Most reliable equipment manufacturers

To nedgillette, I have never heard of anyone complaining about failure rates on Krell equipment. I know many people into high end with Krell and all love it. Why don't you e-mail me your proof. I'd like to see it. As for why have I bought three amps and one playback system over the past 10 years? Because the sonic improvements have been major and I can afford it. Most people bashing Krell can't afford it anyway. As for MacIntosh being in business longer than Krell, what does that prove. Ford motor has been making cars longer than Toyota. Does that make Ford better and more reliable? As far as the comment on this being a thread on reliability, not sonics, you are right. I just thought I would add my two cents on the equipment. It is overated mid-fi junk good enough for a door stop. Hey, if the Gore can demand every vote be counted to his agenda, then I can stretch to include my dislike for MacIntosh. Who owns those guys now? Is it Harmon International?

I've had my Magnum Dynalab FT101 tuner for (I think) about 15 years, & it's never even dropped a light bulb! These guys seem to be there for the long-haul, which means alot if you find a component you like & want to hang onto it. I've never had to call them so I can't speak for their support. But they do perform upgrades (I'm gonna do that) so we'll find out soon how they support customers? Just the fact that they'll tweak my older product, vs. only be interested in selling me a new one, I believe says something for them...

I have to give Mondial a thumbs up. Would you beleive they are still doing upgrades for the aragon 4004! Well built and good sounding gear.

I have owned many pieces of equipment by many manufacturers and I have found that Mark Levinson equipment is by far the most robust and reliable equipment I have owned.

Audionut: Allow me to relate an event which happened a few years ago which may have been discussed here at that time. A very well known Florida high-end dealer accepted a challenge to his claimed ability to readily distinguish diparate amplification under controlled blind testing. The circumstances have been reliably reported (and not denied) by some of those in attendance. I.e., the dealer's system was all Pass. The test was done in his environment with his source material and he selected the equipment (a or B) which was playing a any given time. The challeging hardware was either a Japanese receiver or integrated amp. The dealer's and challenger's amp were very closely matched in output level to eliminate that common bias. When at the end of the test, the dealer could NOT identify the Pass system to a statistically significant degree, the usual excuses followed and the test was repeated the next day. This time, he and some of his friends participated with the same results obtained. This type of testing has been done many times and I don't believe that anyone has ever been successful in their identifications. The point is that the differences in reasonably well designed equipment(amplification) are negligible when subjectively evaluated under controlled conditions. Of course, we're all aware that gross differences are apparent to many (we're not talking about comparing Stereo 70s to Crown Reference amps). If you're capable of reliably making such distinctions under controlled conditions then you are a VERY unique natural talent who should be able to win lots of wagers. The principal reason that the high-end eschews controlled blind testing is that they can't reliably support their claims. You should also know that both Krell and Mac amps would make good doorstops and even better anchors. Of course this has absolutely nothing to do with their respective sonic capabilities.