Testing a trio of receivers at Innovative Audio. The older units more than held their own.
The “Garage Sale”
Thus I found myself traveling to Vancouver last month to attend Innovative Audio’s annual “Garage Sale,” where it sells off its surplus gear and also invites customers and other dealers to set up stands in the parking lot to sell gear, used records and memorabilia. It was an even more amazing scene than Sauck predicted: two parking lots packed with vendors, vintage gear enthusiasts, vinyl record collectors and classic rock fans.
Dozens of enthusiasts were picking through a huge collection of receivers, cassette decks and speakers, most of which were gone by the end of the day. Even a huge Altec theater horn speaker, 3 or 4 feet wide and perhaps 7 feet high, sold. I assumed the customers would all be middle-aged audio geeks like me, but I met kids as young as 18 there. I asked one why he was buying a Sansui receiver that was probably twice his age, and he replied, shaking his head, “All that iPod stuff sucks, man. This is way better.”
I asked Cam Steere, an obviously successful 40-something professional of some sort, which he considered a better value, old gear or new, and he said, “I have a home theater setup and it’s great fun, but personally I prefer buying vintage.” He then rattled off the model numbers of 19 pieces of vintage gear he owns — yet he couldn’t remember what kind of DVD player he had in his home theater system.
How Does the Old Stuff Sound?
Not only did Sauck give me a chance to listen to some vintage gear, he also gave me free reign to run whatever other tests I wanted to do. Because I drove up to Vancouver from Los Angeles, I was able to bring along my Clio FW and Audio Precision System One Dual Domain measurement systems, as well as a few pieces of reference gear and some test CDs.
For a couple of days after the garage sale, we conducted blind listening tests to compare vintage gear to new equipment. This proved easy at Innovative Audio not only because of all the vintage products in stock, but because the store has a steady stream of customers who were happy to donate their time for some serious listening. I later set up a test bench and ran technical measurements, with a large stack of old issues of Stereo Review (Sound+Vision’s revered ancestor) to give me tips on how to measure some old gear I’d only ever seen in pictures.
The most illuminating tests were the evaluations we did of receivers and turntables. Not only did the vintage gear generally hold up well in the comparisons, in a couple of cases (as you can read if you follow the links) it embarrassingly outclassed the new stuff.
I walked away from my five days in Vancouver with a new appreciation of the gear of my youth and the people who built it. Sure, I’ll always love home theater, but there’s something really special about using a piece of gear that was built in the same era when I bought my first copy of Led Zeppelin IV . . . on 8-track. And there’s no denying the appeal of the warm glow of incandescent panel lamps; the elegant, often-unique styling; and — best of all — having a piece of gear you can operate without having to turn on your TV set.
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.