Stereophile's Products of 1993

There is a tendency in magazine publishing to concentrate on the present. Writers generally downplay what happened in the irretrievable past as being of lesser importance compared with the new and exciting, their enthusiasm pretty much tied to the ever-in-motion time-line. I instituted Stereophile's annual "Products of the Year" feature, therefore, to give recognition to those components that had proved capable of giving pleasure beyond the formal review period. To confound confusion, there are just five individual categories: "Loudspeakers" (including subwoofers); "Amplification Components" (preamplifiers, power amplifiers, etc.); "Digital Sources" (CD players, transports, D/A processors); "Analog Sources" (phono cartridges, turntables, tonearms, FM tuners, etc.); and "Accessories" (everything else).

The two most important categories are self-explanatory: the "Component of the Year"—the Best of the Best—and the "Budget Component of the Year"—the Best Sound for the Buck. (Last year's winners were the Mark Levinson No.30 D/A processor and the Spica SC-30 loudspeaker, respectively.)

There is also an "Editor's Choice" award, which I reserve to myself to single out those superb-sounding products that have proved themselves. When a company replaces a line of components less than a year old with a whole new line which, in turn, will be replaced in less than a year, I start to wonder if it's even worth reading the promotional literature. When I'm asked to recommend products, therefore, I fall back on mature products that have proven long-term satisfaction. To be eligible for "Editor's Choice," therefore, a component must have been continuously available for at least a decade.

The formal voting procedure consisted of two steps: First, I asked Stereophile's hardware reviewers each to nominate up to five components in each of the seven categories. To be a contender, a product had to have been reported on in Stereophile between the November 1992 and October 1993 issues, either in a full review or in a Follow-Up. Most importantly, only those components for which a writer had put his opinion on the line for public scrutiny could be nominated. I then put together a ballot form which included all the components that had been nominated by three or more writers and/or editors. In this manner, most of the nominees in most of the categories would have been auditioned by most of the reviewers.

So it proved to be. Fifteen of the magazine's reviewing staff gave three votes for their first choice in each category, two votes for their second choice, and one vote for their third choice (if they had a third choice). I tallied the votes; the results you now hold in your hand.

COMMENTS
smargo's picture

who cares about the products of the year in 1993?

Anton's picture

Your umbrage is an easily remedied first world problem.

Seeing that list makes me wonder just how far we've advanced in the intervening years.

5%?

Less?

cgh's picture

That was my thought too Anton. I think the visual appearance of the speaker is probably what did it. (The speaker of the year would be $6783 on an inflation adjusted basis today.)

Staxguy's picture

Not been in the hobby for long?

For me, seeing that photo was gorgeous. The Theil. The CEC. The SL-1 (still being made) by CAT. The CP-1 (Lexicon).

Just look at that Mark Levinson. I don't care much for the Linn LP, for many reasons, but reading about the Kimber PB+J and Sumiko's Blue Point Special brought at tear to my eye.

What especially caught my eye when reading was the price of the Symphonic Line RG-8 ($5000) - 1993.

Over at TAS, they're recommending the Symphonic Line based Odyssey Audio Khartago (and Stratos) amps by Klaus Bungee.

http://www.odysseyaudio.com/products-khartago-stereo.html

You can get Symphonic Line from him as well.

In the news, Symphonic Line (Germany) just came out with the Kraftwerk Reference Integrated Amplifier, which was covered by Wizard High End Audio Blog, no less.

http://wizard-highend.blogspot.ca/2017/02/symphonic-line-kraftwerk-refer...

The collector in me now wants all these 1993 products! :)

To explain the emotive or reading interest, take a footballer.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993%E2%80%9394_Manchester_United_F.C._season

Down at the pub, you might just get into this same conversation but any hard core Manchester United fan, like the carpenter from Dublin who just came into my home, might look back to 1993 with the same sort of enthusiasm.

Are you or I going to be buying a belt-driven transport like the CEC? Likely, not. I've had just about enough of belt driven turntables, re: wow and flutter, and breaking $5000 MC cartridges installing a new belt (one was enough...), but my what a list of items.

Don't tell me that you wouldn't mind a Krell KSA-250 or 300?

For everyone else,

Look the Bryston 7B was in it's 7B-NRB-THX stage back then. Bryston just realeased their 7B 3 last week (well, it's review came out, anyway). Amazing!

smargo's picture

its funny how much we have a concept of someone - I have been in the hobby for 24 years - i still think products of the year from 1993 are a waste of time to read.

Id rather see a review of something or an article that applies to the hear and now!

cgh's picture

I unwittingly blew future income listening to Beveridge electrostatics and DQs before 1993... so no, not new to it all. My nostalgia is easily trumped by my interest in music.

Staxguy's picture

I was just trying to guess the reason underlying your comment, Smargo. No offense, intended. :)

Whether it be nostalgia, or a cetain love of architecture, certain products bring a smile to my face.

http://www.stereophile.com/content/stereophiles-products-1992#AvjFGV6k6E...

Take the cover of Stereophile's 1992 Recommended Componets: The Mark Levinson No. 30 DAC.

To me, it is a thing of beauty, that to my eye exceeds most Hi Fi products built today.

The CEC looks great to me too, or the ol' Threshold T2 Preamplifier of yore: certain things of beauty.

Certain products today get design right, to my taste.

The Lumin S1 Streamer
http://www.luminmusic.com/lumin-s1.html

Sort of a computer + DAC. :)

Now take a computer like the Cray 2 Supercomputer. You wouldn't likely want one today, but look at the design!

https://theinfomonkey.com/2015/06/15/moores-law-and-the-technologies-of-...

Pievetta Opera Only ($2M) sort of copies it or plays homage (not to cop a Sonus Faber)...

http://newatlas.com/pivetta-opera-only/29824/

;)

Certain products like that Theil (3.6) had something beautiful or at least interesting to it - like that curved baffle along with it's flat front and over-all slope to it.

Look at Thiel Loudspeakers today (not to be Thiel / Small):

https://www.thielaudio.com/

Their sort of interesting and decor friendly (in the same way the 3.6 was and is today if in good condition) and yet...

my mind's eye says they're just ...

http://www.stereophile.com/floorloudspeakers/1208snell/#zveiuY7M9tTzr5rH.97

given that Snell is no longer in market, today.

I've never been one for history, but there was one graph (Adbusters, I believe) which showed the decline of Earth species, left to right (falling line) and the increase in consumer products (more brands of toothpaste, etc.), correspondingly...

and this immediately made me interested in the history of technology and it's evolution from sort of the British do-nothing in it's heyday Empire free-man perspective.

That's one side.

On the other, certain objects are just to my eye, intrinsically beautiful.

The Devialet Expert 1000 today may be the more competent product of the two, but to my eye the circuit board of the original D-Premier is much more lovely.

[off-topic content deleted by John Atkinson]

cgh's picture

Working on my PhD I recall executing massively parallel Fortran on Crays (and IBM SP3s) from the Unix shell to solve certain classes of partial differential equations. Even screwing up a password involved getting on the phone to the Sys Admin at Lawrence Livermore or Berkeley who didn't differentiate between me and the guy doing top-secret nuclear simulations. Today I (rather, the kids that work for me) run CUDA on GPU grids and write to a cloud. While I have a certain nostalgia for sitting in my basement waiting hours for QBasic programs on, at best, a 486 to produce fractal images (which I my iPhone could do in a second now), which is similar to my nostalgia for listening to really bizarre music at all hours on those ESLs, I have zero nostalgia for those old Crays.

dalethorn's picture

The old stuff makes me think, if I could go back to the 80's, I'd get a better amp for the DQ10's and a more suitable room as well. Then I could build better memories. The lessons of history are valuable things.

Anton's picture

It's not as if Stereophile just spent time writing an article that could have otherwise been written about 'something new.'

Perhaps other people think surround sound articles area waste of time, or vinyl, or CD players...

Hopefully, they won't now waste all that time writing up articles about gear from 1992 and can focus on 'new stuff!' ;-D

Chakenheimer's picture

Sorry to be off topic but lost your email. Do you intend to review The Co-Op lp?

Chakenheimer's picture

When may we expect posting?

readargos's picture

I agree those Thiel speakers have a certain visual appeal. I also liked the similar-looking Hales tower speakers from this era. I remember seeing the Hales at a dealer in Indianapolis for the first time, and found the appearance arresting. The aesthetics of the current Mark Levinson gear is a pale imitation of the chunky art decco glory of the stuff from the '90s.

Moreover, much of the gear remains relevant, and could be the basis of a good second system, or even first system. Replacing passive components that age, like capacitors and resistors, with more modern designs can keep older gear refreshed, and in many cases, sounding better than it did when it premiered.

The Levinson gear from this era was also heroically overbuilt, and like a number of other luxury class goods (I'm thinking of automobiles, in particular) continued to compete with newer designs for many years. If I recall correctly, JA was using the Mark Levinson Reference digital processor until it died on him a few years ago, and I believe some of Stereophile's other reviewers (LG?) are still using Levinson amps of this vintage. We have higher-specification DAC chips now, and higher-resolution digital, but the analog output stage and overall design and attention to detail have almost as much to do with ultimate sound quality, and long-term listening pleasure.

X