Does audio gear need to be sustainable?

[March Audio]

It's really quite simple. Sustainable means keep something alive.

Vintage HiFi is sustainable, it always has been. Ever since the very first after school job I got, I have been repairing, restoring, rebuilding and keeping alive electronics. I remember walking in and asking the owner of a large local pawnbroker "who fixes your broken things?" He told me his technician was old, expensive, slow and was about to retire.

I told him I could fix anything. He gave me a car load of stuff to 'test' me and my mum dutifully took it all home. That was around 1981 and I was a 15yo (still 3 years left of school). He set me up with my own service bench, whatever test gear and parts I needed. He paid me well, in either cash or broken audio gear or some combination of both. He also was an amazing business man and I learnt a lot from that humble pawnbroker.

I remember a pile of HiFi sitting out the back of his store about 10ft tall which had been 'written off' by the previous tech. I fixed every piece- all without schematics. He gave me a lovely Luxman L-81 integrated amplifier (dead of course) as a bonus with my pay. It took me a long time and a lot of tears (I was young) to solve its frustrating intermittent fault. Apparently my Dad said it nearly broke me. It turned out to be what is now a famous fault in amplifiers (not back then, they were new), what we call STVs or in this case 'blob diodes' or 'spider eggs'. A 5 cent fix. A lesson I never forgot.

Luxman L-81:
View attachment 20550

Now, that actual L-81 amplifier is still functioning perfectly. It was the start of my Dad considering the possibility of ever having a 2nd hand piece of HiFi in his house. Everything prior was bought in a factory sealed box (he was a Doctor- everything had to be perfect). In this country the Lux was expensive and exclusive at AU$780 and only about 4 years old at the time. I fixed it, gave it to him and he still has it. With hindsight, it was the start of the really serious HiFi collecting by both of us. (prior to that he only had perhaps 20 pieces of HiFi and I, perhaps a dozen)

Now, nearly 40 years later, I have many hundreds of HiFi components. Two offsite storerooms, and I have spent decades restoring and moving-on gear, often at simply incredible profits. It's always been there, whether as a hobby, a business, a livelihood or a passion. It put me through uni, paid for a house, bought me a wife and son and provided endless years of enjoyment and ongoing challenges. It has always been there, even years later, when I was selling property or working in the finance industry.

Modern HiFi is not sustainable. It cannot be economically repaired. It doesn't last very long. Even old-skool technicians with decades of skills and parts are stonewalled by companies with their lack of available bespoke spare parts and other roadblocks like SMD and PbFree. And that can be regardless of retail price. In short, it is a bad investment for the purchaser and the planet.

I see these silly little pieces of Chinese crap people are lapping up like lemmings and it makes my stomach turn. They will all be in landfill soon enough with their overheated and failed SMD parts, their burnt-out SMPSs and more dry joints than a weed seller at a music festival.

Problem is that your vintage hifi doesn't do what modern hifi can.

Shall we not have computers because they use smd technology? Clearly you need to log out, turn your pc off now.

As an observation (and please take this in the spirit it is intended) I think you do have a bit of a jaundiced perspective on product reliability. You see broken electronics everyday. You seek it out. Therefore your view on product reliability may not be entirely balanced.

The last bit of electronics that I had that failed was about 6 years ago. A computer psu. The number of electronic products in our homes has hugely increased and so has reliability. In the 70s the TV repair man would visit on a regular basis. Not any more. I just don't find people I know complaining about electronics failing.

 

[SIY]

I enjoy designing, building, and testing tube amplifiers. Like mechanical watch aficionados, I enjoy the technology as an art form. Why would I stop? My last amplifier will be the last one I design and build before dropping dead.

 

[restorer-john]

Problem is that your vintage hifi doesn't do what modern hifi can.

That is a vague, vacuous and unqualified statement, Alan.

This thread is not about what modern HiFi can 'do', it is about sustainability, remember that. Comparing modern feature sets vs older feature sets is a whole other subject altogether. Actually, in that regard, modern gear is at a significant disadvantage as most stuff these days appears to be simple one-trick ponies, unlike gear of yesteryear. (Linn Akurate DSM type product excluded, that is an example of a HiFi company producing a large and valuable feature set IMO, albeit at a neck-snapping price)

Sustainability has been proven for vintage HiFi gear. The runs are on the board. The performance tests for tens of thousands of pieces of gear that are still in service is evidence enough. One cannot argue with that and not look foolish.

Modern HiFi gear is unreliable. I see tons of it. Why should a person with a $2000 multi format Cambridge player be told by the distributors it can't be fixed? Why is it that when presented to me, I can fix it easily at board level and at a relatively low cost? Cambridge had zero problems sending me the full service manual, but parts are not available after only 4+ years. What's the point? That's when stuff needs parts! Luckily, no bespoke parts had failed and the Cambridge lives again.

I have said I think your products may be sustainable, but at what cost? Will you be simply board-jockeying or actually repairing the PSUs, the amplifier modules or the D/A boards? What will happen to that Hypex amp board with blown MOSFETs? What will happen to the 'tone board' when the USB socket is cracked off the board? What will happen to the SMPS with exploded caps? I think I know the answer and so do you. Replacement will be justified due to time and parts availability 'issues' and it will hit the landfill prematurely. Tell me honestly otherwise, and I will be greatly impressed.

These types of threads are valuable and conversations about longevity, repairability and sustainability are important. The past teaches us lessons in this regard and the regulators are finally, slowly, dragging manufacturers kicking and screaming back to responsible practices.

 

[March Audio]

It's not in the slightest bit vague. Part of this conversation is directly related to people choosing to replace their equipment. A major reason is functionality. It's not all about whether a piece of kit still functions after twenty years, it's also about whether it does what people want.

I would dispute that claim about reliability. You see broken kit. It's what you do. If you go to a monastery you see nuns and monks. What you are not seeing is the millions of bits of kit that work just fine for years and years.

BTW hypex do repair boards.

 

[restorer-john]

Part of this conversation is directly related to people choosing to replace their equipment. A major reason is functionality.

So tell me, where does a typical vintage or reasonably modern high quality integrated amplifier fall down in the functionality stakes as compared to your gear (and a lot of other gear on ASR)?

More than one pair of speakers either together or separately?
Tone controls if you want to use them?
Loudness, filters or even a simple mono switch?
Phono preamplifier either MM or MC?
Multiple inputs?
Loop outs for external amps?
Processing loop for EQ or anything else?
Headphone socket?
Volume control?
Balance control?

Answer: It doesn't.

The only part in functionality where vintage can fall down, is multi format digital inputs and that is solved with one cheap little box if you so wish.

...I would dispute that claim about reliability...

OK, ring your local warranty service centre for the big brands in Perth tomorrow. Try to get hold of someone who knows which end is the hot end of a soldering iron. Ask them honestly what the most common failure modes are for modern CE gear. Ask them what they actually repair. Report back with your findings.

 

[Blumlein 88]

Like anybody cares. My opinion about vintage gear has morphed over the years. Not just audio, but many things. I understand, and appreciate that some people keep the best of old tech alive. And it provides insight into the past. At times I preserved such things too (or still do). You can get an appreciation for what is better now, and what was better then.

However, I think great designs are greatest in their time of manufacture and should be used more so than preserved. Including things that get used up. It is almost like an evolutionary situation. What is possible changes, other aspects beyond the device itself changes, and it fits in its own niche in the world at its best when it is made and used shortly thereafter. Some things will be useful without much bother from other areas in the world for longer periods. At different times the expected useful life of something goes up or down for many reasons.

I get the complaint restorer-john has about things like the Khadas Tone board or similar. I've owned a Wadia 23 DAC which is built like a super tank. It would last for a long time. It is more repairable than something new (though not like even older hifi gear almost repairable forever). But now in this time that Wadia makes no sense were it a current product. For 5% the price I'll get comparably good or better performance. Okay it'll crap out in a few years (or may not some of these things do hold on longer than you'd expect). Formats and connections and maybe wireless networking will have become something different. I'll buy something as good or better that is a proper technical citizen of its own time. And that is just fine.

