Why do people that own vintage gear think It's better than new gear

[amirm]

Point on nostalgia, that people who like vintage are nostalgic

? He only talked about himself, and no one else:

I never bought anything because it was "old" or "nostalgic". Every equipment I have bought in my life was "brand new" and "state of the art" at its time. We just grew old together with some of them. I recently coughed a lot of money for a "state of the art" home theater system for the family. Lots of big speakers and mean looking black machines outputting superb sound. I really am amazed by the clarity and depth... The now "old" stuff which grew up with me are in my study and in my office at work. When I listen to them, I listen to my old friends. ?nexplicable feeling...

He also clearly says that he never bought anything himself because of nostalgic factor. So not sure why the disagreement. I too have fond memories of my old system because of memories like playing my first CD player on them. This is why I agreed with him.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

A lot of people forget that high end audio is an experience. What this means is that when normal people listen to music - to enjoy the music for its own sake, they are not primarily concerned with mathematical graphs of the music waves or gear measurements. (I don't consider compulsive gear swappers or reviewers who dissect gear along audiophile words like transparency, pin point imaging, etc., while missing the musical whole, normal music lovers. But those guys have their own goals...)

The term "experience" implies that emotions play an equal - or greater - role alongside the physics and math side of the hobby. By considering the emotions people have when encountering music, one needs to understand that subjectively people experience emotions based on different life happenings. So what if the latest gear has slightly better resolution or better extension? The music that vintage lovers have been listening to since the 60's or 70's in their basement has been a great thing in their life. That type of sound has become their reference, is meaningful to them, and meets their human needs. And for them that's what a great audio experience is all about.

I agree 100%. And I'll take it a step further: I know lots of people who hire babysitters or leave their empty nests to get out to clubs and bars and restaurants and coffee houses to listen to live music all the time. I see them in those places when I'm out playing music and listening myself. These are normal music lovers, and I'll bet half of them don't even have vintage midfi. They're probably listening to MP3s from their phones in the car and on docks. There are plenty of people in this hobby who love music, but that's not what this hobby is about.

Tim

 

[bonzo75]

? He only talked about himself, and no one else:


He also clearly says that he never bought anything himself because of nostalgic factor. So not sure why the disagreement. I too have fond memories of my old system because of memories like playing my first CD player on them. This is why I agreed with him.

Maybe I misinterpreted it to mean people like old stuff for nostalgia and not for sound.

 

[microstrip]

One point to consider about vintage gear is that the vintage gear still coveted today are those that have been vetted over time. They are the cream that literally rose to the top. For every coveted piece there are probably hundreds or thousands of other models now in land fills.

Excellent point. Most of the so called vintage is simply old equipment ...

 

[Al M.]

My CD front end is new. Otherwise I have vintage gear (new when bought) because I don't see a reason to switch. Yes, my 24-year old mini-monitors (Ensemble Reference) are modified with internal cabling, crossover and new tweeters. My also 24-year old parallel push-pull triode amps are internally modified as well, and were recently supplemented with BorderPatrol external power supplies, a substantial upgrade.

How does it all compare to more recent stuff?

1. Speakers:
I have listened 2 years ago to two-way floorstanders from a currently 'hot' company in the same price range as my mini-monitors (inflation-adjusted). At first they appeared to have somewhat higher resolution, but upon longer listening it was clear that this was an artifact of emphasis on the lower treble, creating a tonal balance that I did hear live on a few occasions, but rarely. The balance of my speakers is much closer to my average live experience. At high SPL (around 90 dB) the floorstanders completely fell apart in grinding congestion, really embarrassing. At these SPL, and quite a bit above, my speakers play quite cleanly in a much bigger room. Rhythm & timing of the floorstanders was abysmal, while that of my speakers is phenomenal.

I also heard a pair of new mini-monitors, albeit in a lower price range, and my own speakers destroyed them in a quite bloody fashion. They did all the same things, but with far less coloration.

My REL Storm III subwoofers are 15 years old, but have fast and clean sound. They integrate seamlessly with my mini-monitors. After the latest acoustic upgrades, the midbass of my combo can compete in strength and quality with a large floorstander. Overall, I have not yet heard a better bass from any other system.

