Is Newer Necessarily Better???

[jaxwired]

Looking at an 8 to 10 year period as mentioned by the OP, I'd say hifi equipment has changed very little. The one exception is digital sources. CD players, DACS, and all the streaming options. That stuff I do believe is significantly better. I'd say amplifier technology has changed the least with speakers a very close second. Some high end speakers have started using driver material that was not used 10 years ago and that could be called an improvement, but it's debatable. On the amp front, in the Class A and Class A/B which is the majority of all amps, there has been little technology advancements that I can see. There have been advancements in Class D amplifiers (also called digital amps or switching amps). Class D amps have become more respected and much better sounding. NADs lates M2 offering is definately an example of amplifier technology advancements.

But to summarize, I think a 10 year old amp and speakers can easily sound every bit as good as brand new.

 

[the record spot]

mitch65:
the record spot:It's all part of my evil plan to convert the world to Sansui's pre-1980s range...*cackle*.

Ahh....so the old 'evil plan to convert the world' ploy eh?

It's a very popular pastime!

 

[aliEnRIK]

spring3r:

How do today's amplifiers and speakers compare to those produced 8 to 10 years ago?

Everyone seems to be missing the actual question

Id say theyre better today (for the money) than 10 years ago generally speaking

Loudspeakers in particular just keep getting better and better

 

[Frank Harvey]

I'd agree if we're talking 8-10 years ago.

I was going to try and explain a few things, but I realised it was just way too much to type on a lazy Sunday

 

[the record spot]

aliEnRIK:spring3r:

How do today's amplifiers and speakers compare to those produced 8 to 10 years ago?

Everyone seems to be missing the actual question

Id say theyre better today (for the money) than 10 years ago generally speaking

Loudspeakers in particular just keep getting better and better

Not really; there's greater difference if you look beyond eight to ten years, where digital sources and amps haven't changed hugely at all. Maybe in the functionality, additional, as in, but where there is a big difference, as in with older equipment than a decade ago, the performance isn't bettered at all. By the accounts of others on here and elsewhere on the web, older hifi often surpasses what more recent stuff is capable of.

Ten years back I think the last of the Sony ES amps were coming out - the TA-F30ES for example - superb in every way. Not much in the sub-£1k bracket to touch that one currently.

And speakers? I think when you consider the likes of the Mission 75 range, KEF's Q range, both from the mid-90s, Peter Comeau's Heybrook HB2 speaker from the early 80s, I'm not so sure there is a wide gulf at all.

 

[MUSICRAFT]

spring3r:
That's very interesting, Rick.

What amps? The question begs asking ;-)

Hi spring3r

Rotel's RA-1062 was/is a better amp and costs less (£600) then the A85 (£800).

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[jaxwired]

aliEnRIK:

Loudspeakers in particular just keep getting better and better

Ever hear a pair of classic KEF Reference 104/2s circa 1990? Easily competes with anything on the market today IMO.

 

[MUSICRAFT]

Hi jaxwired

Good old KEF Reference. Superb speakers. I used to own a pair of model 3.2 (in stunning Rosetta Burr finish) for many years. It is with this range that KEF peaked for me. Old is gold.

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

 

[Frank Harvey]

jaxwired:Ever hear a pair of classic KEF Reference 104/2s circa 1990? Easily competes with anything on the market today IMO.

Awesome speakers.They're not perfect, but possess amazing dynamic abilities and bass presence. I used to own a pair of these (wish I still did!), as well as 103/4's, 4.2's, and now 207/2's. I can't wait to see what KEF hold in store for the next Reference range, and which Blade technologies will be utilised.....

 

[Anonymous]

Very interesting - Thanks for the insight.

There's a very clean Sansui amp on EBay at present -

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/SANSUI-AU-3900-INTEGRATED-STEREO-AMPLIFIER-AU-3900-/260665379022?pt=UK_AudioTVElectronics_HomeAudioHiFi_Amplifiers&hash=item3cb0de08ce

Not sure whether this model is of interest to anyone - Looks new!!

the record spot:It doesn't pan out across the board all of the time, but older gear can make a pretty good fist of it up against the new(er) stuff. There's a lot of junk out there too though, so it helps, if anyone's thinking about buying older stuff to bone up a bit on the good, the bad and the downright ugly!

