my arc vt60 (with curcio modded input stage) and 100.2 ss amp still kick some serious butt... :)
Old Amps that can still Kick Butt
Not being a believer that time necessarily = progress, I would like to offer the following example of a sonic gem that has transcended time and can totally kick butt in a modern milieu:
The Robertson 4010. I got one of these about two years ago because it was in immaculate condition, the price was so low and I was inquisitive. I hooked it up and let it warm up for a couple of days. OMG this thing was in the super amp league: Transparency to die for, slam that you couldn‘t‘ believe for for a 50W amp.. Peter Moncrieffe wasn‘t wrong in his review of this amp: this thing is in the Sterreophile Class A component category hands down. Even after all these years.
What amps have you encountered that have defied time and can still kick butt today?
161 responses Add your response
Imho....the majority of 'new' anything hasn't improved to any great degree of late. Most boast of various 'n sundry, but it seems to come down to ones' preferences in the interactions of the other components before and after 'Item X' in the space listened within.... It seems that one can always find 'flaw' or shortcomings in Anything. One persons' Yay is anothers' Meh.... It's commented upon daily in these forums... The Daily Kvetch...The emperors' new robes are still transparent, and his 'short comings' are painfully obvious. ;) |
The parasound hca 3500 i have owned it for twenty five years and have never heard or found a better overall amplifier for all speakers. My favorite tube amp is the sonic frontiers for the same reason Hilarious. The Parasound HCA 2500 II and the Sonic Frontiers Power 2 were two of the worst sounding amps I have owned (around 30 in the last 30 years). To each his own. Oz |
While I much prefer Audio Research products, I still use a Hafler 500 I built at my desk in my shop in 1974. Recently checked over, the bias was adjusted and the amp pronounced perfect, and it sounds that way. I am using it on the bottom end of my bi-amped Tympani I-C's, so it is not called upon to be full range, but it works just fine either way. Not perfect in accuracy, but just fine. The Adcom 535 I got around the same time runs my home office system, which I use when doing stuff like this. Neither is as accurate as the Audio Research amps I use on the top end or such older amps as the D-150--wish I still had one of those!--but they run and run and run and never give me a problem. So yes, some older amps are just fine. This is not to say I would not buy a new amp given the $$ and desire, but since this is not a priority for me right now--fixing up my newly-purchased house is #1--I am not in the market. But those two amps seem to do the job for over 40 years, so why complain? What else do you use that is 40+ years old and works as well as it did when new? Maybe a musical instrument, and of course my C-2, which needs constant attention, but that's about all I can think of. Cheers! |
@lou_setriodes B&K EX442/ST-140 It’s been fun reading through this thread and seeing some blasts from the past. I built a DH500 from a kit in 1985, then moved on to a New York Audio Labs Moscode 300 about 2 years later (that one’s a bit obscure, and was surprised to see it mentioned! I actually got to meet Harvey Rosenberg...a very colorful and interesting character, as so many of these high-end entrepreneurs are!). My next amp was a Distech LS-2 based on the B&K ST-140. Ironically, I just picked up one of the last of the B&K ST-140s for my son as a graduation gift....he’s gonna love it! |
@knotscott / @lou_setriodes - Did either of you ever perform any of the mods, to your Moscodes? Great amp!
|
@knotscott / @lou_setriodes - Did either of you ever perform any of the mods, to your Moscodes? Great amp! Other than changing some tubes, I didn't do anything else to mine. |
Most of the amps listed here will sound fine at low volume. But if you want to blast they’ll get painful. The mark of a good system is one that sounds smooth and detailed (not brightness masquerading as detail) even at high volume. The problem is caused by insufficient feedback. At low frequencies the feedback is fine, which is why they can play bass well. But as frequency is increased, the distortion goes up with it because the design lacks the Gain Bandwidth Product needed to support high levels of feedback at high frequencies. This results in harshness and brightness since that is how the ear perceives the higher ordered harmonics generated by the amp. You can’t just add more feedback; you might exceed the phase margin of the amp, causing it to oscillate. Its a compromise. I have a lower powered Radio Shack amp that sounds fine as long as you don’t push it hard. It tends to make the 2nd harmonic as its primary distortion product and that masks a good deal of the higher orders. But at higher volume levels there isn’t enough lower ordered content to mask anymore- and so it gets harsh. But if I run speakers that have enough efficiency, the amp never gets to those volumes and it sounds fine. Put another way, even though a lot of the amps mentioned so far can make quite a bit of power, matching the speaker to them (using an easier to drive speaker) is paramount to getting the most out of them. |
I still use Luxman M-4000 on a daily basis (together with its C-1010 pre amp companion). Although it’s now 45+ years old, I’m still amazed at how musical and ’modern’ (as in transparent) it sounds. Then upcoming engineer Tim de Paravacini (RIP) did it right and it stands as an early testament to his genius. One of the more powerful amps in its day (although the M-6000 was the real monster) it doesn’t run out of stream and keeps its composure when pushed really hard. I use it with speakers of the same vintage with fairly high efficiency (Pioneer CS-3000a and CS-T8), but it can just as easily drive my low sensitivity Maggie 20.7’s without any trouble. A true classic! |
@ebm I don’t think the Rowland 8T is really an ’old amp’. The OP seems to be looking for amps from a much older generation. The Rowland can indeed compete well today, and yes it is a classic and exceptional. Probably more in line with the OP’s question, would be something like the ARC D70Mk2 or the ARC M100’s, both of which were incredible for their time and still also highly competitive today. ( In fact, i believe there are still a lot of new amp designs that these three will put to shame!) |
Kick butt. What a joke. Set that old tube amp out by the curb, and you'll be ahead of the rush. Class D is already starting to make such amps worthless sonically and in time, in terms of valuation. In a couple years such amps will be fairly worthless, and rightly so, as they will have slid from occupying a status of HiFi to MidFi. Class D is now so good that I would not dream of using any amp, SS or Tube, over five years old. It would be a waste of my time to even assess such amps. I predict that in a couple years those who are serious about an assault on SOTA will be looking to Class D to achieve it. Those who want a bargain will be looking to the other genres - an inversion of the historic norm regarding amps. It's going to be come bloody among amp manufacturers going forward. Not that I wish ill on other SS and tube amp makers, but such profound technological and sonic progress will not be impeded by nostalgia. The only justification that one might have to use an old tube amp will be that it is cheap. Looking at the other two threads started by the OP with the same dismissive statement, that is perhaps the motivation of this thread - pretend old, cheap gear performs as good. :) SOTA sound is changing for the better right NOW, and Class D is a primary driver of it. Class A, A/B and tube amps? No, they are doing nothing of the sort. The glorious future of Class D amplification HAS arrived, and it will only get better! Cynical? Skeptical? You lose out. If anyone would like insight on this, read my review of the Legacy Audio i.V4 Ultra Amplifier review at Dagogo.com |
@atmasphere said: "Most of the amps listed here will sound fine at low volume. But if you
want to blast they’ll get painful. The mark of a good system is one that
sounds smooth and detailed (not brightness masquerading as detail) even
