Vintage vs Modern 2 ch receivers question - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 103Likes
Reply
Thread Tools
post #1 of 294 Unread 10-03-2019, 12:07 AM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Vintage vs Modern 2 ch receivers question

This has been a serious issue for me to understand, due to the fact that we are made to believe "if it costs more, it's better". Recently, I aquired a new, from Harmon Kardon, HK 3770. It's flawless, doesn't require a update, and sounds good considering it's rated at 120w/ch. I was curious how it compared to a early 90's model Sony STR AV320, so I pulled it out of storage. To say I was shocked was an understatement, even a little embarrassed. Hands down, without a doubt, the older, less expensive, lower powered, basic 2 channel receiver by Sony, literally smoked the HK. I am using a pair of Yamaha NS-A100 floorstanders in the base comparison. The Sony has better separation by far, the sound is definitely stronger in the bottom end range, and doesn't fade as the volume rises. My question is this- Why would a 30 year old base model receiver, costing half as much when new, sound so much better than a modern receiver, with more than twice the power output? I realize most audio companies have slid towards the energy efficient power supplies, but, have they really cut it back that far? 1 more point, the HK is a 2.1 channel receiver, with no level adjustment for the sub, save the bass level in the receiver, so I didn't connect the SVS for the comparison. I was leaning more towards how the 2 speaker set up compared.
Lefty71 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 294 Unread 10-03-2019, 02:25 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
m. zillch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 13,019
Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5419 Post(s)
Liked: 3906
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty71 View Post
This has been a serious issue for me to understand, due to the fact that we are made to believe "if it costs more, it's better". Recently, I aquired a new, from Harmon Kardon, HK 3770. It's flawless, doesn't require a update, and sounds good considering it's rated at 120w/ch. I was curious how it compared to a early 90's model Sony STR AV320, so I pulled it out of storage. To say I was shocked was an understatement, even a little embarrassed. Hands down, without a doubt, the older, less expensive, lower powered, basic 2 channel receiver by Sony, literally smoked the HK. I am using a pair of Yamaha NS-A100 floorstanders in the base comparison. The Sony has better separation by far, the sound is definitely stronger in the bottom end range, and doesn't fade as the volume rises. My question is this- Why would a 30 year old base model receiver, costing half as much when new, sound so much better than a modern receiver, with more than twice the power output? I realize most audio companies have slid towards the energy efficient power supplies, but, have they really cut it back that far? 1 more point, the HK is a 2.1 channel receiver, with no level adjustment for the sub, save the bass level in the receiver, so I didn't connect the SVS for the comparison. I was leaning more towards how the 2 speaker set up compared.
The Sony has a feature you are digging the new H/K lacks: DBFB. This reinforces the bass beneficially and slightly variably depending on your selected volume level. It works especially well at making the sound full and rich even at lower playback levels.
m. zillch is offline  
post #3 of 294 Unread 10-03-2019, 05:20 AM
Senior Member
 
Roseval's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 218
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 69 Post(s)
Liked: 47
Might it be the HK is configured for 2.1. hence send anything below 80 Hz to the sub-woofer?
Roseval is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 294 Unread 10-03-2019, 09:59 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,433
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1750 Post(s)
Liked: 443
The power amp part of the receivers have NOT evolve much( if any) in the last 30 years, a good amp that is 30 years old is not by default inferior. In fact all the new bells and whistles can make it worst like all the digital stuffs. Notice the faster and newer the computers, the SLOWER they are? The ones 20 years ago were more primitive, but they run faster and more reliable than today's computers. The fancier they get, the slower, more inconsistent they are? Don't even get me started on the new cars. Let's just say my new car spent at least a month in the first half year in the shop dealing with strange problems and they couldn't exactly resolve it.


I will hold onto a good amp from 30 years ago than a new amp.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
post #5 of 294 Unread 10-03-2019, 10:09 AM
_tk
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 728
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 578 Post(s)
Liked: 254
This is the reason why some of the vintage amps and receivers still command such a huge price and are continuing to go up in value. I don't consider 90's equipment all that great, but some of it was very decent.

