Second hand gear is it all that ?

[admin_exported]

I got to thinking that a lot posts i read are people who want a system for x amount of £ and want to know the system to get, a lot of replies are buy second hand you get a far better system for the money. I wonder sometimes if people just look back with rose tinted glasses and think all things of yesteryear were better, i know some people are going to say you dont know what your on about you can get a ten year old cdp player originaly £1000 for £200 now, my point is have things not improved over the years such as dacs, etc, etc in the cdp so now a £600 cdp should sound as good as ten year old £1000 cdp(plus the fact that its new, with no wear and tare).

Iam looking to buy a new system in the near future and have been looking at the marantz 6003 combi as a good system, but keep reading threads about second hand gear being better. anyway just thought i bring it up and see other peoples thoughts.

Sorry for any spelling mistakes i know this offends some people.

 

[a91gti]

I'm ready to get flamed here but I'd say that although technology has moved on or changed it has not got any better. I'm probably influenced in my thoughts by the 25yr old dac in my cdp.

 

[Anonymous]

If hi fi has not improved in 25yrs then i would suggest it has a problem.

 

[a91gti]

I'd hazard a guess that improvements get more noticeable the more you spend. Itd be interesting to get Thaimans opinion on this, he operates in a much higher pricebracket than I.

 

[Thaiman]

2nd hand hifi sometime can be for those who want to re-live the dream. I remember when I use to own a pair of kef coda7 and lush over whathifi's review of Kef reference twothree. Few years gone by and few (luckily) good jobs later I bought the pair for half price 2nd hand. Do they sound as good as I hope they would? No! but I was living my dream at the time. Having said that some golden hifi products are timeless, my Marantz CD7 for example, It was first come on the market in 2000 so quite a few years old design now and if I can find a better CD player this side of £6K, I would purchase it but I can't! (for my taste anyway) in fact I stop looking now! Even the new pearl signature wasn't quite do it for me, it's very good but not better.

 

[Anonymous]

Fair comment Thaiman its nice nice to get the point of view of someone who had and still has top gear, thanks.

 

[Vimeous]

For me it really depends what your after. Around 50% of my kit is 2nd hand and it has been superb in everyway.
However all of it has been used to fill functional gaps where my desire to upgrade outweighed my financial assets!

That said it means I'm still living in the '90's and I know decent style-orientated speaker systems will humble my setup for integration and deliver a great deal more thump.
In sterio my Arcam/Arcam/B&W combination still makes me sit-up and marvel at how fills the room and its truely impressive mid-range. However I also know the later B&W 602 S2 and S3 have much better control over the lower frequencies with warm kit like the Arcams. At Ebay prices you could have my setup for approx £350 but when you hit £600 it becomes a very different proposition.

Yes careful component choices and an even more careful buying process can net you monster bargains but in the end you get what you pay for and ten year old kit is still ten years closer to failing, It may also be short of the connectivity you might expect like digital audio.

I'd suggest careful component matching of modern kit will net you a better setup than buying disparate secondhand components without the ability to check the performance and integration.

 

[Dougal1331]

Personally, I wouldn't recommend buying a secondhand CD player. Asking for trouble- the servos and laser will have had years of use and may not have long left. Anything with motors and moving parts is a bit of a gamble...

Amps are generally OK, although they often develop 'scratchy' volume controls, but this can be fixed fairly cheaply. Pop the case off if you can, and check for bulging or leaky capacitors, especially in the PSU and the output stage. The amp may work at the time, but if the caps are going it won't last long. They can be replaced, but it does mean extra expense. Speakers, provided they are in good order to start with, will last for years to come. Gently press the bass cones in and check for any rubbing or scraping, and get a demo if possible! If doing the interweb superhighway thing, it's a case of having to trust the seller's description and assume honesty...

I think kit probably does sound a little better these days, but the difference is not night and day. A good piece of hifi from, say, 15 years ago, should still be pretty good today. I love my almost-vintage kit, I prefer to buy it cheap and then do it up with modern components- my Mission 753s have Vifa ring-radiator tweeters and all-new crossovers, and they sound stunning. Total cost about £250 (got the speakers for a bargain £100...) all-in. Next project is a not-quite-an-antique-yet, broken Myryad Z140. Dunno what's up with it yet but bits of it have exploded...

 

[Anonymous]

we would all love brand new, but sometimes budgets do not allow for that .... suppose it's the same with cars ... would you rather own and drive a brand new Fiat Punto or a 10 year old Porshe 911 in good condition for the same money?

many people opt for new ...

 

[Anonymous]

Thaiman:2nd hand hifi sometime can be for those who want to re-live the dream. I remember when I use to own a pair of kef coda7 and lush over whathifi's review of Kef reference twothree. Few years gone by and few (luckily) good jobs later I bought the pair for half price 2nd hand. Do they sound as good as I hope they would? No! but I was living my dream at the time. Having said that some golden hifi products are timeless, my Marantz CD7 for example, It was first come on the market in 2000 so quite a few years old design now and if I can find a better CD player this side of £6K, I would purchase it but I can't! (for my taste anyway) in fact I stop looking now! Even the new pearl signature wasn't quite do it for me, it's very good but not better.

always wanted a Marantz CD-7 cdp .... have never seen one for sale ... you are very lucky to own one, as only a few were made (think 750 were made) ... am still searching daily

 

[Anonymous]

There's no simple answer to this. It depends which components you're talking about, which brand and even which product. If you want a merged home cinema/hifi or kit with a focus on computer/iPod-based audio then obviously you're looking at more recent kit for the functional changes. If you're looking at a cd-based (I can't comment on vinyl) stereo system then that opens your options more.

Then when deciding between second-hand and new I'd say you need to consider reliability (how likely it is to fail), support (what options are open to you if it does fail) and your subjective experience of the sound.

From a reliability perspective in a cd/amp/speakers system I'd probably be most concerned about 2nd hand cd players and how the transport's getting on, then power amps (does it need recapping?) and worry less about pre-amps and speakers. Considering support - is the manufacturer still in business? What's their attitude towards/ability to service older kit? Are the parts still available (e.g. Naim are great at servicing kit 20+ years old but there's no stock left of certain transports)?

Considering sound quality - I recently considered replacing my 10+yr old Densen cd player (cost about £1200 new) with the current entry-level Naim (cost about the same). No good reason, just a silly desire to spend money getting the newest/best. Anyway, I was pleased (and almost disappointed in one way!) to find I thought my Densen noticeably better.

Similarly, I've just bought a pair of 9 year old Ruark Crusader IIs, for £1k less than their replacements (the III believe it or not). I've not heard the III but have spoken to people who've listened to both and prefer the older model. Do I believe that loudspeaker technology has moved on so that my £500 would have been better spent on brand new speakers? Not if the models I listened to at dealers recently were representative.

From your original post it sounds like you might be happier buying new so that could be best for you (and my pre-amp was brand new this week!). Just bear in mind that newer doesn't necessarily mean better, but as a general rule you're not going to get product review mags or an industry arguing you might as well stick with your ten-year old kit!

Rob

Edit: forgetting which forum I was on for a moment I guess I need to make clear that my final comment wasn't a reference to conspiracy theories . My point is that mags like WHF review new kit. They may make comparisons in passing to the preceding model or (as has happened recently) revisit older products to lop a star off, but it isn't their job to compare a new bit of kit with each permutation of 3, 5, 7 or 12 year old kit - that's what ears are for!

 

[Anonymous]

nick46:If hi fi has not improved in 25yrs then i would suggest it has a problem.

To be slightly flippant, I'd suggest it only has a problem once people stop buying new hifi. And even if loudspeakers have not 'night and day' improved in 20+ years, the industry is still coming out with innovative products which is where I think it will do well - I'm thinking of the Naim uniti and the doubtless cheaper-brand equivalents which will start to appear.

 

[John Duncan]

Well my CD player and amp are both second hand and not that old. And to extend the Fiat Punto/911 analogy - which would you rather have, a Marantz 6003 combo or this for less:

 

[bretty]

I used to be snobby about second hand hi-fi, dismissing it out of hand. This time last year, I was saving for my first 'proper' system, which was going to be Cyrus/MS Mezzo 6. It was going to cost about £2000.

Then, I noticed a second hand hi-fi shop in town. I went in on a day with nothing to do and tried a few things out. I walked out with a second-hand system, which sounded better than the new Cyrus I was saving for, and cost £1200 less. I've just upgraded my amp with another second-hand unit. My kit, new, is worth just short of £4000: I paid £1000.

I'm a complete convert to the way of the used! I think the analogy used earlier in the thread about cars is spot on. I'd snap your arm off to have a 10 year old Porsche over a new Punto, anyday.

Having said all this, I wouldn't spend big money on second hand, blind. I'd only buy from a dealer that offers a warranty, to protect yourself.

 

[bretty]

JohnDuncan:Well my CD player and amp are both second hand and not that old. And to extend the Fiat Punto/911 analogy - which would you rather have, a Marantz 6003 combo or this for less:

What are they, Johnny?

 

[John Duncan]

Primare D20 and A20 MkII. £212 and £315 respectively from a well-known auction site.

 

[bretty]

They look good, matey. Sounds like really good prices for Primare kit, too.

 

[John Duncan]

Yep, especially bearing in mind that the CD player cost less than the Cambridge 640 I replaced...

 

[a91gti]

Bretty makes a good point about buying secondhand kit, I`m fairly safe buying "blind" as I`ve been using secondhand kit for twenty years (I`ve only ever bought new three times and I returned two purchases within days as sub standard) and can fix most if not all likely faults. The same can`t be said for the majority of people so they may well be better off playing it safe and sticking to dealers.

Speakers are one area in which caution is a must, spotting a "dog" can be much harder. I bought a few knackered boxes before I learnt what to look and listen for!

 

[fatboyslimfast]

Most of my kit is 2nd hand - only the Beresford and the RS6s in my main system below are new (and they were ex-demo).

My other systems are all 2nd hand, with the exception of a 19yr old Technics receiver. They all work beautifully.

There is no way I could have afforded/justified my main system (and yes, there is a fair bit of Thaiman's living the dream! - Linn/Naim was all I ever wanted... now, about those 'bariks...) at it's retail price (best part of £7k), but by buying carefully, I've got the lot for around £2.5k.

Whilst it is nice to have the benefit of a warranty, most of the kit I have is easily serviced and parts available, so isn't too much of a risk.

 

[Thaiman]

dim_span:
Thaiman:2nd hand hifi sometime can be for those who want to re-live the dream. I remember when I use to own a pair of kef coda7 and lush over whathifi's review of Kef reference twothree. Few years gone by and few (luckily) good jobs later I bought the pair for half price 2nd hand. Do they sound as good as I hope they would? No! but I was living my dream at the time. Having said that some golden hifi products are timeless, my Marantz CD7 for example, It was first come on the market in 2000 so quite a few years old design now and if I can find a better CD player this side of £6K, I would purchase it but I can't! (for my taste anyway) in fact I stop looking now! Even the new pearl signature wasn't quite do it for me, it's very good but not better.

always wanted a Marantz CD-7 cdp .... have never seen one for sale ... you are very lucky to own one, as only a few were made (think 750 were made) ... am still searching daily

Have you try Sugden Masterclass mk1? It has a similar sound (one single rather than two double) I used it for a while before found CD7. The other CDP I rated so very highly is Audionet ART V2, inky black background with bass to die for.

 

[Overdose]

The reason that you keep reading threads about second hand gear being better is that pound for pound it is and although technology has moved on, it hasn't moved on all that much, particularly in the CDP and amp department. Meaning that a top CDP of 10 years ago, is still going to be very good now. If you look around for well made and designed gear that has been looked after, you will get a better deal overall. For example a used Roksan Kandy CDP of the previous model will be a whole lot cheaper than the new model, but not a great deal different in sound. There will be a difference of opinion regarding that last statement, but you have to consider where the law of diminishing returns really kicks in and where the limit of sound quality from a CDP lies. Given the 'massive' improvements in sound from every new CDP model release over successive years, you may wonder as to whether CD was worth listening to at all 10 years ago. (Vinyl purists need not comment

)

 

[Anonymous]

Overdose: although technology has moved on, it hasn't moved on all that much, particularly in the CDP and amp department. For example a used Roksan Kandy CDP of the previous model will be a whole lot cheaper than the new model, but not a great deal different in sound. There will be a difference of opinion regarding that last statement, but you have to consider where the law of diminishing returns really kicks in and where the limit of sound quality from a CDP lies. Given the 'massive' improvements in sound from every new CDP model release over successive years, you may wonder as to whether CD was worth listening to at all 10 years ago. (Vinyl purists need not comment

)

To build on this, I think it's worth remembering that it's not simply a case of kit 'advancing' with each generation, often it's more about the sound changing to suit fashions/tastes dominant at the time. For example with Naim amps (area where I've listened to a good few over the years) you get people today who prefer the sound of 'olive' (1990s) kit over the new line, or CB kit (1980s) over olive...generally there's a perception that 'bang for buck' the entry level stuff has improved, but above that is it better or just different?

 

[Overdose]

Very true, but then shouldn't all 'hi-fi' be aiming towards the 'as close as possible to the original recording' sound?

Any difference in sound is a change in the original recording sound (for better or worse) and change is bad.

 

[Anonymous]

Overdose:
Very true, but then shouldn't all 'hi-fi' be aiming towards the 'as close as possible to the original recording' sound?

Any difference in sound is a change in the original recording sound (for better or worse) and change is bad.

I know that's a common idea, but what did the original sound like and to who?

I guess if you're talking about stuff that can be measured empirically, close to the original recording sound must mean not introducing distortion/noise or particularly emphasising/de-emphasising aspects of frequency, but what about things like spatial aspects? Some systems make you feel like you're on stage with performers, others like you're x rows back in a concert hall.

Given speakers interact with rooms/furnishings to create sound, the speakers can't createthe same sound (i.e. as the original recording studio/concert) in all environments, nor does the listener or dealer know what that sound was like to compare!

Bit of a tangent but meh - bored