[brassplyer]

Ever heard an exotic turntable in action? Do you have one? Do you feel the difference between it and say a correctly set up Technics SL1200MK2 is night and day?

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2018 16:49:01 -0700 (PDT), Brassplyer
wrote:

Ever heard an exotic turntable in action? Do you have one? Do you feel the difference between it and say a correctly set up Technics SL1200MK2 is night and day?

The rumble, hiss and crackles are much clearer on the exotic
turntable. If you are going to attempt to polish a turd, buff it for
all you are worth.

But do hold your nose. It is still a turd.

d

[Trevor]

On 5/08/2018 3:50 PM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 4 Aug 2018 16:49:01 -0700 (PDT), Brassplyer
wrote:

Ever heard an exotic turntable in action? Do you have one? Do you feel the difference between it and say a correctly set up Technics SL1200MK2 is night and day?

The rumble, hiss and crackles are much clearer on the exotic
turntable. If you are going to attempt to polish a turd, buff it for
all you are worth.

But do hold your nose. It is still a turd.

:-)

But back in the day the BEST reason for having a *good*
turntable/tonearm/cartridge was you didn't destroy your records every
time you played them! Better sounding **** was mainly a bonus. Now most
people don't care, (not that they ever did) their records sounding
crappier and crappier every time they play them adds to their "appeal"
now apparently. And they still get to perform the "rituals" they missed
out on with digital media. :-)

[John Williamson]

On 05/08/2018 08:02, Trevor wrote:

But back in the day the BEST reason for having a *good*
turntable/tonearm/cartridge was you didn't destroy your records every
time you played them! Better sounding **** was mainly a bonus. Now most
people don't care, (not that they ever did) their records sounding
crappier and crappier every time they play them adds to their "appeal"
now apparently. And they still get to perform the "rituals" they missed
out on with digital media. :-)


I've always been one of those that plays the record once, while
recording it on to the best tape or digital medium I have available.

Except when running the disco, in which case the singles were
consumables, and only got played a few times anyway before they dropped
out of the playlist...

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 8/5/2018 3:22 AM, John Williamson wrote:
I've always been one of those that plays the record once, while
recording it on to the best tape or digital medium I have available.

I'm too old to have done that. When I first started buying records, I
didn't have a tape recorder. And my record playing system was far better
than the tape recorders I could afford when I could finally add one to
my system. Today, I have no compelling reason to buy a phonograph record.

Ticks and pops don't bother me. Wow and flutter does, so I spent my
money on a good turntable and that justified a good cartridge and stylus.

--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[John Williamson]

On 05/08/2018 12:10, Mike Rivers wrote:
On 8/5/2018 3:22 AM, John Williamson wrote:
I've always been one of those that plays the record once, while
recording it on to the best tape or digital medium I have available.

I'm too old to have done that. When I first started buying records, I
didn't have a tape recorder. And my record playing system was far better
than the tape recorders I could afford when I could finally add one to
my system. Today, I have no compelling reason to buy a phonograph record.

Nor do I, but my local Tesco superstore has just started stocking a
(very) limited range of vinyl.

As most of what is there is classic rock titles, I would hope they've
not suffered any remastering other than making new stampers. I'll still
be listening to the CD versions, though.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Trevor]

On 5/08/2018 5:22 PM, John Williamson wrote:
On 05/08/2018 08:02, Trevor wrote:
But back in the day the BEST reason for having a *good*
turntable/tonearm/cartridge was you didn't destroy your records every
time you played them! Better sounding **** was mainly a bonus. Now
most people don't care, (not that they ever did) their records
sounding crappier and crappier every time they play them adds to their
"appeal" now apparently. And they still get to perform the "rituals"
they missed out on with digital media. :-)


I've always been one of those that plays the record once, while
recording it on to the best tape or digital medium I have available.

Me too back in the day. Played the record, recorded onto reel for home
and cassette for car. Then only played the record for serious listening.
By the time digital came along though, there was no need to buy vinyl,
or record CD's onto tape.

[Scott Dorsey]

Brassplyer wrote:
Ever heard an exotic turntable in action? Do you have one? Do you feel the difference between it and say a correctly set up Technics SL1200MK2 is night and day?

I have, and some of them are very good and some of them are very very bad.