It's like most of today's manufacturers are racing to see who can make the most sterile and flat sound and a lot are even deleting tone controls (and I haven't seen a modern loudness button in forever, sans the new Luxmans).
_tk is offline  
post #6 of 294 Unread 10-03-2019, 08:05 PM - Thread Starter
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 5
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 0
Thanks for the replies, everybody! "Listening before you buy" has taken on much more validity now. Simply reading the tech specs of the new models just isn't enough these days, I guess. Ironically, I also purchased a Sony STR AV720 on reading the specs, when it was a new model, and was never disappointed by the sound quality (the neighbors were a different story Being HK, I naturally assumed the sound to be stellar in 2 Chan mode, with the sub out being a "reinforcement feature" instead of a basic component to full frequency response sound. Live and learn, I guess. The addition of the Bluetooth, DLNA and satallite radio features, over the Sony, don't justify the .1. Again, thanks for the replies.
Lefty71 is offline  
post #7 of 294 Unread 10-03-2019, 09:30 PM
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Farmington Hills, MI
Posts: 628
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 493 Post(s)
Liked: 338
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
The power amp part of the receivers have NOT evolve much( if any) in the last 30 years, a good amp that is 30 years old is not by default inferior. In fact all the new bells and whistles can make it worst like all the digital stuffs. Notice the faster and newer the computers, the SLOWER they are? The ones 20 years ago were more primitive, but they run faster and more reliable than today's computers. The fancier they get, the slower, more inconsistent they are? Don't even get me started on the new cars. Let's just say my new car spent at least a month in the first half year in the shop dealing with strange problems and they couldn't exactly resolve it.


I will hold onto a good amp from 30 years ago than a new amp.
The main issue with vintage receivers, amps, etc is worn out caps, transformers, etc. Is the cost to refurbish worth it? That’s up to the owner.
3db likes this.

Jolida Fusion Preamp, Jolida JD1000P Amp, VPI Scout turntable with Dynavector 10X5 cartridge, Paradigm Studio 100 v.5 speakers, Sonica DAC streaming lossless files. Furman Elite 15 Power Conditioner.
MSchott is online now  
post #8 of 294 Unread 10-04-2019, 05:48 AM
Member
 
Marine121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Allentown, PA
Posts: 107
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by _tk View Post
This is the reason why some of the vintage amps and receivers still command such a huge price and are continuing to go up in value. I don't consider 90's equipment all that great, but some of it was very decent.

It's like most of today's manufacturers are racing to see who can make the most sterile and flat sound and a lot are even deleting tone controls (and I haven't seen a modern loudness button in forever, sans the new Luxmans).
You're right about that. Even after 10 years those speakers from the 90s still pack a punch. But often times you'll have to refurbish them. Even change some parts wholly.
Marine121 is offline  
post #9 of 294 Unread 10-04-2019, 06:10 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 158 Post(s)
Liked: 224
I have some Vintage restored Marantz receivers from the 70's like the 2015 2030 ect. They were the Bomb in their day and look killer with their blue light and pulley control Tuner. They have a warm sound and have all the tone controls and loudness buttons. But to my ears my newer Rotel and Creek intergrated amps have a better sound. Better separation ' faster' cleaner' . My friend has some old 1970 Mcintosh stuff that still sounds killer ' but they were super high end in their day and still are.
gibson61 is online now  
post #10 of 294 Unread 10-04-2019, 07:13 AM
EM3
Advanced Member
 
EM3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Logan, WV.
Posts: 598
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 147 Post(s)
Liked: 69
Its funny this topic was brought up. I have often went back and forth on this subject. I even belong to a couple of Facebook groups that revolv around vintage gear. The first question a lot of folks ask "Is it worth it?" As stated earlier parts for these older pieces of equipment can be expensive to replace and plus you either need to have enough skill to do it on your own or have enough cash to pay someone to do it. I do think the older equipment has a warmer sound to it and a lot of it looks gorgeous. I guess that is why I loke the looks of Outlaw Audio 2160. The only thing that keeps me from getting this is no bluetooth but even that is a requirement for purchase. I do miss the days when you could go in to a shop and just listen. Its a shame there is nothing around here in this rural area. I always love to try before I buy and I detest buying online because of returning stuff can be a pain.



Sorry I didn't add anything to the conversation.

This space for rent!
EM3 is online now  
post #11 of 294 Unread 10-04-2019, 06:21 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Skytrooper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baden, Pa.
Posts: 1,272
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 409 Post(s)
Liked: 393
I always liked the receivers of the 1970's. Built like tanks, discrete components, wooden cabinets and just great to look at. I still have a Pioneer QX-8000 Receiver and CS-77 speakers I bought in Vietnam in 1972 in my attic and just can't throw them away. Like MSchott said, it probably would take a lot of work to get it going again.

One advantage the new receivers will always have over Vintage is the Remote Control.

