Sony V-Fets .
Amps from the 1980's -- What gear holds up sonically? Reliably?
Hi Everyone,
For me, the 1980s were a real "golden age" of amplifiers. Dr. Leach’s paper on building a low TIM amplifier had been widely distributed and relied on by budding designers, and lots of boutique brands came. It was also the era of the biggest of the Conrad Johsnon tube amps as well and the invention of the MOSFET.
For me, brands I cared about:
I’m curious who is still listening to these vintage pieces, and which brands you think have stood up both in terms of reliability and / or sonics ?
For me, the 1980s were a real "golden age" of amplifiers. Dr. Leach’s paper on building a low TIM amplifier had been widely distributed and relied on by budding designers, and lots of boutique brands came. It was also the era of the biggest of the Conrad Johsnon tube amps as well and the invention of the MOSFET.
For me, brands I cared about:
- Threshold
- Sumo
- Perreaux (New Zealand, very pretty)
- Tandberg
- Hitachi
- Kyocera
- Nikko
- Krell (of course)
- CJ
- ARC
- Yamaha (professional)
- Carver
- Mark Levinson
- Amber
- Tandberg
I’m curious who is still listening to these vintage pieces, and which brands you think have stood up both in terms of reliability and / or sonics ?
165 responses Add your response
HEA=High End Audio. I have had so much gear in my lifetime. What is interesting was / is the transition of the " hard wired " power cords on most of this vintage equipment, to the now widely use of IEC inlets. One of the many tweaks I did on all older components, of all kinds, was to change the factory cords out to heavier gauge cords I purchased from wire supply houses. In every case, on every piece of gear, the improvement in sq was quite noticeable and enjoyable. Now, power cords are actually no longer accessories, but components......But, I digress, not to get off of Eric's thread...…..Enjoy ! MrD. |
Post removed |
I was in this camp as well and believe it was the best sounding era of all up till the new Class D designs which have been a dream come true. From around 1993-recent (with the exception of a few) the sound of amps have been bland and smallish staging and uninvolving. Now with the Class D (tuned properly) mated with low mass speakers HEA amps are in serious trouble. I was also a huge fan of B&Ks early models. The days of B&K and Superphon was a pretty amazing time. Lots of great amps back then, but when the next generation came along the musically became hard to find as compared to some of these brands best efforts. Not their most expensive efforts but their best! Michael |
Funny, I'm finding myself squarely stuck in the 80's when it comes to audio gear and rather enjoying it. Been a classic B&K guy for a long time as this is my 4th B&K amp (2 - ST140's, an EX442 Sonata & now an ST202), but would love to try Perreaux, VSP Labs, Moscode, Acoustat, PS Audio and maybe a couple others. I like the sound of Mosfets too. I had a Tandberg 3012 integrated that was lovely as well. To me, nothing is as tubey, warm, and as reasonably priced as B&K, which is why I always tend to revisit this amp. Which 80's amps do you love and why? |
Amplifier design matured during the 1970’s and the better ones reached sonic perfection at the time. Of course, such technical instruments age, and the most problematic components are the power supply capacitors. Quality of those at the times was not as good as it now, and after 10-15 year many had already aged dangerously. So if you have an amplifier from those days, it pays to get it recapped. If you don’t, one day you may destroy your speakers. The vast majority of the amplifiers mentioned here were never on the European market, so my experience has been with Quad: a 303, a 405-2 and a 606-2. I still have all three of them, and all three completely refurbished. The 303 is a bit old fashioned and is less usable for the lower impedance speakers that only came on the market after its introduction. But it was the ideal amplifier for my Quad esl 57 speakers. The 606-2 and 405-2 were bought second hand quite recently, and are now used to drive my Quad 2805 main speakers and Harbeth P3ESR desk top speakers respectively. Sonically, there are no differences at lower levels, but the bigger ones do sound better at higher levels. The design criterion for ampifiers was defined long ago by Peter Walker, to be ’a straight wire with gain’ and that was indeed achieved by the better amplifiers of the period. After all, there are only three ways in which a well designed amplifier can sound different: 1 input sensitivity that is not matched to the output sensitivity of the source. This was a problem in the early days with no effective fixed standards for home audio. Hence Quad pre amplifers like my Q33 had variable inputs to precisely match the output level of the pickup cartridge, the tape recorder etc. If this is not done, there can be clipping of the input stage. This is quite common when you use these older amplifiers with modern cd red book standard sources with their 2.0V output (or more if the designer wanted to cheat). 2.0 V is way more than their rca inputs can handle. The solution is simple: inline attenuators. 