As for me, I've one way or another gotten several DACs (the most recent one from Alan March). I could be using one I was stuck on for nearly 10 years with little problem. But I wanted to record music when I retired and ADC/DACs were the way and inexpensively with good performance. I finally had room for a MCH setup and used other DAC-like devices for that. I've not yet had a DAC quit working on me ever, and some I've kept for 15 years which still function.

So its great for people with an interest in doing so that keep quality pieces going. The current climate favors disposable items other than maybe speakers. In the current climate that also makes sense. The part we need to sustain is keeping alive music. The how isn't as important as the what.

This makes me think of the 1950 Argus C3 camera I have. I purchased it used in I think 1972. It still works. But what can I do with it now? It was called "the Brick" affectionately. All metal and it is near the size and weight of a brick. They weren't much less durable than a brick. When I got a Canon AE1 Program I stopped using it. I stopped using the Canon more or less once I purchased an HP digicam (which did finally die). I next purchased a better digicam for less that also finally died. Though this one more or less could equal picture quality of the Canon. The next couple including what I have are even better. All things considered it made no sense for that first HP digicam to be made better or last longer. And most often now, the phone on my camera is what I use and within a narrow scope of use it does a great job. But its just a feature of another device.

 

[restorer-john]

And most often now, the phone on my camera is what I use and within a narrow scope of use it does a great job. But its just a feature of another device.

I get your position. It kind of makes sense.

Clearly at one point, photography was an interest to you, now it is less so, and a 'great job' within a narrow scope of use is good enough for you. Convenience has trumped ultimate performance in imaging for you, wouldn't you say?

All these standalone boxes (headphone amps, DACs, amplifiers, volume controls, switch boxes etc) are just like the DSLRs (or mirrorless), the various lenses and flashes, filters and accessories that enthusiasts of photography collect and upgrade constantly.

An integrated amplifier is like an iPhone- it does a lot well in all in one package and is 'good enough' for most.

I drew a line in the sand when I realised it was my photographic skills (or lack thereof) that were the limiting factor in my pictures, not the gear. (no, that was not in the box-brownie era either).

 

[March Audio]

So tell me, where does a typical vintage or reasonably modern high quality integrated amplifier fall down in the functionality stakes as compared to your gear (and a lot of other gear on ASR)?

More than one pair of speakers either together or separately?
Tone controls if you want to use them?
Loudness, filters or even a simple mono switch?
Phono preamplifier either MM or MC?
Multiple inputs?
Loop outs for external amps?
Processing loop for EQ or anything else?
Headphone socket?
Volume control?
Balance control?

Answer: It doesn't.

The only part in functionality where vintage can fall down, is multi format digital inputs and that is solved with one cheap little box if you so wish.



OK, ring your local warranty service centre for the big brands in Perth tomorrow. Try to get hold of someone who knows which end is the hot end of a soldering iron. Ask them honestly what the most common failure modes are for modern CE gear. Ask them what they actually repair. Report back with your findings.

Actually it does. People don't use hifi in the traditional sense you are thinking of there. With respect that's very old school. People have moved on. Streaming. One box controlled from an ipad. Phone via Bluetooth to sound box.

You are missing the point that the number of electronic devices in a typical home has exploded. Don't conflate reliability with doing repairs. It is also proportional to the quantity of products in use.

 

[restorer-john]

You are missing the point that the number of electronic devices in a typical home has exploded.

Oh, I know the sheer number of devices is in a whole other realm to the 80s or 90s. You should see our place. Two boys, multiples of everything plus my extreme amounts of gear.

Don't conflate reliability with doing repairs. It is also proportional to the quantity of products in use.

I would change your quote to the quality. Muggins here does all the repairs for everything in this house and my friends/father's house too. It is modern stuff that fails both for us, and for people who want me to fix their gear. Expensive headphones that are poorly made inside. Cables not secured getting torn out. Poorly made plugs. Computer power supplies. Laptop power socket failures that render entire laptops dead. Blu-ray players, let's not talk about them, ever.

