Do You Regret Your Pre-ASR Audio Gear Choices of the past?

[Robin L]

Robin, what was it about the 8B that made it stand out in your regrets?

It's classic old-school tube sound, lacking in the frequency extremes, not that much power, obvious audible distortions, nothing "special" in spite of its reputation. In terms of old school tube amps my favorite is the Scott 299B integrated, greater clarity and presence. Its phono stage managed to iron out many of the surface noise issues with typical LPs. However, I prefer the sound of the Yamaha RX-V461 AVR I'm now using, much more low-level detail, more power, less distortion. It also has a line-level out for my powered subwoofer.

 

[Nicoff]

I never had the urge to spend a fortune on audio gear, and by sheer luck, most of my early choices aligned with what ASR now recommends.
I avoided pricey cables, focused on good speakers, and adopted room correction and DSP early on.
After discovering ASR, I deliberately sold off several components and replaced them with ASR-recommended gear. No regrets, since I’ve enjoyed the music every step of the way.

 

[rdenney]

Two factors saved me.

1.) Unwillingness to spend what the Purveyors of Woo too often suggest will be necessary to spend. I have a friend who is a top-ranked executive in the high-end industry, whose name I will obviously not drop. I've heard him use the "removing veils" phraseology. But on the back channel he thought my choices at the time solid--B&K amplifier, Adcom preamp, and Advent speakers--all quite affordable. The stuff he was making and selling at the time was far, far more expensive. Takeaway: Even the high-end intelligentsia, if they have integrity (and my friend absolutely does), know that the high-end is all about diminishing returns, even when there are returns, and about lifestyle choices.

2.) Inability to hear a difference. The couple of times I did spend money to get an upgrade in sound, it sounded just the same. Rather than believing something else was limiting the ability of the system to reveal the improvement, I simply concluded that the improvement, even if it existed, was too subtle for me to hear. The only exception to that in my experience was when comparing speakers and turntables.

I've always enjoyed the idea of finding low-price stuff that produces high-end sound and features, and when I started updating my ancient system a few years ago, my objective was stuff that would have impressed an audio expert in 1990, in the same way my purchase of Advent speakers impressed the much-loved friend of my grandmother's who had written an occasional hi-fi column in the Houston newspapers back in the pre-woo 60's and 70's. And stuff that would be considered a solid choice by my childhood buddy who was my mentor for my occasional duties as a roadie and for mixing audio. He is a broadcast engineer and installer of pro sound systems, and I helped him with some of that, too. He taught me what to listen for and how to correct it, which are skills that still work for me when putting together sound systems for events and for my church.

ASR provided for me verification of what I had always believed, based on those experiences going back to my youth.

The history of the audio business is fun to explore and research, too. That as much as anything nudges me into changing out equipment for the fun of it. For example, when Tom Holman and David Moran showed up in this forum, I knew I would have a Holman preamp at some point, just because I liked their data-driven philosophy of design, and despite that my current B&S MC-101 is a highly respected preamp (as is the Adcom 565 that is now in the inventory). The stories of the audio giants of the 70's and 80's are about as interesting as the stories of the music scene from the beginning of that era, when bands were bands and not products of producer market-casting.

Rick "we abandon reluctantly the truths and loyalties of our youth" Denney

 

[rdenney]

Is that your normal or my normal? No measurement of a sound parameter is a reliable prediction of what an individual hears much less what they like.

This is a straw man. People grow up with their hearing, and thus their hearing is normal to them. When they listen to live music, it goes through their filter of their hearing. When they listen to recorded playback, they listen through the same filter. Making changes to the playback system to accommodate specific differences in hearing just moves them away from their experience with live music, not towards some ideal that they have never experienced and thus will never sound natural to them.

Rick "not confusing correction with targeting" Denny

 

[Sal1950]

It's classic old-school tube sound, lacking in the frequency extremes, obvious audible distortions, nothing "special" in spite of its reputation.

That's what I guessed. I think they were decent performers in their day but time does move on.
My 1963 Allied catalog shows it's price then was $264 plus $9.00 for the tube cage.
That would be about $2700 today. Not too far off what they are selling for now.
I got caught up in the tube amp thing back in the late 1980s and ended up with VTL Compact monoblocks on John Atkinson measurements and others reviews. After some initial headaches due a problem VTL was having with their wave soldering of the circuit boards I was quite happy with their sound except for the bottom end. Then I added some big subs with SS power and things went great for the next 15 years.
I can kind of understand the subjectivist world, Hi Fi was lots more fun back then when everything really DID sound different.
So now the Stereophile-TAS crews just make things up. LOL

 

[TurtlePaul]

I don't regret my old purchases - they didn't cost too much and overall I am doing quite well financially. I am also happy with my current system. I bought them in the past two years and could have upgraded sooner, but the timing of my upgrades aligned well with no long having very young children and purchasing our current residence.

For years I didn't upgrade because I thought that hifi was a mix of i) legitimately better equipment, ii) overkill, iii) looks (audio jewelry and furniture) and iv) a scam. I could never figure out which devices were scams and which were legit sonic improvements. For a long time I wasn't willing to pay for something to just be impressive looking. When I browsed Stereophile, there was a lot of stuff that was well reviewed but at the top my budget. When those reviews appeared next to a review of cryo treated USB cables, I knew that a lot of the reviews were spewing with BS and it was impossible to know what was good and what wasn't.

Before ASR I wasn't spending more than $500 on each piece of gear, primarily to protect myself from being burned on BS. The science aligns with how I look at things. I have been to audio shops or audio cafes a couple of times and heard nice systems, but knew they wouldn't sound like that at home. Now I have the objective data on the equipment and know about parametric equalization, in room measurements, directivity, etc.

