Why does this circa '75 receiver sound so good?


I am in the process of rebuilding my system and have been listening to a Kenwood KR3200 receiver while I save up the funds for new ARC gear. The more I listen, the less I want to buy expensive gear. This old receiver sounds VERY good with my new Nautilus 805's. I can't figure it out--why? I have also powered the speakers with an Audio Refinement Complete, but the receiver is much more enjoyable--the Complete just didn't sound as good-period. Too much like electronics and not so much like music. I did power the speakers for one night with an ARC D300/LS3 combo and loved it. Don't know what made me think I need something "better", but I already sold the amp, so there is no turing back. Anybody have personal experience with an Adcom GFA5802/GFP750 setup? That has been another consideration lately.
adrhld
Hi: I have experienced similar results. I bought a Yamaha CR220 15 watt/channel receiver new in 1980 with a pair of Bang and Olufsen Beovox S35 speakers. The combo sounded clear and very accurate then vs other choices (Pioneer, Technics, B&O Beomaster). Lately, I upgraded all my interconnects to Audioquest Viper and the speaker cable to Audioquest CV-4/Type 4 (run as one cable to duplicate Audioquest Granite) just to see what would happen. My CD player is a very warm and revealing NAD C520, and yes, at under $250.00 also great buy. The end result of the cable "upgrades" have been startling. Very, very "musical" are my CD's and not digitalized and tinny as before, but rather analog-like and richer with the cable upgrades. The 1970's electronics may be vintage in design but the end result is a very warm, very acoustic, very defined and rich sound from CD play having Audioquest (and NAD) to thank. Best of all, all is bought and paid for. Have plugged in newer speakers (Dynaudio Audience 40) and another vintage type (Harbeth HLP3) and my original system (CR220 with Beovox's) sounded better even though not as "highly reviewed." An NAD C340 amplifier at 50 watts/channel was tried recently and it sounded dull, very undynamic and less punchy than my 18 watt Yamaha. As did a 75 watt, 1980 Yamaha CA1010 amplifier, not as clear or as musical as its 15 watt junior. My CR220 receiver is a "discrete" amplifier design with no massive heat sinks or overbuilt anything. "Just music" seems to get through to the speakers. You may be experiencing the same thing (great sound) with your 1970's receiver. This era of hand made amplifiers without remote controls were made to last, not like today's plastic and LED happy consumer electronics. The 1970's were analog as well--pre CD technology, not digital at all. If you like the sound of a 25 year old amplifier you are not alone. Check out Classicaudio.com. Tim Whyte sells vintage gear and can tell you about your receiver and why it sounds that good. Your ears are not hearing things. My modest vintage system sounded better to me than a $2200.00 Sunfire 225 watt/channel tube amplifier and $1500 Monitor Audio Gold 10 speakers and a $550.00 Integra CD changer! Price is not always the measure. Sometimes you get rich sound and save a lot of cash so you can afford to buy CD's. Trust your ears, and not your pushy stereo salesman trying to move product. Best of luck, Jon
Adrhld,you should consider the Musical fidelity A3CR amp and pre amp. I had a late 70's Canadian made pre and power amp that would kill any mid fi Japanese amp of the same time peroid. I recently upgraded to the Musical fidelity A3CR amp and it is much,much better.
don't mess with the Adcom stuff.

Cheers,
Ron
I was a salesman in the audio business in 1975 and understand what you are talking about. The Yamaha and Kenwood electronics of that era were particularly great for the buck . I remember one Yahama receiver, about 20 watts per channel and sold for less than $200.00. It was a terrific sounding unit with a variable loudness control, a good tuner and a five year warranty.

If you are getting good sound, why not enjoy it until you can afford something that is much better?