Can anything beat Vintage Amps for the $$$?

JTN ...

By vintage, we are talking at least 25 years old ... right?

I have been using two restored Marantz receivers for the last 4 or so years (2216B and 2240). Their tuners perform great, but the amplifiers will sound like a modern amplifier only with judicious use of the tone controls. A NAD C320BEE will best these two receivers for most tasks.

Tube to tube, I had a Scott 299 for a while, but my Prima Luna Prologue Two is just better. There is a cost difference ... but also a performance difference. I find the old vintage amps have the desired warm sound to them, but are just not as clear and clean sounding.

If you do go the vintage amp route, I am of the mind that you should consider going vintage speaker. If you research these things over at Audio Asylum, there are threads that point to how damping and slew factors, etc are different today and that speakers were voiced back then to take this into account. But as said before, restoration is really the key.

Regards, Rich

For the money, no. I have an upgraded HK 730 Twin as the center of my analog system. I had modern separates. Much of today's modern electronics use digital chips whereby vintage equipment was intelligently designed by engineers, not computer geeks. I had the already terrific phono section upgraded even more as that's the only imput I use along with the great tuners section (as mentined by other posters). I would happily put my HK up for comparison with most anything up 5K. It may not be as accurate as the more costly pieces, but sound-wise...you might be suprised.

Yes Rich, I'd say at least 25 years. So far I am a bit suprised by your responses. I have previously searched many forums here, and on audioasylum. I 've read numerous claims, stating that amps such as the Scott 299 or Eico HF81 can not be touched for 3 of 4 times the price. Does no one here think that? Are the people making such claims just vintage fans, not being truly objective?

Joe

I have swapped every component to vintage gears simply because they're better value. Is it coincident that all these vintage gears are from the early 1960's?
No surprised the tube gear technology peaked around that time.

I've put my aged HK930 up against a NAD C320BEE and the HK wins, by a small margin. All I have done to the HK is have it cleaned and replace the preamp-out power-in jumpers with OCC cables. That's not to say the NAD is bad, in fact some people might prefer its more forward presentation. The HK is more laid back and with the new jumpers the timbres are sweeter. Probably I could tweak the NAD too.

The HK does need work. Its PS is aging and gets buzzy when the AC power is dirty. The balance and volume pots should probably be replaced, since at low volume (essential for the bedroom) one channel winks out. The NAD is utterly silent and plays at low volumes just fine.

If I spent the money to have the HK properly fixed up that would bring it pretty close to the cost of the NAD.