How much has the SQ of gear improved in the last quarter century?

Thanks for the response, looks great and a setup arrangement I have always wanted to try but it doesnt always present the opportunity and needs a larger room, which you have. I bet it sounds fantastic! Harbeth....

 

I think diagonal setup if possible takes the room out of the equation even in smaller rooms.Listening volume of course has limits depending on room size.

 

You have done exactly that, taken the room out of the equation(more or less/depending). Large room/diagonal setup, near-field, and Harbeth speakers! Very nice, would love to hear it!

 

The AR amplifier was ahead of its time in some ways. By the use of inter-stage (driver) transformers, they could get around the requirement of a large coupling capacitor on it's output while still using a quasi-complementary output stage. I would say it sounds a bit better than other typical amplifiers of the time (mine still sounds fine, but the bias potentiometers are very unstable). The change to full complementary output stages made possible by the introduction of PNP/NPN complementary transistors changed all solid state power amplifiers for the better. The timeframe for this was the late 1960s.

 

Thanks....i doubt you're hurting with the Carvers lol Bob Carver is a very clever guy

 

Here’s a report that I wrote to myself when auditioning a new in the box preamplifier do see what solid state could do to mainly handle my specific noise problems. I still have a bit of auditioning to do after a week of burn in.

I won’t name the preamplifier at this time but it sells at about 1/3 the cost of the previous one at around the $2k retail mark:


+ Pluses:

The wonderful comparative sounds of silence.

Excellent Clarity

Pinpoint accuracy of performers position

Revealing high frequency reproduction

Very natural and realistic brass, woodwind and string tonal quality.

Great depth of vocal rendition.

Extremely good bass extension.


⁃ Minuses:

Softness to overall presentation specially leading edge to the bass and lower strings.

Lack of slam, ultimate dynamics.

Less total expansion of soundstage ? (want to check after warm up period).

Ergonomics and features

Great preamplifier for price. Would satisfy a great percentage with more “normal” systems.

Like to see an extension to higher level model.

Personally would need to address some of the shortcomings to be satisfied but some would undoubtedly add to the cost of production.

Told things would improve after running 24/7 for a week.
Seeing as this unit was brand new and unopened I feel I should give it at least the recommended run in before a final opinion it.
Also the sonic “shortcomings “ listed may be unique to my system and situation.

All in all really remarkable I must say.

 

When you're dealing with high sensitivity speakers they will amplify mismatches between power/pre amp units....but when you get it right

 

Having frequented a Naim Audio dealer during the 1990s and having bought one of the last Nait 2 ‘silver buffer’ models, I was always intrigued if not actually envious of Naim’s much more costly ‘active systems’.
At the top of the Naim range in the 1990s were the 135 mono amp set ups in multiples of 2, 4 or 6 packs using the NAXO crossover box with additional HICAPS sat below ones 72 pre amp and HICAP or the later 52 pre-amp and dedicated Supercap. The NAXO’s had tuneable output pots for which ever multiple driver active speakers were used. I wonder how those finely tuned set ups compare to more modern pre power or active systems or how many users still have those active set ups with all those boxes, fans a whirring or have traded them in for more modern stream lined packages?

 

and transparency. older speakers can be very recessed in the midrange with too much cabinet boom.

 

And how much was a sign of the times? That was the flavor of the day back then and quite frankly we may not have known any better. I remember being blown away hearing Emerson, Lake and Palmer cranked extra loudly on a pair of Advent 2 speakers. Sounded incredible at the time, in hindsight not very good at all.

 

Simple crossover upgrades and/or mods on 40-50 y/o loudspeakers can change that dramatically.

 

It seems undeniable that the low-to-mid tier of sound has vastly improved in the last 25 years. A $250 Bluetooth speaker sounds infinitely better than a $250 boombox from 1997, forget about inflation. And this follows logic—Class D amps and DSP are so much better, and engineers are much better at squeezing more out of small spaces. High end is harder to say but logic dictates that it would improve as well, since there would seem to be more money to be made in HiFi in 2022 vs 1997, and thus more incentive to improve your products. Absent someone hearing every piece of gear in the world and making detailed notes of it all, the only way to answer this question is with logic. Who benefits from sound generally getting worse? Companies that cut corners, potentially.

 

sure, but driver technology has also advanced considerably. you can only get so much out of a 4 inch paper tweeter.

 

I would certainly agree that driver technology has advanced considerably/noticeably in the past 25 years+/-. But there are still plenty who prefer the sound of "old school" paper drivers and "old school" overall speakers in general. Case in point-
Altec Lansing (among others, some of which have been mentioned in this thread). And I dont doubt that (many/most of) these audiophiles who prefer them have compared them to high-end modern speakers.

Having said that, I personally agree more with your statement than I disagree, probably bc Im biased since my background is materials science and engineering. So I hear you!

Great point, and and I was thinking about the first half of this statement just before you posted it. While I am content with the sound of my system and think it sounds great, I dont doubt that I would be absolutely blown away by many systems on here! As far as the second part, yes it is a very general topic, with lots of nuances as well. Thanks again everyone!

