vintage versus modern speakers

Technology has definitely advanced, but it doesn't mean that the end product is truly better or more effective. The B-52 Stratofortress has been in military service for 60 years and the Air Force has plans to extend its use to 2040. It's been extensively reworked since its introduction, but apparently it still works well enough to get the job done. The B-52's cost $70 million per plane while its "replacement", the B-2, costs $900 million. If the latest high tech loudspeakers are the equivalent of the B-2, then what vintage loudspeaker is a stand-in for the B-52?

I've heard of some apples to oranges comparison before, but that takes the cake,

Aren't you the person who was bringing all that insight about Chevy Vegas?

I have a friend who specializes in vintage speakers. He repairs/rebuilds them and sells the ones he does not want to keep. Most of the older speakers 70s & 80s lets say, have a very musical sound. Some really have an excellent mid-range. That may be to the box sound as I call it. Depending on the design, some are more open and some have better bass. It also depends on what you match them up with. The newer (maybe not the current models) designed speakers like Alon, Meadowlark, Vandersteen (used in your price range) are more open and balanced top to bottom versus the much older box speakers. Each speaker has strengths and weaknesses and match up with different components differently. When I hear the oldies at my friends house, the mid-range sucks you into the music at first but then you realize that you are missing so much more. BUT I could like with that if I only listened so much and vocal music, etc.

Happy Listening.

I am the proud owner of Apogee caliper signature bought in 1990 and to get the same musical level today would cost me a little fortune.