Can anyone explain the vinyl renaissance?

[MattHooper]

what are your impressions of the omni speaker? I have never known anyone that had them.

I was a long time fan of MBL speakers and ended up with their 121 stand mounted omni.

I loved the sound, nothing else like it! Totally boxless, very dimensional and spacious, but dynamic and punchy. Like an electrostatic with balls. I found the timbre of instruments and voices generally superb and they had the very rare (for me) quality of "surprisingness." By that I mean that most sound systems I find homogonize the sound
so that after a certain number of tracks I have grokked the tone and there is nothing surprising - drum cymbals, sax, trumpet, whatever...I generally know what they will sound like. But on the MBLs I could be listening to a recording and an instrument or voice would suddenly pop out of the mix in a timbrally surprising, vivid manner. Like a bongo, or voice, or sudden appearance of an acoustic guitar, or chime, would just be "there" suddenly, in a realistic manner. It's a hard aspect to get across.

Also, I did not find the cliche people have about omnis to be the case - "spacious but the imaging is vague and diffuse." In my room (which is well treated) the imaging was quite precise and solid. But it just sounded like the instruments existed more in 3 dimensional space, like performers "beamed in to the room" to play, to a degree I have not quite heard from conventional speakers.

That was my experience, anyway.

 

[Galliardist]

Closest measurements to my Performance DC are here. http://www.soundfowndations.co.uk/reviews/HFN_Clearaudio Performance DC_lowres.pdf

Mine has the Satisfy Carbon arm. The referenced review the TT-5 Linear arm.
Relevant measurements below. I think they are "good enough".

View attachment 300479

I’d been looking for this… missed it on the website…. thanks.

So much for -98dB rumble. That number I quoted is nowhere to be seen on the Clearaudio website and our local dealer said it couldn’t be better than the Reference, so I was going to withdraw anyway.

 

[Galliardist]

I was a long time fan of MBL speakers and ended up with their 121 stand mounted omni.

I loved the sound, nothing else like it! Totally boxless, very dimensional and spacious, but dynamic and punchy. Like an electrostatic with balls. I found the timbre of instruments and voices generally superb and they had the very rare (for me) quality of "surprisingness." By that I mean that most sound systems I find homogonize the sound
so that after a certain number of tracks I have grokked the tone and there is nothing surprising - drum cymbals, sax, trumpet, whatever...I generally know what they will sound like. But on the MBLs I could be listening to a recording and an instrument or voice would suddenly pop out of the mix in a timbrally surprising, vivid manner. Like a bongo, or voice, or sudden appearance of an acoustic guitar, or chime, would just be "there" suddenly, in a realistic manner. It's a hard aspect to get across.

Also, I did not find the cliche people have about omnis to be the case - "spacious but the imaging is vague and diffuse." In my room (which is well treated) the imaging was quite precise and solid. But it just sounded like the instruments existed more in 3 dimensional space, like performers "beamed in to the room" to play, to a degree I have not quite heard from conventional speakers.

That was my experience, anyway.

Why change then?

 

[MattHooper]

Why change then?

I tried to explain here:

Soundstage and imaging

That is a nice video. Thank you. AT 9:24 he combines and ITD and ILD, and explains that we most likely will be hearing his sound coming from the Right channel as ITD wins over ILD generally. For me I was hearing it coming from Left channel. Tried it with 3 headphones, with EQ on and off - all...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[computer-audiophile]

I think they are "good enough".

Agreed!

(But it is not outstanding)

 

[Bob from Florida]

I’d been looking for this… missed it on the website…. thanks.

So much for -98dB rumble. That number I quoted is nowhere to be seen on the Clearaudio website and our local dealer said it couldn’t be better than the Reference, so I was going to withdraw anyway.

That reference was hard to find and there was no second test to be found to provide any kind of verification. I had a Merrill Heirloom - considered among the best in the 1980’s and when compared to the Performance DC, the DC was a bit more “silent” to my ears. I think the Ceramic Magnetic Bearing is one of Clearaudio’s best features and I believe that is a key differentiator. I was fortunate to find a deal on the Clearaudio as they are not cheap. As long as it keeps working I will keep it.

 

[Bob from Florida]

Agreed!

(But it is not outstanding)

I have some of the same stuff on vinyl and CD’s ripped to my music server. As long as the levels are closely matched and the record is clean, it is very difficult to say which is digital. The mastering may be different, but actually labeling the vinyl source accurately- if you are conducting a blind test, is not easy. This kind of “good enough“ is more than adequate for me to enjoy all my sources of music.

 

[computer-audiophile]

Closest measurements to my Performance DC are here. http://www.soundfowndations.co.uk/reviews/HFN_Clearaudio Performance DC_lowres.pdf

Mine has the Satisfy Carbon arm. The referenced review the TT-5 Linear arm.
Relevant measurements below. I think they are "good enough".

Because I was curious, I compared the comparable data of the Technics SL 1200GR from the same magazine. Also good enough, I would say. I always pay a lot of attention to S/N.

 

[Bob from Florida]

Because I was curious, I compared the comparable data of the Technics SL 1200GR from the same magazine. Also good enough, I would say. I always pay a lot of attention to S/N.

View attachment 300567

That Technics table is pretty nice and price wise is close to Clearaudio. My aesthetic taste leans towards the Clearaudio, while the direct drive and detachable head shell leans towards the Technics.

 

[computer-audiophile]

That Technics table is pretty nice and price wise is close to Clearaudio. My aesthetic taste leans towards the Clearaudio, while the direct drive and detachable head shell leans towards the Technics.

In terms of technical data, it is hard to rise above this level. Despite this, the turntables do not all sound exactly the same (with the same cartridge and the same level). I have already participated in many comparisons and shootouts and have a lot of experience listening to different turntables I owned in 60 years. The 1200 GR, for example, tends to a rather bright sound, which has an influence on my choice of cartridge.

 

[JP]

In terms of technical data, it is hard to rise above this level. Despite this, the turntables do not all sound exactly the same (with the same cartridge and the same level). I have already participated in many comparisons and shootouts and have a lot of experience listening to different turntables I owned in 60 years. The 1200 GR, for example, tends to a rather bright sound, which has an influence on my choice of cartridge.

What controls were in place for these comparisons?

 

[Bob from Florida]

In terms of technical data, it is hard to rise above this level. Despite this, the turntables do not all sound exactly the same (with the same cartridge and the same level). I have already participated in many comparisons and shootouts and have a lot of experience listening to different turntables I owned in 60 years. The 1200 GR, for example, tends to a rather bright sound, which has an influence on my choice of cartridge.

I just realized the Technics you mentioned is the cheaper version GR-$1700 versus G-$4300. So, the pricing is not comparable to the Clearaudio unless you go with the Technics model “G”.

 

[computer-audiophile]

What controls were in place for these comparisons?

I had already reported on this. I would have to repeat myself, or search the forum. One Shootout was organized by a former European Triode Festival e.g.

 

[Bob from Florida]

What controls were in place for these comparisons?

That is a problem, insufficient data. It would be nice to have more testing of these tables with controls in place. The OEM’s are not necessarily going to help with this…..

 

[computer-audiophile]

That is a problem, insufficient data. It would be nice to have more testing of these tables with controls in place.

I wrote about hearing tests (shootouts) that were performed in front of an understanding audience. One's own presence is indispensable.
Just like with loudspeakers, the ear has to decide in the end. Measurements only provide clues.

 

[egellings]

Agreed. The numbers did surprise me when they first came out.

I know a lot of vinyl folks make a lot out of sitting down listening while looking at liner notes or whatever. I do like quite a number of my albums as very nice objects, really great designs. But I don't sit down holding the covers and virtually never read the liner notes these days. In fact, I kind of thought CDs at one point produced maybe the better liner notes. I'm a soundtrack fan and CD re-issues/remasters used to come with booklets with much more information and commentary than I'd find with most LPs. Though it is nice that they seem to be fitting more of this on new soundtracks on vinyl. But, still, not my main motivation. I like turntables. I like records. I like the sound. All puts me in a particularly focused mood for listening to music.

Me too!

 

[mppix]

I just realized the Technics you mentioned is the cheaper version GR-$1700 versus G-$4300. So, the pricing is not comparable to the Clearaudio unless you go with the Technics model “G”.

Technics gives the 1200G and 1200GR exactly the same performance specs.
They only upspec the money-no-object and weight-no-object 1000R

Modern Record Playback?

Turntable - Technics SL1200 G, GR, and mk7 are all build in the same country (and likely factory) to the same performance (rumble; wow and flutter) - All exceed the capabilities of the medium - G has outstanding fit and finish and is considered a bit of a collectors item that people buy if they...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[mppix]

I have some of the same stuff on vinyl and CD’s ripped to my music server. As long as the levels are closely matched and the record is clean, it is very difficult to say which is digital. The mastering may be different, but actually labeling the vinyl source accurately- if you are conducting a blind test, is not easy. This kind of “good enough“ is more than adequate for me to enjoy all my sources of music.

Absolutely - these systems are all "good enough" to enjoy music. I particularly enjoy records in social settings.

However, I am curious. Distinguishing records and CD should not be particularly hard for anybody. What else do you use in your system?

 

[Bob from Florida]

Absolutely - these systems are all "good enough" to enjoy music. I particularly enjoy records in social settings.

However, I am curious. Distinguishing records and CD should not be particularly hard for anybody. What else do you use in your system?

My vinyl setup is hum free at sane listening levels. Most of my records are scratch free and quiet as I use a good vacuum record cleaning machine on them. The Hana SL cartridge withe the Shibata profile diamond set up correctly helps with the lack of surface noise. The ifi Zen phono is particularly hum free.

 

[computer-audiophile]

The Hana SL cartridge withe the Shibata profile diamond set up ...

I also use a Audio Technica VM 750 Shibata often when it's about high definition. The humble Sumiko Pearl, however, with its normal elliptical stylus I like best on the Technics GR all in all. It sounds a bit warmer and more colorful. The new Technics, as I said, has a tendency to sound bright.

Own actual photo: