I agree with newf27 as I myself also have a mint pair of Martin/Logan Sl3's. They are simply incredible even though they were introduced in 1997. I got them from a nearby Martin/Logan dealer for $1600 and nothing new could come close for the price. Certain old stuff is still very good today. It is just picking the rite ones. I myself play 35 year old Stax electrostatic headphone systems thru my Audio Research LS27's record out outputs and get fantastic audio reproduction that can compete with much of todays mega priced headphone systems.
Yesteryears' expensive speakers compared to modern moderately expensive speakers
For the purpose of this discussion, let’s assume that ...
Yesteryears’ -- 10 -15 years old
Expensive speakers -- $25,000+
Moderately expensive speakers -- $8,000 -- 12,000
I often wonder if it’s worth paying 50% of the original retail price for older speakers that were considered state-of-the-art and flagship during their day. So let’s say an expensive Sonus Faber was around $30,000 in 2005. The seller is asking for $10,000 in 2018. Is it worth paying the asking price, or is one better off buying, say an Olympica III, brand new for about $13-14k (maybe less with dealer discounts)?
I feel that due to trickle-down effects and manufacturing advances and efficiencies, the modern speakers are as good, if not better, than speakers that were twice or thrice the price ten to fifteen years ago. Is this a valid assertion? Or do you guys feel that speaker technology really has not advanced to that extent? In other words, is a flagship speaker worth $30k a decade ago still going to outperform a new one at half its price?
The reason I’m asking is that I am going to save some $$$ this year to buy a speaker in the range of $8000-12,000 in about 6 - 7 months. Since it’s a pretty substantial amount (for me), I am planning to do as much research and auditioning in the next few months. So might as well get started now. Given that it is really difficult to audition used speakers -- not that it’s easy to audition new ones, but at least you can if you try, should I just strike used ones (ones that were uber expensive a few years ago but more affordable now) off of my list and just focus on new?
P.S. -- I’m just using Sonus Faber to illustrate my point, otherwise, I’m very open to anything that is in that price range. I am purposely not turning this into a discussion on what I like, room size, music preferences, etc just yet since I want to stay focused on the topic -- yesteryears’ expensive speakers vs not-so-expensive modern ones.
P.S -- I understand that Tekton is going to render all other speakers obsolete in due time, and I respect the opinions of those who agree with the assertions, but please understand that it is not going to be on my list. Period. I will really appreciate if we don’t turn this thread into a Tekton battleground.
Yesteryears’ -- 10 -15 years old
Expensive speakers -- $25,000+
Moderately expensive speakers -- $8,000 -- 12,000
I often wonder if it’s worth paying 50% of the original retail price for older speakers that were considered state-of-the-art and flagship during their day. So let’s say an expensive Sonus Faber was around $30,000 in 2005. The seller is asking for $10,000 in 2018. Is it worth paying the asking price, or is one better off buying, say an Olympica III, brand new for about $13-14k (maybe less with dealer discounts)?
I feel that due to trickle-down effects and manufacturing advances and efficiencies, the modern speakers are as good, if not better, than speakers that were twice or thrice the price ten to fifteen years ago. Is this a valid assertion? Or do you guys feel that speaker technology really has not advanced to that extent? In other words, is a flagship speaker worth $30k a decade ago still going to outperform a new one at half its price?
The reason I’m asking is that I am going to save some $$$ this year to buy a speaker in the range of $8000-12,000 in about 6 - 7 months. Since it’s a pretty substantial amount (for me), I am planning to do as much research and auditioning in the next few months. So might as well get started now. Given that it is really difficult to audition used speakers -- not that it’s easy to audition new ones, but at least you can if you try, should I just strike used ones (ones that were uber expensive a few years ago but more affordable now) off of my list and just focus on new?
P.S. -- I’m just using Sonus Faber to illustrate my point, otherwise, I’m very open to anything that is in that price range. I am purposely not turning this into a discussion on what I like, room size, music preferences, etc just yet since I want to stay focused on the topic -- yesteryears’ expensive speakers vs not-so-expensive modern ones.
P.S -- I understand that Tekton is going to render all other speakers obsolete in due time, and I respect the opinions of those who agree with the assertions, but please understand that it is not going to be on my list. Period. I will really appreciate if we don’t turn this thread into a Tekton battleground.
- ...
- 35 posts total
Interesting discussion, if after many years we either know or are used to certain types of speakers ie. British warm or leaner US style or even certain types of speakers we should be able to recognise 'best in class' and or major evolution in speaker design. I think the modern movement to active, and speakers that have their own DACS is for simplicity and better cohesion of the different components in the sound production stages was started by Meridian in the 1990's and their top of the line are as good as any today's speakers, and at todays used price market are tremendous value. |
@almarg +1 Cost often has very little to do with performance. FULL STOP. As HiFi is very personal, it's important to know what constitutes good sound to you and you alone... within reason ;-) AND you are building a system. A loudspeaker than only sounds good with a small subset of electronics will ultimately disappoint. Well designed products can be timeless, in spite of their failings relative to the latest theoretical improvements. Over the past couple of years I have updated the crossover caps, replaced connectors and bi-wired. The improvements are astounding, far better than anticipated because the original design was very, very good. Recent auditions of systems costing two+ orders of magnitude more have left me extremely non-plussed as they did not emote, had limited sound stage dimensionality, poor focus and instruments wandered about as if played by strolling minstrels. Additionally, I reverse engineered my 2003 ACI Force sub, modelled its circuitry and was able to integrate with the mains with a theoretical better than ±0.75db vector sum of amplitude and phase. All I had to do was add a 180° phase switch. The tympani in Dvorak's New World are better than ever before. Other orchestral works with less ambitious tympani are accurately placed and dynamically correct. When such works are well presented, Miles, Evans, Herbie, Jimi, Toto, Fagan, Led Zeppelin, Queen, etc. are a doddle. The short version of the above paragraph is that an aural education pays great dividends. $2000 per year spent on acoustic concerts in good halls is cheap tuition compared to blowing $5-10-??K on repeated loudspeaker changes. IMO, far too much of the loudspeaker market today is not driven by sound engineering principals. One can look at a design and Stereophile measurements show a ragged top, poor off axis, mid-bloat, what-ever, as would be expected from the geometry. IMO, many would be well served to divide the loudspeaker budget in two and spend half on room treatments. I have far more invested in books, bookcases, carpets and art that act as diffusers and absorbers than I do in HiFi hardware. Educating oneself on room interaction will pay dividends for the rest of your HiFi life. The ONLY reference is unamplified music in good acoustic space. If one's system can recreate that, all the heavy lifting is done. It may not play Led Zeppelin at concert levels, but it will be accurately rendered. |
- 35 posts total