what really happened during the late 70s early 80s in the hifi press

[Arkless Electronics]

Again your black and white view does you zero justice Jez - you are mostly correct but, for instance, the last new Hi-Fi purchase I made was for 2x 4m lengths of Linn k400 from a Linn dealer in Chiswick I guess late 90s to early 2000s. They were disgusted that I just bought the raw cables and connectors off them (for more, from memory, than my Nad 3130 cost me some 4 years earlier), not believing I’d be able to solder the bananas on myself. They cost more than my amp did! But guess what, they sounded vastly better than the dual 2.5mm mains cables I was using until that point between Nad 3130 and modified 737-rs… Oh, wait a minute, I mentioned bi-wiring…shit… LOL

Nope... they sounded the same and your imagination did the rest. Bi-wiring can make a slight difference but is dependent on many factors.

 

[CTank]

I once took my Linn Axis/Akito in for a service at that Chiswick Linn dealer.

I was somewhat bemused on going to collect it, to be passed a lovely fluted LP12/Ittok. After initially thinking this servicing was a grand idea, honesty prevailed.

They did give me a Naim sample CD as compensation for the mix-up.

 

[Dowser]

Nope... they sounded the same and your imagination did the rest. Bi-wiring can make a slight difference but is dependent on many factors.

Where’s the dislike button? Would be much easier to deal with some of these contradictory **** posts from self proclaimed experts…

 

[Arkless Electronics]

Where’s the dislike button? Would be much easier to deal with some of these contradictory **** posts from self proclaimed experts…

I believe there is an ignore function.

I'd be fascinated as the where I've ever said anything to contradict what I say here!

Magic wire, earthing boxes, cable lifters, magic RCA plugs etc etc believers are variations on a theme which includes Qanon, anti-vaxxers, literal flat earthers and 5G conspiracists AFAIC

 

[davidismynaim]

Bring back the little HFC A5 books. Those were excellent and I loved the format.

I had forgotten those, I remember buying one that focused on cartridges with a lovely technics cartridge that came with its own headshell on the cover, and another that focused on cassette decks with some cool sony one with touch controls on the cover - I was easily impressed back then, haha

 

[spanna]

Hi,

Linn and Naim grew from three HiFi outlets around the UK in the early days, they helped show that there was more to HiFi than the brands that were currently on the market at the time, those outlets gave very good and lengthy demos to potential buyers, you made your own mind up, if you could not hear a difference there was never any pressure to buy.

Later there was however a lot of pressure from companies on reviewers and magazine owners not to keep pushing Linn and Naim or the new trends of the day or large scale advertising would be dropped from not just the HiFi magazines but anywhere they advertised.

There was also other incentives given to reviewers to give great reviews.

Linn and Naim did not market big in magazines at the start, even later maybe one page, not many pages like the large HiFi companies.

Ivor once told me he spent more time in airports and on planes around the world than he ever did at home, he was the guy that promoted the LP12 around the world.

Reviewers like Paul Messenger gave good solid reviews that explained why he liked certain brands and they were not all Linn and Naim.

Most of my friends all had decent HiFi's of the day, they would come along to my house have a listen and go back thinking what a load of crap they had and within weeks had an LP12 or Rega deck along with Naim or an Nad amp.

People of all ages listened with their ears, often getting equipment to take home and try, so it was never a trend, it was something that was better, people bought into that and that was what made Linn, Naim and Rega what they are today.

Cheers

John

3 Linn and naim dealers? Who were they?

 

[jtgofish]

My first hi fi system at age 18 in 1978 was a Dynaco Pat4 preamp,Dynaco Stereo 120 kit power amp,AR turntable with Stanton 681eee cartridge and a pair of Tangent RS4 speakers.That was a great system and suspect it would still sound very good today.I managed to avoid the Linn/Naim thing mostly because I could not afford it.
Back in the late 70s the system I lusted after was an Accuphase C200 preamp/P300 power amp and Gale 401 speakers.That still makes a great sounding system today.Accuphase was never cheap back then but neither was it as pricey as it is today .The build quality was amazing.Forty years on most of that Accuphase stuff s still going strong.
I still own a Logic DM101 from the early eighties which I bought new.A piece of junk really with a horrible wobbly suspension and an average woolly sort of sound-no better than an AR really.
I found that an old Lenco rim drive sounded much better.
I recently refurbished some Rogers Studio 1s from the early 80s.They are completely normal sounding speakers by todays standards-very good imaging[which surprised me] and plenty of bite to the midrange.They sound very much like the modern Harbeths to me.I still own a pair of Gale 401a and can't ever imagine not owning them.

