OK, sound advice, which all helps paint a picture, with one exception:
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/high-end-vintage-vs-contemporary-dac-s-are-sonic-improvements...
I've now come to recognize a related issue: when it comes to "vintage vs today" questions few people have actually heard the "vintage" equipment in question, so we get general assessments that necessarily don't apply to the specifics. This seems particularly true in the case of things digital.
My own happy conclusion, more than ever, is that the super high end gear from the 90's (more or less) represents a kind of golden age of 2-channel audio. :-)
Digital has improved substantially. A better DAC will make a very audible improvement. In fact, over the past few years, price to quality ratio has moved more quickly in digital than in any other area of high end. Advancements in electronics certainly help, but also the success of the headphone industry. Economies of scale in this area have enabled companies to offer outstanding DACs at great value prices.I've heard similar "digital has improved" comments like this again and again and again. Others say the same thing in this thread. That's what got me concerned about the whole question in the first place. However, after more digging I'm now quite convinced that it just ain't so, or at least not when stated so broadly. See thread below.
https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/high-end-vintage-vs-contemporary-dac-s-are-sonic-improvements...
I've now come to recognize a related issue: when it comes to "vintage vs today" questions few people have actually heard the "vintage" equipment in question, so we get general assessments that necessarily don't apply to the specifics. This seems particularly true in the case of things digital.
My own happy conclusion, more than ever, is that the super high end gear from the 90's (more or less) represents a kind of golden age of 2-channel audio. :-)