What I have learned from ASR (and Erin and others) has given me the confidence to purchase Genelec and Revel speakers, while knowing that a $3k amp, for example, is wasted money. I am willing to pay for audible performance improvements and now I can see what devices deliver that. Without the confidence given by the objective data, I don't think I would have ever been able to step up to this level comfortably. With the confidence of the data, my days of buying vinyl wrapped two-ways and open box receivers are behind me.

 

[PristineSound]

How important is aesthetics for everyone here? Are you willing to pay a premium for it?

I went as far as stripping one of my electronics to it's shell, to sand blast and anodize to silver so that it can match my entire rack.

 

[Nicoff]

How important is aesthetics for everyone here? Are you willing to pay a premium for it?

I went as far as stripping one of my electronics to it's shell, to sand blast and anodize to silver so that it can match my entire rack.

It Is important to me. I actually wrapped my silver amps to change their appearance to black to match the speakers. I took the wrapping off before selling them.

 

[Short38]

Nordost power cord and flat speaker cables. Amplifiers that had audible transformer buzz
Amplifier with fan noise audible at listening position.

 

[xanalog]

Do you regret much of the gear that you owned in your past audiophile journey?

Thank you for the post.
This is going to be embarrassing, and you are the cause of me having to face the facts:
I actually have purchased 3 'regrettable' audio gear, while lurking audio forums during the past three years.
What makes it more embarrassing is that there has been so many worthy-gear (w/great measurements on the 'cheap') recently, that I've bought them just to upgrade my cohorts' relics, au gratis.
I still have some unused, late-model Topping/SMSL/FOSI gear that have not been pawned-off to suitable victims yet.

 

[MattHooper]

How important is aesthetics for everyone here? Are you willing to pay a premium for it?

It’s very important for me, especially for loudspeakers. There’s no way I’m going to be placing ugly loudspeakers in my room and staring at those for years. I also much prefer my other equipment to be aesthetically pleasing to at least my eyes. I like my Conrad Johnson tube amplification, my turntable. I appreciate the performance of my Benchmark DAC and Benchmark preamp, but I find them to be eye sores and try and keep them more hidden in my rack.

 

[xanalog]

How important is aesthetics for everyone here? Are you willing to pay a premium for it?

That 'aesthetics job' is made much easier by stashing all of the electronics inside of a humongous 600pound entertainment center, which also hides a 55" OLED-TV.
It even prevents any/all unsightly cabling... yet, access to equipment rear-panels and their connectivity become almost a manageable problem.
Then, all that remains is finding the right speakers that match the solid oak entertainment center and the furniture.

I still think @MattHooper's Thiels would look much better in our dig than his. But I'd be willing to let him keep his speaker springs...

 

[MattHooper]

I still think @MattHooper's Thiels would look much better in our dig than his. But I'd be willing to let him keep his speaker springs.

OK now you have to show us your digs so that I can confirm

 

[Cogito]

Not yet! Nothing I currently own (or ever owned) has been reviewed by ASR.

 

[rolfrander]

Well, I used to have a marantz "slim" AVR which served me fine, but after becoming aware of SINAD-measurements I replaced with a SOTA DAC and well measuring power amplifiers. Now I need three separate remotes to even turn on my home theatre and my wife isn't able to operate it anymore. But atleast I have gained a lot of inaudible benefits...

 

[rwtooley]

my wife isn't able to operate it anymore.

mission accomplished.

 

[Vacceo]

I got a set of second hand KEF IQ speakers before descovering ASR attached an AVR. It was a nice surprise to see that these 20 year old boys are perfectly fine (sure, with a lot of room to improve) speakers.

On electronics, I can do a lot better than a ten year old Marantz AVR, but the improvement will not be massive compared to what can be done to a room.

Thanks to ASR I went straight to a set of LS50 WII and a set of LSX to replace the ancient (and very low quality) sets that my mother used. Not super cheap, but the change for the better has been quite drastic.

 

[Robin L]

That's what I guessed. I think they were decent performers in their day but time does move on.
My 1963 Allied catalog shows it's price then was $264 plus $9.00 for the tube cage.
That would be about $2700 today. Not too far off what they are selling for now.
I got caught up in the tube amp thing back in the late 1980s and ended up with VTL Compact monoblocks on John Atkinson measurements and others reviews. After some initial headaches due a problem VTL was having with their wave soldering of the circuit boards I was quite happy with their sound except for the bottom end. Then I added some big subs with SS power and things went great for the next 15 years.
I can kind of understand the subjectivist world, Hi Fi was lots more fun back then when everything really DID sound different.
So now the Stereophile-TAS crews just make things up. LOL
View attachment 466193

I didn't hear any meaningful differences between the Dyna 70 and the Marantz 8B. Or the Fisher 500C for that matter. In retrospect I regret getting rid of my AR integrated amp. Plenty powerful and clean, did a good job driving AR-3s.

 

[Leeken]

I don’t regret buying any of it in the slightest,I love listening to music,my systems have always been my gateway to that music,I have a system to listen to that music,I do feel many have music to listen to the system and buy gear which they think their peers will congratulate them for,you see that both on here and on the most ardent subjectivist forums,and I don’t give a shit if that’s a popular view or not,I’m just calling what I see.

 

[xanalog]

My biggest/costly mistakes (beyond simple regrets) were 'buying' (<literal/figurative) into that marriage of Audio+Video.
Three iterations of multi-channel AV hardware purchases (Yamaha/Integra/Rotel) made me realize that I did not like the results.
Each of these 3 systems were software-driven monsters; requiring updates, maintenance, burps, snorts, delays and much patience.
A dozen years later, I had finally decided to go back to a 2-channel audio system… and happiness ensued…