 

Like many audiophiles, I am no longer a 'spring chicken', and have developed many systems over the decades. Roughly 40 years ago (never mind 25!) I used the following system in my funky coach house in Evanston, IL:

The original Bryston 4B amp ($1,200 then; ~$4,500 inflation adjusted)

APT-Holman pre-amp ($575 then; ~$2,000 IA)

Magnepan Tympani IVA speakers ($3,800; ~$13,700 IA)

Nakamichi 600 cassette deck ($600; ~$2150 IA)

B&O 4002 turntable (~$700; ~$2,500 IA)

As cable development (and associated hype) were in their infancy, whatever I spent on cables was relatively unimportant. My current system cost is a bit higher than aggregate of my '80s components, though that is taking into account that most components were purchased used. So in terms of retail costs, it would likely be ~40% higher.

Obviously I cannot compare the two systems in any precise manner, but I have no doubt that the advances in materials and design have improved SQ potential to a meaningful degree. I do have very fond memories of my earlier system, and there are some things that those Maggies were able to do that many contemporary speakers, including my own, cannot. But the nuances that a high-quality DAC can retrieve, coupled with the resolution, speed, and balance of really good contemporary speakers, lead me to the conclusion that I wouldn't want to trade my current experience for the one that I enjoyed so much decades ago.

As others have touched on, though, if a typical young person today, who has had little if any exposure to high-end audio, were to listen to my old system, they would be likely be bowled over, so context is important.

Finally, note that the early '80s was the twilight of the peak of middle-class America. I was able to purchase the above-mentioned gear, rent a nice apartment (in Evanston - those who know the town will understand), own a car, and cover all of my various living expenses, while working as waiter. Try pulling that off now, after ~30 years of neoliberal economic policies!

 

About 10 years later I was jamming out to a 100 WPC Onkyo Receiver and BIC Venturi V820 (I returned the Spicas to Saturday Audio bc they werent a good "college speaker"- little bass ) in the 2nd floor apartment on the corner above Shermans restaurant. When the L.A. Riots broke out I saw people throw a steel trashcan into the window of Jims Charbroil. Buffalo Joes rawked...wings and their cheddar burgers...

Cosi shutters Evanston restaurant - Evanston Now

 

If there's one thing neoliberal policies have not harmed, it's the price of audio gear.

 

Other than the class-D part I fully agree.

 

No more politics please.

Here is a song (the first one) that was recorded 25 years ago (5-17-97) with radio shack mics.

 

Well, OP asked about sound quality versus 25 years ago. I’m 62 now, was 37 then. I’d already attended about 75% of the concerts I’d ever attend (I have no plans to die anytime soon, I just don’t go to many concerts anymore) so any mileage related hearing damage had mostly already occurred. Plus it’s almost always in the HF, which is just a small part of what constitutes SQ for me. (Note to self: probably ought to just sell the not-so-super tweeters at this point.)

The most salient comment in this entire thread was the chap who noted that modern tech has improved measurements, the vast majority of which aren’t audible. Ironic on many levels.

 

I think the biggest advances have been in loudspeaker technology and digital playback. Amplifier technology, preamp, turntables, and cartridges are being refined nothing revolutionary. Interestingly lots of advancements have been reverting back to things like vacuum tubes, single ended triode amps and horn loaded loudspeakers. Klipsch has made huge comeback.

On the lower end the modern mass market stereo receivers are mostly disposable and cannot hold a candle to the average offering from Pioneer, Marantz, or Sansui pre-1980. Good stuff is being made but it is only for a niche market. Class D has potential but I don’t think it is there yet.

Bluetooth is a lossy technology and most people are using it to listen to compressed lo-res files. The average person is listening to a “smart speaker” that has sound similar to a Bose wave radio.

The best high end gear from 25 years ago will still sound good today. Stereo is an antiquated form of home entertainment, but I’m happy to say the rediscovery of vinyl is fueling a rebirth in people’s interest in good sound.

 

Hi rez anyone?

 

Sure, why not?

"Here’s my point: our industry will respond to HD Audio with next generation products, some sooner than others. So, if you’re even toying with the idea of buying conventional, last century style audio gear, my advice is: don’t. And please don’t fall into the trap of adding an HD source to your conventional system, only to find you’re not getting much more out of it. That’s like trying to watch 4K video on an standard def TV. To get the most out of HD Audio, you’ll need next gen speakers. Speakers that can handle it."

 

Yeah ….. exactly.

 

It may not be HD Audio, but only this week relatives of a neighbour who recently died were clearing items from their old home.
They offered me anything in the garage I could carry away. Among some very handy tools were boxes of old compact cassette tapes. These were in very good condition and consisted mainly of 1970s classical records. I carried away about 200 cassettes in various boxes!
The key element might have been that they are all of the solid coloured plastic case variety as opposed to later clear cases, which are usually (to my ears) inferior later digital re-issues. I’m not an expert in these matters, but I have noticed before how good these earlier cassettes can sound on a decent cassette deck. Some of these sound remarkably good on my Nakamichi.
Last night we had a very pleasant evening listening to some of these tapes on my partner’s budget set up in her lounge; Yamaha KX383 tape deck with QED Qnect 4 leads, Arcam Solo Mini system amplifier through Wharfedale Diamond 9.1s. Dvorak’s Symphonie No9 From the New World was particularly enjoyable. CBS Masterworks 40-76817.

The sad thing is how many thousands of these very serviceable tapes have just been binned for recycling over more recent years.