TV - LG 65B7P OLED / Receiver - Yamaha RX-A1040 7.2 / Blu Ray - Oppo BDP-83 / Turntable - Technics SL-3300 / Cable Box - Comcast X1 V4 4K /L & R Paradigm Studio 20 V3
Center - Paradigm CC-470 V3 / 4 Surrounds - Paradigm SA-15 V3 In Walls
Subwoofer 1 - Sunfire HRS-12 / Subwoofer 2 - Paradigm PW-2100
Skytrooper is offline  
post #12 of 294 Unread 10-07-2019, 06:49 AM
Member
 
Marine121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Allentown, PA
Posts: 107
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Liked: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by EM3 View Post
Its a shame there is nothing around here in this rural area. I always love to try before I buy and I detest buying online because of returning stuff can be a pain.

You know I want to experience going to a shop and listen some music right then and there.
EM3 likes this.
Marine121 is offline  
post #13 of 294 Unread 10-07-2019, 09:01 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
SmittyJS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Eastern U.S.
Posts: 1,121
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 457 Post(s)
Liked: 652
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skytrooper View Post
One advantage the new receivers will always have over Vintage is the Remote Control.
Not so fast. At a blowout price of $157, I just bought a Paradigm PW Link in an attempt to make my vintage receiver and amps wireless and Alexa-enabled. The manual says it should work. We'll see.
yanks1 likes this.
SmittyJS is offline  
post #14 of 294 Unread 10-07-2019, 12:58 PM
3db
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3db's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,717
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 663 Post(s)
Liked: 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchott View Post
The main issue with vintage receivers, amps, etc is worn out caps, transformers, etc. Is the cost to refurbish worth it? That’s up to the owner.

I agree assuming you can get the oats required. As far as I'm concerned, the quality of the newer receivers are really good and should last 30 years. This leaves 30 years to figure out whether one wants to restore or upgrade.

AVR Yamaha RX-V 1800/1900/1500
TT/Cassette ProJect Xpression III/Yamaha KX1200/KX800
BR Yam. BD-S681/Sony X800/Pan. BD30 DPL Sam. 65"/ 55"/50"
Speakers PSB T-45,8C,1B/ PSB 500,200C,RBH A600/Alphas
Subs Rythmic LV12-R/PSB Subsonic 6/5
3db is online now  
post #15 of 294 Unread 10-07-2019, 12:59 PM
3db
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3db's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,717
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 663 Post(s)
Liked: 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmittyJS View Post
Not so fast. At a blowout price of $157, I just bought a Paradigm PW Link in an attempt to make my vintage receiver and amps wireless and Alexa-enabled. The manual says it should work. We'll see.

Let us know how its going.. I'm interested from a geek perspective.

AVR Yamaha RX-V 1800/1900/1500
TT/Cassette ProJect Xpression III/Yamaha KX1200/KX800
BR Yam. BD-S681/Sony X800/Pan. BD30 DPL Sam. 65"/ 55"/50"
Speakers PSB T-45,8C,1B/ PSB 500,200C,RBH A600/Alphas
Subs Rythmic LV12-R/PSB Subsonic 6/5
3db is online now  
post #16 of 294 Unread 10-07-2019, 01:28 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Russia
Posts: 406
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 287 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty71 View Post
My question is this- Why would a 30 year old base model receiver, costing half as much when new, sound so much better than a modern receiver, with more than twice the power output? I realize most audio companies have slid towards the energy efficient power supplies, but, have they really cut it back that far?
Cutting costs is a very effective way to increase profit.
Sometimes it gets in the way of quality, sometimes not.
Guess this time it did.


Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
Notice the faster and newer the computers, the SLOWER they are? The ones 20 years ago were more primitive, but they run faster and more reliable than today's computers.
What are you talking about? Newer computers run much, much faster with shorter boot times and much much better performance. I sometimes use old computers and they are real pain to use after modern SSDs and processing power.
hogues, m. zillch, 3db and 5 others like this.

Last edited by aats; 10-07-2019 at 01:35 PM.
aats is online now  
post #17 of 294 Unread 10-07-2019, 04:00 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
gajCA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 19,707
Mentioned: 231 Post(s)
Tagged: 2 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9269 Post(s)
Liked: 6373
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty71 View Post
This has been a serious issue for me to understand, due to the fact that we are made to believe "if it costs more, it's better". Recently, I aquired a new, from Harmon Kardon, HK 3770. It's flawless, doesn't require a update, and sounds good considering it's rated at 120w/ch. I was curious how it compared to a early 90's model Sony STR AV320, so I pulled it out of storage. To say I was shocked was an understatement, even a little embarrassed. Hands down, without a doubt, the older, less expensive, lower powered, basic 2 channel receiver by Sony, literally smoked the HK. I am using a pair of Yamaha NS-A100 floorstanders in the base comparison. The Sony has better separation by far, the sound is definitely stronger in the bottom end range, and doesn't fade as the volume rises. My question is this- Why would a 30 year old base model receiver, costing half as much when new, sound so much better than a modern receiver, with more than twice the power output? I realize most audio companies have slid towards the energy efficient power supplies, but, have they really cut it back that far? 1 more point, the HK is a 2.1 channel receiver, with no level adjustment for the sub, save the bass level in the receiver, so I didn't connect the SVS for the comparison. I was leaning more towards how the 2 speaker set up compared.
My friends lost their old school stereo equipment in the 2017 fires here so I pulled my old 70's era middle of the road Sansui 881 out of storage and I had it refurbished for them as a gift as they wanted 2.0.