2. Amps:
As tested at home on my speakers, my amps could easily compete with a Spectral DMC-15/DMA-260 pre-amp/amp combo -- and that was before the substantial upgrade of my amps with external power supplies. Tonal balance was nearly identical. Of course, the Spectral can drive almost any speakers, and my low-powered (15 W pch) triode amps would fall apart on most. Yet on my 90 dB sensitive mini-monitors their performance is excellent. No need to consider anything else.

3. Cables:
Two years ago my now 22-year old Monster Sigma 2000 interconnects and speaker cables could quite well compete with MIT/Spectral cables in my system. On some music (e..g solo violin) high-energy transients were a tad slower and less clean, but that problem was fixed with an upgrade elsewhere in my system -- the external power supplies for my amps. No need to switch at this point either.

The verdict:

1) I don't have vintage gear for nostalgia, but for sound. When I bought my gear, it was new, and in terms of sound quality there is no need to switch to current stuff only because it's newer.

2) Progress in audio is overrated. Yes, there are landmark new designs, like for example the Magico M Pro speakers and the best current SOTA digital, and the best SS amps have become much better, but I am not so sure if everything is considerably better than 20 years ago. Of course, if you would believe all the breathless audio reviews, everything is now much better than the stuff 3 years ago, which in turn was much better than…oh, well.

 

[Simon Moon]

My system is a combination of vintage and new.

I don't think that my vintage gear is necessarily better then new, but it is certainly better than any new gear for anywhere close to the same money.

For example: I own a Hafler DH-500 that I picked up used for under $250, working perfectly that meets original specs. I replaced the driver stages with much better (Toshiba cascode topology), swapped out a bunch of caps (most likely degraded), replaced the power supply caps with higher capacity new ones and swapped a few other parts. he entire cost of the upgrades was about $300.00. And the sonic improvement was immediately noticeable.

So, for the cost of less than $600.00, I now have an amp that far outperforms anything new that would cost anything close to $600. I can't even imagine a modern amp at 3X the price sounding better. If anyone can name a current model amp that I could get for $600 (hell, even $2000), that puts out over 250 watts, stable into 2 ohms, with distortion in the .00 range, that sounds as good as this amp, I'm all ears.

On anther system I have a pair of Kenwood Lo-7m mono amps (150 watts each) from the 70's. They were highly rated by the audiophile press at the time.

I picked them up for about $300 for the pair. Again, they will far outperform anything new that would be several times their cost.


Listen, I will probably not be able to afford, anytime soon, the kind of new gear I drool over, and love to read about and listen to at audio shows and shops, but for fractions of the price and a little sweat equity, I can get a strong taste of that kind of performance with a combination of new and vintage gear.

 

[flez007]

Some "vintage" gear sounds better than "new" gear, but overall..it is my perception that new gear is much more accurate to the source. Saying that, the average age of my system is around 4-5 years old! (The Avalons ruined the math here )

 

[Diapason]

Depends on your definition of vintage, I suppose, but for me a 20 year-old component isn't vintage. I still have magazines in my bathroom reviewing this stuff!

 

[Groucho]

Don't know if anyone has mentioned it so far, but there is one specific area in which old speakers are likely to surpass modern ones: the old sealed enclosure versus today's ported. They have distinctly different characteristics, but most people don't seem to care, nor are even curious about it. One person who does care is Mr. Linkwitz

http://www.linkwitzlab.com/ALMA'14/Sound_quality.htm
http://www.linkwitzlab.com/conclusions.htm

 

[LL21]

One point to consider about vintage gear is that the vintage gear still coveted today are those that have been vetted over time. They are the cream that literally rose to the top. For every coveted piece there are probably hundreds or thousands of other models now in land fills.

Good point:

CJ Premier 8s
DDK's Siemens Bionors
Apogee speakers
Krell FPB650/750
SF Extremas
ML Statement
Wilson X1/Grand Slamm
Rockport Sirius TT


The question is...what new components today...will become the all-time classics of tomorrow? My guesses from my own personal experience only:
SF Guarneri
Wilson XLF (and i'll guess the new WAMM)
CJ MV60
I will guess the Lamm ML2.0 and ML3
Genesis Dragon
CJ GAT
Gryphon Mephisto
Zanden digital

 

[Audio_Karma]

A lot of people out still think that the Western Electric Vintage speakers are the best speakers.. at any price too!

