Turntables for listening.
young_cream
540 Posts
just for listening purposes, not too expensive but something that last, what's out there?
young_cream
540 Posts
Comments
$125. Probably more than I should have spent but it did come with a nice Pickering cartridge that, by itself, retails in the $100 range.
For real - the choices you have are very numerous, especially if you live near a big city. The question ultimately comes down to how badly you want a specific model. If you're not that particular and just want something that works, there's a ton of "listening turntables" you can get for sub-$100. German or Japanese models are your best bet in terms of mechanical reliability. From what I saw, Duals are quite popular.
It seems to get good reviews on audiophile fourms and can be picked up on the cheap.
Recently sold off that Pioneer PL-530 after acquiring a Linn LP12 off a friend but I'm still itching to get another "listening turntable", preferably something that's at semi-automatic (with an auto-stop, if not return).
Wondering what people are rocking out there that they like, both in terms of the quality of construction as well as design?
http://www.vinylengine.com/images/model/at_at6006_safety_raiser.jpg
Thorens TD-160 Super - paid $300 - Highly recommended.
And just picked up a Micro Seiki DD-40 for the new craftsman living room - paid $400 - No review yet:
(not my picture, but same TT)
This local place seems to make the process easy, but I'm not sure about value: https://www.planetofsoundonline.com/systems/. They offer a Marantz SR4023 Receiver, Pro-Ject Xpression III Turntable, and Knight 5 Speakers for two grand.
Anyway, I'm grateful for whatever thoughts the strut may have on this. I just want a good set-up to listen to my records.
i have one for sale right now and i'm getting rid of it for that exact reason. sounds really good tho.
Actually in the process of moving it on, great deck I've had for almost five years. I hardly use it due to the Technics getting used on a daily basis (quicker access), and with having a small boy about the house, always nervous to use it when he's in the room!
I shall be putting it up on Ebay.co.uk this coming weekend, sad to see it go but it needs to get used more than the odd occasion I fire it up. Does bass really well due to the silicone damping trough...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/75791223@N08/6949038595/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/75791223@N08/6802927640/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/75791223@N08/6949035797/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/75791223@N08/6802925942/
Nice headshell on the Micro Seiki DD-40 deck.
Is that a standard issue headshell with the DD-40 model, or is it from another (Japanese) company?
Rega RP1 turntable w/ the RP1 Performance Pack.
Rega 24v High performance motor upgrade kit.
http://www.rega.co.uk/
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rega-RP1-Turntable-w-Performance-Pack-factory-fitted-Dust-Cover-Cool-Grey-/110801148182?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item19cc435916
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rega-Turntable-Upgrade-Package-motor-belt-power-supply-/150791756371?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item231be39a53
For my non-DJing, listening pleasure, I have the NAD-533 turntable:
Here are its vital statistics:
Description
The NAD 533 turntable's simplicity contributes to its excellent performance but will also guarantee long term reliability.
The turntable features a high-torque synchronous motor, high-density non resonant base, high quality Goldring Elektra cartridge, a one piece aluminium pressure cast tone arm, miniature ball bearings in the tonearm, static balancing and magnetic anti-skate device.
Specifications
Drive system: belt drive
Motor: high torque synchronous motor
Speeds: 33.33 and 45rpm
Suspension system: 3 energy absorbent synthetic rubber feet
Operation: manual
Dimensions: 447 x 115 x 356mm
Weight: 5.25kg
I bought mine some years ago, and it has been very reliable. I've but I've seen it priced between $350-$500, but it has been discontinued and replaced with the NAD-556, which is very similar to the 533. My 533 turntable plays very well and has a very warm and crystal-clear sound. I recommend it highly.
Peace,
Big Stacks from Kakalak
modify it. Done. All that other shit is audiophiles snake oil.
That's standard issue for the DD-40. I have a Grace arm and headshell on the Thorens.
Disagreed. My Thorens sounds significantly better than my 1200s hooked up to the same system.
You can build a nice system for a lot less than that. Buying older gear that's been well kept has been successful for me. I have a Sansui AU-D9 amp and JBL ND310 floorstanding speakers that I have less than $400 into and sound excellent.
I have a Harman Kardon HK990vxi amp for sale right now for $300 that has an excellent phono stage and puts out some serious watts. I'd recommend staying with solid state over tube. Brand new systems are nice and will last you a very long time, but they are expensive. If $2000 is nothing to you, go for it. You'll love the sound. I'm surprised how many people I know that live and breath music and listen to it on the worst systems.
With that kind of budget I'd look at some used amps and speakers on Audiogon http://www.audiogon.com/
i just use my SL-1210 for listening. no complaints, but im no audiophile either. for $100 i cant complain, but i'd like to get a nicer listening cartridge.
Thanks for the advice!
Yeah, you've heard me acknowledge as much. Technics wins for "best turntable" but for me, I'm just drawn to the idea of a different turntable for design reasons. I'm going to keep my 12s until I die but in the meanwhile, I like the idea of having a third listening turntable that's not a 12, just for the hell of it.
http://goo.gl/qUYQF
Fuk that!
PL-530
PL-570 (I want to say the main diff besides where the controls are located) between the two is that the 570 is quartz locked, unlike the 530)
Personally, I admire the Luxman 2xx series, mostly for the faceplate on the plinth.
No tone arm, motor etc is going to change that. Just like audiophile speakers aren't going to change the sound of a record recorded with sm57s.
If one sounded better than the other its most likely the cartridge/stylus and different frequency responses.
This comparison makes no sense whatsoever.
Once things get down-converted in format (which happens in a both digital and physical sense) you can up-convert them to whatever rate or format you like but the loss that has occurred will never be restored by the higher playback medium.
For instance, if you take a .wav file, down convert it to a 192 mp3, and then play it on a 100,000$ audiophile setup, it will never sound better than it did as a .wav file. In much the same way, audiophile idiots pay 1000's of dollars for things like power cables (lol) and unbalanced RCA cables that they claim are directional (which laughs in the face of physics) only to play back music that was recorded, at best, using balanced Mogami or Canare cable which costs about 1.50 a foot. So do you think the audiophile cables will make the music sound better when it was RECORDED using, unbeknownst to them, lower grade cable? The simple answer is no. The same goes for microphones - if a microphone, like say an sm57, has a frequency response of 80hz-15k, in what magic land will audiophile gear capable of reproducing (as they may claim) a frequency response beyond 30K be necessary? Once those frequency were lobbed off by the recording medium, the playback medium specs are irrelevant. Assuming the playback medium is flat - meaning it is not boosting frequencies, no matter what claims are made about the audiophile gear, the science here is clear - it will only sound as good as how it was recorded and no better.
As far turntables and vinyl goes, its the same principal. The platter on many lathes is a direct drive Lyric (sp?) motor, which operates in very much the same way a 1200 platter does. I know because i not only work on them but have repaired them. And so you get an audiophile using some crazy belt drive setup to avoid physical rumble when the could have been introduced in the actual cutting of the record because they, we, ARE NOT USING BELT DRIVE lathes. See what i'm saying here? And beyond that, an actual record can not really capture more than 30Hz -just below 20K. So why would anyone need a setup capable of more than that? Some needles may sound better than others but in a perfect world, if the cartridge/stylus setup is FLAT, then they will all sound the same and just reproduce the recorded medium accurately. Sadly, this is not the case and many stylus's have bumps in their frequency response, the RIAA filters have inaccuracies and most of all the phono pre-amps don't have ruler flat responses as well. So we get people thinking one turntable may sound better than another one and on and on. For instance, the impedance of the stylus will change the way the phono pre works which will change the frequency response and so on. It is true that certain tone arms may resonate at frequencies but again, this problem is easily fixed on a 1200. So like I said, modify a 1200 and move on with your life.
My point is there is a huge disconnect between the playback/audiophile stuff and practical recording/science theory. Which is why pretty much every single recording engineer in the world uses professional monitors and not some audiophile jackass setup (and in doing so we pay 1/10th the price). And why we use regular balanced cables and not audiophile cables. You can play the shit back on whatever you want, but if we decide to use one mic over another mic in the recording, no playback setup is going to reintroduce those frequencies.
Thes, exactly what modifications?
http://www.kabusa.com/frameset.htm?/
Here's a primer: http://www.kabusa.com/1200agon4.htm
Basically, I think the goal would be to get the turntable to function like a lathe does using these mods:
1) http://www.kabusa.com/td1200in.htm This dampening system makes the tonearm respond more like the leadscrew of the lathe and has the added bonus of allowing you to play records that are warped and or skipping (within reason). I had records that used to be dish warped and would skip that I can now play with this system. I've been using it for about 5 years now.
2) New footers for more isolation
3) a clamp (which acts like the suction platter of a lathe)
4) new power supply (not necessary but shit since you've gone this far)
I have no affiliation with KAB but dude knows the secret here.
oh and oliver - wood that shit:
that's the money right there. an unused b&o cartridge can go for about $175 if you can find one. the one i'm selling has a brand new cartridge.
Unless I misunderstood you, it makes no sense because you are saying that the motor on the cutting lathe is the main factor in determining the final sound quality. I don't know any cutting engineer that would agree with that. The electronics of the cutting apparatus are far more of a factor, for example.
It also ignores the cumulative effect involved. In other words, say there is a certain degree of rumble introduced by the cutting lathe motor. The playback turntable will add it's own rumble as well. Obviously, the less rumble introduced the second time around the better, so saying that there is no point in a playback system having less rumble than the cutting system is simply incorrect.
I also have to disagree that the only factor in a cartridges sound is it's frequency response. You can have two carts with identical response curves that will sound totally different.
In addition, you're assuming that a 1200 is somehow the 'equivalent' of a cutting system, but there is no inherent reason why that is the case. The fact that they have similar motors is only one of many points of comparison.
I agree that the audiophile world is full of all kinds of chicanery, but dismissing all of it as snake oil does not stand up to any scrutiny, theoretical or experiential. In the course of working on releases for my label, I have spent many, many hours comparing vinyl rips of the same record made on my system (I have a 1200 and a Music Hall) into my hi-res digital recorder, and the Music Hall has won every time.
I also agree that a KAB modified 1200 can be an excellent choice (my 1200 is stock), but not for the purpose of this thread. A modified 1200 is not exactly cheap, and $400 Rega can sound just as good and will cost a lot less.
So far I have on a new 1210 MK II deck the following:
Japanese Oyaide metal mat
Ortofon 2m blue cartridge
Sumiko headshell
Isonoe feet
Isokinetik Isopuck 350gm (looks identical to the Scheu Record Weight W/Bubble Level, but with Isokinetik printed on it)
Sounding similar in performance to the Townshend Rock, but with the benefit of easier use, certainly looks nicer than the stock model...
Probably go for separate power supply and damping trough next, maybe even a higher grade ball-bearing unit perhaps!
Yes, you are both misunderstanding me and proving my point. But i think we are in agreement here, let me clarify:
At no moment were we talking about electronics. Neither on the lathe or with a regular turntable so we can leave that out. Of course the electronics (pre-amp, RIAA curve, feedback loop etc) are going to make 99% of the difference and had this thread been about preamps I would have had entirely different suggestions. I would have pointed out that the vast majority of "audiophile" preamps are using off the shelf IC's and at best maybe THAT corp chips but mostly 5532s. The biggest factor on the sound on any turntable setup is going to be the preamp and how it handles the impedance from the cartridge. In this discussion we are simply talking about the mechanical device that spins the records and holds said headshell and stylus. There's only so much it can do. And my point is that, at best, it can act like the device that spun the record when the record was cut, the lathe. So there are certain steps you can take to get a 1200, which is 95% of the way there anyways - a lab grade turntable if there ever was one, an incredible value that will last forever and that would cost 1000$s of dollars if sold only in the audiophile world, to act like a lathe. Then you can leave the rest of the lifting to your cartridge setup and most importantly, your phono pre - which of course will make the biggest different. Therein lie distortion, noise, noise floor etc. With a few simple mods, which can be done incrementally, a 1200 can be made to be better even than most cutting lathes. Which is overkill but might offer piece of mind to some folk.
So yes, you misunderstood my point. And I say that with all due respect, let me reexplain:
The motor on a lathe isn't determinant in the sound of the cut, you'd have more issues with a malfunctioning lead screw, improper cutting depth, improper heating, etc. I know how to cut records. MY point is that a turntable for playback is pretty much a mechanical device that spins records. So if it acts like the lathe motor, job done. Everything else is left to electronics. If you can get it close to a lathe motor, like a 1200, what more do you need? Also, if two cartridges have identical response curves and sound differently, that's a loading issue on the preamp and has nothing to do with the turntable or the cartridges. The point is audiophiles use stupid non-scientific terms to describe things they "hear" which aren't rooted in science and physics. They throw around terms like soundstage but don't measure the THD of their preamps. And most funny, to me at least, is that now a days especially, most records are cut from shitty cd rips at 44/16. Some even come off mP3's. And I'm talking about big reissues and releases where the label intern is archiving everything in Itunes and then sending it to the cutting engineer. I wont name names but you'd be shocked how many records get cut on 180gram vinyl from a 192 mp3 because the label doesn't know or care about the music - especially with reissues. And lastly, when it comes to classic records, most were recorded to 2"/16 or 2"24, downmixed to 1/4" at 15ips all the while being mixed on NS10s or something like that and then cut to vinyl and pressed by the 1000's. Assigning some special magical value to the playback medium is hilarious. It's just NOT in the music to start with. Thriller has nothing below 90hz. NOTHING. That was intentional to have good FM playback. SO you can bump that shit on a massive system with 24" subs but, you get nada. Science. Might as well listen on a good pair of reference monitors. I personally use first issue ADAM S3As and they will kick the shit out of any audiophile rig in accuracy, distortion, etc. They are made for working engineers.. Ok, I;'m on a tirade hear but the point is, give me a room full of audiophiles and their cables and I would challenge them to hear the difference between some boutique RCAs and a coathanger. It's been done before and in blind ABX testing there was virtually no difference with extremely short lengths. Monster cable is the pro-sumer version of this snake oil. The only thing that changes, potentially is resistance which can act like a low pass filter, but again, it's negligible in short lengths, and that's science.
Most importantly, I'm a record collector who lives and buys records in the real world. I don't keep my stuff hermetically sealed and I hardly ever buy new records. I need a record player to respond well but also be able to deal with warped records, scratched records - I need to be able to flip to 45 instantly (not lift up the platter and flip a button) and I like to listen to some stuff pitched up and some stuff slowed down. Often times a .5db difference in volume can make people think one thing might sound better than the other, and the placebo effect is strong in audio. Very strong. The preamp in rane mixers is as good as many audiophile preamps or at least is using the same gain stage components. It's not like dudes are using discrete op-amps. And tubes? whole different story but rarely better from a spec standpoint.
I'm not trying to come off as antogonistic, I just REALLY have an aversion to the audiophile world and the bullshit it entails. Anyone reading this shoudl take me with a grain of salt.
so i guess my bottom line is this -
buy a 1200, modify it if you aren't happy with it's performance, but spend your $ on a decent preamp and good cartridge. If you still aren't happy about it, just know you have entered the world of snake oil and diminishing returns and tread light.
1200's are still the best value in turntables period.
If playback quality is your biggest concern, Vinyl is hardly the medium to be collecting. High res native formats or tape would get you closer to the source. Vinyl is a dinosaur.