We settled on LX16s speakers as I have them in my secondary room 2.2 music system and they blew away the new KLH Albany's I thought would be perfect for them but they sucked in comparison.

My LX16s are black but we got them the Cherrywood cabinets which look 100 percent better to be honest.

Anyway, no A/B vs my well regarded 1980s era NAD7250PE or anything like that but i was blown away by how good the LX16s sounded with the Sansui in 2.0.

As I had measured my LX16s I bumped up the Sansui bass control by 2db centered at 50hz and knocked down the mids by 3db centered at 1500hz and they sounded even better.

I'd forgotten that old receiver had a midrange control along with bass and treble and it was nice the manual, (which I still had), specified the db increments and the frequency they were centered at.

I just wish I'd asked the guy to fix the damned lights on the AM/FM display!

They can pay for that themselves if it bugs them.

Bottom line is I was blown away with the great sound and easy power of that ancient "heavy as hell" receiver even though, even in its day, it wasn't considered "great" by any means.

Geoff A. J., California
gajCA is online now  
post #18 of 294 Unread 10-07-2019, 05:58 PM
_tk
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 728
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 578 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by aats View Post



What are you talking about? Newer computers run much, much faster with shorter boot times and much much better performance. I sometimes use old computers and they are real pain to use after modern SSDs and processing power.
I get what he's saying. Yes, processing power is waaay more powerful in today's computers. So is software bloat (and poorly engineered and written software).

With those older computers, developers were writing within certain limitations and thus were forced to streamline and optimize their code. Some of that older software made direct calls to the hardware too.

I have an old windows 95 computer that boots the O/S from a flash drive (no mechanical drives involved). It is absolutely lightening quick in everything that it does.

Also, those older processors ran with passive heatsinks and that's it. They were designed very robust. Today's processors are so far on the cutting edge that they wouldn't survive a minute or two (without active cooling) before they shut down.
_tk is offline  
post #19 of 294 Unread 10-07-2019, 10:36 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Russia
Posts: 406
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 287 Post(s)
Liked: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by _tk View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aats View Post



What are you talking about? Newer computers run much, much faster with shorter boot times and much much better performance. I sometimes use old computers and they are real pain to use after modern SSDs and processing power.
I get what he's saying. Yes, processing power is waaay more powerful in today's computers. So is software bloat (and poorly engineered and written software).

With those older computers, developers were writing within certain limitations and thus were forced to streamline and optimize their code. Some of that older software made direct calls to the hardware too.

I have an old windows 95 computer that boots the O/S from a flash drive (no mechanical drives involved). It is absolutely lightening quick in everything that it does.

Also, those older processors ran with passive heatsinks and that's it. They were designed very robust. Today's processors are so far on the cutting edge that they wouldn't survive a minute or two (without active cooling) before they shut down.
Flash drives are not 95 tech, go use it with a tech of those times and check how "lightning quick" it is. Software was much better optimised, yes, but hw did not cut it even with all bloat on top today.
you can make a pc without fan today if you want. You'll lose in performance though unless absolute monster heatsink.
aats is online now  
post #20 of 294 Unread 10-15-2019, 02:18 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DreamWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Dirty South Jersey
Posts: 2,252
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1048 Post(s)
Liked: 618
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
The power amp part of the receivers have NOT evolve much( if any) in the last 30 years, a good amp that is 30 years old is not by default inferior. In fact all the new bells and whistles can make it worst like all the digital stuffs. Notice the faster and newer the computers, the SLOWER they are? The ones 20 years ago were more primitive, but they run faster and more reliable than today's computers. The fancier they get, the slower, more inconsistent they are? Don't even get me started on the new cars. Let's just say my new car spent at least a month in the first half year in the shop dealing with strange problems and they couldn't exactly resolve it.


I will hold onto a good amp from 30 years ago than a new amp.
The reason computers feel "slower" today is because companies are more concerned about their bottom line and taking the time to engineer and build efficient software is costly. Thus, the chosen technology is generally inferior performance-wise, but can more quickly turn around a working piece of software. But, if you think that computers are actually physically slower then you're just way out of touch with technology -- a travesty for someone who lists their location as "Silicon Valley", IMO.

Moreover, amplifier technology has evolved with Class D/G/H amps. Better, because technology marches on, they no longer perform "worst like all the digital stuff" -- but, I guess "digital stuff" is just another thing you're clueless about (and, for a Class D amp, the "D" doesn't mean "digital" like the clueless believe).

And cars...well, let's say they make it harder for people to work on them, but, again, if you think the engine technology required to eek out the MPG that modern gas engines are capable of could be implemented through simple carburetors then you're also crazy and you have no clue what goes into them!

So...yeah, you're just wrong, 100%, on everything you typed. Maybe educate yourself regarding newer technology before wrongly dismissing it?

Finally, let's not equate the average human's incompetence (e.g., can't fix your car in months) with technological inferiority. If anything, it's the reverse -- things are getting so much more complicated that fewer of the typical morons that run rampant in the world can actually comprehend (and therefore diagnose) them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by _tk View Post
I get what he's saying. Yes, processing power is waaay more powerful in today's computers. So is software bloat (and poorly engineered and written software).

With those older computers, developers were writing within certain limitations and thus were forced to streamline and optimize their code. Some of that older software made direct calls to the hardware too.

I have an old windows 95 computer that boots the O/S from a flash drive (no mechanical drives involved). It is absolutely lightening quick in everything that it does.

Also, those older processors ran with passive heatsinks and that's it. They were designed very robust. Today's processors are so far on the cutting edge that they wouldn't survive a minute or two (without active cooling) before they shut down.
Mostly true -- software bloat (even things like anti-virus) add complexity to the system and slow things down. It's a combination of a lot of things, but in general, more work gets done and the processors are faster, but much of the work is "background" tasks that have to time-share with "productive work" (that the user actually sees).

That said, I'm unsure we can say that older processors were designed more robustly because they didn't use anything but heatsinks -- you do realize that older processors had significantly less transistor density and therefore could withstand more heat in general, right?

Last edited by DreamWarrior; 10-15-2019 at 02:30 PM.
DreamWarrior is offline  
post #21 of 294 Unread 10-15-2019, 06:11 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,433
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1750 Post(s)
Liked: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWarrior View Post
The reason computers feel "slower" today is because companies are more concerned about their bottom line and taking the time to engineer and build efficient software is costly. Thus, the chosen technology is generally inferior performance-wise, but can more quickly turn around a working piece of software. But, if you think that computers are actually physically slower then you're just way out of touch with technology -- a travesty for someone who lists their location as "Silicon Valley", IMO.

Moreover, amplifier technology has evolved with Class D/G/H amps. Better, because technology marches on, they no longer perform "worst like all the digital stuff" -- but, I guess "digital stuff" is just another thing you're clueless about (and, for a Class D amp, the "D" doesn't mean "digital" like the clueless believe).

And cars...well, let's say they make it harder for people to work on them, but, again, if you think the engine technology required to eek out the MPG that modern gas engines are capable of could be implemented through simple carburetors then you're also crazy and you have no clue what goes into them!

So...yeah, you're just wrong, 100%, on everything you typed. Maybe educate yourself regarding newer technology before wrongly dismissing it?

Finally, let's not equate the average human's incompetence (e.g., can't fix your car in months) with technological inferiority. If anything, it's the reverse -- things are getting so much more complicated that fewer of the typical morons that run rampant in the world can actually comprehend (and therefore diagnose) them.

Mostly true -- software bloat (even things like anti-virus) add complexity to the system and slow things down. It's a combination of a lot of things, but in general, more work gets done and the processors are faster, but much of the work is "background" tasks that have to time-share with "productive work" (that the user actually sees).

That said, I'm unsure we can say that older processors were designed more robustly because they didn't use anything but heatsinks -- you do realize that older processors had significantly less transistor density and therefore could withstand more heat in general, right?

FYI, I was an engineer and manager of EE in silicon valley for 30 years designing both analog and digital, including MPU controllers, USB interface etc. So I sure have clues on the technology. Hardware is useless without software, it's not how fast the hardware, it's how fast the TOTAL package is. I know all about modular design of software to speed up the development of software, that's the reason it make it so slow to run throught all the subroutines instead of dedicated programs to run much much more efficiently. Newer software has a lot of fancier option that make you go through all the selection and slow you down and slow the computer down. All these are in the name of user friendly. But if you know what you are doing, the simplier, more primitive software can do the job faster. Then to rush onto the market, software are never debugged before they are released and let the users to debug for them.