I have a true story. A few months ago, there was another massive storm here, lightning strikes etc. My father's place has underground power, but the huge substation up the road that has twin 275kV feeds for most of the gold coast area and must have taken some fierce hits. He was listening to Pavarotti in his listening room. Apparently there was a huge bang up the road and the lights flashed, the intercom, computer, modem, alarm system and some other stuff was obliterated along with a whole slew of LED downlights I'd only installed a few months earlier. All SMPS powered stuff. $5K worth of insurance replacements and repairs.

Pavarotti continued to sing on his vintage system of the day, right through it all. It made us both smile. No damage to his entire HiFi audition room where there is well over 100 pieces of gear hooked up. I was relieved- less work for me.

 

[Blumlein 88]

I get your position. It kind of makes sense.

Clearly at one point, photography was an interest to you, now it is less so, and a 'great job' within a narrow scope of use is good enough for you. Convenience has trumped ultimate performance in imaging for you, wouldn't you say?

All these standalone boxes (headphone amps, DACs, amplifiers, volume controls, switch boxes etc) are just like the DSLRs (or mirrorless), the various lenses and flashes, filters and accessories that enthusiasts of photography collect and upgrade constantly.

An integrated amplifier is like an iPhone- it does a lot well in all in one package and is 'good enough' for most.

I drew a line in the sand when I realised it was my photographic skills (or lack thereof) that were the limiting factor in my pictures, not the gear. (no, that was not in the box-brownie era either).

Well you know the saying about the camera you have in your pocket beats the super outfit that is back home.

I do still have a quality Canon DSLR. I can get better pictures in more varied conditions than with my phone. But the phone can work for maybe 80% of what I need. When I go and shoot cars at the racetrack I need the DSLR. Super low light, I need the DSLR (but the Dark shot processing in my Pixel phone gets pretty close). Long telephoto shots like at the track again DSLR. My on again off again astrophotography I need the DSLR.

Now my phone also means I rarely pull out a scanner. There are apps where I take a picture, select the corners of the document, and processing fixes the perspective and gives me a fine result as good as you need for scanning of documents or even modest quality prints. It wouldn't serve for doing dozens of documents daily, but for the now and again need for such a thing I don't use the scanner.

Oh, and I don't guess I mentioned video. With a little creativity you can do lots of things with the video on the phone you couldn't do with any of the regular cameras. That is what I mean about design being part of a web of evolution of technology and fitting in its time.

 

[restorer-john]

Well you know the saying about the camera you have in your pocket beats the super outfit that is back home.

So true, I just now got some really cool, surreal shots of my son swimming in the pool on my iPhone. Why, because it was in my pocket.

 

[Sal1950]

Lots of good points made here.
But what we don't need is a big brother government telling us what we can or can't buy with our hard earned dollars.
We have way too much of that going on already.

 

[restorer-john]

But what we don't need is a big brother government telling us what we can or can't buy with our hard earned dollars.
We have way too much of that going on already.

I agree. People should be able to make choices if they can afford the bill.

That said, consumers must also share the responsibility of disposal and recycling costs at the end of life. Those costs should decrease according to the service life. Where items prematurely die, the manufacturers should shoulder a greater disposal cost than the consumer. Where products have an extremely long life, manufacturers should receive accreditation and reductions in their disposal/recycling costs.

Isn't there systems like that already in the US for disposal of certain whitegoods?

That would encourage better made, longer lasting products where everyone wins and the planet is a happier place.

 

[JJB70]

I think that it is important to separate opinions of an idea from opinions of that idea being imposed on people. I am a tree hugger and support energy efficiency and reducing our emissions and environmental impact. I also object to government imposing things on people. The drivers to reduce our environmental impact are largely being driven by society and many businesses have invested heavily to lower their impacts for entirely commercial reasons. Politicians are followers who want to be re-elected, and are very attentive to political currents. It is easy to support big government intervention when it is something you agree with, the problem is that it is not a switch you can turn on and off, once you accept that government will take decisions for you and you will surrender basic freedoms then you have crossed a metaphorical Rubicon and who knows where it could end. Most of the truly evil governments of the 20th century appear to have genuinely believed that they were making the world better as they killed millions.

