done a review on how good these speakers/amps/source sound in the latest group test. So is it that equ is designed to work well with their own 'generation' and crossing generations ref upgrades is destined to dissappoint - i.e a 2013 amp with 2003 speakers etc?

A very interesting post, many people are dissatisfied with their system or upgrade irrespective of the age of the equipment.

Reread your own post, particularly the highlighted bit, then have a think about what you have just said.

What?

I think Davedotco maybe referring to to the fact that many people appear to read reviews, go & purchase based on said reviews to then be dissatisfied with the results - in other words, haven't botthered to listen for themseves. Could be wrong, of course.

 

[lpv]

Best Nikkor lenses ( both mechanical and optical) has been designed in 70's... and works superbly with today high resolution full frame DSLR's... while new Nikkor offerings are inferior built and costs a lot.

 

[davedotco]

Amps/speakers are they designed for their time. Some talk of synergy is it time related i.e in many threads when people 'upgrade' we read about their dissatisfaction with the sound, even though the magazines have just done a review on how good these speakers/amps/source sound in the latest group test. So is it that equ is designed to work well with their own 'generation' and crossing generations ref upgrades is destined to dissappoint - i.e a 2013 amp with 2003 speakers etc?

A very interesting post, many people are dissatisfied with their system or upgrade irrespective of the age of the equipment.

Reread your own post, particularly the highlighted bit, then have a think about what you have just said.

What?

I think Davedotco maybe referring to to the fact that many people appear to read reviews, go & purchase based on said reviews to then be dissatisfied with the results - in other words, haven't botthered to listen for themseves. Could be wrong, of course.

Nope, right as far as it goes. Doesn't go anywhere far enough though.

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Since the 70's, amps & speakers revisions year on year have been improving. All hifi press agrees. So 70's stuff must have been rubbish. And they have dropped in price in real terms. Not so I hear u say.
Or is it simply styles & facilities have improved? My home made 12in drivers in a cupboard sized box must have been appalling with an old Leak amp and Garrard 86sb TT. Food for thought I thought.

 

[CnoEvil]

IMO. I think there has been a trend towards a brighter more digital sound over the years. I'm not sure if the industry has led this change of taste, or reacted to it.

The younger generation seem to embrace it, whereas those of us who grew up in the "analogue era" often crave something less in yer face.

Whether this is an "improvement" or not, is open to debate......what is interesting though, is the way younger folk seem to be embracing vinyl atm.

 

[Thompsonuxb]

Amps/speakers are they designed for their time. Some talk of synergy is it time related i.e in many threads when people 'upgrade' we read about their dissatisfaction with the sound, even though the magazines have just done a review on how good these speakers/amps/source sound in the latest group test. So is it that equ is designed to work well with their own 'generation' and crossing generations ref upgrades is destined to dissappoint - i.e a 2013 amp with 2003 speakers etc?

A very interesting post, many people are dissatisfied with their system or upgrade irrespective of the age of the equipment.

Reread your own post, particularly the highlighted bit, then have a think about what you have just said.

What?

I think Davedotco maybe referring to to the fact that many people appear to read reviews, go & purchase based on said reviews to then be dissatisfied with the results - in other words, haven't botthered to listen for themseves. Could be wrong, of course.

Nope, right as far as it goes. Doesn't go anywhere far enough though.

pls don't be so criptic....expand.

 

[davedotco]

The hifi industry survives by selling new product, there is no other viable revenue stream.

The industry loves serial upgraders and the entire industry is geared towards that, new products have to be better, to 'raise the bar' otherwise why would anyone buy them when their existing components are fine.

There are some technological improvements, but in the main these are functional rather than sound quality based, can you imagine an issue of WHF where the review section is just one page saying,

"Nothing released this month is any better than the stuff we reviewed last month, so we didn't bother."

 

[cheeseboy]

The hifi industry survives by selling new product, there is no other viable revenue stream.

The industry loves serial upgraders and the entire industry is geared towards that, new products have to be better, to 'raise the bar' otherwise why would anyone buy them when their existing components are fine.

