Vintage Receivers vs. Modern MidFi

Good point Joe_b. The last time I used the Advent in a system was in the mid 80's. I also did not use CD's as a source. When I jumped back into this hobby 3-4 months ago I pulled some old Quad solid state gear out of storage and thought I had it made. While properly stored for 15+ years it had developed an intermitent ffssssst sound at all volume levels. It sounded like some one was lighting one match after another across the room. I was told that the repair (rebuilding it with new parts) would cost more than I paid for the equipment. I traded the old gear (with full disclosure) for a painting and came out ahead, I think. I went with new gear for both reliability and sound, also to stay within my budget (repairs can be very costly). I purchased new Musical Fidelity X gear which with the right cable sounds a little like my old tube stuff, especialy in the midrange, but without the expense of maintenance. It is so odd looking that it will most likely become a classic in time. The integrated amp was only $500.00 (now discontinued but there is a new higher powered replacement) and I just located a pair of 50 watt monoblocks in Canada for around $800.00 shipped and taxed. The MF gear has a very distinctive sound Carter that is not for everyone, but if you are also looking for style, and are interested, you can view it at Audoadvisor.com. The new integrated is model X-A2 and is within your budget granted that you keep your current and highly praised tuner. Also, maybe start a thread on integrated amps for $600.00.

As the owner of several near mint Japanese receivers from the late '60s -mid '70s (I can't resist a very clean piece of old gear, even if I don't prefer it), I must respectfully disagree with comments asserting that they are sonically good equipment. I happen to have a mint SX1250 and it is beautifully built with a substantial power supply, a very good tuner, and excellent flexibility. But, sonically it is strident with a pervasive glare which makes listening for extended periods of time unpleasant. For passive listening it is fine. But I like sound reproduction to be relatively natural in effect and most receivers of that era just don't cut it. In fact, the earlier tubed receivers were sonically superior. Do some AB comparisons and I think that you'll agree.

The early NAD Receivers the 7060 and 7080 were damn near good as separates. Although nowhere near the cosmetic beauty of the Marantz units. Also to my ear the early NAD receivers were sonically superior to anything at that time.Being from 1978 to 1982.

Hi, you cannot beat older gear. I am currently using a Pioneer SX-1980, SX-1250 and a Pioneer Series 20 A-27 integrated amp. Thease are very well built receivers and amps. Sound quality and power superb. Can drive low impedance speaker loads with no problem. I use Infinity SM-225's (two pair hooked in parallel) 6 ohm speakers which means the amps are running at 3 ohm's. Also, Pioneer won the Receiver Power wars of 1980 beating out Marantz and Sansui with 270 watts per channel @8 ohm's but the sound quality of the SX-1250 and the SX-D7000 and the A-27 I think, is a little better. For not a hole lot of money, you can get more bang for your buck with older gear. Mike