Can anyone tell me where the progress in audio went?

@tannoy56 ,

I expect that over the years, Carver has sold far more SS amplifiers than tube amplifiers. Carver as a company (considering it has been many) had by far its best commercial success in the 80's into 90's with SS amplifiers, the M series and Sunfire series. Did you know he sued Stereophile claiming bias ... essentially claiming it was bad for their business that he was competing with super expensive products on the cheap.

Supposedly the M1.0t sounds exceptionally close to a Conrad Johnson Premier Four.

However, to the point of my last post, tube amps don't sound better than SS, and often the latter is true too. With SS, the speaker and room is a system. With tubes, it is more accurate that the speakers, room and amp is a system. As a system, the sound is the total, not just one piece. I don't think you will find many saying tubes are the best compliment to big panel speakers.

Hipsters, funny. 

theaudioamp

Yes, Carver sold more SS gear than VT. The reason being is that he, Carver found a niche in the market for mid hi-fi equipment at very affordable prices.

On your second point: Do you really believe that Carver Silver 7t SS mono block amplifier will driver your big panel speakers and sound better than the Silver 7 tube mono amps?  Not that I like either of them. 

The responses proceeding my post prove my point. Progress assumes advancement from a lesser point to a better one. 

By most technical aspects audio equipment has and continues to progress. 

Preferring vintage gear is completely subjective. It doesn’t indicate a lack of progression within the space, it just means that it’s sound is more pleasing to certain individuals. 

@theaudioamp Thank you for repeating what I said; just in long-winded form. Most audiophiles don’t care about the technical aspects, they want what sounds enjoyable to them. It’s not a lack of knowledge; it’s a choice. 

I agree with the premise they want what sounds enjoyable @kingdeezie 

However I disagree and believe it is lack of knowledge. There is a big big difference between having what you like, which we can assume most audiophiles have achieved to some degree, and knowing what you like. They may have something they like, but they don't know what it is. Some do. By far most of them do not. They only know what it physically looks like. Because they do not, they can't replicate it when they move, and they can't intelligently work on improving it. They guess, and sometimes that is right, and sometimes it is wrong and most of the time it is exactly the same, but they convince themselves it is better or worse. That is what I mean by knowledge has stunted or even declined.

An objective approach to audio does not mean ignoring the subjective. That would be stupid. An objective approach ideally is about identifying the subjective qualities that you as an individual prefer, and giving you the tools to fine tune the objective qualities to your subjective preference.