Can't quite recall how I found out about Sansui, but probably over on the Hardware section of the Hoffman forum. Someone probablyhad one of the high end amps there and I picked up on the brand name (typical thinking here is: "Sansui? I thought they just did cheap stuff in the 80s" or: "Sansui? Oh yeah, I always wanted the SR222 turntable"...and so on!). Found out about the 17 series range and it went from there. Got the 217, loved it (IMO, the best hifi bargain out there for under £200 if you've a simple system and easy to drive speakers - utterly brilliant). Got a 717 in the new year and though it needs a bit of TLC from time to time to keep it in good shape, it's faultless IMO. Best sound I've heard and it just makes music sound right. Their high end stereo receivers are out of this world by all accounts and they even had a respected series of quadrophonic amps (presumably lusted after by Dark Side of the Moon wielding Floyd fans of the day...!).

The same applies to others out there of course; Pioneer made some superb amps in the 70s, Aiwa, Akai, JVC, Hitachi (the latter do a completely unheralded series of power amps that go for peanuts, but if I ever remember the damn name, I'll let you know - extremely good quality) and so on. Build quality for the high end stuff was often tank like and weighed a ton. My 717's about 18kgs and although rated at 85wpc, is probably around the 100 mark according to the service engineer, dual mono internal configuration. Similar amps with that kind of spec come in around the Yamaha AS-1000/2000 kind of mark, the nearest sounding one to it has been the Leema Pulse. It costs £1300 or so (or around £700 if you got one ex-dem), so pretty decent.

IMO, they're astounding VFM but with a performance that way exceeds the buying price. The caveats are the aforementioned TLC, most will need a qualified engineer to do some work on them - replace worn capacitors, etc. - but once done, you're away. A great way to get into high end performance without wrecking the bank account.

 

[Anonymous]

I remember not being able to afford (or find space for) those KEF's ;-)

 

[aliEnRIK]

jaxwired:aliEnRIK:

Loudspeakers in particular just keep getting better and better

Ever hear a pair of classic KEF Reference 104/2s circa 1990? Easily competes with anything on the market today IMO.

Im talking about 'for the money'

And ill reterate what the OP asked for which was 2000 onwards

 

[Mr Morph]

brittondave:

the record spot:15 year old speakers, 33 year old amp... I think the really great stuff is older!!

I wonder why this should be the case......but in certain circumstances it certainly is.........some older speakers seem to reproduce a more realistic sound( if that makes sense). In fact I currently have my I on some older speakers for my upatirs system for this very reason. Perhaps some forum members might like give some

reasons why this may be....

I would be very interested..........

People forget about 'inflation', and what cost £500 ten years ago would cost you £1000 today. You have to remember that the cost of producing goods is ever increasing. The cost of wages, materials, energy, and expertise in order to produce these goods is constantly going up and has to be passed on to the customers. This is the reason they moved production from Japan to China.

That's not to say that there isn't anything good produced today, as the tuner I bought recently is well up to scratch. So often it's a case of being in the right place at the right time. Quite often it's the 'thought' that went into making something that can be more impressive than the materials used in its production.

A lot of the time I think it's a question of the era in which hi-fi is made. In the mid to late 90's (a period of wealth) there was some great hi-fi produced. This was mirrored by the mid to late 80's where CD players were being built like battleships and weighing in at 11 - 14kg! When recession hits, I guess manufacturers find it harder to give us value for money.

 

[robreid]

I have found a lot is subjective, depends what music you listen to, how loud, what type of sound your after.

From my experience a lot of older kit may have a percieved nicer sound as it may be smoother with a strong midrange and not so much detail, making bad recordings sound a lot better.

I owned a pair of CDM1-NT speakers and when I auditioned them I was stunned by the detail, but after a year I got tired of them as the sound was so accurate and detailed it made all the bad recordings difficult to listen to. Thats why I guess a lot of recording studios use B&W's as you hear everything with them. When you say better it depends what you mean, I think if your looking for an accurate and detailed sound you would need to spend a lot of money to beat your current speakers. Some more modern amps for a similar cost to the Arcam may have slight improvement but I don't think it would be major.

If your looking for a smooth relaxing sound a lot of things will sound better as they will not reveal so much detail. I recently went for Spendor A5's as I found they have a nice balance of detail and smootness for me but they won't be everyones cup of tea.