 

[Yuri Korzunov]

Depends on your definition of vintage, I suppose, but for me a 20 year-old component isn't vintage. I still have magazines in my bathroom reviewing this stuff!

Yes. First need define: "What is vintage?"

For me it's tapes and vinyl same years.

 

[mrcool]

Have you heard Western Electrics? The speakers? And do you think digital sounds better than vinyl?

I do not have any knowledge about Western Electrics speakers. I will look them up though. I have preferred JBL speakers for a long time but now I have Quads at my personal spaces and Dalis at the living room. I am very much satisfied with both brands.

As to digital being better than vinyl, I cannot say one is better than the other. My generation was introduced to recorded music through vinyl media. It has a certain nostalgic appeal for a lot of people and the sound is definitely different from today's digital outputs. I am extremely impressed with the amount of clarity and depth which can be achieved by digital equipment. In my opinion, and please bear in mind that I'm not an expert in these matters, vinyl has mechanical limitations in sound production. I do not mean that vinyl produces a poorer sound. It is just different. I listen to my old LP's from time to time, it is a different world, but every time I play one, I know in the back of my mind that I destroy a tiny bit of it. Kind of saddens me.

 

[flez007]

I have a good friend down here who has WE speakers (single drive, no cover implementation) - and has one of the most real midrange reproduction I have heard anywhere.

 

[microstrip]

Depends on your definition of vintage, I suppose, but for me a 20 year-old component isn't vintage. I still have magazines in my bathroom reviewing this stuff!

My feeling is that equipment must have been produced at less 40 years ago to be considered vintage.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Have you heard Western Electrics? The speakers? And do you think digital sounds better than vinyl?

Yes, and I've owned Klipsch and Altec. Yes, speakers. When playing the same master through a decent contemporary DAC? You bet.

Tim

 

[bonzo75]

Well yes ,they have no bass and no real treble extension.
Keith.

Yes, you need to add additional drivers for that

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Yes, you need to add additional drivers for that

And, of course, you need a listening room the size of a small theater. Anything less and you are listening to vintage horns in a near field configuration. Not necessarily a bad thing, but certainly not what they were intended for. These old horns sound great. They are full of colorations and they still sound great. They possess remarkable amounts of headroom, even when very modestly powered, and they move a lot of air, giving them great dynamics at high volume. They sound a lot like really top-quality PA, which is something horn-lovers should try. It wouldn't take such a big room and they are often inexpensively bi-amped and active, lowering the noise floor and offering better dynamics at more moderate volumes. I like horns; vintage and otherwise. If I could have, maybe 3 systems, and the rooms to match, a big horn system would probably be one of them. But I'd feed them on digital and solid state...

Tim

 

[ddk]

And, of course, you need a listening room the size of a small theater. Anything less and you are listening to vintage horns in a near field configuration. Not necessarily a bad thing, but certainly not what they were intended for. These old horns sound great. They are full of colorations and they still sound great. They possess remarkable amounts of headroom, even when very modestly powered, and they move a lot of air, giving them great dynamics at high volume. They sound a lot like really top-quality PA, which is something horn-lovers should try. It wouldn't take such a big room and they are often inexpensively bi-amped and active, lowering the noise floor and offering better dynamics at more moderate volumes. I like horns; vintage and otherwise. If I could have, maybe 3 systems, and the rooms to match, a big horn system would probably be one of them. But I'd feed them on digital and solid state...

Tim

I don't know what you've heard Tim, but your description of their sound is way different from most of us who live with high end vintage horns! PA? Active bi-amping to lower noise floor and better dynamics; WTF? This is rubbish! Only the clueless use solid state with 100+ db sensitive vintage horns .
david

 

[amirm]

Only the clueless use solid state with 100+ db sensitive vintage horns ??.
david

Mod: I suggest we stop characterizing each other before someone else becomes unhappy over these discussions and wants to leave the forum.