Click to view our Accessibility Statement or contact us with accessibility-related questions
Showing 1 of 55 conversations about:
SkipPp
278
Dec 28, 2017
bookmark_border
I am not so educated on record players. What makes one record player better than another?
Dec 28, 2017
flyinglotus1983
358
Dec 28, 2017
bookmark_border
SkipPpYou want to spend more money to get the ones with an anti-skating mechanism, adjustable stylus weight, decently stable motor speed, and a heavy base and platter. If you buy a cheap Crossley brand vinyl player at a big box store, it will damage your records. The anti skating and stylus weight being the biggest culprits there.
Dec 28, 2017
GUTB
238
Dec 28, 2017
bookmark_border
SkipPpThere are 4 major factors:
1. Vibration control. Vibrations from the environment and the turntable's own operation. This is the largest factor, and what separates the mass consumer junk like this and a real turntable. 2. Speed control. WOW and Flutter should be as low as possible, the lower the better. 3. Tonearm. A real tonearm has an advanced pivot design, serious resonance control measures, a counterweight and anti-skate system. 4. Platter. Makes a large difference. Delrin and acrylic are best, aluminum is okay, MDF, cheap plastic, etc, is junk. The more massive and finely machined the better.
The cartridge is also critical, but that is something you can mix and match with. Obviously, if the tonearm doesn't have an adjustable counterweight and anti-skate it's trash because you can't put in a good cartridge. The sound quality range from the low end to the high end of turntables is enormous. The GOOD NEWS is that after a certain point the turntable itself becomes less important and the cartridge takes over as most important. For example, if it has a big beefy tonearm, nice acrylic platter, decoupled belt drive, and a heavy plinth, you are probably as far as you need to take the turntable and you can concentrate on upgrading just the cartridge.
Dec 28, 2017
SkipPp
278
Dec 28, 2017
bookmark_border
GUTBMuch obliged. Also, is it better to get a phono-pre-amp, or to simply buy an old receiver that has one built in? There are so many killer, high-end two-channel receivers from the 1990's lying around in pawn shops here (Chicago) not to mention eBay, and I was thinking about grabbing one. Do the new phono pre-amp's add any value?
Dec 28, 2017
gameaholic
61
Dec 29, 2017
bookmark_border
GUTBBased on these 4 criteria what would you recommend? Is there something someone on a budget could start out with and then over time upgrade?
Dec 29, 2017
flyinglotus1983
358
Dec 29, 2017
bookmark_border
gameaholicUnfortunately there isn't a great turntable out there for less than $400 new. There are some that come quite close, but get things wrong. The closest is probably the ones made by the Pro-Ject brand, but they have their issues too. Audio Technica's and TEAC's are okay brands but not perfect by any means. They're better than Crossleys and the Chinese ones you can pick up from big-box stores. Most of the AT's and TEAC's have anti-skating and adjustable counterweights, but lack in other features and exhibit stylus / arm geometry issues, undamped platters, bearing issues, etc. Oh, and horrible preamps.
The best budget player is probably an old used player from the 70's or 80's that has been fully restored and tuned by a professional with the tools. I use an old MCS player which were re-branded Technics units sold at JC Penney back in the heyday of vinyl. It was picked up at a Goodwill for under $30, and I restored it myself, and probably have under $150 in it total. If I bought something like that brand new, it would probably be > $1500. I took a look on eBay and you can get an MCS 6601 for slightly more than the price of this drop, fully restored.
If you can find an AT-LP120 for cheap, that might be the way to go. They're upgradable over time, and they look like the Technics SL1200 which is a plus :) You can change the stylus out to a Grado Black (my personal recommendation), rip out the preamp once you purchase an external RIAA preamp (I built mine from a kit for under $50), and you can also do things like damped the platter, change the slipmat, add more weight to the base, etc. They won't damage records in their stock state unless they're horribly setup. There's a video by a youtube channel called HiViNyws titled 'Detailed turntable set-up for beginners - advanced'. Watch that, set it up properly, and upgrade when you're able to.
Dec 29, 2017
GUTB
238
Dec 30, 2017
bookmark_border
SkipPpExternal phono preamp. Unfortunately these will cost some money, but they can't be ignored and they can't be cheaped out on. You need to go with a reputable brand. The phono stage is incredibly important because it needs to amp a very weak signal, and quality / design of the phono greatly impacts the audio quality of vinyl. If you can find a receiver that has a good quality MM phono stage you may as well go for it -- you can upgrade with to MC phono later once you move onto MC cartridges.
Getting a good quality restored vintage turntable from the 80s is also valid.
If we're talking about new systems, $400-600 will get you through the door into "okay" sound. Around $1500 it's better than a CD player. Around $3500-4000 you get clearly superior to even hi-rez digital audio. After $10k it's the finest sound in the realm of audio (except perhaps 15ips reel-to-reel master copies).