 

[herb]

Where’s the dislike button? Would be much easier to deal with some of these contradictory **** posts from self proclaimed experts…

I would recommend the ignore function, it is very effective

 

[Yank]

Bring back the little HFC A5 books. Those were excellent and i loved the format.

And they weren't afraid to print negative reviews. Lots of them.

 

[Yank]

Nakamichi TX-1000

Was that the self-centering one?

 

[Yank]

I think Stereophile, when J Gordon started it, was the first 'subjective' mag, they didn't do any technical reviewing for many years, did they?

https://www.stereophile.com/content/altec-7-electro-voice-patrician-800-loudspeakers

https://www.stereophile.com/content/dynaco-pat-4-preamplifier

The latter refer to some simple FR measurement but it wasn't published. But the words 'They just sound very good' is there.

My first subscription copy of The Stereophile included this review:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/transcriptors-vestigal-tonearm

Warning - it contains math and graphs. And Thalidomide.

 

[RJohan]

My first subscription copy of The Stereophile included this review:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/transcriptors-vestigal-tonearm

Warning - it contains math and graphs. And Thalidomide.

Yes, with the graph having the comment 'Courtesy Shure Bros.' We now understands that Stereophile must have an affilliation with Shure, the fact that Mr Holt uses data from an ADC XML for his calculation just proves it even more. Smoke screens!


This thread is the most mad and crazy ever with clear evidence there is people here who believes in all sorts of conspiracy theories. Tony, please save it for posterity!!!

 

[Octavian]

That’s probably an inevitable consequence of the democratisation of hifi. Once it starts to become popular, and no longer the exclusive preserve of the technically literate, prospective purchasers need something other than a technical treatise to guide them. That’s just life. If you want to keep hifi for those who understand how it operates, it’ll stay in its niche and the manufacturers will stay in their little sheds.

Those are the signs of hifi becoming populist, not just popular. From this perspective it is commendable to feed the masses alternative facts instead of truth to keep them interested.

 

[Tony L]

My first subscription copy of The Stereophile included this review:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/transcriptors-vestigal-tonearm

Warning - it contains math and graphs. And Thalidomide.

Proper critical reviewing IMO, but without the arrogance, ego and absolutism we see all to often in some quarters today. History & 20/20 hindsight obviously tends to side with JGH rather than David Gammon. Fascinating to read. That arm really was bonkers!

 

[marshanp]

The only way is to compare to live acoustic music. Nothing more.
Pop music will never really be hi-fi, that’s impossible. There’s no way to tell what it sounds like because it’s fabricated...

Yes; but live music as reproduced in a domestic setting will always be different to the real thing... so I would add that the primary objective should be the most convincing or satisfying domestic sound, with "accuracy" a distant second.

 

[Octavian]

Yes; but live music as reproduced in a domestic setting will always be different to the real thing... so I would add that the primary objective should be the most convincing or satisfying domestic sound, with "accuracy" a distant second.

Quite the contrary, I think. Artificial recordings created in the studio represent "the art of recorded music" even more than the typical classical recording aesthetic. That is the reason why accuracy must be the ultimate goal in domestic hifi. Sadly it usually is not. Part of the reason is the populist hifi propaganda from the 70s and 80s when tapping feet and bopping heads were supposed to be all that mattered.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

Quite the contrary, I think. Artificial recordings created in the studio represent "the art of recorded music" even more than the typical classical recording aesthetic. That is the reason why accuracy must be the ultimate goal in domestic hifi. Sadly it usually is not. Part of the reason is the populist hifi propaganda from the 70s and 80s when tapping feet and bopping heads were supposed to be all that mattered.