 

[Anonymous]

the record spot:It doesn't pan out across the board all of the time, but older gear can make a pretty good fist of it up against the new(er) stuff. There's a lot of junk out there too though, so it helps, if anyone's thinking about buying older stuff to bone up a bit on the good, the bad and the downright ugly!

Can't quite recall how I found out about Sansui, but probably over on the Hardware section of the Hoffman forum. Someone probablyhad one of the high end amps there and I picked up on the brand name (typical thinking here is: "Sansui? I thought they just did cheap stuff in the 80s" or: "Sansui? Oh yeah, I always wanted the SR222 turntable"...and so on!). Found out about the 17 series range and it went from there. Got the 217, loved it (IMO, the best hifi bargain out there for under £200 if you've a simple system and easy to drive speakers - utterly brilliant). Got a 717 in the new year and though it needs a bit of TLC from time to time to keep it in good shape, it's faultless IMO. Best sound I've heard and it just makes music sound right. Their high end stereo receivers are out of this world by all accounts and they even had a respected series of quadrophonic amps (presumably lusted after by Dark Side of the Moon wielding Floyd fans of the day...!).
The same applies to others out there of course; Pioneer made some superb amps in the 70s, Aiwa, Akai, JVC, Hitachi (the latter do a completely unheralded series of power amps that go for peanuts, but if I ever remember the damn name, I'll let you know - extremely good quality) and so on. Build quality for the high end stuff was often tank like and weighed a ton. My 717's about 18kgs and although rated at 85wpc, is probably around the 100 mark according to the service engineer, dual mono internal configuration. Similar amps with that kind of spec come in around the Yamaha AS-1000/2000 kind of mark, the nearest sounding one to it has been the Leema Pulse. It costs £1300 or so (or around £700 if you got one ex-dem), so pretty decent.
IMO, they're astounding VFM but with a performance that way exceeds the buying price. The caveats are the aforementioned TLC, most will need a qualified engineer to do some work on them - replace worn capacitors, etc. - but once done, you're away. A great way to get into high end performance without wrecking the bank account.

Hey Mr Record Spot,

Very please to have bagged myself a Technics SU-V40 in excellent condition recently serviced.......can't wait to hear it.

 

[the record spot]

brittondave:

Hey Mr Record Spot,

Very please to have bagged myself a Technics SU-V40 in excellent condition recently serviced.......can't wait to hear it.

Nice one Mr. Dave - hope you enjoy it!

 

[Anonymous]

MUSICRAFT:spring3r:
That's very interesting, Rick.

What amps? The question begs asking ;-)

Hi spring3r

Rotel's RA-1062 was/is a better amp and costs less (£600) then the A85 (£800).

All the best

Rick @ Musicraft

The Rotel RA-1062 is undoubtedly a well engineered and solid product and we could certainly argue as to which was sonically better - the A85 or the 1062.

However the A85 was introduced at the end of 2000 at £699 where it was considered to set new standards at the price point. As far as I know the RA-1062 did not exist until 2003, so for a while at least there was no contest 🙂

Sincerely,

John Dawson (Arcam)

 

[Anonymous]

the record spot:brittondave:

Hey Mr Record Spot,

Very please to have bagged myself a Technics SU-V40 in excellent condition recently serviced.......can't wait to hear it.

Nice one Mr. Dave - hope you enjoy it!

furthermore http://audio-database.com/TechnicsPanasonic/amp/su-v40-e.html

 

[Singslinger]

My experience is that there's very little difference if you're referring to older and newer loudspeakers, though I'm not sure about electronic equipment like CD players and amps.

For eg, I have a pair of ProAc Response 1SCs that I think sound as good, if not better, than the current D1 version.

I also own a pair of Tannoy D700s which are now 16 years old, and they still sound as good as any of today's floorstanders.

All of which leads me to believe that technological advances in loudspeaker design may only produce marginal, perhaps indiscernible improvements in sound quality. I've also got a feeling the same might apply to amps.

However, I think the biggest differences when comparing new and old would probably be for CD players.

 

[Frank Harvey]

It's not really whether older or newer stuff is better, it's more down to what's possible for the price point. As an example, KEF Reference 104/2's(5 drivers - 2 bass, 2 mid, and 1 treble each) were about £799 back in the late 70's/early 80's, and I'd still say is better than any speaker under £2k now. What can you get for £799 now? An averagely made floorstander with 3 drivers tops, or an excellent 2 way standmount. If those KEF's were made now, they'd be about £3k, maybe more.