Vintage vs New

Actually, I meant to say Pioneer SA-9100, although I also have the 7100.

Interesting discussion. There may never be a consensus of what constitutes the best loudspeaker due to psychoacoustics, HRTF and confirmation biases. That said, here’s what we know has and has not changed over time:

What has:

• materials (drivers, circuits, components, enclosures, damping)
• design technology (CAD -- construction and measurements)
• digital recording and playback (bits)
• room acoustical design and implementation (studio and home)

What has not:

• anatomical design of the ear (biology)
• vibrational excitement of a medium (how sound is produced)
• wavelengths of audible signals
• unique emotional responses to sound from listeners

I’m sure the above list is not comprehensive, but it represents some of the obvious variables which affect why we might like, or not like, what we hear from a loudspeaker. On the bright side, it’s such a subjective topic that there will always be something to talk about. :-)

While Class-D amplification is the new thing- there really hasn't been very much improvement in basic component design over the years.  Improvements -have- come from better quality parts.  Capacitors are much better now than 40-50-60yrs ago, same with resistors and wiring.  A good basic design can be made to sound better and very competitive with new equipment just from a careful restoration using new high quality parts.  Several have mentioned the MAC 240, certainly.  And there are many other examples.  A restored HK CIT II is about $3500-$4000.   Are there any new 60wpc tube amps available for the same price that sound better ?   Many say the new Mac 275 mk (whatever version) sounds inferior....    Audio Research D76,   At the other end- a carefully restored ST-70 is about $800.   You would have to spend -alot- more to meaningfully better it.  A VanAlstine Super Pas3 is an outstanding preamp that can be found for $600-$800.  And so on.

Speakers however have seen considerable improvement through design and implementation.   Use of CAD and modeling have led to very audible advancements in what is possible at any given price point.  The proliferation of ribbon tweeters at modest cost has led to great speakers that outperform their price points.

IMHO older speakers (there are exceptions) just do not sound as good as newer speakers.  Transient response is not as precise, treble not as clean, a few more cabinet resinances and so on.   May people gloss over these flaws out of a sense of nostalgia.   Someone lusted after JBL monitors 45yrs ago, and can now afford to build a system around them.  JBL understands and introduced a new L100, but is it a good $4k speaker......

My system is a combo of old and new- older amps, preamps, and TT, with newer speakers.   Works for me.

If you are happy with the way your system sounds then I would leave it alone. Some times that is the hardest part about this hobby. I believe that newer isn't necessarily better.

If you are looking to improve the sound - there are several ways to make improvements without replacing speakers. ( more power = cleaner sound)

If you feel that you absolutely need new speakers, then I would look beyond B&W. There are a lot of option especially in a used market. 

I’ve been listening to the same pair of floor standing speakers for 44 years. They were manufactured in 1955. 

I used to shop once a year to see what else was out there that was significantly better at a reasonable price point, or even just somewhat better. 

I stopped bothering with this exercise about 10 years ago.