Is Hi-Fi sound quality actually that much better than it was 10-20+ years ago?

[doifeellucky]

I notice than some products, even award winners, over time have their score dropped when a new product comes onto the market that is deemed to be the new leader in a particular category.

Every year there's a new Denon micro system, Sony surround system, this amp, that speaker, etc, that seemingly nearly always improves on the previous version. On that basis products from 10-20+ years ago must be pretty awful.

In general has sound quality actually improved that much, compared to products from 10-20+ years ago?

How would a Pioneer A400 compare to the current equivalent? Do the internal components deteriorate over time so it's difficult to make a like for like comparison?

Or rather have the improvements effectively raised the bar so that today's £500 amps are equivalent in sound quality to those costing £1000 from a few years ago?

 

[chebby]

In general has sound quality actually improved that much, compared to products from 10-20+ years ago?

No.

 

[stereoman]

No. Only Bluetooth speaker / streaming technology can be more promising. As far as the overall quality is concerned - no. About few months ago I had a chance to try out a vintage Accuphase E 205 from 1978 - even today it laughs in the face of todays' new mid budget amps...

 

[insider9]

I notice than some products, even award winners, over time have their score dropped when a new product comes onto the market that is deemed to be the new leader in a particular category.

Yes, the wheel needs to turn to keep all involved in business.

Every year there's a new Denon micro system, Sony surround system, this amp, that speaker, etc, that seemingly nearly always improves on the previous version. On that basis products from 10-20+ years ago must be pretty awful.

Not at all. On that basis the newest model will incorporate the newest tech like streaming, DACs, new Wifi or any other thing for that matter so if that matters to you than buy new. Review stars have hardly any relevance to absolute sound quality. Their mostly useful to compare products at similar price point.

In general has sound quality actually improved that much, compared to products from 10-20+ years ago?

No, like mentioned by others. I stated from new speakers and amp. My current lineup is amplification from circa 20 years ago. And four pairs of speakers. Ranging from early 2000's to late 80's.

How would a Pioneer A400 compare to the current equivalent? Do the internal components deteriorate over time so it's difficult to make a like for like comparison?

The problem will be methodology. What would you compare exactly price when new? Power? Sound quality?

You only need to look at second hand prices for some gear to undestand how good it is. And that doesn't even tell you the whole story.

Some components deteriorate some don't. I would only compare amps if they were both fully working.

Or rather have the improvements effectively raised the bar so that today's £500 amps are equivalent in sound quality to those costing £1000 from a few years ago?

No, not even close. Some would say (and in most cases they'd be right) that a £2,000 amp from say 20 years ago is an equivalent of a much more expensive amp right now. That's why some models still hold their value.

*********************************

OP, good post and all valid points. I wasn't trying to be condesending. We'd all would like that level of improvement in our hobby. Look at computers and what has happening now/happened over last 6 months alone is staggering. The technology made a massive leap. Unparalled to anything we've seen for over a decade.

Better to ask a question than to make costly mistakes. My advice for buying would be for most value for money go second hand. Buy cheap with option to return and you're likely not to lose any money should you not like it or if there were issue simply return. Have some fun with it without a guilt associated with spending lots of money you will never recoup.

 

[MajorFubar]

It's like washing powder. It's so improved that 50 years ago it must've been making our clothes dirtier. WHF and the industry it supports have a vested interest in making you buy new kit. If you didn't the industry would die.

 

[jjbomber]

In general has sound quality actually improved that much, compared to products from 10-20+ years ago?

Yes, but our ears are getting worse faster than hi-fi is getting better!

 

[Al ears]

In general has sound quality actually improved that much, compared to products from 10-20+ years ago?

Yes, but our ears are getting worse faster than hi-fi is getting better!

+1

 

[CnoEvil]

I am going to answer this by going further back.

Before CD, systems were usually vinyl based, with a tape deck (or a Reel to Reel if you were very lucky). IMO. TTs at the more budget/mid range seemed to be better built, Amps were often less powerful and speakers were generally sealed boxes (which works better with vinyl).

The sound was smoother, less forward, but less detailed.

The area that I believe has improved, is the SQ that is achieved by a good Streamer/DAC. On the amp front, it's mostly with Class D / Digital Amps that things have changed....but whether that's for the better, is down to taste. I still prefer Valves and Class A, which aren't exactly new.

Speakers have certainly changed, with modern materials for the Cabinet and Drive units.....what the speaker is made from has a big impact on how it sounds. The use of computers to aid design, have also brought changes....just have a look at Kef Technical Papers.

Many of today's systems can certainly sound a bit too forward, analytical and bright, especially to someone who was more used to the older, more "palatable" sound from yesteryear....but there is such a big variety out there atm, that any taste can be catered for.

So in conclusion, the sound of your general system has become more modern, probably measure better., are often more convenient....but the enjoyment of music is subjective, which means it's down to personal preference.

 

[muljao]

It's hard to say. I would think that the comparison can only be made in the analog domain (vinyl) as the digital has so many variables that it's never comparing like with like

 

[chebby]

I'd happily use a brand new NAD 3020 (just with a few refinements like source selector buttons that don't fly off and 4mm speaker terminals) and brand new Acoustic Research AR18s.

'Coloured' as you like but really 'hairs rising on the back of the neck', 'infectious', 'we want to dance now' kind of enjoyable. (Not modern, sobre, chin-rubbing, ernest looking demos where you are only allowed to tap one toe discretely inside your shoe.)

The idea of 8" paper cones (and cone tweeters) in compact, sealed cabinets would be scorned by people now, who wouldn't be able to get 4.5" past a modern wife (oo'er matron) but at least those old speakers performed well up against a wall (stop it!) and we only needed a couple of quid for QED 79 strand.

 

[plastic penguin]

Without doubt hi-fi has changed over the years, although I don't necessary believe it's for the better. I've just pulled out a random WHFI mag from 2004, and they seem to be (almost) obsessed by 'detail'. On their top 3 recommended systems, the midrange and hi-end sources were Cyrus 6 and 8 respectively. There's nothing wrong with more detail or more bass or more anything... but it does come at a price - quite literally.

Over the years I've been on this forum the amount of questions relating to bright or harsh sounding systems increased (for about a 10 year period). Therefore room acoustics became as big a part as the hi-fi itself; companies selling expensive acoustic panels have increased.... there can only be one reason: Systems have become more forward.

Chebby is right to say most people now would frown (or scorn) at sealed cabinets. But the fact remains there's very few mainstream speaker maker that actually produce modern sealed (infinte baffle) speakers. Of course, go off piste a little and they are available - look at independents and you'll find sealed speakers.

The big hi-fi chains seem to only supply ported designs. Again, it's about the marketing people and mags... back in the late 70s the 'buzz word' by a number of the mainstream speaker maufactueres was "Acoustic Suspension". That all sounded exciting, but it was only speakers with chuffing great holes in the cabinets (Wharfedale, Tannoy, Jamo... and a number of others). Or now just known as ported.

In all thruth I would be quite happy to use an old Pioneer amp with Acoustic Research speakers. I wouldn't dismiss the notion of a older system - assuming you can find one that's been serviced on a regular basis.

 

[CnoEvil]

Over the years I've been on this forum the amount of questions relating to bright or harsh sounding systems increased (for about a 10 year period). Therefore room acoustics became as big a part as the hi-fi itself; companies selling expensive acoustic panels have increased.... there can only be one reason: Systems have become more forward.

I think I'm right in saying, that a bright sound, which is too bright for the owner, is still the number one complaint on here....either caused by room acoustics, or poorly matched kit that wasn't properly demoed.....so I totally agree.