 

[svart-hvitt]

Better, longer-lasting gear can be made but consumers do not want to pay for it. Other than outlawing the cheap stuff (however you define it) is there an answer? Forcing manufacturers to use more "sustainable" materials and practices adds cost. Gov't mandates (I am no fan of the UN) will shift manufacturing to areas that are less restrictive again to save costs.

Another issue is the constantly evolving standards in consumer gear. We went from R2R to cassettes to CDs to streaming, video tape (VCRs) to DVDs to BD (now in various flavors from standard to 3D to 4K), stereo, to 5.1 to 7.1 to Atmos, etc. From composite video to SVHS to HDMI. And so forth and so on. Progress inevitably obsoletes older technology, leading to loss and waste. If I had to be taxed to support it (and I am), I'd rather the money go towards advancing recycling operations than arbitrary "sustainability" requirements.

Lead solder bad, so outlaw lead in solder. It is better now, but the reliability or repairability of components using non-lead solder is much worse than the old stuff. And where did the lead come from? The planet? We took it out but now it is absolutely horrible to put back in -- recovering it from components seems a better focus.

To touch upon the two examples:

1. There is a lot more to the Apple story than the media shouted. Battery lifetime is limited and capacity diminishes. Someone probably thought it a great idea to slow down the processor and extend the battery life for older devices, saving consumers from having to buy a new one. Never let a good deed go unpunished.

Making devices that are difficult to repair has been attacked, and I tend to agree with that, but OTOH making something like a phone or MP3 smaller, lighter, and more resistant to the environment (like water damage) means seals and tightly packed products tough to repair. The consumer wants it all, and sometimes reality gets in the way...

2. I guess I am just old-fashioned in that I think competition is good and am willing to let the marketplace (consumer) decide if a new product is differentiated enough from others to justify itself. If not, it won't survive, but the world will go on. Differentiation means much different things to different people; some will pay more for looks, some for additional features, others for better technical specs (I intentionally left off "different sound", no need to add more rabbit holes to go down). A one-size-fits-all approach means building to the lowest or highest common denominator and I don't see either as a viable long-term strategy. The least in terms of performance and features will be supplanted by other products that people will buy for their better performance (audible or not). Building to the most means paying a lot in features, SWaP, etc. for things not everyone needs or wants, again a waste or resources.

My guess is I won't be alive in the "post-consumerism" world. Striving for better seems part of our nature and I don't see that going away anytime soon. For audio components that means always wanting one more feature, one more format, one more watt...

@DonH56 (and to others who disliked my pointing out the Apple battery scandal) regarding Apple you wrote:

«1. There is a lot more to the Apple story than the media shouted. Battery lifetime is limited and capacity diminishes. Someone probably thought it a great idea to slow down the processor and extend the battery life for older devices, saving consumers from having to buy a new one. Never let a good deed go unpunished».

I think you’re naive here. The case, legally, ethically and morally is this:

«“If it turns out that consumers would have replaced their battery instead of buying new iPhones had they known the true nature of Apple’s upgrades, you might start to have a better case for some sort of misrepresentation or fraud,” said Rory Van Loo, a Boston University professor specializing in consumer technology law».
Source: http://fortune.com/2017/12/26/apple-lawsuit-old-iphones/

And then came the profit warning of Apple some weeks ago. Some claimed it was partly due to the battery scandal:

«Apple reportedly replaced about 10 times more iPhone batteries than it expected to».
Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/15/apple-upgraded-10-to-11-million-batteries-according-to-report.html

In Tim Cook’s own words:

«While macroeconomic challenges in some markets were a key contributor to this trend, we believe there are other factors broadly impacting our iPhone performance, including consumers adapting to a world with fewer carrier subsidies, US dollar strength-related price increases, and some customers taking advantage of significantly reduced pricing for iPhone battery replacements».
Source: https://www.apple.com/qa/newsroom/2019/01/letter-from-tim-cook-to-apple-investors/

This case is pretty good evidence that people (millions of them) want sustainability instead of new, expensive gear, despite the fact that Apple are extremely good at pointing out why you should have their new, «best ever!!!» products.