You don't want to talk about newer cars to me. I just bought a 2018 Mercedes E300 a year ago, it spent a month or more in the first 6 months in the dealer and still cannot resolve the software problem. They make it so complicated with 3 different touch pads and mouse knob to control, then it has bugs and never really worked right. The radio station kept changing, all of a sudden lost control of the audio and radio and had to stop the car, put it in neutral, then the control came back. Compare to my 2014 Mercedes ML350, it's been 5 years, never been in the shop yet. So don't you tell me I have no idea about cars.


I don't care about fixing cars, I stop doing that since I was in the 30s already. I don't care to even open the hood of the car now!!! My problem is even when I brought it to the Mercedes dealer, they couldn't fix it until they had an update on the software available and made it a lot better. Now, it still have problems, but is at least livable. You don't believe me, read the latest Long Term Test on Motor Trend on the Subaru. All the beeping, warning and all, that's what I have been putting up with the E300.


I was looking at the new Mercedes GLE as the ML is 5 years old, it has option on the suspension that can hop out of a pothole!! Can you imagine if ( say when) it goes out of wack, you driving on the road and the car start hopping!!! Like the Hot Rod with air suspension of those gangs!!! OH SORRY, just wait for the software update and it will fix the hopping!!!


I know about Class D and Class H, those are cheaper option to get reasonable sound quality. Yes, I know how they work. High quality amps are still traditional design from 30 years back. How do I know? I DESIGN AUDIO POWER AMPS!!! I likely have more equipment for testing amps than most of the service place to measure THD and all.
RAART likes this.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.

Last edited by alan0354; 10-15-2019 at 09:03 PM.
alan0354 is offline  
post #22 of 294 Unread 10-16-2019, 09:16 AM
3db
AVS Forum Special Member
 
3db's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,717
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 663 Post(s)
Liked: 426
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
FYI, I was an engineer and manager of EE in silicon valley for 30 years designing both analog and digital, including MPU controllers, USB interface etc. So I sure have clues on the technology. Hardware is useless without software, it's not how fast the hardware, it's how fast the TOTAL package is. I know all about modular design of software to speed up the development of software, that's the reason it make it so slow to run throught all the subroutines instead of dedicated programs to run much much more efficiently. Newer software has a lot of fancier option that make you go through all the selection and slow you down and slow the computer down. All these are in the name of user friendly. But if you know what you are doing, the simplier, more primitive software can do the job faster. Then to rush onto the market, software are never debugged before they are released and let the users to debug for them.
.

Dont blame poor coding and long compilation times for slow response times on modern computers. Poorly written hex code on old computers also slows down old computers. Two different beasts.

AVR Yamaha RX-V 1800/1900/1500
TT/Cassette ProJect Xpression III/Yamaha KX1200/KX800
BR Yam. BD-S681/Sony X800/Pan. BD30 DPL Sam. 65"/ 55"/50"
Speakers PSB T-45,8C,1B/ PSB 500,200C,RBH A600/Alphas
Subs Rythmic LV12-R/PSB Subsonic 6/5
3db is online now  
post #23 of 294 Unread 10-16-2019, 09:58 AM
_tk
Advanced Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 728
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 578 Post(s)
Liked: 254
Quote:
Originally Posted by aats View Post
Flash drives are not 95 tech, go use it with a tech of those times and check how "lightning quick" it is. Software was much better optimised, yes, but hw did not cut it even with all bloat on top today.
you can make a pc without fan today if you want. You'll lose in performance though unless absolute monster heatsink.
I realize that flash drives aren't "95 tech". It was an example used to counter the fact that SSD's are the one piece of technology that has significantly sped up PC's in the past 10 years or so.

Still, even old mechanical higher rpm SCSI drives (which was 95 tech) were pretty dang fast. O/S's weren't as bloated back then and most everything you did after the O/S boot could be loaded into RAM (if you had enough). So, the mech. disk wasn't accessed a whole bunch.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWarrior View Post

Mostly true -- software bloat (even things like anti-virus) add complexity to the system and slow things down. It's a combination of a lot of things, but in general, more work gets done and the processors are faster, but much of the work is "background" tasks that have to time-share with "productive work" (that the user actually sees).

That said, I'm unsure we can say that older processors were designed more robustly because they didn't use anything but heatsinks -- you do realize that older processors had significantly less transistor density and therefore could withstand more heat in general, right?