2 Insufficient output power to avoid clipping of the output during dynamic peaks. Real dynamic music like a symphony orchestra may occasionally need hundreds of watts. Here, big power output rules, so beefy power supplies and big output capacitors. You can upgrade the latter, which is well worth it on the older Quad amps if you have them recapped anyway. Modern capacitors can be much smaller, so you can now fit bigger values in the same case. 3 load dependent frequency response. Real speakers are not just e.g. 8 Ohms, but their impedance varies quite a bit. The more the impedance varies, the harde the speaker is to drive for the amplifier. What this means is that the frequency response is not flat, but varies with the impedance at that particular frequency. To avoid this, amplifiers need a low output impedance, for a high damping factor (i.e. speaker impedance divided by output impedance). If this is not the case with real speakers of varying impedance over the frequency spectrum, the frequency response of the amplifier can vary quite a bit, giving that amplifier a signature sound like extra bass or a high frequency roll off for more ’warmth’. Many audiophile amplifiers are like this, thus deviating from the ’straight wire with gain’ criterion. Here, solid state amplifiers have a great advantage over most tubes. So, to come back to the original discussion about older amplifiers, yes there are real beauties. Get one with sufficient power (there were some really big ones at the time), have it at least recapped, and probably get some inline attenuators to connect modern 2.0 V sources. |
The first version of the Acurus DIA-100. I bought it along with the Acurus CD player (also the original version) right after they were available. I paired them with a pair of Snell E-IIIs and it was my first decent stereo system. I still have the DIA-100 driving a decent pair of outdoor speakers and the CD player is in a second home system. The CD player was also used as a transport in earlier main systems I had. Even the LED on the CD player still works and the DIA sounds great. I get compliments on how good the outdoor system sounds. The Snells I had re-foamed several years ago and the oak cabinets are still beautiful. Even have the original stands with the Snells. They are in storage and I need to sell them as I have another pair of Spendors I use with the surround system and swap those with the Logans every once in a while. Recently I tried the Acurus in my current system, diving Martin Logan ESLs and was shocked at how good it sounded. For those that do not know - the DIA -100 was described as an amp with a passive gain stage (?, I think). I see no reason to sell the Acurus stuff. |
Lou - Nope, mine is a KT88 SET stereo amp with a total of 5 tubes. Two Kt88's, two EL84's (6bq5's), & one 5ar4 rectifier tube.The amp is very good. That stated, I wouldn't hesitate to buy anything he has made. Jeff is very approachable, I've talked to him a couple times over the phone. However, I don't think he is building or designing anymore, unfortunately. |
Hey Boxer - you wouldn't happen to have one of Jeff Korneff's 6bq5 integrateds would you? I had one many years ago, sold it to someone in Washington state who was using it with Klipschhorns. What an amp! I now have a couple custom SE int amps built by Ed Duda, the chief amp designer of the old Lafayette Radio Corp.... And yes, what a hobby!!! |
No Melos fans? I bought a used 222 preamp in the 90's & am still enjoying it today, in fact right now. I had it services last year (for the first time) & they replaced some of the switches, & the volume pot. Apparently that was their weak points. I also have been enjoying sonic frontiers first version signature phono preamp for a dozen years or so. I think that one dates back to the early 90's. My amp is a staggering 5 watts per channel. It was built by Kornef, don't know when but it's old enough to have it's first service this year. This all drives lowther speakers which were a modern marvel in the 50's I believe. The system sounds incredibly real. Wide, deep, & 3D enough to fool you into believing they're in the room on a good record. It's also forgiving enough to make you not cringe on a record that is < perfect. With all the vinyl that is out there today, it's a great time to be alive. What a hobby! |
Eric, perhaps my jaded view has something to do with my experience with 80's gear. My Luxman R-115 developed a volume and intermittent channel problem that got worse with time. A yamaha cd player starting skipping after a few years. My buddy's proton amp went south after 20 years. Though I guess neither one of those would be considered high end. The thing is, the beginning of the 80's was when all the big brands reduced the quality of their lines from what was offered during the golden age of audio, the 70's. I suspect the truly high end managed to avoid this. The Conrad Johnsons and Mark Levinsons of the era probably did just fine. Carver made quite a name for themselves, but their gear didn't last forever. |
Hi 213! For many of us who have been in the hobby for a long time these threads are ways of us sharing our experiences over time and connecting with other long-time hobbyists. A trip down memory lane if you will. This is also a good way to talk trends/fads and look at the winding road Hi-Fi has been on. At the same time, all of my audio gear is less than 4 years old. :) Best, E |
Hmm, another "back in the day" thread. I guess its inevitable to recount how good the high end was back in the 80’s, and no doubt the good brands have lasted year after year. But 30+ year old components are going to develop issues and start to operate out of spec. Yes I know that there will be individual amps that it seem time can’t kill, but those would be in the minority. And to find a tech that really knows old electronics is getting rare. But it’s okay, amp design is not exactly rocket science, and many technological advances have occurred since the 80’s. A lot of new gear these days is actually pretty good too. |
Post removed |
Well, this is interesting, I don’t know which is right, but this article claims the first series of the Nak amps were better? http://www.tonepublications.com/old-school/nakamichi-pa-7-amplifier/ Per other threads, the original PA-7 was pure class A and 150W/ch instead of 225W/ch Best, E |