Dec 30, 2017
SkipPp
278
Jan 2, 2018
bookmark_border
GUTBThanks for the reply, but it confused me. How can a record have higher fidelity than digital? That does not seem possible. If one keeps the orginal wav files (there is no reason to rip mp3's anymore with storage being so cheap), there is simply no reason. A good cd/dvd audio player can be had for a less than $300 used. Good two channel amp's can be downright cheap on ebay or at pawn shops (I recently bought a Rotel at a local pawn shop for $80 for a friend; FYI they are HEAVY!).
I cannot see how it is possible for a record to out-perform digital. I can see how the effect sounds pleasant, but records are simply lower fidelity. I mean, the original used to make the record is digital (albeit a fancy master digital). What am I missing? Thanks again.
Jan 2, 2018
Nicholas322
6
Jan 2, 2018
bookmark_border
SkipPpYou are comparing a painting to a sculpture. No matter what the resolution only the digital audio products over $20,000 can currently match a turntable. Analogue reproduces the sound differently which explains why there are so many high end turntables and $5000 cartridges. As an audiophile I can tell you that a good copy of a master pressing is magic, the soundstage and imaging is very natural and emotionally involving. Quite different from digital and yes, I have a great digital front end. Find an audio club that can A-B for you a record and a CD of the same song. I think you will be surprised.
Jan 2, 2018
DiegoV74
1
Feb 3, 2018
bookmark_border
SkipPpIt really comes down to the mastering process. Most cd’s today commonly suffer from too much compression in an attempt to make it sound louder, which is a cheap way to fool the mind into making you think it sounds better where as the inherent limitations of vinyl actually prevent this as vinyl is not as forgiving a medium, hence better dynamics. The better dynamics in my opinion is really what makes the same album sound better on vinyl then on cd. Google loudness wars on this for furthering reading.
Feb 3, 2018
Tragique
712
Feb 3, 2018
bookmark_border
gameaholicTidal, Roon or even a CD player.
Feb 3, 2018
Jdjung
147
Feb 4, 2018
bookmark_border
SkipPpYou're right in most cases it doesn't unless you have a ton of money to burn that makes a very, very slight difference from CD quality. CD quality I believe is 44k so the high frequencies and based on your age (high frequency loss) may make a difference. 48k digital files, yeah there is no difference accept for "psycho-acoustics" (i.e. Your mind telling it sound better since you spent more money on it, turn table feels heavier, made of shiny heavy acrylic). You can pick up a burr brown 48k phono usb/rca kit for $30, Behringer ufo 202. http://nwavguy.blogspot.com/2011/02/behringer-uca202-review.html?m=1
Feb 4, 2018
SkipPp
278
Feb 5, 2018
bookmark_border
DiegoV74Thanks. I know what you are saying about compression. I have noticed that comparing regular wav files to mp3's or AAC files. I did not realize the wav files themselves had that much compression, although I do remember how much storage cost back in the 1980's, so it does make sense.
I am curious, if one had the actual master (mostly digital since the late 1970's), what would the difference be bewteen that and that file pressed into a record?
Feb 5, 2018
Jdjung
147
Feb 6, 2018
bookmark_border
SkipPpCompression doesn't really deal with CD vs vinyl in terms of sampling rates, they're different things. Compression means dynamic range of music being compressed so there is less jarring high vs low volume. Sound engineers pay big bucks to master their music which generally deals with some sort of compression. .wav files are lossless and is not the format CD music uses, btw (PCM stereo audio at 44khz). Of course you can BURN CDs into a digital .wav file, mp3 etc. If you mean compression in terms of smaller sampling then what you are trying to say is 44khz (CD quality) vs higher then 44khz such as 48khz. CD vs vinyl for dynamic compression should be the same, vinyl appearing to have less compression due to needle/cartridge sensitivity, arm balance, etc being drastically different then what the mastering engineer was using. In other words, most mastering engineers don't use vinyl to master music they use their computers and software using a lossless format which was recorded with 48khz or higher sampling rates. If you want a true audiophile experience (to sound like what the artist intended) you determine who mastered the music then pick up the same equipment as that person. The funny part is, it's difficult to do because when you mix then master music the sound engineer use possibly three or four systems to ensure it sounds good across the board. They mix in their car, studio monitors and headphones. Then they master using very hi-end speakers then move down to the incredibly crappy Avatone cubes.
Feb 6, 2018
SkipPp
278
Feb 6, 2018
bookmark_border
JdjungThanks. I am always curious because I used to know a couple guys in the industry (including a sound engineer), and they were all about speakers and amps, but none of them were into vinyl. Now everyone is into vinyl, and I never understood it. To me it always seemed like vacuum tubes (an effect, not superior fidelity). For me, I like highly finished, well-produced stuff over live recordings and such, and in general I like "cleaner" sound, if that means anything. Thanks for the info bro.
Feb 6, 2018
View Full Discussion
Related Products