The Technics can sound pretty good if you put a good arm and cartridge on it,
but the arm, cartridge, and preamp are much of the equation. It still cogs
audibly a little bit and that can be annoying. It adds a slight sense of blur,
much like scrape flutter on tape machines. But put an SME arm and a good MC
cartridge on it and it will be as good as some of the systems seen in the
high end shops.

Go to a high end show and listen to some of the systems there, they are often
all over the place. Very clean sounding systems next to horribly honky ones.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On 5 Aug 2018 10:08:06 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Brassplyer wrote:
Ever heard an exotic turntable in action? Do you have one? Do you feel the difference between it and say a correctly set up Technics SL1200MK2 is night and day?

I have, and some of them are very good and some of them are very very bad.

The Technics can sound pretty good if you put a good arm and cartridge on it,
but the arm, cartridge, and preamp are much of the equation. It still cogs
audibly a little bit and that can be annoying. It adds a slight sense of blur,
much like scrape flutter on tape machines. But put an SME arm and a good MC
cartridge on it and it will be as good as some of the systems seen in the
high end shops.

Go to a high end show and listen to some of the systems there, they are often
all over the place. Very clean sounding systems next to horribly honky ones.
--scott

Yep, some of them are so good they come up to level about 5% of that
of a cheap CD player.

d

[John Williamson]

On 05/08/2018 16:40, Don Pearce wrote:
On 5 Aug 2018 10:08:06 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Go to a high end show and listen to some of the systems there, they are often
all over the place. Very clean sounding systems next to horribly honky ones.
--scott

Yep, some of them are so good they come up to level about 5% of that
of a cheap CD player.


About as good as a 64kbps mp3 file, then?

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Sun, 5 Aug 2018 17:04:09 +0100, John Williamson
wrote:

On 05/08/2018 16:40, Don Pearce wrote:
On 5 Aug 2018 10:08:06 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Go to a high end show and listen to some of the systems there, they are often
all over the place. Very clean sounding systems next to horribly honky ones.
--scott

Yep, some of them are so good they come up to level about 5% of that
of a cheap CD player.


About as good as a 64kbps mp3 file, then?

Well, that's pushing it a little maybe - not really that good.

d

[John Williamson]

On 05/08/2018 17:44, Don Pearce wrote:
On Sun, 5 Aug 2018 17:04:09 +0100, John Williamson
wrote:

On 05/08/2018 16:40, Don Pearce wrote:
On 5 Aug 2018 10:08:06 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

Go to a high end show and listen to some of the systems there, they are often
all over the place. Very clean sounding systems next to horribly honky ones.
--scott

Yep, some of them are so good they come up to level about 5% of that
of a cheap CD player.


About as good as a 64kbps mp3 file, then?

Well, that's pushing it a little maybe - not really that good.

Grin


--
Tciao for Now!

John.

[Trevor]

On 6/08/2018 2:04 AM, John Williamson wrote:
On 05/08/2018 16:40, Don Pearce wrote:
On 5 Aug 2018 10:08:06 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Go to a high end show and listen to some of the systems there, they
are often
all over the place.* Very clean sounding systems next to horribly
honky ones.
--scott

Yep, some of them are so good they come up to level about 5% of that
of a cheap CD player.


About as good as a 64kbps mp3 file, then?

Only if you add wow, flutter, rumble, tics, pops, distortion etc. to
that MP3 file. Once did that to a 128kbs MP3 to see how many people
preferred it to the CD it was taken from (without telling them what I
was playing of course) No surprise there were a few. :-)

[Phil W]

Trevor:
On 6/08/2018 2:04 AM, John Williamson wrote:
On 05/08/2018 16:40, Don Pearce wrote:
On 5 Aug 2018 10:08:06 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Go to a high end show and listen to some of the systems there, they are
often
all over the place. Very clean sounding systems next to horribly honky
ones.
--scott

Yep, some of them are so good they come up to level about 5% of that
of a cheap CD player.


About as good as a 64kbps mp3 file, then?

Only if you add wow, flutter, rumble, tics, pops, distortion etc. to that
MP3 file. Once did that to a 128kbs MP3 to see how many people preferred
it to the CD it was taken from (without telling them what I was playing of
course) No surprise there were a few. :-)

Izotope´s old "Vinyl" plug-in is still around and has even been "renewed"
somehow some years ago... so, there´s also a bit of "vintage digital" for
those, who are mainly after "vintage" whatever...

[PStamler]

Don, Trevor, e know you don't like LPs. Guess what: Those of us who collect music on LPs are as aware of their flaws as you are, maybe more so. To put it simply: from a technical point of view LPs suck. But, in many cases, *that's where the music is". An awful lot of LPs were never reissued on more proficient media, or were reissued badly.

What good turntables do is to retrieve the music with as little effect from the disc's flaws as poaaible. Some of the expensive, fancy tables do that well, some of them do it badly. My own preference is to copy the LP into the computer, use iZotope RX to eliminate the scratches, ticks and pops, do a little judicious filtering to eliminate infrasonic crap (good power amps aren't affected mu ch infrasonics, but radio station processing goes haywire -- and the goal is to broadcast the music -- then divide up into bands and burn a Cd, which is what gets played on the air. CDs are way easier to cue, too.

This is all a pain in the butt, but if, say, you're looking for music by Rev. Pearly Brown, well, you're not going to find that except on LP -- in our case, an LP that's in rough shape. His singing and playing, though, make the work worthwhile, and a good turntable helps. What do I mean by "good"? One that doesn't add significant rumble to what comes from the cutting lathe.. One with a cartridge/arm system that doedn't resonate a typical warp frequencies. One without significant wow & slutter (and, in the case of servo-controlled drive systems, one without cogging). Et cetera, et cetera. Oh yeah, one with a good clamping system to minimize warp. And a tone arm that doesn't resonate.

Like I said, the more you work with LPs, the more you know just how bad they can be. Digital recording has now gotten sufficiently transparent that if a record gets played back well, you can make a good digital recording of it and use software to clean up a lot of the remaining flawsremaining flaws. And finally get to the music, which is what it's really about.

Here's what still needs to be done: a variably off-center spindle to compensate for the wow caused by off-center stampers. Nakamichi had a system to deal with that in the 1970s, but it was kind of cobbled-together at best, and it aoon disappeared from the market. I can hear that wow, a lot, and short of reaming out the center hole, there aren't any good ways to deal with it. Back in the 60s we used to call one another on the phone when we got a Folkways record with the stampers properly centered on both sides -- it was that rare and exciting. To my mind, this is one of the biggest unsolved audible problems in LP (and 78) reproduction right now.

Pesce,
Psul

[Chuck[_11_]]

On Sat, 4 Aug 2018 16:49:01 -0700 (PDT), Brassplyer
wrote:

Ever heard an exotic turntable in action? Do you have one? Do you feel the difference between it and say a correctly set up Technics SL1200MK2 is night and day?
Yes, I have heard quite a few. Back in the late 80s I worked for a
company that sold turntable - arm combos that sold for thousands of
dollars. I own a Technics SL1200MK2. If there is a major difference, I
can't hear it. Cartridges, however can vary greatly in all parameters.
Linear arm turntables, like the Revox and Rabcos will have less
distortion on the inner tracks but they also have other drawbacks. If
I were you, I'd keep the table you have and, if you want better sound,
upgrade the cartridge.

[[email protected]]

Linear arm turntables, like the Revox and Rabcos will have less
distortion on the inner tracks........

YEP


It was a subtle thing but I always liked the first cut one each side the best, and the last cut the least.
Then i found out why.

the tracking distortion on the inner most tracks which were also usually the loudest, is one of the "features" I am most happy to be rid of.

m

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:

Linear arm turntables, like the Revox and Rabcos will have less
distortion on the inner tracks........

YEP

It's not as big a win as you might think. With a conventional turntable,
the zenith angle changes between the outer grooves and the inner grooves,
but the actual error on the outer grooves is as bad as on the inner ones.

Yes, the zenith error is a source of distortion, but the REAL problem is
the lower linear velocity at the center of the disc, which may be a tenth
that of the velocity on the outer edge.

The linear arm systems vary a lot. The servo-controlled ones always seem
to have weird rumbling and bumping sounds from the servo moving the arm
back and forth. Folks in the seventies didn't care so much but today we're
likely to have better low end extension and so it can be a big issue.

