Do vintage receivers sound better than new ones?

Discussion in 'Audio Hardware' started by 12" 45rpm, Mar 12, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. punkmusick

    punkmusick Amateur drummer

    Location:
    Brazil
    My receiver is a mid-term I guess. Not actually vintage but not modern also.

    It's a Denon AVR3200 from 1998. It was graded five stars by What HiFi back in the day and the price was 1K in 1998. 80W: Denon AVR-3200 - Manual - AV Surround Receiver - HiFi Engine

    Not sure how it would compare with the good receivers from the 70's or with the current ones. I think it sounds great but would be interested in a comparison if anyone has the experience.
     
    Last edited: May 18, 2018
    The Pinhead likes this.
  2. Mike from NYC

    Mike from NYC Senior Member

    Location:
    Surprise, AZ
    Smoother generally means less detail and less 'air' in the playback which limits the depth of the soundstage as well as the inability to differentiate instruments in position in the soundstage.

    Moreover, most of them are low wattage and fail to control the woofer of many larger speakers and enhances the so-called richness.

    My Rogue Pharaoh beat my vintage 100 WPC Yamaha receiver hands down as well as my vintage Pioneer receiver which I use in my office stereo.

    The 70s gear was OK for its time but technology has moved on and new receivers sound better to my ears.
     
    Curtdr and punkmusick like this.
  3. Now, all you need to add is a Pioneer RT-909!
     
  4. LitHum05

    LitHum05 El Disco es Cultura

    Location:
    Virginia
    I live in daily fear that mine will break down and need recapping. Have you had any extensive work done on yours? The only problem with mine is dirt in the phono button pots, which cuts off one side of the speakers. It’s tough to get all the way back there to clean with the de-oxit.
     
    Harvestor likes this.
  5. The Pinhead

    The Pinhead KING OF BOOM AND SIZZLE IN HELL

    I've been experimenting the same fear fear since I bought it..........in '92 !!!;)

    Same problem with both phono buttons till I found a tech willing to take apart whatever was necessary to get to them (they are not user-accessible) and clean them.
     
    LitHum05 likes this.
  6. gorangers

    gorangers Forum Resident

    Location:
    New Haven area
    I can vouch for the vintage Pioneers. I own a sx 650 and sx 434...excellent performers and built like tanks.

    I have a sx 1010 as well. The receiver that started the watt wars. It's a beast.

    The 434 and 1010 are earlier and sound more tube like.

    The 650 a bit newer and a bit more dry sounding...but build quality still high and sounds quite nice.
     
    Dennis0675 likes this.
  7. LitHum05

    LitHum05 El Disco es Cultura

    Location:
    Virginia
    You know a lot about Pioneers. How does the SX-980 sound in relation to the ones you’ve mentioned? It’s the one I have.
     
  8. gorangers

    gorangers Forum Resident

    Location:
    New Haven area
    I know a little...more about the ones I own. Also what I've read about the others.

    The early to mid 70's receivers had more tube like sound...especially the 2 series and 3 series.

    The 5 series...like my sx 650 and the 8 series like the 980 you mentioned less tube like and a bit drier in sound.

    Later in the 70's, many companies were using more IC's which affected the sound. Earlier 70's used more discreet components which lent to better sound.

    These are general statements and there will always be exceptions.

    My guess is that the 980 may sound quite nice, just less tube like than earlier models.
     
    LitHum05 likes this.
  9. Harvestor

    Harvestor New Member

    Location:
    Michigan
    H
    Hello there...
    I have always since 1978 when my older brother came home from Tech-HiFi with a Technics SA 500 and a Technics SL-230 turntable and a pair of OHM Acoustics model H.... Loved those 1978 model year Technics SA Receivers..
    I have a a couple of SA600 and one SA800
    Ever since 1978 over all these years I have purchased or helped others purchase many systems and my personal favorites are still my SA Receivers...
    I have family and friends that own Marantz , Pioneer, Sansui and while I like them all....I prefer and Love the Technics SA sound overall......
     
  10. LitHum05

    LitHum05 El Disco es Cultura

    Location:
    Virginia
    :pug::pug:
    The better sound is, of course, a preference. I remember switching back to an earlier sx model from my sx-980. It sounded muddied. I didn’t feel that way before. That’s the thing about this hobby. There are so many differences yet we (I do, at least) try to convince ourselves that there is some sort of endpoint. The minute you find it, you start missing another sound signature. o_O
     
  11. Sneaky Pete

    Sneaky Pete Flat the 5 and That’s No Jive

    Location:
    NYC USA
    I have a low end Onkyo receiver in a secondary system. It sounds good and performs well. But the sound is a little thread bare and lacking in harmonic richness. I have some vintage NAD gear that sounds better. I’ve had silver face pioneer and old marantz that also sounded great.

    I like vintage gear better but it will require more money and maintenance to perform up to spec. It depends on your priorities. For most people the newer gear will be the best option because they will want the ease of use and a remote.
     
  12. McGuy

    McGuy All Mc, all the time...

    Location:
    Chicago
    All depends as others have said. If you're talking about McIntosh, tough call. I had all vintage until I upgraded to newer gear...I can't say the newer gear sounds better but I have more flexibility and my system is now fully balanced... still miss the vintage gear in a way though. Vintage Mc has it's own unique sound that can't be replicated.
     
    Sneaky Pete likes this.
  13. ChristopherFletcher

    ChristopherFletcher Forum Resident

    Location:
    Boston
    You just highlighted my conundrum: whether to a) Keep using my current mid-level Onkyo SR505 receiver (drives a pair of Wharfedale Diamond 10.2 speakers; the sound is OK, nothing special but it is convenient and reliable), b) Repair my vintage NAD 3140 integrated amp (which has been fixed once already), or c) Buy a new integrated amp (likely a Marantz or Cambridge Audio, depending on price). Opinions?

    I will add one point: There is no arguing with the aesthetics of this Pioneer receiver - that is a classic look that never goes out of style.
     
    Stone Turntable likes this.
  14. The Pinhead

    The Pinhead KING OF BOOM AND SIZZLE IN HELL

    HEY ! Stop posting porn !:cheers:
     
  15. Beatles4503

    Beatles4503 Senior Member

    Location:
    Indiana
    Sansui 5000X

    [​IMG]
     
  16. fish

    fish Senior Member

    Location:
    NYS, USA
    I have a 1984 Kyocera (competed with Macintosh at the time both in Sound and Price, I chose it over the Mac) I also have a mid 70's Luxman.
    I had mid 70's High End Sansui too.

    In my opinion, Modern Receivers are much better but not nearly as cool D-)
     
  17. Gibsonian

    Gibsonian Forum Resident

    Location:
    Iowa, USA
    That's a beauty, would love to hear that girl.
     
  18. Curtdr

    Curtdr Member

    I'm going to jump in here and maybe spoil a party but here goes:
    I have a professionally refurbed Marantz 2238. Yes, it is beautiful to look at. Yes, it's built very well. Yes, it does sound... well, it sounds great BUT, and there's the rub. I put it head to head with a new Marantz nr1200. Yes, they sound DIFFERENT... yes, there is a compelling appeal to the 2238, even just on aesthetic look and vibe alone, even to the sound of it. However, and I really didn't even want to discover this but I did: the nr1200 is more clear, more precise, quieter noise floor with greater dynamic range, double the power AND definitely does have a warmth and musical vibrancy simply not attainable by the 2238. Yes, the 2238 sounds good, very good, but it falls short of the new nr1200 not just in measurement. Contrary to some other posters' statements, the new Marantz is absolutely NOT "sterile." (that said, I do also have a newer Pioneer Elite THX everything receiver that decidedly does sound sterile and I'd take the 2238 over it based on "heart" and musicality)

    And, whereas all told I spent about $1000 on the 2238 (including the beautiful wooden cabinet), I spent a total of $600 on the nr1200 including taxes, shipping, and five year extension on the warranty. And, the nr1200 has the modern hookups like hdmi and optical options, AND the nr1200 has a built in streamer for Pandora and such, and of course the nr1200 has remote control AND can communicate with other new Marantz models, or another nr1200, around the house. So, to stream music on the 2238, I'd have to add and external streamer or maybe an older iphone 5s from the headphone jack to the rca inputs... and thus there goes more money into it...

    Seriously, the 2238 is beautiful, but when I'm honest with myself the nr1200 not only is superior sonically by a pretty substantial margin, the nr1200 ALSO has more features AND costs less money.

    What to do? Well, like others have suggested, use the vintage in a secondary system; it will sound different than the new receiver, and that can be a good thing because you might actually notice different things on the recordings or just experience an alternative interpretation of the music. Nothing wrong with old school; in fact I'm a big fan of epi 100 speakers so I'm not an anti-vintage person. Myself, I'm still in the "torn" state and figuring out what to do about my realization... one option for me is to put the 2238 up at the Minnesota lake cabin; it'd fit right in with the overall vibe there, and I can reserve the newer Marantz for the southern home. What if I could only have one? Clearly, the new Marantz nr1200.

    As for the vintage Pioneer... beautiful, well-constructed pieces of equipment. I've had x50 series in my home just recently, put 'em through the paces against my other receivers (an Onkyo Integra from about 1986, a Harman Kardon HK430 which is way cool and sounds great too btw, the newer Pioneer, and both Marantz)... and sad to say the x50s went out the door pretty quickly; all my other receivers sounded better... they don't look better, although you gotta love the HK430 and the 2238 vibe, but all of them sounded better than the vintage Pioneers.
     
    Bobsblkwax likes this.
  19. Curtdr

    Curtdr Member

    That's my experience also with the Pioneers... both the 70s models and the newer Elite THX model that I have.
     
  20. Bobsblkwax

    Bobsblkwax Forum Resident

    Location:
    NorCal
    A bit of a generalization, but the 70s Pioneers series with the blue panel lights sound very good and much better that the clinical sounding later ones. That goes for amps and tuners as well as receivers.
     
    Curtdr, JakeMcD and gorangers like this.
  21. krisjay

    krisjay Psychedelic Wave Rider

    Location:
    Maine
    I have found some newer gear can sound "cleaner", but sounding better I'm not sure. Something about vintage gear that has been serviced correctly that just seems to win me over. Tube gear is another matter, I'd probably take tube gear over any SS, vintage or modern.
     
  22. luckybaer

    luckybaer Thinks The Devil actually beat Johnny

    Location:
    Missouri
    If you are handy with electronic components, or if you have a good service shop nearby, it would be cool to get it serviced and re-capped. Be on the lookout for another one that is available for parts to snag knobs, etc. That’s a good looking receiver.

    I would use it in a second system - one that you piece together on a budget or by scrounging for vintage gear. Could be fun!
     
  23. gorangers

    gorangers Forum Resident

    Location:
    New Haven area
    I've owned lots of Pioneer's and agree 100%. The 2 and 3 series were very warm sounding...somewhat tube like. These were manufactured at a time when quality build and sound were important. Before the watt wars and integrated circuitry ruined sound quality. If I'm buying vintage receivers, I look for 1975 and before.
     
    Bobsblkwax likes this.
  24. Michael

    Michael I LOVE WIDE S-T-E-R-E-O!

    IMO, yes, but I am biased...
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine