This isn't so much of as a question as just intrigued to know others opinions and experiences. I had a 7.1 system made up of B&W 601's and the LCR60 centre, but after a house move had to downgrade to a smaller system due to size; but my budget was very limited. Anyway sold all my ageing B&W's to fund the upgrade (ebay is a wonderful thing), and really toyed with what to go with without breaking the bank. Jamo's £250 package looked great, Kef's 1005.2 in the gloss black finish looked very smart but came in at £400 - and couldn't go with fuller boxes sadly. Anyway auditioned both the Jamo's and the 1005's and ruled both out, just couldn't live with the enclosed sound of the smaller cabinets - so it pushed me towards the 2005 now getting serious reductions thanks to the new 2005.3 coming out. I read the what hifi review recently and was a little worried, but auditioned yeaterday and at £299 made the plunge. I have to say i absolutely love them....
Question therefore, is it always best to go for a newer piece of kit at a price, or an older model thats been reduced significantly? I'd really be interested to know what you all think of this, and perhaps even see an article on this in a future what hifi? I mean if, like me you have to work to a price, and can't afford to throw in an extra few hundred quid when upgrading, maybe older is the way to go...
Question therefore, is it always best to go for a newer piece of kit at a price, or an older model thats been reduced significantly? I'd really be interested to know what you all think of this, and perhaps even see an article on this in a future what hifi? I mean if, like me you have to work to a price, and can't afford to throw in an extra few hundred quid when upgrading, maybe older is the way to go...
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram