Sound quality of Newer versus Older speakers

@artemus_5 ,

Loudspeaker design seems no more immune to the vagaries of fashion than anything else.

Huge boxes, big boxes, smaller boxes, thin tall boxes, sealed boxes, ported boxes, horned boxes, backless boxes, paper cones, plastic cones, metal cones, hemp cones, kevlar cones, ribbons, panels, 1 way, 2 way, 3 way, multi drivers etc etc.

Perhaps we should ask whether any loudspeaker ever managed to surpass the 1957 Quad ESL?

Or are we still just going around in circles sampling different dishes off the same menu?

Fish or steak sir? With wine or port?

There was no need for subwoofers with the older speakers, unless they were bookshelf type.  Even some of them did a reasonable job. 
There was a push for "clarity" in the late 70's and onward for mids and highs to be extended. Now, even with floor standers you need a sub to cover the low end frequency. I understand the need to cut back on the low frequency to get clarity but the pendulum has swing too far imo.  But it has created a new market for subs that didn't exist before the great push for midrange.

From a sound quality perspective, is there anything that newer speakers are doing better than older speakers.

Uh, yeah. Everything.

It is a very big question.
Vintage speakers are very different, from electrostatics to horn.
There are also different time periods.
For example speakers from 50x-60x are different from speakers form 70x.
What I don’t like in the speakers evolution, it went to direction of small and low sensitive designs. That makes sound more compressed, tiresome and unmusical.
The second think I don’t like, many modern speakers designer try to emphases high frequencies and it makes speakers sound unnatural.
I also don’t like the fact the new speakers are designed to play modern POP music that makes them sound worse for classical, vocal and jazz music.
I also want to add the "new" materials like beryllium are not really new and have been used in speakers industry since 80x.
Here is an opinion of Peter Qvortrup about it:
https://parttimeaudiophile.com/2018/01/25/peter-qvortrup-high-fidelity-the-decline-of-the-decades/
For people why think that vintage speakers are garbage can listen this video of Jensen D4 field coil speaker 9" from 1920's. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nTRcg7DCuMQ

Regards,
Alex.

One area where I think we are in much better shape is in tweeter technology.

For a traditional speaker (not horn or ESL,etc.) tweeters have achieved remarkable extension and low energy storage. The innovation of the ring radiator moved the bar up considerably for what could be done with an inexpensive tweeter.  Top level AMT show remarkably low distortion or thermal compression in addition to extension.  It's easy to find tweeters that are flat through 20 kHz even among soft domes.

While the idea of Be tweeter diaphragms has captured the imagination, they vary greatly in quality and are now equaled or bettered by others.

Another might be how inexpensive really good film caps are now.

The speakers in my main system are 40 years old. I paid $264 for them about 4-5 years ago. They do some things remarkably well. I'm sure they can be bettered but I enjoy them tremendously. I just don't see any reason to spend 10X more for a little improvement when I'm already enjoying myself so much.

The oldest speakers I own are the Spica TC-50s, which are probably about 25 years old.  Properly set up, they sound about as good as any speaker I own, and I own quite a few.  

I agree with the above-poster about speaker technology not having changed much.  After all, 90 percent of them are various drivers in some form of a wooden enclosure.  

I'm of the mind, though, that most speakers (once past a certain price point) are all generally very good sounding, provided you have the rest of your gear/room setup to take advantage of any given speaker.  For example, huge speakers in a small room or tiny monitors in a huge room would probably not be ideal.

Newer is definitely not better in the speaker world, except when it is.

CnC was the changing point... From there forward, or from there back..

The only difference from that point was the material being CnCed
and automotive paint finishes. OAK and (?) were out and fancy computer designed manmade materials as veneers were in.. Epoxy/Polymer Dipped cabinets. Hard as the hubs of HELL.. Polish to an ultra high gloss finish.

Oh BTW all the new cabinets will self destruct and crawl out your door into your garden.. If you don’t have one. They will double for cat litter.. Expiration date is on the bottom..:-)

Other than some pretty fancy laser etching and water jet cutting. It’s a lot of Bling. Actually BETTER? They been making hand made cabinets onesies and twosies for a long time. 30-50k for hardwood cabinets and or exotic one of a kind veneers. Hand picked Seas drivers, or hand made ribbons/planars.. I’ve seen 3 sets, in my life and a fourth here on Agone a few months back.. The guy had 3 Custom built LS planar/ribbon speakers. He didn't say a word about cost.. So you know it was top of the line. I think is was a active servo column system..

Production speakers for a whole lot of money... there is a lot of that...
But better.. NO!!!

Good older speakers are just fine and usually represent excellent value. Really very little has changed in speaker design.

I guess that the biggest overall change across all of the brands has been in cabinet design and refinement, aiming to minimize energy storage, and keep them quiet. 

The Quad 57 (designed in '55) is still the benchmark for "natural" sound! Every audiophile should own a pair or two. I have two pairs for stacking!

There are lots of good loudspeakers today. But large statement loudspeakers from years ago can still produce great sound if they have not deteriorated over time.