vintage versus modern speakers

in hindsight the amps most people were using in the 70s with whatever speakers they had were probably the weaker link. I'd guesstimate most speakers I heard back then on your typical Japanese or similar receiver or integrated amp would sound at least twice as good with even decent quality modern amplification.

Acoustic suspension designs back then were probably the best technical match for many of teh 40 watt or less SS amps/receivers of the day. The designs that extended the low end response like those with ports or passives requierd more power usually and the same amp would be at a disadvantage trying to drive those to their max which in general would be a notch above int erms of being able to deliver more extended bass with teh right amplification.

btw...there weren't any speakers in the 70's that cost $20,000. If I remember correctly I think 4,000 to 5,000 was about the highest price on a very few speakers. The uber high end didn't happen until much latter. That's not to say that there weren't some great sounding speakers.

If I were you I would grab a pair from the 90's. Maggie 3.3, BW 801 or Ariel 10T's and be done with it.

Not sure why it matters to you, but by the end of the 80's I remember seeing some at over $50,000. Grabbing 20 year old speakers from the 90's might be fine for a while, but will they soon develop foam rot? When will the caps in the crossover start to go? I'd suggest something a decade newer, after computer design became more common.

It doesn't matter to me at all. The OP stated that buying 20,000 speakers from the 70's should be a good value. The problem is that there were none.

Replacing foam and caps are difficult....if that is what needs to be done after a while. Speakers from the 90's should be fine.

Yea, I believe that by the 90’s the foam surrounds were abandoned for better materiel, at least in most speakers.