A couple years ago a friend gave me a Hafler P225 (pro version of DH220) with one faulty channel. The fault was a bad connection at the RCA input jack my friend had installed; an easy fix. After recapping, rewiring and then setting DC offset and bias, the amp sounded great. At the time I was using a Nelson Pass First Watt amp. After listening to the Hafler for a while, I found I preferred it to the First Watt amp. The Hafler has been in my system for more than a year now and surprisingly, I have no desire to swap it out. This amp was my favorite amp to drive a pair of Magnepan 1.6s I was playing with. |
Great thread Erik! I was 20 years old in 1980, so the 80s gear was my intro into high end gear having owned a Mitsubishi DA-R8 rec’r & B&O RX tt in the early 80s to owning a B&K ST-140, Music Reference RM5 pre & Rega Planar 3 by the end of the 80s. i also had a TAS & Stereophile subscription back then and several issues of HiFi Heretic & other defunct magazines as well, so I ended up reading about a whole lot of gear that I never got a chance to hear. Currently, I’m thoroughly enjoying a Tandberg TIA 3012 integrated, (and Erik, as you mentioned earlier in a post), it is a deep, rich sound as compared to my aural memory of the B&K ST-140 sound, more like the higher powered EX442 Sonata that I owned back in the day too. I’ve owned several other 80s products as well but a few that really stood out were the B&K amps, the Onix OA-21s & Onix OA 20/2 integrateds, cj MV50, Mac MC225, Music Reference RM9 & RM5 pre. I also auditioned a VSP Labs TransMos 150 & an Acoustat TNT120 that were both very memorable as well. I always wanted to hear/own a Perreaux amp, PS Audio 200C, Forte 1a, Spectral DMA50 or Motif amp as I thought they were amongst the coolest looking pieces back in the 80s. |
I have to say, that my old Sumo Nine took on all comers in my system, I've had some very well respected amps in there... to be fair, my old Sumo was hardly a Sumo any more, it had a radically superior part upgrades throughout... from the power supply to the boards to the wiring.. So probably not fair... It is getting upgraded again this minute with Newer, higher voltage, higher mfd and lower esr supply caps now as well as a minor circuit change with all new Higher quality output transistors. I'm excited to get it back. I've always been told that the 2SC1831 could not be replaced. |
I would certainly add Audire to this list, at least everything built after the Model 2 amp and Legato preamp. The Legato is reliable, but I wonder about the people who rave about its sound. It is certainly clean , but it's power supply limits its dynamics beyond belief compared to newer models, i.e. Diffet 3, 5 and Andante. I even preferred the bulky Diffet1. The Diffet 2 is also very good, but it was designed before CD's and before Julius built his speakers for testing. As such, it is a little loosey goosey in the bass, compared to the others. FYI, there is no Diffet 4, nor an amp using a 4 in the model number. Instead, the early amp was nalled the Forte", because so much of his equipment went to Japan, where the number 4 is considered to be like our 13. After this, Julius continued the use of musical terms. |
Thanks to all of the contributors so far, this has turned out to be a great thread. I appreciate hearing about all of the experiences and especially about gear I never heard or saw myself. I want to take a moment to acknowledge that our pleasure, our hobby, our interest and the industry has been advanced by people like the late Dr. Marshall Leach Jr. as well as others who researched, studied and shared their work with a needy/greedy audience. Dr. Leach’s paper in 1976 was, I believe, a turning point and fuse lighter for the solid state amplifier market. Our hobby and expectations and the quality of products we can afford to buy would most likely be something entirely different without that paper and without his work. Certainly, many manufacturers took advantage of his proposal almost verbatim. If you understood his paper, you can read almost any amplifier schematic for the next 20 years before Class D amps came to the fore and identify each section in it. His paper was at the same time a recipe and a challenge. It said "Here is how you make a good amplifier" and at the same time "See if you can make something even better." Engineers no longer had to hunt in the dark and search for the secrets to good solid state amps. All the parts and their use were laid out before them, while at the same time opportunities to improve upon and leave their own marks upon the discipline also opened up. I should also point out that designers like Nelson Pass have long taken a different approach, and looked to simplify as opposed to enhance or perfect. And we are grateful for that approach as well! But when Nelson looks to simplify or others to re-think components they are constantly challenged by the Leach legacy. We can’t just remove sections, or alter feed back circuits. We must do so AND get sound as good if not better by doing so. Dr. Leach left a clear foil and challenge for others to take up, and improve upon. This is how progress gets done. We can say "Oh, amp X is nothing like the Leach paper..." but it is impossible to say these amps were not informed and challenged by it. I should point out and thank Nelson Pass as he is quite active in the DIY community, sharing his thoughts, and tinkering "out loud" for the benefit of this community. So, to people like Nelson pass as well as the late Dr. Leach, and the universities which create environments so students can learn from people like him, I would like to offer a heart-felt thank you. They enabled the industry, the hobby and ultimately the music. Best, E |