Older article somewhat detailing this, but it does somewhat speak on the older processors being well designed:

https://www.zdnet.com/article/why-to...0s-processors/

I know when I spoke with a NASA engineer a few years back he mentioned that the older processors were pretty robust.
_tk is offline  
post #24 of 294 Unread 10-16-2019, 10:46 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,433
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1750 Post(s)
Liked: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3db View Post
Dont blame poor coding and long compilation times for slow response times on modern computers. Poorly written hex code on old computers also slows down old computers. Two different beasts.

Result is the same. Don't care whether the computer or the code.


I forgot to mention. Everything on that stupid E300 is slow. Even if you try to turn the fan up and down, it takes 3sec to respond. You shift the transmission, it still take like 2sec to shift. Try making a 3-point U-turn in busy traffic, it is dangerous and embarrassing. My 2003 E320 and the 2014 ML respond instantaneously. We really really regret buying the new E300. Both older ones give us trouble free service for years, now we got this piece of junk. Luckily my big boss is the main driver, not me!!! Now the "Check Engine" light comes on, another trip to the dealer.



Then about the printers we have, I already buy the better type, not the $59.99 Canon. We still have a little business going, we need something a little better than those cheaper printers. We have an HP Officejet 7510 and Canon MB2700, both are less than 2 years old, none of them work that great. Compare to the old HP we had, it's like snail. Always has to "think" for like a minute or two before printing. Keep saying "processing". Keep asking questions, never print it right. Constantly need updating the drivers. The old printer was more simple minded, but it's so fast. I should have fix the old HP printer.



For one reason or the other, we have been buying new laptops like every other year, I only buy ones with SS drive instead of the HDD drive to speed up the computer particular booting up. Paying at least $60 more just to speed it up a little, still it's just getting slower and slower. I have to keep updating the drivers also.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.

Last edited by alan0354; 10-16-2019 at 10:58 AM.
alan0354 is offline  
post #25 of 294 Unread 10-16-2019, 11:01 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
DreamWarrior's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Dirty South Jersey
Posts: 2,252
Mentioned: 29 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1048 Post(s)
Liked: 618
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
FYI, I was an engineer and manager of EE in silicon valley for 30 years designing both analog and digital, including MPU controllers, USB interface etc. So I sure have clues on the technology. Hardware is useless without software, it's not how fast the hardware, it's how fast the TOTAL package is. I know all about modular design of software to speed up the development of software, that's the reason it make it so slow to run throught all the subroutines instead of dedicated programs to run much much more efficiently. Newer software has a lot of fancier option that make you go through all the selection and slow you down and slow the computer down. All these are in the name of user friendly. But if you know what you are doing, the simplier, more primitive software can do the job faster. Then to rush onto the market, software are never debugged before they are released and let the users to debug for them.
Ok, well, engineer and manager or not, you make an oblique statement that newer computers are slower and that's untrue. As an engineer, I expect you to make more cogent statements.

I'll skip your rants about vehicles because it's just a furtherance of the "complex software is complex" tautology that I already pointed out more generally.

Further, I'll give you a pass on being too...incompetent...to figure out, as a self-proclaimed talented EE of 30 years, how to wrestle the complexities of a few touch pads and "mouse knob" -- maybe Mercedes vehicles are just out of your league these days? Possibly time to find a simpler vehicle that meets your needs better?
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
I know about Class D and Class H, those are cheaper option to get reasonable sound quality. Yes, I know how they work. High quality amps are still traditional design from 30 years back. How do I know? I DESIGN AUDIO POWER AMPS!!! I likely have more equipment for testing amps than most of the service place to measure THD and all.
Ok, pal -- design power amps like a champ. When you can hear the difference in a controlled DBT between a well designed class D and class A, let us know.

Regardless, it seems your rants can be generalized to new technology is "worst like all the digital stuff". That statement is all I need to know about where you stand and what your level of competence is. I'll chalk it up to you being incapable of keeping up with the times -- much like my dear departed dad, who thought digital was the devil and would never be able to replace analog. Then, one day those thoughts cost him his job because he wouldn't work with it and the last vestiges of analog were gone from his company.

Yes, new technology is more complicated. Yes, that means, unfortunately, it takes bigger brains to work with it and figure it out -- both hardware and software. Unfortunately, just because it takes bigger brains doesn't mean there exist bigger brains in the tech world in mass quantities. So, sure, more software, more complex, not smart enough folks dealing with it...sounds like a powder keg, right? Rant about that, not about how it's inherently "inferior" and "slower" -- in the right hands, it's neither.

