Hi, you cannot beat older gear. I am currently using a Pioneer SX-1980, SX-1250 and a Pioneer Series 20 A-27 integrated amp. Thease are very well built receivers and amps. Sound quality and power superb. Can drive low impedance speaker loads with no problem. I use Infinity SM-225's (two pair hooked in parallel) 6 ohm speakers which means the amps are running at 3 ohm's. Also, Pioneer won the Receiver Power wars of 1980 beating out Marantz and Sansui with 270 watts per channel @8 ohm's but the sound quality of the SX-1250 and the SX-D7000 and the A-27 I think, is a little better. For not a hole lot of money, you can get more bang for your buck with older gear. Mike
Vintage Receivers vs. Modern MidFi
As I was looking at classic tuners from Marantz I started to notice their receivers and I've become very interested. I'm curious what people here think about the comparision between these 'classic' receivers and modern midfi equipment. I've been considering an NAD c340 or Jolida 102b matched with a classic Marantz tuner or my current FT-11, but when I considered replacing my FT-11 I thought 'why not consider replacing my whole deal with one of these vintage receivers'. The more I look at these receivers the more I am struck by their beauty. I am too young to have ever owned one of these new, but I must admit that I am very drawn to them. In the end though it is about the sound, and I want the best I can afford. I've got about $600 to spend on tuner and amplification. So, should I get a classic Marantz(or McIntosh?) receiver or stick with my NAD/Jolida + Magnum/Classic Marantz combo, and how do these two paths match up sound wise? Your advice, concerns, confessions, and/or recommendations are warmly welcomed. Oh ya, if it matters I'm using AE Aegis speakers. Thanks. Carter.