70's and early 80's Japanese Component: How good were they?

[FrantzM]

Hi

I am wondering if we haven't been unfair to the components produced during the 70's. Especially the Japanese components.
Millions were invested to produce superior components (the Japanese companies in particular) For a long time they were derided by audiophiles... I am beginning to think however that we may have been prejudiced toward these.

For example Technics and Denon TT are highly sought after. The SP-10 and DP-67003(?) are researched actively by enthusiasts... let’s not even talk about the fabulous Nakamichi TX-1000, which remains pretty unique to this day, addressing a serious problem no current TT does (that of the off-center records, more common than one thinks). I am reading through the Internet that the Yamaha TTS were also very good and in demand right now... Each of these companies produced also a good number of MC cartridges.
The Technics RS-1500 RTR is very loved by R2R amateurs, so are the Teac and Pioneer.

We haven’t yet talked about some stalwart of Japanese SS equipment, namely the Luxman, Accuphase, Pioneer, Sony, Tehcnics, Sansui and Yamaha.
Recently a member here, mep, found the Yamaha C2 if not great was a very decent preamplifier... Enough to satisfy the previous owner of a Counterpoint SA 5.1 preamp!
The Studer A810 (or is it 820) used by our own Steve Williams for a while with stock electronics and with excellent results

Were these uniformly bad? How would they sound with today’s speakers? How would we coerce good sound from these? Back in the 70’s, 80’s we knew nothing of room interaction. Oh Yea a few luminaries would talk about Room Treatments but they were largely and roundly ignored. We went into tweaking, into cables and euphonic equipments before we start addressing the room problems and even today many an audiophile look at room treatments as a second thought, many would claim the solution worse than the problem!!!
What are your thoughts? Experiences? Advices? Opinions?

 

[microstrip]

Frantz,

You have to separate audiophiles and collectors, two different worlds. Most of this 70 and early's 80 equipment is becoming collectable just because of fashion, not quality.

Another aspect is that you can not mix all Japanese electronics of this period under the same umbrella. Japanese had excellent and very expensive hi-end equipment, that was not exported to the Western countries, and was almost unknown. I remember a journalist of the french magazine L'Audiophile, Jean Hiraga, who lived during his youth in Japan and sometimes wrote about it in French magazines.

Can you imagine that Denon, about thirty years ago, manufactured a ultra expensive high power amplifier using only a single pair of custom made power transistors for the same reason that Dartzeel refers now a days?

Unhappily, most of their designs of that time were compromised by weak points such as unbiased electrolytic capacitors in the signal path and very poor quality potentiometers.

 

[FrantzM]

Micro

I may not have been clear in my OP.. I am questioning the unfair patina of inferiority we tend to throw on any gear of the 70's . I believe sincerely it is undeserved. The Technics SP-10 is a case in point and os is the RS-1500 R2R. i believe the electronics of a Pioneer SA-9500 or Yamaha CA-2010 to be very decent sounding and they will drive some odd speakers... I know jean Hiraga works very well... Wasn't he of "la Nouvelle Revue Du Son"? Was brought up reading his articles and dreamt about the famed Onken tweeters... I may still have a copy of his book called "Les Haut Parleurs" Loudspeakers somewhere in the family house

 

[RogerD]

Frantz I have owned a Accuphase preamp and amplifier since new in 1975 or 1976. I have never found a better built and designed electronics. They have all been recapped and brought up to spec. They are very transparent and low distortion. They were originally made to go head to head with McIntosh. Many of us at the time thought they sounded better.

It seems like vintage hi end gear is on the rise,both American and Japanese and the price keeps escalating. I even read on another forum that select gear was being bought up by New York hedge funds. As the USD continues to fall, good quality gear will continue to be sought after and purchased. I don't like the idea of gear being collected and the prices inflating,but that's the world we live in now. Buy it for it's beauty and sound performance.

 

[XV-1]

Japanes high en turntables are superb - here is the most successful high end table in Japan. they kept it all to themselves for the local market only. I luv it

 

[RogerD]

Japanes high en turntables are superb - here is the most successful high end table in Japan. they kept it all to themselves for the local market only. I luv it

Beautiful!

I have to laugh when people listen expecting to hear a severely flawed reproduction,they look puzzled and then say "there must be a synergy created here".

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

That Stereo Review article, "Do All Amplifiers Sound Alike?" I wouldn't say it proved that they do, and in the rush to discredit the methods there were a few valid points. It did demonstrate one thing pretty clearly, though -- at one point, in 1987, the audible difference between a pair of $6k (each) Futterman's with dual outboard power supplies, a $2k Mark Levinson and a <$300 Pioneer receiver was very, very subtle. Subtle enough to be missed by a nice collection of golden ears who had all agreed to the testing methodology prior to the testing.

And I don't think Japanese receivers progressed that much from the mid 70s to the mid 80s.

Tim

 

[RogerD]

That Stereo Review article, "Do All Amplifiers Sound Alike?" I wouldn't say it proved that they do, and in the rush to discredit the methods there were a few valid points. It did demonstrate one thing pretty clearly, though -- at one point, in 1987, the audible difference between a pair of $6k (each) Futterman's with dual outboard power supplies, a $2k Mark Levinson and a <$300 Pioneer receiver was very, very subtle. Subtle enough to be missed by a nice collection of golden ears who had all agreed to the testing methodology prior to the testing.

And I don't think Japanese receivers progressed that much from the mid 70s to the mid 80s.

Tim

I remember back in the 70's my uncle who was in his 80's wanted a stereo. So I took him down to the local hifi shop. He purchased a Pioneer receiver and when I hooked it up at his home,he couldn't believe the sound,like a kid with a new toy. I'm sure it was those wonderful blue lights.:b

 

[mep]

Frantz-I believe the Yamaha C2a was a very late 1970 to very early1980s preamp. This preamp would cost thousands if it was made today. I think it was a very special design and was built to an incredibly high standard. It operates in pure Class A, and one touch to the chassis confirms that. The fact that the black color which appears to be anodized turns bluish/purple over time due to the heat is another tell-tale sign.

I will never sell this preamp if for no other reason than the price that you can buy it for in no way reflects its sound quality. The phono section in the C2a is better sounding than the ARC PH-3SE that I owned which cost well over $2K. The guy that sold it to me begged me to sell it back to him and he was going to pay the shipping costs too. I had to politely tell him it wasn’t going to happen. One of these days I will break it out again and put in my system to see how it stacks up against the Krell KBL. One thing I already know for sure is that the C2a has more *air* on top.

The bottom line is that the C2a IMO is still a damn fine sounding full-function preamp that will give many modern day preamps a run for their money.

 

[microstrip]

That Stereo Review article, "Do All Amplifiers Sound Alike?" I wouldn't say it proved that they do, and in the rush to discredit the methods there were a few valid points. It did demonstrate one thing pretty clearly, though -- at one point, in 1987, the audible difference between a pair of $6k (each) Futterman's with dual outboard power supplies, a $2k Mark Levinson and a <$300 Pioneer receiver was very, very subtle. Subtle enough to be missed by a nice collection of golden ears who had all agreed to the testing methodology prior to the testing.

And I don't think Japanese receivers progressed that much from the mid 70s to the mid 80s.

Tim

Tim,
Great. Do you thing that we should accept that an amplifier with an output impedance varying between 2 and 4 ohms, depending on the frequency, and an amplifier with an output impedance of around .04 ohm should sound the same?

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim,
Great. Do you thing that we should accept that an amplifier with an output impedance varying between 2 and 4 ohms, depending on the frequency, and an amplifier with an output impedance of around .04 ohm should sound the same?

Nope. I think you should accept that those amps, in that system were, evidently, very, very close. I think the statement "all amps sound the same" is hyperbole. But I don't think it even bumps the exaggeration meter compared to the drama of audio enthusiasts decrying the stuff (SS, digital, redbook, mp3s....) that is on the official audiophile bad list, and praising the stuff that is approved, pedigreed and expensive.

Tim

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Some pics of my vintage Pioneer SA-9500II

I don't think this IA lacks for anything, including plenty of headroom for my small room. It's sound is not (IMO) typically SS either with a rather soft or warm element to it. I love the fact it has adjustable cartridge load, which (dare I say) I use from time to time to suit my taste at the moment. I'll probably get flak for doing this, but so be it.

 

[FrantzM]

Hi

We had it at home and replaced it with a Yamaha CA-2010. It is still working after all these years. I plan to build a Vintage Sytem around the Yamaha CA-2010. The Yamaha YP-D8 and a pair of magnepan MMG I found at the family house.. They all work. I will comment on the sound later... I find us, audiophiles, too quick to dismiss these as bad sounding SS. Some were but not across the board as we tend to repeat ...

 

[RogerD]

John that looks like it just came out of the box!

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

John that looks like it just came out of the box!

Sorry Roger....and everyone...I think that was misleading. These are pics I took of the web, but my IA looks just as good. It's as close to mint as you'll find.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Wow. So far, from the 70s, an HK, a Pioneer and two Yammies. And none of them have blown up? after 30 years? And they sound good? How can this be true?



Tim

 

[MylesBAstor]

Wow. So far, from the 70s, an HK, a Pioneer and two Yammies. And none of them have blown up? after 30 years? And they sound good? How can this be true?



Tim

Four examples out of how many units made don't make a statistical slice.

Oh and by the way, perhaps you should have visited the Marantz factory in Queens and seen rack upon rack of early transistor preamps and amps that had blown up.

More to the point, perhaps you should have also researched your facts first too. The Pioneer and Yamaha were hardly early ss; manufacturing of the Pioneer began in 1975 and the Yamaha in 78/79. By then, many of the original bugs of the first transistors were ironed out.

 

[Johnny Vinyl]

Wow. So far, from the 70s, an HK, a Pioneer and two Yammies. And none of them have blown up? after 30 years? And they sound good? How can this be true?



Tim

We still beleived in non-disposable goods back then. Build 'em like tanks and people will come back. Today....builld 'em like plastic as people will want a change in a year or two anyway.

 

[amirm]

Some pics of my vintage Pioneer SA-9500II


View attachment 2953
View attachment 2954
View attachment 2955

I love the look of equipment in that era! I still have my Optonica Amp which had the same look. So much better than today's boring gear.

BTW, I do not miss my Sansui amplifier. It had capacitor coupling on the output so it had horrible bass. And it would distort easy. I think it was worse than my Pioneer speakers to tell the truth. The latter at least had good woodwork.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

The Pioneer and Yamaha were hardly early ss; manufacturing of the Pioneer began in 1975 and the Yamaha in 78/79. By then, many of the original bugs of the first transistors were ironed out.

So I believe when I discussed my old HK I said it was more mid-70s than early 70s, Myles. If you referring to a much narrower definition of "early" SS, and stated it here somewhere, sorry, I missed that. It's just that I'm used to the high end crowd sniffing at all vintage SS, unless, of course, we're talking about $1k mono blocks or something. But Yamaha and Pioneer IAs? Are you telling me you think that's good stuff? I'm shocked, but pleasantly so.

Tim