 

[plastic penguin]

Quite right, Cno. Matching is also an issue. A fair percentage of people take mag reviews at face value and purchase without demoing.

Haven't seen as many threads about brightness over the last year or so.

But I can't ever remember having issues with room acoustics with my early systems (late 70s and early 80s). I think now hi-fi is less of a pleasantry and more of a technical exercise.

I hadn't heard the Tucana before buying but it was purchased purely on the strength of the Pulse. Exactly the same with TB2is. If it wasn't for my admiration of the DB1i, I would probably have a totally different speaker.

 

[ellisdj]

Last 20 years mains quality and general signal pollution has been getting worse as more and more wifi, cell towers etc are built and in every home every business and everywhere.

More computers, more phones, far more cheap smps power supplies, more microwaves, more hair straighteners

Is it actually the hifi getting brighter or just more noise on the signal causing the issue ...

 

[insider9]

Last 20 years mains quality and general signal pollution has been getting worse as more and more wifi, cell towers etc are built and in every home every business and everywhere.

More computers, more phones, far more cheap smps power supplies, more microwaves, more hair straighteners

Is it actually the hifi getting brighter or just more noise on the signal causing the issue ... 

You're not suggesting I should stop using my hair straightener?!

 

[chebby]

... back in the late 70s the 'buzz word' by a number of the mainstream speaker maufactueres was "Acoustic Suspension". That all sounded exciting, but it was only speakers with chuffing great holes in the cabinets (Wharfedale, Tannoy, Jamo...

Actually 'acoustic suspension' is/was quite the opposite whereby the cabinet is sealed and the trapped air acts to resist the excursions of the bass driver's diaghragm to help reduce distortion...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustic_suspension

 

[doifeellucky]

Hi, thanks for all the replies.

I remember back in the day listening to ELO's Turn to Stone on my Dads Rega Planar 3 with a Sony TA-1630, no idea of the speakers, and the hairs seemingly standing up on the back of my neck.

Using a digital source with a CX60 and Dali Zensor 3's that track just sounds too flat to me. Other music is great but there's just something missing from when I heard vinyl from the late 70's and early 80's.

 

[plastic penguin]

@Chebby

"Actually 'acoustic suspension' is/was quite the opposite whereby the cabinet is sealed and the trapped air acts to resist the excursions of the bass driver's diaghragm to help reduce distortion..."

Perhaps my memory isn't as good as thought. But I remember Wharfedale mentioning something about "something suspension" when they released the 'E' series.

 

[tonky]

Hi, thanks for all the replies.

I remember back in the day listening to ELO's Turn to Stone on my Dads Rega Planar 3 with a Sony TA-1630, no idea of the speakers, and the hairs seemingly standing up on the back of my neck.

Using a digital source with a CX60 and Dali Zensor 3's that track just sounds too flat to me. Other music is great but there's just something missing from when I heard vinyl from the late 70's and early 80's.

[/quote

Something magical about those Planars 2 and 3 - I remember being similarly affected. I think the vibrancy of youth and original spellbinding music had a good deal to do with it too!

cheers - tonky

 

[Leif]

I don't doubt that very good systems from 20 years ago are still very good. But we have huge advances in electronics, and streaming lossless audio from a smartphone to a hifi was unheard of then. And there have been advances in computer aided design of components such as speakers for example. I have a feeling that some items such as amps show less improvements because they rely on quality casing, shielding, cables, power supplies and transformers, and those bit and bobs have not changed so much. It's the digital side that has leapt forward. On the other hand, audio on DAB is often far lower quality than FM. Just listen to Planet Rock, they use a very low bit rate encoding. *sad*

I have a 20 year old Sennheiser HD600 headphone which sounds wonderful with a good source, and after all these years they are still made which must say something.

 

[chebby]

@Chebby

"Actually 'acoustic suspension' is/was quite the opposite whereby the cabinet is sealed and the trapped air acts to resist the excursions of the bass driver's diaghragm to help reduce distortion..."

