JamesGangNC@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
a écrit :
> On May 9, 10:35 am, Major Jocelyn <maj...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Trevor Wilson a écrit :
>>
>>
>>
>>> "Major Jocelyn" <maj...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:BHWUj.4139$zm2.12557@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> Trevor Wilson a écrit :
>>>>> "Major Jocelyn" <maj...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>> news:rpNUj.16181$HB2.8355@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>> Trevor Wilson a écrit :
>>>>>>> "EADGBE" <hwbossh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>>>>>
news:618995cb-7dbb-4a94-806c-a2c24de7541e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>> Thanks for taking the time to reply, but I have to say that you
seem
>>>>>>>> to be too biased against "old stuff" to really be able to give me
a
>>>>>>>> thoughtful answer.
>>>>>>> **Incorrect. I am merely providing a thoughtful, concise answer. I
am
>>>>>>> intimately familiar with old equipment.
>>>>>>> I'm not trying to insult you, but it does seem to
>>>>>>>> me that you are one of those who thinks that "old = bad" and "new
=
>>>>>>>> good".
>>>>>>> **Nonsense. I am one of those who thinks that old, crappy = bad.
Old,
>>>>>>> good = good.. New, crappy = bad. New, good = good.
>>>>>>>> You said it yourself - people are paying big bucks for vintage
gear
>>>>>>>> like this. You have to ask yourself: WHY are they doing it?
>>>>>>> **They're deluded.
>>>>>> Totally Wrong! You can get awesome piece of vintage equipment for
the
>>>>>> price you will pay for new crappy stuff.
>>>>> **Wrong. You MIGHT get a piece of adequately functioning equipment.
Or
>>>>> not. You might end up with a piece of junk wich requires vast sums
to be
>>>>> spent, in order to bring it up to a reasonable level of performance.
>>>>>>> If there
>>>>>>>> is one area where people are very picky about getting what they
paid
>>>>>>>> for, it is in the area of home audio. If there wasn't such a
demand
>>>>>>>> for certain pieces of vintage gear, the prices wouldn't be as
high as
>>>>>>>> they are. YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR more often than not!
>>>>>>> **Nope. More often that not, you get crap, at high prices.
>>>>>> I see that you really but really don't know what you are talking
about.
>>>>> **Really? Let me outline _my_ experience for you:
>>>>> * 1974-1979 - Service manager for Marantz Australia.
>>>>> * 1979 - Now - Service tech for my own business. I've serviced
thousands
>>>>> of different products, including many Pioneers. Unlike you, I KNOW
>>>>> exactly what is wrong with 1970s vinage equipment.
>>>>> The old Pioneers are better than some and worse than others, in both
>>>>> design and construction. In all cases, they cannot come close to
modern,
>>>>> PROPERLY designed equipment, in performance on a Dollar for Dollar
basis.
>>>>> Second hand prices are, of course, difficult to assess. I can tell
you,
>>>>> however, that 1970s equipment tends to be over-priced.
>>>>> Now: Tell me about YOUR experience. How many old Pioneers have you
>>>>> serviced?
>>>>> Trevor Wilson
>>>> I have own several Pioneer receivers and amp (starting with the
>>>> SX-626,going to the SX-939 then the SA-9900) followed by Kenwood
KA-9100
>>>> then Sansui CA-3000 Preamp with Dynaco ST-400 power Amp followed by
>>>> Radford SC-242 Preamp and Quad 405 Power Amp and Finally since 1990
the
>>>> Luxman L-550. All these component are still working perfectly.
>>> **You don't know that. You're guessing. I promise you this: After 30
years,
>>> no amplifier will meet it's published specs, unless you've replaced
every
>>> electrolytic cap in the product. Of the specific products you
mentioned, I
>>> have a great deal of experience with the Luxman, the Quad, the Dynaco
and
>>> the Pioneers. ALL suffer from dried out electros. Amongst other
things.
>>> I gave
>>>> the CA-3000/Dynaco ST-400 to a kid (22 years old is a kid for me) a
couple
>>>> weeks ago. I admit that I had to replace some capacitor on the Quad
and
>>>> the Dynaco + cleaning of the other one but as I said they all work
>>>> perfectly. As for my Experience, I work as a senior salesmen in a
Hi-Fi
>>>> chain so I know by the quatity of receivers that stop working after
being
>>>> in use for less than 2 years that today's stuff do not have the
quality of
>>>> construction and design that the vintage stuff do.
>>> **Utter nonsense. You can buy decent quality modern equipment, as well
as
>>> crap.
>>>> And unlike you I do not make a living servicing NEw equipment.
>>> **I make a living servicing new and old equipment. The old stuff is
nothing
>>> special. A lot of the new stuff is nothing special.
>>> Trevor Wilson
>> If a good vintage amp of receiver have been well taken care it can (and
>> probably will give you years of pleasure. On the other hand if it was
>> not then it will have to be serviced and sometime it is not worth the
>> money (and the time involved). I have seen people that have bought H/K,
>> Rotel and Nad that where totally scrapped by the previous owner. I have
>> also see Luxman, Quad, Radford, and H/K stuff that where in pristine
>> condition. As for my Radford I have it check by one guy at our service
>> dept that is a Radford Nuts and all the spec where still on the spot.
>>
>> One thing that I did'nt care before that we see on new stuff is a
Remote
>> control. I did'nt care before but when I broke my ankle this winter you
>> bet I was craving for one (and I still do today after 3 month);-).
>>
>> As for the Quality of today receivers, yes you can get decent and even
>> great quality modern equipment but not below 400$. I never get any
>> return on High-End Receivers It is always with the one that cost less
>> than 400$. This is not Utter nonsense as you said. Do you remember that
>> some people recommend this poster to buy a 200$ basic receiver. What I
>> wanted to said is that you're better to spend that 200$ on a good
>> vintage amp or receiver than on a 200$ crappy basic receiver.
>>
>> Jocelyn
>> Proud Son of Leo Major, DCM & Bar
>> To know why I am proud go there:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Major-
Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> What I said was that those particular pioneers were not any better
> than a new $200 stereo. Not that you could not get a better deal by
> buying used equipment. Those particular pioneers can be had for under
> $100. Could you get a better used amp for $200 than you could a new
> one? Sure, as long as used is ok with you. That's not true for
> everyone though.
I agree with you! Vintage is not for everyone. Some people just want new
stuff because there is a warranty. Other honestly believe that new is
better than old, other believe the other way. I have find few new
equipment that where as good as my Luxman L-550 except they all cost
over 1800$.
Jocelyn
Proud Son of Leo Major, DCM & Bar
To know why I am proud go there:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Major
|