If we talk about what actually matters, what matters is that people enjoy music to the greatest extent possible. As human perception is different in each individual, there is no ‘one size fits all’ solution. The objective of accuracy is a good one, but it is a means to an end. We should not allow ourselves to slavishly pursue it to the detriment of enjoyment. ‘High fidelity’ is a technical objective, in pursuit of an artistic aim. Where these things interact, it’s going to get messy. There is, by and large, a correlation between accuracy and communication, but it isn’t absolute. If you fixate on the term ‘high fidelity’, especially the ‘fidelity’ bit, you leave yourself open to missing the ultimate point.

 

[chartz]

I want my recorded piano or acoustic guitar to sound exactly like the real thing.
My hi-fi has to be able to do that.
If not then it’s not hi-fi.
Trouble is, too many recordings are poorly recorded and can’t give this perfect illusion.

 

[Jim Audiomisc]

That’s probably an inevitable consequence of the democratisation of hifi. Once it starts to become popular, and no longer the exclusive preserve of the technically literate, prospective purchasers need something other than a technical treatise to guide them. That’s just life. If you want to keep hifi for those who understand how it operates, it’ll stay in its niche and the manufacturers will stay in their little sheds.

No, it's not an EITHER / OR bipolar dichotomy.

It is quite possible to have a mix of content which includes reviews that give both subjective opinions and *explained* measurement results. If the reviewer has the clue and can be arsed. And a magazine can contain both reviews and explanatory articles for those who wish/can to develop their own ability to judge.

Older mags did that. They also published 'write in' DIY articles and items, etc, to help readers gain confidence and share how-to.

The problem now is that few people recall or have read what mags were like 'back then'. And they are given the impression that even *understanding* something like a graph or some figures is "too difficult", glossed over with "irrelevant because Golden Ears has spoken". Which can suit Golden Ears as it helps them write wafflings and get paid for it.

So it happens, but is not 'inevitable'. Part of the problem is that the modern 'view' is so entrenched that anyone pointing this out is told, "I keep telling people, there's no call for it!" 8-]

 

[Jim Audiomisc]

I’d be very interested to see sales statistics (balanced against growing population etc) as I’m not convinced there was any more popularity in the ‘80s than in the ‘70s and before.

Hi-fi had always been a fairly popular market until comparatively recently when smartphone and computer technology arrived. Now it is unquestionably a niche. Given just how many old Leaks, Quads, Thorens, SMEs etc from the 50s, 60s & 70s still survive to this day along with huge numbers of Japanese receivers, direct drive turntables etc I suspect they sold in at least the quantities of the ‘80s black boxes.

I don’t know many figures off the top of my head, though I do know that the Quad 33 & 303 sold in the region of 120,000/90,00 units though their time in production (more 33s due to the 405 being released). The Garrard 301 & 401 sold around 7000 a year throughout the production run from 1954 through to the early ‘70s. Admittedly these were broadcast units so went to pro-use across the world rather than just UK audiophiles, but I’d be astonished if any other UK hi-fi was shifting in anything remotely like those numbers in the ‘80s. I’d be very interested to see annual figures for the LP12, Planar 3, Nait and other key items just to get some historical perspective here.

Alas, I can't tell you the numbers for Armstrong as they got lost after the factory shut down. But simply recall that:

1) The 521 amp got a good recommendation in "Which" magazine.

2) Then Comet used it as a 'loss leader' and it sold like hot cakes.

The Armstrong 500 and 600 ranges sold far more items than QUAD. They hit the peak of the popular demand surge when HiFi was the new 'must have'. And in terms of market segment they were right on the main demand.

Comet sold the 521 for 50p *less* per amp than the price they paid Armstrong. They relied on buyers also buying speakers, a deck, etc, as well, to make the profit. But people came in for the 521 at low price. The main limit was how fast they could be made.