My ex's husband used an Eminent technology air bearing arm for years, and
it didn't have any of the rumble issues of the servo units and was very
clean-sounding, but I honestly don't think the tracking on inner grooves
was audibly any better than my old SME arm.

It was a subtle thing but I always liked the first cut one each side the best, and the last cut the least.
Then i found out why.

the tracking distortion on the inner most tracks which were also usually the loudest, is one of the "features" I am most happy to be rid of.

If the inner track is the loudest, the producer and mastering engineer should
be ashamed of themselves. Always put something quiet without a lot of high
end on the inner track. I know with classical music this isn't always
possible, but with rock albums it's not a big deal. (With classical music
you can always just leave the last couple inches blank and make the record
a twofer).
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[[email protected]]

Scott Dorsey wrote: " If the inner track is the loudest, the producer and
mastering engineer should be ashamed of themselves. Always"

What if the client wanted it that way?

Remember, if the chef in Restaurant A
won't char table # fifteen's steak to a
crisp, that customer will simply eat
elsewhere!

[None]

theckmah wrote in message
...

Scott Dorsey wrote: " If the inner track is the loudest, the producer and
mastering engineer should be ashamed of themselves. Always"

What if the client wanted it that way?

You can't let that one go, can you? But you can still pretend that you know
better than those who are not dumb ****s. FCKWAFA!

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 8/7/2018 11:23 AM, wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: " If the inner track is the loudest, the producer and
mastering engineer should be ashamed of themselves. Always"

What if the client wanted it that way?

That's why they invented CDs - so there weren't different types of
distortion built into the different tracks. So now the DJ can cue up
Track 11 and a different song than what he's expecting plays.

--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: " If the inner track is the loudest, the producer and
mastering engineer should be ashamed of themselves. Always"

What if the client wanted it that way?

Then you make everything else quieter in order to compensate so you don't
have to cut the last one so hot. OR, you put less time on the record.

Remember, if the chef in Restaurant A
won't char table # fifteen's steak to a
crisp, that customer will simply eat
elsewhere!

He can't, because you can't fight physics. You can only cut so much excursion
before the record won't play at all.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 8/7/2018 10:58 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
If the inner track is the loudest, the producer and mastering engineer should
be ashamed of themselves. Always put something quiet without a lot of high
end on the inner track.

There was a formula, or maybe a rule of dumb, that defined what the
first and last tracks should be (on a pop record). The first track on
Side 1 was always the hit because that was the easiest for a DJ to cue.
The first track on Side 2 was the one you wanted to be the next hit, for
the same reason. The second to last track on Side 2 was a loud throwaway
so the last track could be the "calm release." TI don't remember what
the last track on Side 1 was supposed to be, but none of these "rules"
had to do with linear velocity.


--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[[email protected]]

Mike Rivers wrote: " but none of these "rules"
had to do with linear velocity. "

Wowww. Skeptical even of something one
of your equals stated?

Regarding impedance numbers on the backs
of amplifiers in my stereo thread, you stated
they served as " a guide for salesmen".

I doubt that all labelling - on audio equipment
and even on forms of physical media - as
well as how songs are sequenced on a piece of
vinyl - is for marketing purposes and should be
taken with a grain of salt.

[[email protected]]

On Tuesday, August 7, 2018 at 10:58:18 AM UTC-4, Scott Dorsey wrote:
wrote:

Linear arm turntables, like the Revox and Rabcos will have less
distortion on the inner tracks........

YEP

It's not as big a win as you might think. With a conventional turntable,
the zenith angle changes between the outer grooves and the inner grooves,
but the actual error on the outer grooves is as bad as on the inner ones.

Yes, the zenith error is a source of distortion, but the REAL problem is
the lower linear velocity at the center of the disc, which may be a tenth
that of the velocity on the outer edge.


good point

the sound was noticeably worse on the inner tracks

so what you are saying is that even the fancy "linear tracking" tables that had zero tracking error across the entire disc, would still suffer with this "feature" of worse performance on the inner tracks.

m

[Mike Rivers[_2_]]

On 8/7/2018 5:04 PM, wrote:
so what you are saying is that even the fancy "linear tracking" tables that had zero tracking error across the entire disc, would still suffer with this "feature" of worse performance on the inner tracks.