at high volume." I do not disagree because I simply don't have the experience to do so (and I do not have golden ears) but I will say that my Proceed HPA2 mentioned above, driving the Aerial Acoustic 8Bs through an AR LS-16 tube preamp sounds good as high as I care to crank it before the neighbors start to complain. Remarkably, it sounds pretty good at lower volumes as well. There is no point in the volume range where they get too bright or too muddy for that matter. But, as @sameyers1 mentioned these speakers and this amp seem to have been made for each other. The one exception is overly DR compressed recordings. The louder they get the worse they sound.....on all but my lowest end systems. |
I understand people feeling nostalgic. That is all this is. Young hormone filled people get emotionally attached to people, events, music and sounds. If old equipment, in general, sounded better than new high end equipment, then the price on the old stuff would rise above new stuff. The reviewers and serious amateurs would get rid of the new stuff. There would be a blossoming industry with The Absolute Vintage Sound magazine leading the way. You can fool the mid-FI folks with buttons and new looks... you can fool the high end folks for a short time, but not for long. I bought a CD player when they came out... but sure didn’t get rid of my turntable. The idea that there is a lot of old equipment that sounds better than equivalent equipment today is nonsense. That sounds pretty good for it’s age, or better than infirm or equipment today... sure maybe. |
daveyf, I have heard a lot of ARC gear over the past 30 years at dealers, shows, homes. I would not go back for any of it. Imo, the best ARC pre/amp were the past two years of AXPONA. We are likely on the opposite ends of the warmth and coloration spectrum in preference. Even better tube/SS amps are occluding older recordings (i.e. 50 years) that with the i.V Ultra topology are opened up, revealed gorgeously at higher levels, and without any of the noise and distortion added by Class A, A/B and tubes. It’s a stunning experience, without strain, whiteness, etc associated with cheaper, previous class D. Last night I was using the Eastern Electric Minimax Tube DAC Supreme with the i.V4 Ultra and achieving a sound quality level unmatched by some far pricier rigs/amps using both class A, A/B and tubes. Even the upper end gear is being outdone by the IcePower module featuring IceEdge technology. If current designs are being bested, I have no interest in returning to vintage. I would only do so if cost was the overriding concern. :) I liken this development to the wider acceptance of Open Baffle speakers versus dynamic. Over the years I have come to dislike the box coloration of dynamic speakers. If I detect too much of it, I am unhappy. Increasingly I turn to OB and dipole to rid the sound of the cabinet contribution. Some prefer this, and would think OB and dipole to be "wrong". There’s hardly a happy medium in such cases. If you inherently think the warmth/syrupy/heavy sound to the bass, etc. IS good music, then likely no class D will satisfy and you would likely think the old amps are terrific. But, to me they are distorted, adding damaging character to the music. They also do not have the capacity to drive speakers dynamically like the i.V Ultra series and other class D now. Just as I have worked to eliminate perceived box colorations in speakers, I am working to eliminate unwanted indistinctness and occluding of the signal in amplification. Once the improvement is heard, it is understood. You may not want to be at the same destination sound as me, but trust me, there is a world of difference happening with certain modules/amps of class D now. |
| Post removed |
@douglas_schroeder
I know nothing about Class D, but will look into it. Mainly, I wanted to support your conversation regarding boxes. When I opened my shop in 1974, I thought I knew a lot. HA! After locking the doors every evening, the real work began. I learned VERY QUICKLY that ALL boxes distorted reproduced music. My guitar and bass amps are boxes, but they are built for a different purpose than hi-fi speakers. The real revelation, after learning about box speakers, was listening to the ever-popular Bose 901 hot mess and then turning on a set of Magneplaners driven by Audio Research gear of the day and a Linn Sondek with a moving coil cartridge. A Lincoln Mayorga Direct-to-Disc source finally got me to put down the guitar and listen to recorded music. There it was, and I have never looked back. Certainly there are many boxes today that are much more refined and have much better engineering than they did in the 1970's and '80's when I had the shop, but they remain boxes. While I understand different strokes, I still find it interesting that people will not even try Maggies before dropping tons of money on boxes. My point is, at least try them in your room. If they don't work for you, at least you will know that. And, you might learn something. Imagine that! Cheers! |
