Which hi fi manufacturers never got the credit they deserve, and which ones got more praise than they deserved? This is not a fact poll folks, this is strictly opinion.

I'll throw my hat in the ring first.

Underrated--Pilot. Outstanding quality, and performance that would shame many brands with far more recognition.

Overrated (and this will probably anger a few people)--anything with the Dynaco nameplate attached to it. Before anyone goes off on me, I understand the premise; David Hafler wanted to build hi fi in kit form on the cheap. There's just one problem; it showed. Chassis so flimsy you could push them in with a finger, troublesome PCB's, and all of the reliability of a saturday night special.

This thread is going at least for four pages, so let the debate begin

Over-rated: Marantz SS. Dynaco? Built to a price point, faults can be corrected for more $$.

Totally agree about Marantz SS. These were just average Japanese transistorized amps with a storied nameplate on them.

Solid State
underrated: Luxman. Their integrated amps were simply amazing. Receivers were good too up through the funky suck-face ones of the early 80's.
overrated: NAD. Great specs, sound, and minimalistic design couldn't help the reliability which is just this side of awful.

Tube
underrated: Agree with Pilot. Very well built and sound nice.
overrated: Early Sansui. These bring huge bucks and I don't know why, or maybe I've just never heard a good one.

You must have some strong fingers....

Hardly; the PAS-2 (should've been named POS-2) preamp had a chassis so flimsy that even moderate finger pressure would cause the chassis to bow inwards. Worst preamp I"ve ever used by the way; horrible top end, and the power transformers were known for being undersized and frying.

I have to agree about Dynaco--absolute garbage. I'm a tech, and I never knew when it was time to tell the customer their junk was ready to pick up; nothing they made sounded right. Hum levels that would practically knock you down. Noise that wouldn't quit. Twisted wire where shielded cable was called for. Function switches in the wrong location that would guarantee lousy sound. Under-rated, cheap components.

Under-rated gear? Some of the JVC and Kenwood amps from the late 70s and 80s. I said SOME; yes some were cheap and just about thrown together, but some were well-worth the money and could easily put out the rated power and sound very nice while doing it. Yamaha was good, but pricey.

I'm not gonna go all judgemental. Firstoff, I'm still using 1969 Dyna PAT4 (cap upgrade mid 80s) so what could I possibly know? And Dyna ST70 sells well in the collector market. Not at Mac prices but nonetheless.

Underrated, EICO. HF87 stereo power amp (EL34, 35W/ch) is ultralinear with only 17dB overall feedback. Most of their other stuff from the era was the same design, scaled. You have to go to Acoustic Research today (and pay their NASA prices) to get comparable. (EICO ST70 was integrated, Dyna ST70 was PA only. No relation.)

Oh OK, AR has 3 regulated DC filament supplies. But if you're going to be that obsessional, you make them alternate polarity on alternate startups so the filament metals don't unilaterally migrate. They didn't do that. Faux obsession. AKA, marketing to the lowest common denominator within your market sector.

Overrated, all the early Japanese SS stuff. Marantz, Sansewage, Kenwood. Copied American Marantz aesthetics, but the guts were mislabeled Chinese fireworks. Should have come with a fire extinguisher. And earplugs.

And Bose. ALL Bose. They have unimpressed me since 1974 and at their priceline still do.

RCA Victor until Solid State Happened.

Great performance for a major brand, very under rated by Audiophools (Or Audiophiles)

-Nolan

Over-rated? McIntosh. Eicos would universally sound better, at 1/3 the cost or less.

Don't believe me? Put an Eico TX97 against an Mc. MR78. The Eico will have less noise, and better audio bandwidth, in stereo.

Put a pair of Eico HF22s vs. a pair of MC30s. Or an HF89 vs. an MC240. Again, better bandwidth, better dynamics.

Put an Eico HF85 vs. a Mc. C20 preamp. Same again here.

Eico wins all of those. Easily.

The only exception would be speakers. And that's because Eico didn't really specialize in speakers- they only made them for about 2 years or so. They stuck to what they did well- making electronics that sounded ridiculously good for the money...

