2. amps-preamps
  3. 153764-111696

Anyone done A / B listening to compare vintage stereo receivers with today’s Amps/Preamps?

I bought a Pioneer SX-1050 new in 1977. It was my first serious audio purchase and set me back around $3000 when adjusted for inflation to today’s dollars. IOW, quite a lot.  In 1985 I made my second major audio purchase when I bought Quad ESL-63 electrostatic speakers and a Quad Amp and Preamp. The Pioneer wound up in my closet where it has set until 2018 (34 years) when I put it to work in my second best system, the TV room. Last month I decided to have it refurbished and I have to confess it set me back way way more than I expected, but it does sound very good indeed.  

But I’m definitely wondering if I made a good investment. And how the Pioneer, specifically the SX-1050, but others of similar character,  compares to present day equivalents.  

Has anyone done any comparative listening to electronics in the $3000-$5000 range? How does the Pioneer compare?  

Answering that question would go at least some way to answering the question whether the vintage electronics are as good or better than those designed and built for today. And whether I made a good investment.

My TV System
Vizio 60” Ultra HD
Spendor FL-6 floor standing speakers
Arcam SR-250 two-channel AVR used for video only
Pioneer SX-1050 used for audio only
Video sources:
1 - Dish DVR
2 - Oppo UDP-205 DVD
3 - Roku streamer
4 - Pioneer Elite CLD-99 Laser Disc Player
128x128echolane
cd318
2,636 posts
 
@echolane, there are some who say that amplifier technology matured as long ago as 1960 - give or take a few subtle tonal variations thereafter.

The only thing of possible concern might be the power rating - but this usually depends upon upon loudspeaker ease of drive.

I used to own a 1970s Japanese amplifier which I gave away about 15 years ago.

As far as I know it's still working fine.

As far as I know it still sounds remarkably similar to a NAD 3020.
qilin_maker
10 posts
 
Hello echolane, I think you're making a good investment. I bought a Pioneer SX-1980 and had it re-capped and thoroughly gone-over by a Pioneer tech specialist. When I tried it in my main system, the Pioneer soon displaced a well-known modern amp & pre-amp, and I never missed them. The only other physical change I've made to the SX-1980 is to replace the captured power cord with a Furutech NCF IEC socket (wired as a 2-prong) so that I could use a high performance power cord. I also use high performance interconnects, and footers. Together with my speakers, the Pioneer is very transparent and revealing of all the upstream equipment. I mostly listen to vinyl. I use a high end moving coil cartridge and SUT, and an outboard phono stage (not the internal Pioneer phono). My local audiophile friends are always impressed how it's not only the best sounding Pioneer receiver they've ever heard, but how well it sounds, full stop.
btw I also own a restored Pioneer SX-1250. The market value of these famous Pioneer receivers does not depreciate, unlike modern gear. And they also have useful features like tone controls and loudness contour switch (gasp!).
Thanks,
millercarbon's avatar
millercarbon
12,531 posts
 
If you're happy with the way it looks and sounds then yes, you made a good investment. Even without knowing what you spent its a slam dunk you could have got a lot more sound for the money just about any other way. But still, if it looks and sounds good to you....
lowrider57's avatar
lowrider57
5,411 posts
 
I followed your other thread. Is your Pioneer sounding any better?

More to discover