That said, if you want to pine for the days when things were simpler, then go ahead. But, rightly state that you'd prefer simpler technology, not that new technology is inherently inferior (and imply the reason is because it's digital).
DreamWarrior is offline  
post #26 of 294 Unread 10-16-2019, 11:23 AM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,480
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2418 Post(s)
Liked: 2247
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/173-2...l#post58012114



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman
I did! And that's the fact.
What is your accredited EE degree and from what institution so we can put it into perspective? You claim to be THE expert here.



alan0354

Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley



What is your degree? Yes, I don't have EE degree, I only have a Chemistry degree. What's yours? A PhD? You sound like one.




If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough – Albert Einstein

Last edited by Ratman; 10-16-2019 at 11:40 AM.
Ratman is online now  
post #27 of 294 Unread 10-16-2019, 01:37 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,433
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1750 Post(s)
Liked: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamWarrior View Post
Ok, well, engineer and manager or not, you make an oblique statement that newer computers are slower and that's untrue. As an engineer, I expect you to make more cogent statements.

I'll skip your rants about vehicles because it's just a furtherance of the "complex software is complex" tautology that I already pointed out more generally.

Further, I'll give you a pass on being too...incompetent...to figure out, as a self-proclaimed talented EE of 30 years, how to wrestle the complexities of a few touch pads and "mouse knob" -- maybe Mercedes vehicles are just out of your league these days? Possibly time to find a simpler vehicle that meets your needs better?

Ok, pal -- design power amps like a champ. When you can hear the difference in a controlled DBT between a well designed class D and class A, let us know.

Regardless, it seems your rants can be generalized to new technology is "worst like all the digital stuff". That statement is all I need to know about where you stand and what your level of competence is. I'll chalk it up to you being incapable of keeping up with the times -- much like my dear departed dad, who thought digital was the devil and would never be able to replace analog. Then, one day those thoughts cost him his job because he wouldn't work with it and the last vestiges of analog were gone from his company.

Yes, new technology is more complicated. Yes, that means, unfortunately, it takes bigger brains to work with it and figure it out -- both hardware and software. Unfortunately, just because it takes bigger brains doesn't mean there exist bigger brains in the tech world in mass quantities. So, sure, more software, more complex, not smart enough folks dealing with it...sounds like a powder keg, right? Rant about that, not about how it's inherently "inferior" and "slower" -- in the right hands, it's neither.

That said, if you want to pine for the days when things were simpler, then go ahead. But, rightly state that you'd prefer simpler technology, not that new technology is inherently inferior (and imply the reason is because it's digital).



I am sure I am not an expert like you. You an EE, programmer?


You must not read my post, I complain because I OWN all the latest computers, printers and all to say that, not that I never have those like your father and complain. I have to live with those day in and day out to complain. All of them are still current and are still being sold on Amazon. Because of the heavy usage, I have to buy new ones all the time. They do break. We went through 3 Canon printers in the last 5 years!!! I have to be on the computer at least 5 ot 6 hours a day.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.

Last edited by alan0354; 10-16-2019 at 02:19 PM.
alan0354 is offline  
post #28 of 294 Unread 10-16-2019, 01:39 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,433
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1750 Post(s)
Liked: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
https://www.avsforum.com/forum/173-2...l#post58012114



Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman
I did! And that's the fact.
What is your accredited EE degree and from what institution so we can put it into perspective? You claim to be THE expert here.



alan0354

Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley



What is your degree? Yes, I don't have EE degree, I only have a Chemistry degree. What's yours? A PhD? You sound like one.

I did published papers in America Institute of Physics and own two US Patent solely under my name, all in electronics.

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
post #29 of 294 Unread 10-16-2019, 02:09 PM
AVS Forum Addicted Member
 
Ratman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Collingswood, N.J.
Posts: 19,480
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2418 Post(s)
Liked: 2247
Quote:
Originally Posted by alan0354 View Post
I did published papers in America Institute of Physics and own two US Patent solely under my name, all in electronics.
But you are not an accredited Electronics Engineer. That is misrepresentation.



If you can’t explain it simply, you don’t understand it well enough – Albert Einstein
Ratman is online now  
post #30 of 294 Unread 10-16-2019, 02:14 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
alan0354's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 2,433
Mentioned: 14 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1750 Post(s)
Liked: 443
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ratman View Post
But you are not an accredited Electronics Engineer. That is misrepresentation.
What degree you have? You really think a BS degree is that important?

Own designed power amp, own designed preamp, JM LAB Spectral 913.1 speakers, Rythmik F12SE sub.
Not hooked up: Nakamichi Stasis PA-7 power amp, Velodyne VA1210 sub, Kef Reference Series center, Kef Bookshelf speaker, Monitor Audio bookshelf speaker, Infinity rear speakers. Acurus 3X200W amp.
alan0354 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply 2-Channel Audio



Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off