Strange isn't it. How I miss tuning my SU carbies
I can't think of anything I don't miss less...
I had twin SU's on my old Volvo... What a monstrous pain they were to get right...
Strange isn't it. How I miss tuning my SU carbies
You are getting a -lot- of subsonic garbage there. With a seismic transducer like a cartridge the output below about 2xFn of the system is garbage and is best filtered out (IMHO) though rumble filters are unfashionable at the moment, perhaps people like more bass regardless.I have only three record players, Dual, NAD and Thorens 145 with Hanze hifi tuned motor, but only the last one active. I have still all my LPs, of whichsome are rare and not yet digitized. No intention to upgrade decks, cartridges or RIAAs. And one cassette deck too, Yamaha.
I've spent some time measuring rumble, cartridge response etc. with Audacity and REW, interesting!
View attachment 50266
It smells like Gwyneth Paltrow's vagina, not some run of the mill vagina.
.
You are getting a -lot- of subsonic garbage there. With a seismic transducer like a cartridge the output below about 2xFn of the system is garbage and is best filtered out (IMHO) though rumble filters are unfashionable at the moment, perhaps people like more bass regardless.
Looks like the cartridge arm mass resonance is around 12Hz so everything below 24Hz is to a greater of lesser extent produced by the dynamics of your record player rather than actually being on the record (though something might be, just not this...)
While am fully in the digital music camp, I suspect there are some aspects that maybe we may have lost along the way...
1.The album as a collection of related songs. When the medium made it less convenient to skip tracks, a listener may have found a greater relationship with a set if songs rather than a single “hit”. I know people who just listen to the hit song and never experience the rest of an album’s music.
2. Dreaded clicks and pops aside, maybe the sound of compressed analog is more desirable than compressed digital? This may apply more to a particular age group than otherwise. As someone mentioned, this seems more of a fad phenomena, but is not without precedence for certain market segments.
3. Physical acquisition and ownership of an album requires a greater level of commitment than simply streaming it from the internet. This may say something about our nature than analog vs. digital, but think most people value something more when they had to work harder for it. Now set the bar by adding that I need a turntable, cartridge and some amount of electronics and you are way more committed .
So, yes I can see some attraction to older technology like a turntable. I rarely listen to my vinyl anymore but I still replaced my nice Dual belt-drive turntable with an Audio-Technica direct drive one just in case! Thanks to the vinyl revival, I sold my Dual for a lot more too...
Hey, don't undersell the value.
It smells like Gwyneth Paltrow's vagina, not some run of the mill vagina.
Just think how much access to her vagina smell would previously cost? Millions?
And apparently her vagina smells like bergamot, something I've never encountered in my life with less than A list celebrity vaginas.
I think it's a steal.
During analog-only days, all (or most all) preamps/integrated/receivers had subsonic filters. Today, in spite of the 'analog revival' it seems that many 'phono oriented' devices don't feature this. One can observe for woofer pumping at the lead in groove. If you see that, you definitely need a filter. You'll save your amp from pushing this LF garbage, and it can't hurt your speakers to filter it, too.You are getting a -lot- of subsonic garbage there. With a seismic transducer like a cartridge the output below about 2xFn of the system is garbage and is best filtered out (IMHO) though rumble filters are unfashionable at the moment, perhaps people like more bass regardless.
That is true, but it is better to just filter out the non-correct signal IMO on principle, because it is crap.During analog-only days, all (or most all) preamps/integrated/receivers had subsonic filters. Today, in spite of the 'analog revival' it seems that many 'phono oriented' devices don't feature this. One can observe for woofer pumping at the lead in groove. If you see that, you definitely need a filter. You'll save your amp from pushing this LF garbage, and it can't hurt your speakers to filter it, too.
How sad, actually having the ease to dodge dodgy tracks from a typical LP. I'm crying. If one wants to hear the Eroica, do you really think one's gonna skip the scherzo? Do you really think most pop albums gain all that much by being played in sequence? Honestly, having greater control over playback options is a flaw? I don't think so.
Random access IS amongst the major reasons I like digital better. My point was that you are less captive than when you were more inclined to listen to (at least) half an album.
Dreaded clicks and pops are never aside. Not to mention off-center records. Beyond that, the groove always runs out of energy as the stylus approaches the deadwax. Nothing can be done about that. Once one hears that flaw, it cannot be unheard. Age group or not, if one hears unamplified music on a regular basis the lack of "grip' of LP playback becomes obvious. Particularly on the last track of an album side.
You clearly had some worse experiences than I, but to clarify, I was suggesting that maybe vinyl sound could be better than highly compressed digital for some market segment, Notably, those that were not knowledgeable about all the sordid mechanical imperfections of vinyl playback. Frankly, am amazed it sounded as good as it did!
"Committed ", now there's a word for ya. Spend enough time attempting to get stylus overhang "perfect" [can't be done on a pivoted arm] and you'll wanna be committed. The relationship to all that stuff is more like being enslaved to one's possessions.
Guilty as charged here and yes, I used the word "committed" with the just the intent you noted. I am also self-aware enough to know that I am more enslaved than I care to admit (whether to my vinyl or my FLACs)!
Got rid of three functional, five non-functional turntables and two thousand LPs last year. Have no intention of ever returning to Lps. The covers are nice. That's about all there really is to it.
While am fully in the digital music camp, I suspect there are some aspects that maybe we may have lost along the way...
So, yes I can see some attraction to older technology like a turntable. I rarely listen to my vinyl anymore but I still replaced my nice Dual belt-drive turntable with an Audio-Technica direct drive one just in case! Thanks to the vinyl revival, I sold my Dual for a lot more too...
- The album as a collection of related songs. When the medium made it less convenient to skip tracks, a listener may have found a greater relationship with a set if songs rather than a single “hit”. I know people who just listen to the hit song and never experience the rest of an album’s music.
- Dreaded clicks and pops aside, maybe the sound of compressed analog is more desirable than compressed digital? This may apply more to a particular age group than otherwise. As someone mentioned, this seems more of a fad phenomena, but is not without precedence for certain market segments.
- Physical acquisition and ownership of an album requires a greater level of commitment than simply streaming it from the internet. This may say something about our nature than analog vs. digital, but think most people value something more when they had to work harder for it. Now set the bar by adding that I need a turntable, cartridge and some amount of electronics and you are way more committed .
I think that is not a too bad of an analogy. But... with books there are advantages. First, they are lighter (paperback) and hence easier to maneuver. Second, it is easier to find them on a shelf (perhaps) than running through a menu. Third, books show off one's ready intelligence in a way that a Kindle never will (here I am being facetious). Fouth, you never have to plug in your book.Vinyl to me is like printed books vs. Knidle. The books (and LPs) look great displayed on shelves, but digital is much easier. I can carry dozens of Kindle books with me all the time.
Ha, I remember those! Rumble filters, iirc.During analog-only days, all (or most all) preamps/integrated/receivers had subsonic filters.
I recall those well. KD-500 was a relatively inexpensive deck made of a concrete resin material. Highly recommended for DD.I bought a Kenwood KD-500 not long after it came out and went through Grace, SME, and FR tonearms, Sonus, Denon, Grado, and other cartridges, and LPs sounded different with all of those combinations.