Perhaps my memory isn't as good as thought. But I remember Wharfedale mentioning something about "something suspension" when they released the 'E' series.

In Wharfedale Exx the 'E' stood for efficiency (often 95dB) and the number was the internal volume in litres (eg. E40 = 40 litres).

I don't recall (nor can I find) any 'Acoustic Suspension' reference in Wharfedale ads. (I've look at a few today.) This was definitely an Ed Villchur / Henry Kloss / Acoustic Research (patented) term.

I'll have a delve in my small collection of Gilbert Briggs literature at home later.

Thanks though for reminding me to buy this earlier today ...

 

[nick8858]

I have a modern £700 Pioneer streamer/CD everything thingy with modern speakers at £650. Great listen and like it. I also have a 1970's Pioneer SX 450 receiver and some Technics speakers similar vintage. No gold plated terminals or any of that tosh. Sounds equally as good. The latter cost £40 for the receiver and £50 for the speakers. Whatever has changed technologically, little has changed audibly to my ears. Moral of the story - isn't one really just my observation

 

[matthewpiano]

My 20+ year old CD player and amp combination is making music superbly in partnership with my 4 year old Dynaudios. The A400 is doing sterling service. The other amps I've had that I would put on a par with it are the Rega Brio-R, Exposure 1010, and Creek 4330. The conclusion? Pay around £500-£600 for a new amp now to match the £200-£250 star amp of the 1990s. Cheaper new amps can perform well, but things like the Denon PMA720ae, Marantz PM600x, Onkyo A9010UK etc. don't grip a quality pair of speakers as convincingly as the A400 (in my experience).

Certainly there have been strides forward in the convenience offered by some digital technologies, and the sound quality available from streaming and file-based formats has improved very nicely in recent years. However, the DAC in my 1990s Rotel CD player is now old technology, but it remains one of the most consistently musical and engagin CD players I've ever owned or heard.

 

[manicm]

My 20+ year old CD player and amp combination is making music superbly in partnership with my 4 year old Dynaudios. The A400 is doing sterling service. The other amps I've had that I would put on a par with it are the Rega Brio-R, Exposure 1010, and Creek 4330. The conclusion? Pay around £500-£600 for a new amp now to match the £200-£250 star amp of the 1990s. Cheaper new amps can perform well, but things like the Denon PMA720ae, Marantz PM600x, Onkyo A9010UK etc. don't grip a quality pair of speakers as convincingly as the A400 (in my experience).

Certainly there have been strides forward in the convenience offered by some digital technologies, and the sound quality available from streaming and file-based formats has improved very nicely in recent years. However, the DAC in my 1990s Rotel CD player is now old technology, but it remains one of the most consistently musical and engagin CD players I've ever owned or heard.

You confirm what I believe that, compared to other household electronics, hifi especially amplifiers have become much more expensive, if you compare like for like.

As for speakers, could it be that the old paper coned beasts were more transparent, albeit exponentially less durable if pushed?

 

[NJB]

I think that there have been overall improvements. Circuit components are more consistent, circuit build is better and design for the mainstream equipment us now regulated by computer programming. This is all good for people buying modest priced equipment. My fear is that the room for a brilliant designer to really show off his skills is arguably reducing and perhaps people like JV from Naim would not get their chance today.

I grew up being used to people frying amplifiers etc, and that is much less likely today. So, the SQ that you buy, is more likely to stay there as the equipment ages.

The other issue is that we are now an impatient society. We want fast, we want everything simple, and we expect all those extra functions. Digital technology provides that, along with broadband ic noise, and so modern equipment is working with a greater need for circuit isolation and decoupling.

On balance, ultimate SQ is probably no better now, with higher quality components set off against interference issues. However, reliability and consistency are vastly better. I do not see any threads nowadays with people saying 'my mate got a good one' etc, when every box sounded different to the next one off the production line.