Did the Old Receivers Sound Good?


Before the high end started, we had all these receivers and integrated amps from Pioneer, Kenwood, Sansui, Sherwood, etc., all with incredible specs.  Then somehow we decided that specs didn't matter and we started moving to the more esoteric stuff from Ampzilla, Krell and whoever, but the specs were not as good.  My question is - Did the old Japanese stuff with the great specs sound better? I don't remember.  I'm asking because many seem to be moving back to the "specs are everything" mindset and I was thinking about all that old stuff with so many zeros to the right of the decimal point. 

chayro

Do any members out there have a vintage stereo shop. that way we could compare old equipment versus new equipment, head to head in the same room on the same speakers. I would like to hear the results of this if somebody out there can do this for us please. I also have a question the modern equipment does have room correction which is going to give it an advantage, but is there a way to add correction to older equipment like that? I would also like to see a comparison of old tube equipment versus new to equipment and old transistor equipment versus new and just find out which is the best. Hey, this is a great subject, way to go. Very interesting.

I wish there was a shop @jason-mc9. Why I work on my own equipment. New vs vintage really isn't a fair comparison unless capacitors have been charged to match new performance. 

I have always heard huge improvement over a recap. 40-50-70 year old capacitors just don't work the same as new. 

@curtdr  nr1200 marantz? I would have to take a listen. But I directly compared a marantz 7t with marantz 16b recapped serviced. Upgraded signal caps, filter caps, change out of spec resisters. 

I compared it to a Marantz PM8006 integrated $1500. There was no comparison with 7t and 16b were so much better. Friend has a marantz 30 class D integrated, he was shocked  I really wanted to like the PM8006 but felt sterile, flat cold. Nr1200 being more of an intro amp. I don't see it beating PM8006 or a dual mono block separates from the 70s.

22xx serial 1970s I could see it beating it but I am open minded take listen when i get a chance. 

 

 

Of course to be fair the old equipment would have to have new caps and have all the parts and switches cleaned but what I really want to know is old spec tube equipment, new spec tube equipment, old spec transistors and new spec transistors all factory fresh all tested at the same time in the same listening room I’m sure each is going to sound good with certain speakers and not with others but inquiring minds want to know

In Junior High School (70’s) I bought a Pioneer SX 535 with lawn money, and after awhile I came to the conclusion it was terrible. My next purchase as an audio salesman was a Kenwood KA-5500 integrated. It was a sweet sounding amplifier, that I wish I still had. I wish I’d have used my salesman’s discount to buy a Marantz, but I wasn’t a fan of FM so I’m sure the Kenwood was the better choice. Marantz had the great knobs, especially the tuning knob but the Kenwood had meters!

My guess is that the Kenwood would still stand up well to modern amps… my buddy who had a Dynaco ST 70 amp liked the sound of my Kenwood.

My first system purchased in 1973 was a Pioneer SX828 with Large Advent speakers, an Advent cassette deck, a Thorens TD160 turn table, and a  Sure V15 Cartridge.  The Pioneer, putting out 54 watts into 8 Ohms, is currently driving DCM Time Windows in a second home condo in Vermont.  The DCMs from my 80s system.  The source is a BlueSound Node.  
Overall character of a classic receiver is smooth and sweet as chocolate pudding that many people like and that is forgiving of poorly engineered recordings but presents an opaque picture of reality unlike modern electronics  that are as clear as a Riedel wine glass in the right system.  Dynamics are acceptable but far from the micro dynamic and macro dynamic resolution produced by today’s equipment.  Resolution in general is characterized by absence thereof.  Images are distinct but without the air that is present between images that presents the three dimensional, dense, and palpable images of today’s equipment.   Timbre makes instruments recognizable but that’s about it.  The tuners are able to pull in the signal well in metro areas and sound as acceptable as FM can sound. That said, they produce very nice un-fatiguing sound four hours of background listening and that renters of my ski condo enjoy.  I also enjoy the nostalgic sound when there for background listening.  They are built for reliability if maintained by cleaning volume and balance controls and recapping the few caps they have as evidenced by my almost 50 year old unit.  In conclusion, they are far from todays standards, pretty to look at (oiled wood, blue and white lights glowing, satin finished metal), reliable, and excellent for background listening.   Some like them better than today’s equipment.  Appreciate them for what they are.   To each our own ears.   It amazes me how far technology in our hobby has evolved