There are some technological improvements, but in the main these are functional rather than sound quality based, can you imagine an issue of WHF where the review section is just one page saying,

"Nothing released this month is any better than the stuff we reviewed last month, so we didn't bother."

Apple seem to do quite well out of the same strategy as well

 

[davedotco]

The hifi industry survives by selling new product, there is no other viable revenue stream.

The industry loves serial upgraders and the entire industry is geared towards that, new products have to be better, to 'raise the bar' otherwise why would anyone buy them when their existing components are fine.

There are some technological improvements, but in the main these are functional rather than sound quality based, can you imagine an issue of WHF where the review section is just one page saying,

"Nothing released this month is any better than the stuff we reviewed last month, so we didn't bother."

Apple seem to do quite well out of the same strategy as well

Absolutely, typed on my 2006 macbook......

This is the case for most consumer goods, newer, shinier, 'better', etc etc.

But hifi is different, there is this constant 'improvement' in the basic function of the product, sound quality, but the reality is that these improvements are mostly illusory in real terms.

 

[chebby]

The hifi industry survives by selling new product, there is no other viable revenue stream.

The industry loves serial upgraders and the entire industry is geared towards that, new products have to be better, to 'raise the bar' otherwise why would anyone buy them when their existing components are fine.

There are some technological improvements, but in the main these are functional rather than sound quality based, can you imagine an issue of WHF where the review section is just one page saying,

"Nothing released this month is any better than the stuff we reviewed last month, so we didn't bother."

When was it ever different? (And not just hi-fi.)

Does any of this actually need saying even?

Hands up anyone who doesn't understand built in obsolescence or capitalism after a lifetime growing up with it.

 

[cheeseboy]

Apple seem to do quite well out of the same strategy as well

Absolutely, typed on my 2006 macbook......

This is the case for most consumer goods, newer, shinier, 'better', etc etc.

But hifi is different, there is this constant 'improvement' in the basic function of the product, sound quality, but the reality is that these improvements are mostly illusory in real terms.

hehehe

yep, at least with computers there is moores law in play, so whilst an end user may not use anything that has been upgraded, there is, if you will the capacity/function available should they so wish.

 

[RobinKidderminster]

Best Nikkor lenses ( both mechanical and optical) has been designed in 70's... and works superbly with today high resolution full frame DSLR's... while new Nikkor offerings are inferior built and costs a lot.

Whilst agreeing with most opinions here I dont think the camera analogy is so pursuasive. My compact has x20 optical zoom. This and other clear advances are evident in camera design. An amp today however, does little more than an amp or speakers of the 70's.

 

[davedotco]

The hifi industry survives by selling new product, there is no other viable revenue stream.

The industry loves serial upgraders and the entire industry is geared towards that, new products have to be better, to 'raise the bar' otherwise why would anyone buy them when their existing components are fine.

There are some technological improvements, but in the main these are functional rather than sound quality based, can you imagine an issue of WHF where the review section is just one page saying,

"Nothing released this month is any better than the stuff we reviewed last month, so we didn't bother."

When was it ever different? (And not just hi-fi.)

Does any of this actually need saying even?

Hands up anyone who doesn't understand built in obsolescence or capitalism after a lifetime growing up with it.

Probably not, until threads like this show up.......

Actually if anyone out there does understand capitalism and how it works, I think the world economy needs your attention...... :?

 

[davedotco]

Best Nikkor lenses ( both mechanical and optical) has been designed in 70's... and works superbly with today high resolution full frame DSLR's... while new Nikkor offerings are inferior built and costs a lot.

Whilst agreeing with most opinions here I dont think the camera analogy is so pursuasive. My compact has x20 optical zoom. This and other clear advances are evident in camera design. An amp today however, does little more than an amp or speakers of the 70's.

Actually lpv is quite right, in terms of resolution, distortion, colour balence etc, etc, the old lenses are massively superior, you are confusing quality with funcionality, the 20 x zoom you mention is a dog in comparison.

However, it is small, flexible and for non professional use it is good enough, just like modern hi-fi.