Comparing three turntables at Innovative Audio, Gordon Sauck's vintage shop in Vancouver, British Columbia
Photo: Brent Butterworth
Comparing three turntables at Innovative Audio, Gordon Sauck's vintage shop in Vancouver, British Columbia
Sauck hosts a vintage-only swap meet and surplus gear clearance event known as the "Garage Sale"
Last year, an audio dealer named Gordon Sauck called to get my permission to use a 1997 article of mine on his website. As I chatted with him, I realized there was a huge emerging trend to which I and most of the other guys who write about audio have been largely oblivious.
Sauck’s Vancouver, BC-area store, Innovative Audio, focuses exclusively on vintage audio equipment. Now, I knew there were guys out there with a fetish for old Marantz and McIntosh tube gear, but I didn’t think they’d be enough to support a business. According to Sauck, though, most of his customers are looking for the mainstream gear from the 1960s, '70s and '80s. “They’re interested in the classic powerhouse receivers from back then, and in big speakers. And reel-to-reel tape decks. And even cassette and 8-track.”
In other words, the kind of gear I’ve seen people discarding or selling off at garage sales for barely enough money to buy a six-pack of Newcastle.
A quick check of eBay and Google showed me Sauck was right, that there was a lot of interest in vintage audio gear. “But why would people be interested in all that outmoded stuff?” I asked him.
“That’s the thing,” Sauck replied. “They don’t want all those new features because they make the equipment too complicated. People want to walk up to a piece of gear, see the function they want, and flip a switch or press a button to make it work.
“Vintage equipment is built to last, too,” he continued. “The products in my store have been working for 20, 30, 40 years. That’s probably not going to happen with home theater gear. The manufacturers know you’ll be replacing a new receiver in three to five years to get the latest technology, so why should they build them to last?” (You can read more of Sauck’s comments about vintage gear in this interview I conducted with him.)
“Yeah, but how does that old stuff sound?” I asked.
“Why don’t you come hear it for yourself?” he countered.
The word count function of the post is over-counting. I can't post what I want.
This is a great article... I love old stuff! Especially since this is what got me started. My grandfather had an old Akai quadraphonic unit that blew my mind, and he also had an old Kenwood integrated amp with Darlington circuits on a second sound system in another room - I miss the old VU meters!
Anyway, I do agree that you can pick up great sounding receivers and separates for less than what an equivalent new unit would cost, but I find the test a little misleading. I say this because with (2) receivers with around 125/channel versus the Pioneer with 270w/channel, I would expect the unit with more power to win... Regardless if it was a new or vintage unit, as long as it was a high quality unit. It would have been nice if there was a fourth option to choose from, which would have been a modern day high-powered receiver such as the NAD M2.
Anyway, please keep these great articles coming!
I have a couple of old Pioneer amps, including the one mentioned here, and the preamps on both seem to have puked. Channels cut in and out, especially when the volume is adjusted. The power amps still work like champs.
I wonder how these owners took care of theirs. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@CLGA: Thanks! Glaf you liked it. The test wasn't intended to be definitive, just a fun exercise. We had to work with the products we had available. The Pioneer's great sound kind of overshadowed the fact that the old garden-variety Sony sounded just as good as a recent-model Yamaha. I'm sure a good high-end receiver would have fared better against the Pioneer.
@Burgerace: It sounds to me like your volume control potentiometers might have gotten dirty. If you're comfortable working on your gear, you could try cleaning them with some contact cleaner (sometimes there's an access hole where you can squirt it in, but sometimes you have to disassemble the pot). Or you might be able to get a new one. Gordon Sauck at Innovative might be able to help you.
I have collected and used "mature" hifi equipment for many years now - my wife indulges me obviously.
The allure is substantial; in the better equipment the quality of construction is unapproachable now days without selling your children. The stepped controls on the early SAE preamps, braiding the wires to prevent cross-talk on early Marantz pieces.. The finish on SME tonearms...
Selling off a half dozen pieces bought all the appliances for our new house... (Which added hugely to my credibility as you may guess.)
Currently the living room has the obvious TD 125/3009 S/imp(R), a DB Systems preamp (they are still in business!) Bryston 3b, Magnum FT101, Revox B225... Paradigm Speakers (and as a concession to the present a project dock for the various iPods that litter the house.) The den has an Advent 300 receiver and a pair of Radio Shack Lineaum LX-5 II.... I was so glad to read your article... makes me slightly - perhaps very slightly more au current.
Thanks
Being a young (and not very experienced) audiophile, I'm curious. What exactly is it that makes the old equipment better? We live in an age when digital is flaunted as being far superior, even if that digital is best on CDs instead of the more modern download services like iTunes and Amazon. We have receivers designed to take advantage of digital sound, and output that sound to more than two speakers. Aside from how long they last, why is the old equipment able to deliver superior quality?
I have the fortune of living in the Vancouver area and I am a regular customer of Gordon's. I personally believe that back in the day this gear was built with care and attention that the modern equipment just doesn't have unless you purchase the ultra high end products. I personally own a number of older pioneer pieces from the late 70's and early 80's ( RT-909 reel to reel, PLC-590 turntable, ct-f1250 cassette to name a few..) and run a tube amp and Revox PR-99 reel to reel. I have a love hate relationship going to Innovative as it leaves me normally quite a bit more poorer, but with a grin on my face from ear to ear. By the way, I own a decent home theatre room system as well and want all the latest gear in my system. I for one think there is a place for the old and the new, I just want the best sound I can afford. With the loudness war that rages in the music industry right now the only haven is vinyl (if you aren't aware of the loudness war wikipedia it and be shocked). As for why the old gear is better just go pick up any of the amps built in the 70's and you'll soon have the answer to your question. Andrew
Regardless if it was a new or vintage unit, as long as it was a high quality unit. It would have been nice if there was a fourth option to choose from, which would have been a modern day high-powered receiver such as the NAD M2.
porn | porno day | kelebek
To sbmmaster regarding sound quality of older equipment vs digital.. When tube amps began to transition out and cheaper transisters took over there was a noticable decline in the "warm" rounded music quality and more of a harsh singular tonal quality. Tubes added harmonics and transisters left you with minimal naked notes...At least that is one of the theories from my generation.