Did the Old Receivers Sound Good?

I’ve had Sansui, Kenwood and Pioneer SX receivers for quite a while. My SX1250 is still what I use for casual listening in my gym area but for critical listening it does not compare to my main system. They sure do look cool though. 

My situation is a bit of a hybrid one vs a true old against new. I have a HK 730 that I gutted, only keeping the amp section. I put new filter caps in along with some other caps, and did some point to point wiring. I’m feeding it from an inexpensive integrated and it’s pretty excellent to me. When running the integrated alone, it pales in comparison. I’ll possibly upgrade the integrated (substantially), and that should give me better insights into how the amp section of the HK compares to a current and upgraded option.

Over the last 10 years, I have bought and sold quite a few pieces of gear ranging in age from 75 years old, to less than 10 years old. I've reduced this collection down to what I consider to be the best pieces. These are my opinions, far from gospel.

My tube separates, integrated amps, and receivers from companies like Scott, Fisher, Acrosound, Pilot, and Grundig, when paired with the correct speakers, can rival even the most expensive gear for sound quality. For the most part, these devices can last forever with a small mount of maintenance and care. 

My solid state integrated amps and receivers also gold their own against newer gear I've demo'd. These pieces range in watt output from 30-100, and again, paired with the right speakers can rival some quite expensive gear. These pieces from Luxman, Marantz, Sansui, and Harman Kardon offer excellent value and sound quality. 

For more established folks that have high levels of disposable income, there are wonderful newer products available that can offer pride in ownership as well as fantastic sound quality. For those of us that have less disposable income, but still desire excellent sound quality and pride in ownership, there are quite a few vintage pieces that can fill that need. 

It boils down to personal preference, and there is no one size fits all solution. The only way to prove or disprove your theory of old vs. new, is to start setting up systems, listening, buying, selling, and swapping components to see for yourself. I'm a strong believer in the fact you can't buy you way to the top. It doesn't matter what your hobby is, the most expensive item will not make you proficient in that hobby. You can buy the most expensive sports car, but if you can't drive it, it's only a showpiece. You can buy the most expensive fire arm or compound bow, but without practice, these won't perform any differently in the hands of a novice. You can spend piles of money on expensive audio gear, and without proper set up, and room conditioning, they become show pieces easily bested by much less expensive gear. 

Only you can decide what you value most in your system. There are quite a few pieces of gear I would love to own and live with. Most of these pieces I can buy any given day new or used. I place a very high value on my vintage tube gear. Some of these pieces would take years of searching to replace. I'm not willing to make the trade from something rare, to something common, only to find its a lateral move in sound quality, or only slightly better sounding. My end goal is always enjoying the music.         

Vintage gear has a certain easy laidback sound that I can enjoy, but head to head with an upper end Levinson or even Parasound system quickly reminds one what hifi sounds like.
 

Obviously, you only listened to one vintage receiver or integrated. Gave up the Levinson, CJ, Threshold, Mc, Carver, to go back to my Sherwood and A14 integrated. The sound is more articulate, detailed, and intimate with my older gear.

To get right to the OP’s point about "specs": The attempt to assign a number to audio performance is often a futile attempt to arrive at something meaningful. Those numbers usually fell into various measurements of distortion and it seemed inconsistent that more expensive, more exotic gear would publish inferior specs compared to the receivers. We later learned that the popular standards of measurements were less meaningful than other "below the radar" specs, or performance parameters that were not published at all. To take some anxiety away from potential customers hyperventilating over "specs", I used to tell them that there were only 2 numbers that mattered: The price. Can they afford it? And, the physical measurements. Will it fit in the room, cabinet, etc? I understand this is a oversimplification, but did put them at ease to open up a meaningful conversation related to what mattered most to them.

Related to the question: "Did the old receivers sound good?", my answer is an emphatic "YES!!!" If we’re refering to the delivering a musically satisfying emotioinal experience, I think I can site hundreds of examples -- from a customer index cards we collected from the 70s to validate this claim.

If receivers from the 70’s were a good example of "good", then the integrated amps from the 70’s were "better" and separates were "best".

But, time marches on. About 10 years later, Nakamichi teamed up with Nelson Pass and incorporated Statis technology in their receivers. With zero negative feedback and other innovations, these eclipsed earlier designs IMHO. I still have a TA2 and TA4 in my collection of "excellent" examples of stereo receiver performance of the 1980s.

A study of the performance of the "big boy" receivers of the 70’s will find a couple performamce constraints that can be remedied. One easy & cheap. The other a little a little more complicated. When the preamp jumper is replaced with an "audio quality" short interconnect/jumper they really open up and become more detailed. Time: 15 seconds. Cost: about $40. The second constrant is the power cord. Even the best receivers (and most separate power amplifiers) of the day had a power cord attached that would not be suitable for a 2-slice toaster, muchless a piece of serious audio gear. Replacing these with modern "audiophile" power cords and upgraded "protective" device" pays major sonic dividents. We routinely do these "mods" in our shop, and I am often stunned at the sonic transformations. Yes, you get the expected improvements in detail, focus and dynamic contrast. But, the bigger surprise (to us anyway) are the changes in tonality, chord structure, warmth, balance, etc. More relaxed, fuller, and musically engaging. The power cord upgrade can be a minimally invasive removal of the factory installed cord and install the better cord in the same manner as OEM (maybe with a slight enlargment in input opening). Or, if the user is okay with sometinig a little more aggressive, cut an opening in the chassis and install a male EIC socket, replacing the internal high voltage wire with better cabling. This allows the customer to not only select their own power cord, but upgrade the cord in the future. Does this make an old receiver sound better than the latest technology? No. But, if they love their old receiver and want it to sound better it is a worthwhile investment.