@douglas_schroeder Your admiration for Class D ICE amps does indeed tell us how we listen differently! The best Class D amp I have heard is the current Rowland model 925 mono block, and I would not swap my modded Rowland model 8T for it under any circumstances. With what you posted, I would suspect that you would absolutely dislike the sound of a tube SET, yet IME they can sound absolutely incredible, in the right situation. I will agree that for commercial use where high power, zero heat and longevity are required ( ala a public address system) the Class D amp makes a load of sense ( as does their pricing). For home audio with the goal of ’The sound of live ’unamplified’ instruments in a natural space’---not so much. ( this may change into the future, who knows? BUT as of now in 2021....not happening!) |
invalid, that’s not a bad guess, but actually the amp has revamped the sound quality of the DAC. I have been using the DAC with numerous amps for years. This amp has elevated the DACs performance, as it has the other DACs I have used. BTW, for better performance, the tube has been removed from the DAC. That was a trick learned long ago when the DAC first came out. Rolling discrete opamps has elevated the sound quality. :) |
I don’t know how to do those fancy looking things to include ones comments, but to answer what knotscott said: “It’s been fun reading through this thread and seeing some blasts from the past. I built a DH500 from a kit in 1985, then moved on to a New York Audio Labs Moscode 300 about 2 years later (that one’s a bit obscure, and was surprised to see it mentioned! I actually got to meet Harvey Rosenberg...a very colorful and interesting character, as so many of these high-end entrepreneurs are!). My next amp was a Distech LS-2 based on the B&K ST-140. Ironically, I just picked up one of the last of the B&K ST-140s for my son as a graduation gift....he’s gonna love it!” He sure will!!! - Still one of the best sounding amps, IMHO. I’ve owned about 3-4 ST140’s (always the early ones with silver handles) over the last 35 years & an EX442 Sonata. I had a chance to get a rare mint dual mono EX140 but ended up not going for it because I didn’t want to drive 2.5 hours to pick it up. I also met Harvey Rosenberg years ago, he MC’d Stereophile’s Single Ended Symposium in Philadelphia in the mid 90’s and was the first time I heard SET amps! Was completely blown away! Met many other amp designers & magazine reviewers that day as well. I also remember the Distech amp, never heard one, but heard they were quite special. Back in the mid/late 80’s & 90’s, Stereo Trading Outlet in suburban Philadelphia was like a museum of high end rare audiophile gear and I purchased many things there. I heard a VSP Labs TransMos 150 that was very special and auditioned an Acoustst TNT120 that was also pretty special. I read and owned tons of hi end magazines and read lots of reviews of gear that I would never have a chance to listen to. Recently turning 60, and in this hobby almost 40 years, including selling it for a couple years @ retail in the early 90’s, my favorite era of gear is the 80’s, although, I dig it all. The nostalgia of some of the older gear is very fun too.... a good friend recently acquired a bunch of classic tube gear as part of an estate (Dyna, Fisher, Scott, Sherwood - all museum quality, a few pieces heavily molded and done well) and this was his first introduction into tubes. The classic gear is just super pleasing sounding, nothing like it and nothing will ever surpass it either, despite what someone above has said about class D stuff. I’ve heard lots of class D chip amps and have owned close to a dozen different pieces and while they can be very good, to my ears, they all tend to sound a little dry and all need a tube preamp in front of them to make them shine - but it’s all about system synergy, so in the right setting, with the right gear, they definitely have their place, no doubt. some old speaker designs, with paper woofers, alnico magnets, peerless tweeters just sound warm and extremely listenable too... .... JUST ENJOY THE JOURNEY ... BTW, RODMAN - I’ve never owned a Moscode 300, always wanted one though...Counterpoint & Perreaux gear too :) |
Not sure what to make of this; the Rowland website shows the 925 production suspended. This amp is 8 years old and seems to not be continuing. I suggest that under those circumstances it is not a great candidate to assess current class D offerings. If the listening experience is from at least 3 or more years ago, then I submit that it does not represent what is happening currently in class D design. I have worked with perhaps 3 previous generations of class D, and this one is unlike the others, holistically superior. The others were no threat to SET, A, or A/B. This one supersedes them. You know how the updated Terminator kept coming back better and better. That's class D. This time, it wins. |
