Old Classic Receivers: A Mistake to Buy?


I was contemplating purchasing a 70's receiver, as I used to love the construction and appearance of the Sansui, Kenwood, Pioneer, Marantz. However, when I ran this by an audio friend, he said, "Forget it."

He says: They sound terrible. The caps & resistors used before the early 90s' were dreadful. The electrolytics are drying up and will start crackling and substantially degrade the sonics. The switches and controls used were almost never sealed, so they deteriorate and make noise and can't be fixed even by taking them apart and cleaning them.

Tuners: He says that nearly all non-digital tuners used varactors, which go out of alignment and cause problems, so no old tuners, with the exception of the Mac MR-78 and possibly a few others, are worth dealing with.

I am tempted to believe all that he is saying is true, but I see a market for these items, and also know that people claim they are still using these pieces for 25 years.

What's the truth here? Can some of the techies enlighten me?
kevziek
Regarding tuners and I have tens and tens of them: The ICs found in many modern tuners can be almost impossible to repair. The MR-67/MR-71 Macs are incredible sounding tuners with gold pin Mullards or better Telefunkens and a professional alignment. I would bypass the volume control on the back of the MR-71 for better sonics. The later Mac tuners in the 70s and 80s where more about reception capability and the 90s tuners more about convenience. Its true you may want to replace some of the caps in the old MR-67/MR-71s but it is well worth it since they can not be beat for sonics from a musicality standpoint (incredible especially when you think, "my god just think how old these are") and I have had several other Stereophile Class A and B tuners. Not until you have gone through over 50 tuners can you have the confidence to make such a statement. If you have difficult reception problems then some newer designs are worth it.
i dont know. i have an old nad 3020 and sumo charlie tuner in an office system (bought in college). it sounds very good. (i also have a mac 67; in my main system; and second the above postings).

will the old receivers sound as good as new seperates? no...will they sound better than todays common receivers....my money is yes. if they break; it may be hard to repair them though.

as a last thought...i passed up a marantz receiver at a thrift shop the other day (looking for albums)...only to find it was going for 300$ on ebay for parts!!! it was 12$

someone likes their sound.

most of all....if you like the sound....who cares what anyone else thinks.

Jim
I think your friend has some valid points if you're comparing them to modern multi-thousand dollar systems, but I still wouldn't be surprised if some of those old recievers sound better than some of the stuff out there. The main thing your friend didn't consider is the fact that you can purchase a top of the line, monster reciever from the late 70s (units that cost about $1000 at the time) for less than $200...sometimes much less. I think it'd be pretty hard to buy a modern system (amp, pre, and tuner) and beat it for less than $1000, and many of the new $1000+ receivers still can't compare. Today's mass-market consumer audio gear is a complete joke in comparison. I have an old Luxman system from the 70s (M2000 amp, C1010 pre, and T-110 tuner)...it's sounds nice(perfect for a bedroom, office, second system, etc), it's built like a tank, it's extremely flexible, it hasn't been hard to repair, and the tuner is still world class (and it doesn't ever shift from the signal). I wonder...did your friend actually do any listening, or was he simply basing his opinion on some technical jargon?? The brands you mentioned were great...as were Onkyo, Luxman, and Yamaha. It is a good idea to make sure the units are clean, noise free, and in good working condition before buying, but other than that they're definitely worth investigating. If audio is your hobby, I'm sure you've probably spent $150 a lot less wisely in the past.
I think your friend is speaking in theory about the electronics, but in reality if a vintage receiver is well taken care of, it will still perform well.


As far as FM tuners, the vintage analog tuners (even solid state) for the price will totally trounce any digital tuner. You could pick up something like a Kenwood KT6500 or Sansui TU-217 for about $50. They will pick up stations and sound as good or better than any digital tuner under $700. All you are getting with a digital tuner is convenience (presets and maybe a remote). For around $275 you could pick up something like a Kenwood KT8300 or Sansui TU-919 that will sound terrific against any digital tuner regardless of price.


More information on vintage tuners can be found at:

http://www.geocities.com/tunerinfo/

I purchased a Marantz 2216B about a year ago at an ebay auction. I was looking for a classic receiver that was in good shape and had not been abused and found one that was part of an estate liquidation on ebay and had had a single owner. I paid about $105 with included shipping costs. The receiver was manufactured in 1978. The model number in the Marantz 22XX series designates the power, so the 16B is 16 watts per channel; the 2325 would be 125 watts per channel (you get the idea.) The receiver developed (or may have had) a problem with the power cutting out and so, I spent about an additional $200 to get the power supply replaced and the receiver overhauled. The Soundsmith in Peeskill did the work and as a side note, they guarantee their work for a year. So, I paid about $300 for a 24 year old receiver ... but I always wanted to own a classic Marantz with the blue lights; gyro tuning; etc.

I use the receiver as part of a bedroom system. It is connected to a pair of Acoustic Research 15's speakers and a SONY NS500V CD/SACD/DVD player. It has also been paired with Wharfedale Diamond 8.1 (very good sounding match)and B&W 302 (uneven & disappointing sounding match) speakers. The jury is still out on the AR-15's, but they sound promising.

Of my 3 systems, this system is the most fun. It is a very musical sounding system, and probably the one system my wife enjoys listening to the most. It has an alive and natural sound with FM and CD's. The sound has presence. FM and AM reception is strong and clear and the tuner holds the signal. (I am using a $5 set of rabbit ears as the antenna.) I am pretty satisfied with it.

One shortcoming of this particular receiver is that it does not have a preamp out, so it can not be mated with a more powerful amplifier ... but this receiver is plenty loud at the 4 (out of 10) level in a 18 X 15 X 8 room.

Of the classic receivers, the 2200 series Marantz (with & without the B designation); the McIntosh SS and SS/tube hybrids (1700/1900/4100/4300); the Sansui 9000 series; the Pioneer X2X series get the most action in auctions (or at least that's how it seems to me). There are also several web-sites out there with good, useful information; i.e.: www.classic-audio)

To enjoy this side of the hobby (spending good money on equipment that was manufactured when Ford and Carter were presidents), it really helps to be a fan of classic audio (very much like being a fan of vinyl). Also, I believe that these receivers are best used as part of a secondary system, mainly because I am not sure how much beyond 25 or 30 years a piece of equipment (from ANY era) can be expected to last (I may be contradicting myself here, as my main system has ADCOM power/pre/tuner equipment that I purchased new 13 years ago).

Within prudent reason (mostly financial ... so, if my Marantz dies tomorrow, I am only out $300), the classic receivers can be an enjoyable, rewarding side hobby/project. Good luck.