Under-rated? The smaller Harman-Kardon tube units (Award series, primarily). Excellent sound. Very reliable. Built like bricks. Everybody jumps on the Citation bandwagon... but the A-series was close to as good of sound, for a lot less money...

Though I've only recently gotten much "face-time" with them, I'd have to agree about the performance of Pilot gear. Astonishingly good. But, it's not really under-rated... there are Pilot models that bring stupid high money now. They're starting to be discovered. The "secret" is out...

Regards,
Gordon.

I wish you guys could have heard Paul Klipsch go off on Bose! He kept several around the lab just for the amusement value.

Dr Bill

To bad Dynaco only sold about 300,000 ST-70 and who knows how many flimsy chassis PAS preamps.... remember, Dynaco sold their products at a price point that was affordable to the common man...

Can you imagine how many ST-70's and PAS preamps would have sold if they sounded great.

Sal

IMHO, Dynaco ST70s are a solid, decent power amp. Same for the ST35, Mk. III and Mk. IV

However, I've found the PAS2 and PAS3 to be insufficient to the task, unless heavily modified. The design was just over-simplified. They tried to do a job that needed at least five tubes (such as the Heath and Eico preamps used), with just four. Six tubes (such as Marantz and others used) would have been even more proper to the task...

The simplifications required for this compromised their performance, on anything resembling a difficult load. No buffering, anywhere. Solid-state amps with less than 50K input impedance need not apply. In fact, anything with a different input impedance from a ST70 or ST35, will usually NOT sound right on one of these, unless it's been heavily modified.

Same for many tape decks and such- any load of under 150K on the tape monitor out would markedly change the sound of the preamp. Not one for anyone who wants to use it for taping anything.

When I can buy a tube preamp (vintage) that doesn't have these problems, for similar or less money... then why would I want a PAS?

Also, the Dynaco Mk VI was a paper tiger, IMHO. Great on paper, but hard to keep running, with the IME mostly unstable quad-8417 output tube arrangement. I've not seen one of those that worked properly, for quite a while. Convert it over to KT88s, with a different input amp configuration with enough horsepower to drive a quad of KT88s, and you might have something...

This is all not even to mention the outright fiasco that was the first generation of Dynaco solid state amps. The ST80 and ST120 were quite possibly, other than the SWTP Tigers, the most unreliable solid state amps, EVER. Just an unstable design. I've never seen a tech that LIKED to work on these amps, or many that will work on them for any price, anymore...

Regards,
Gordon.

I've always had a ton of respect for Paul Klipsch, and now even more so; I've always hated Bose too

ditto on hating Bose. Also Carver. Two brands that are proof that marketing can sell so so product. I could go on and on but nearly all you guys already know it. As far as Dynaco, I had an ST-70 for quite a while and liked it a lot.

1 more underrated SS item. Fisher, pre-1970. Tube Fishers get all the ink and bring nice money but items like the 500TX sounded very nice. SS that still had a tubey sound to it. I had a TX as a daily driver for years. Kinda wish I had it back. HH Scott, of the same vintage, was similar, although Fishers seemed a little more gutsy to me and I used to really push my equipment.

I have to disagree with pre-70 Fisher SS; I had a model 50 (I'm guessing maybe '66 vintage), and those early germanium outputs would clip easily. Those transistors also had an odd high end to them...almost nasal-sounding. And if pushed too hard, those outputs didn't take long to go up in smoke. I sold it on ebay for a nice price, though

maybe the early ones sucked but they really had the bugs out by the time that 500TX came out. It was a 68 or 69. They are bringing real nice money these days too so someone else beside me must think they are good.

Underrated: Most Crown audio products. The FM-2 was a fantastic FM tuner. H-K,

Overrated: Carver, Bose, NAD,

Yeah, but the IC150 pretty much sucked, from a sonic standpoint. Terrible op-amps of the original 741 generation. The slew rate limitations pretty much tanked the sound from an intermodulation-distortion standpoint. Very "smeared" sounding, for lack of a better term.

The D150 and DC300s were decent, though. Great for bass, somewhat less so for highs. I'd still use one in a heartbeat, for a subwoofer amp. They did have the additional advantage of being pretty close to absolutely indestructible, though.

Regards,
Gordon.

+1