douglas_schroeder, I read your interesting and detailed review of the Legacy amplifier, and based upon your past experiences with many other amplifiers, I do believe you when you say that this new iteration of class D is a huge improvement, and a game changer. I wish that I could have a chance to hear it. Aside from that though, I thought that your comments in the early part of the article concerning "tweaks" being a waste of time were incongruous with the fact that you strongly recommended using aftermarket power cords. Are they not a "tweak" as well? |
@
lou_setriodes Harvey Rosenberg from NYAL addressed our audio club back in the mid or later 80's, and I had the pleasure of picking him up from the airport. He wanted to stop by my house, so he could personally "bless" my Moscode 300 and listening room, so we drove 30 miles round trip out of the way. I have a picture of him in a sport coat wearing a bow tie pointing to my amp! He was a little out there, but his presentation was riveting and brilliant, as he talked through the timeline of mankind and the importance of music throughout human history. We thoroughly enjoyed having him as a guest speaker. The Distech LS-2 was made/marketed by Sal D'Amico, whom I also met at the CES shows. It was essentially an enhanced ST-140, with some upgrade caps in the signal path, and possibly other minor stuff. I got to know Eddie Mutka from B&K in Buffalo about 70 miles west of me ....he repaired my Distech amp after I shorted the speaker outputs accidentally (D'oh!). Good guys....all of them, and fairly down to earth compared to Harvey, LOL. The son who's getting the amp, isn't fully invested into audio as hobby yet, but he likely will in time, and he appreciates a nice system, and enjoys hearing the history behind the vintage components in his new system. Many of the vintage components were designed and built by the same guy who would answer the phone if you called the place of business. High end audio had a lot of true "Cottage Industry" participants back then. |
roxy54, a courteous and well reasoned reply; thank you! I hope you do get to hear the new breed of class D. Briefly, I distinguish between the myriad of tweaks outside the signal path, and products/methods that touch the power and signal paths. I am unusual in the industry, as I recommend the proper way to use and assess cabling is with entire looms/sets from the manufacturer. So, my comments on cables are almost always in the context of that methodology. To that end, I have found the efficacy of aftermarket cables to be not debatable when used in sets. I also consider them a component as such, and continuously in personal listening and reviewing they confer as large changes as components - again, when used in sets. Changing a cable here and there ad hoc without a thorough understanding of the manufacturer's intended sound is largely fooling around, a waste of time in that it yields no direction to push the system toward a desired result. That use of cables is very much like using tweaks; no directivity and nothing more than hopefulness of a good result. If you have not yet worked with aftermarket cables, I encourage you to read my reviews of cables, wherein I explicate my methods. You would perhaps enjoy my latest review of the Iconoclast Cables published at Dagogo.com. For someone who is not yet ready to trust the system, to part with more significant numbers of dollars to test it out, the Iconoclast Cables are ideal, because they use the same geometry, AWG, etc, but with a different conductor for each level of performance. That is not very common in the HiFi cable industry. |
@knotscott That’s a great story. Mr Rosenberg addressed the Phila Triode Symposium dressed in a full Native American feather headdress that sported a vacuum tube as the keystone of his feather headdress and an Irish kilt. There were many other Audio heavyweights there in the audio press as well as amp designers. We listened to 8 different SET amps using 300Bs, 845s, 211’s, and 2A3s with a CAT SL1 preamp, the $5K Sony SACD player & 104 dB Classic Audio Reproductions horn speakers with Goertz Alpha Core IC’s & spkr wire. My favorite amp was the lowest powered & least expensive Fi 2A3 monoblocks. Other amps included a 300B SET Prototype by David Berning, Komuro 845 monoblocks, a 110 Lb 211 amp by Wyetech Labs, Caztech Audio 300B amp, Bel Canto, Cary and Audio Note 300B amps. I took my username from that show that made such an impression on me. Interestingly, Harvey Rosenberg years later wrote an article in Listener magazine touting 4 pin true triode tubes run in Push Pull Triode as being far superior sonically to SET Amps. |