It's not exactly the same thing, but functionally, it's like losing
headroom as you move toward the inner grooves. Because the noise floor
is relatively quiet, with a lower maximum level before distortion, you
have less dynamic range available. You may think that's not a big deal
since most pop music is cut with less than 6 dB of dynamic range, but
they do that so they can take advantage of the maximum level and make
everything loud. But try to do that close to the center of the disk, and
you end up with distortion.

--

For a good time, call http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com

[Scott Dorsey]

wrote:

so what you are saying is that even the fancy "linear tracking" tables that had zero tracking error across the entire disc, would still suffer with this "feature" of worse performance on the inner tracks.


Yeah, it might be a little better than a conventional arm, but it won't be
much better.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Scott Dorsey]

Pamela wrote:

I've never understood this properly but on a linear arm turntable,
wouldn't there still be a lateral force experienced by the stylus
(which some sensor then picks up and activates the arm servo)?
Isn't that lateral force going to introduce at least some audio
distortion?

Yes, there's a small skating force, resulting in slightly more lateral
force on the inner groove than the other. And yes, it results in a
new kind of tracking distortion.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Trevor]

On 9/08/2018 9:04 AM, Pamela wrote:
I've never understood this properly but on a linear arm turntable,
wouldn't there still be a lateral force experienced by the stylus
(which some sensor then picks up and activates the arm servo)?

Of course. Should be no more than with any other turntable/arm combo though.

Isn't that lateral force going to introduce at least some audio
distortion?

The lateral force by itself should not introduce very much distortion,
and no more than any other turntable (probably less). It's an
unavoidable consequence of dragging a rock through vinyl. What you do
gain is the stylus is always at the proper angle to the groove, or so
close as makes no difference. Whether you introduce other problems
though is another matter. Funny though that some people forget the lathe
cutter head suffers from these same problems and is already embedded on
the disc. :-)

[Scott Dorsey]

In article , Trevor wrote:
On 9/08/2018 9:04 AM, Pamela wrote:
I've never understood this properly but on a linear arm turntable,
wouldn't there still be a lateral force experienced by the stylus
(which some sensor then picks up and activates the arm servo)?

Of course. Should be no more than with any other turntable/arm combo though.

My arm has an anti-skate mechanism that adds adjustable amount of lateral
force to keep the stylus centered perfectly in the groove. You can't do
that with a linear-tracking arm... the inner edge of the groove -has- to
have more force on it in order to push the arm down the support rod. (The
servo control reduces the amount of force needed but it just helps what is
already there).

Isn't that lateral force going to introduce at least some audio
distortion?

The lateral force by itself should not introduce very much distortion,
and no more than any other turntable (probably less). It's an
unavoidable consequence of dragging a rock through vinyl. What you do
gain is the stylus is always at the proper angle to the groove, or so
close as makes no difference. Whether you introduce other problems
though is another matter. Funny though that some people forget the lathe
cutter head suffers from these same problems and is already embedded on
the disc. :-)

The lathe cutter is driven mechanically by a leadscrew. It is always
centered in the groove because it's making the groove.

With an Edison cylinder, the playback stylus is ALSO moved down the record
by a leadscrew, so with that configuration you CAN get perfect centering.
You can't do that with an LP though, because the pitch varies.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[PStamler]

On Saturday, August 4, 2018 at 6:49:05 PM UTC-5, Trevor wrote:

I am not sure if you think you are telling us something we haven't been
well aware of for the last 2-3 decades?

Good point, but I was mostly writing to show that those of us who collect and use vinyl are under no illusions about its inherent wonderfulness.

[Ty Ford[_2_]]

On Saturday, August 4, 2018 at 7:49:05 PM UTC-4, Brassplyer wrote:
Ever heard an exotic turntable in action? Do you have one? Do you feel the difference between it and say a correctly set up Technics SL1200MK2 is night and day?

Audio technica makes a line of what I would consider high end cartridges. I'd like to see some sales figures. When I questioned one of their folks about it at NAB, he said, "You have no idea!!!" in a way that made me think they too were surprised by the market. At the top of their line is a $5K USD cartridge. Holy crap!!!

https://www.audio-technica.com/cgi-b...s..pl?lang=eng