I am surprised about people’s naivity in sustainability questions. An often used example of planned obsolescence is the Phoebus cartel:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel

From Wikipedia:

«The Phoebus cartel existed to control the manufacture and sale of incandescent light bulbs. They appropriated market territories and fixed the useful life of such bulbs.[1] Corporations based in Europe and America founded the cartel on January 15, 1925 in Geneva[2]. They had intended the cartel to last for thirty years (1925 to 1955). The cartel ceased operations in 1939 owing to the outbreak of World War II. The cartel included manufacturers Osram, General Electric, Associated Electrical Industries, and Philips,[3] among others.

The Phoebus cartel created a notable landmark in the history of the global economy because it engaged in large-scale planned obsolescence to generate repeated sales and maximize profit. It also reduced competition in the light bulb industry for almost fifteen years. Critics accused the cartel of preventing technological advances that would produce longer-lasting light bulbs. Phoebus based itself in Switzerland. The corporation named itself Phœbus S.A. Compagnie Industrielle pour le Développement de l'Éclairage (French for "Phoebus, Inc. Industrial Company for the Development of Lighting")».

Swedish professor Mattias Lindahl, among the top internationally-recognised scholars in the areas of Ecodesign and Product Service Systems (https://liu.se/en/employee/matli36) says:

«Corporations plan that your cars, mobile phones and gear will break down (...). The mobile phone gets slow, the washing machine breaks down and the car stops - and you need to buy a new one. This is planned. Everybody knows it, but nobody wants to talk about it».
Source: https://www.nyteknik.se/innovation/...ar-ska-ga-sonder-6892586#conversion-122831618

I have on earlier occasion (not here) said that audiophiles’ relationship with schitty gear makers is like a Stockholm syndrome; people start to love the ones who do them harm. Because we have been brainwashed to believe in our corporates’ good will, I wonder if the Stockholm syndrome goes further than audiophiles’ love of schiit. The Swedish professor says planned obsolescence is widespread. Yet few want to realize that truth.

 

[Willem]

The Stockholm syndrome is a nice analogy.

 

[jasonq997]

'crazy eco-bolshevists' is certainly a dark turn in what should and can be a civilized discussion of some relevant side effects of our hobby. There really is no need for such language.
Fortunately most audio gear is not that power hungry. There are worse appliances.

Nah, I think the characterization is correct. It probably only applies to one person in this message thread, but it is completely valid.

As a side note, I really like and admire the restoration of this older gear. I am in line right now for a specialized restoration of an amp I own from the early 90s that has sentimental value to me. However, I think the new stuff is probably much better and more reliable, including some of these terrible (actually really good) products made in China.

 

[JJB70]

I have a home hi-fi set up made up of early 90's Sony ES equipment and some rather nice Castle Acoustics speakers. Since I listen to two channel and am still happy with it I have no plans to replace or upgrade. I still use my old Sennheiser HD580's that I bought in the mid 90's although I will admit to having more headphones than I need nowadays. I like my Sony Xperia XZ premium mobile phone and have no plans to replace it. I do upgrade my computer periodically as for quite a long time it was necessary as the state of technology developed however my current computer is a Surface Pro tablet which I hope to get a lot of use from. I buy my clothes from M&S (probably means nothing for non-UK readers) as they sell well made and durable mens wear which lasts a long time for prices which are not unreasonable. I have a couple of mechanical wrist watches which cost a lot but they're the sort of watches which I'll probably pass on to the boy when I die (although I wear a Casio G Shock as my daily watch). I believe in the concept of buy once, buy right, but that is my choice. If people don't want to do that (and it's important to recognise not everybody has the choice) then that is for them but I think Restorer John is correct in that a better way to make people think is to make the purchaser liable for end of life recycling and disposal. That is fully consistent with free choice and also people being responsible for their choices.

 

[graz_lag]

I recycle : buying only second-hand materials, with very rare few exceptions ... for the Topping DX7S for example, which was not available in the black finish in the second-hand market back in November ... while it is now ! For 300 EUR ...
I have been paying 425 EUR for mine, so 125 EUR out-of-my-pocket thrown in the wind, plus the carbon footprint for the additional unit associated manufacturing-logistic stuffs ...
Being impulsive-shopper is never a good attitude ...

 

[March Audio]

I think ebay has done wonders for extending the useful life of products.