For Old Timers who experienced the "Golden Age" of Audio of the 60s and 70s.

Don’t forget, the original Quad ESL was available back then, and so were good tube electronics, the Thorens TD-124 turntable, and the Decca cartridge. So a highly transparent, uncolored system was available, though only the audiophiles and early high end shops of the day knew it. Gordon Holt alone was writing about the good stuff in Stereophile (Harry Pearson and his Absolute sound not showing up until many years after Gordon had started publishing Stereophile), which was a subscription only quarterly (in a good year ;-), with a subscriber base of a few thousand. I discovered him and it in ’71, and that’s when my never-ending quest truly began. Prior to that, it was AR, Rectilinear (who remembers them?!), Shure, Dynaco, and McIntosh. I HATED those damn JBL Century L-100’s---unbearably bright, forward, and colored. But on the other side were the soft, dark, recessed, relatively neutral AR’s. Neither were very good! Hearing my first ESL’s (the RTR tweeters, then the Infinity Servo-Static I, then the Quads) was a revelation! Then Audio Research reached the West Coast, and the SP-3, D-75/D-51, bi-amped Magneplanar Tympani I's was IT!

My primary system is of modern vintage and primarily digitally based though I have a Sonograph turntable connected. I plan on using the ST-70 in a 2nd or 3rd system. I can't help but believe that a refurbished ST-70 with a PAS-3 pre wouldn't make for a nice system when mated to modern front end components and speakers.  

Dynaco electronics were sold as  DIY kits that could also be purchased pre-assembled.  I know that the sound of the Dynaco PAT-4 solid-state pre-amp couldn't touch the sound of a Mac C-26 or C-28.  The stereo 400 SS amp did much better against the Mac power amps.  I'm not saying they didn't exist, but I never heard any speakers in the 70's that compare with speakers of the last 25 years.  The Mac ML speakers, while great for reproducing loud rock music, lacked a lot when it came to presenting a convincing acoustic/classical sound. 

Assertions of the superiority of contemporary equipment vs. vintage equipment, such as have been made in some of the posts above and in many past threads on this kind of topic, often tend to be based on what IMO is an unfair and flawed comparison. What contemporary equipment should be compared with is vintage equipment that **today** sells for similar prices.  Not a comparison between, for example, a modern $50K system and a system comprised of vintage components that can be bought today for perhaps a few percent of that amount, or even less.

And on the basis of that kind of comparison, based on extensive experience I have had (mainly during the 1990s) with vintage tube components of the 1950s and 1960s, there are countless pieces I could cite from the likes of H. H. Scott, Pilot, Fisher, Brook, Radio Engineering Laboratories, McIntosh, Marantz, and others, that sell today for a few hundred to a few thousand dollars, that if in top condition and/or well restored I would easily consider to be competitive with (and in many cases superior to) their modern counterparts that go for similar prices **today.**

And even in the upper echelons of the price spectrum, there are reasons why Western Electric speaker drivers from the 1930s, Tannoy speaker drivers from the 1940s and later decades, Brook power amplifiers from the 1950s, and some Marantz tube products from the 1950s and 1960s sell for tens of thousands of dollars today. In some cases for MANY tens of thousands of dollars. And the reasons are certainly not just nostalgia. In fact there are at least a few of our most knowledgeable and experienced members right here at Audiogon who have assembled systems with some of those products, which if we were to hear I would expect would leave many of us envious.

Regards,
-- Al