Modern Record Playback?

[mppix]

Low wow and flutter, low hum and noise and low rumble for the turntable. Tonearms are less frequently measured, but should be free of ringing resonances, bearing friction and bearing play. Cartridges should have flat frequency response and low distortion at all but the highest frequencies.

Are there any particular components that you think stand out?

 

[anmpr1]

Are there any particular components that you think stand out?

I wouldn't over think any of this. Why don't you just figure out your budget, and then go to a store in your area and get a loaner to try out in your own system, in your own living room? Probably the days of brick and mortar are over, but you can surf to a place like Crutchfield, and they'll send you out something you can try for a week or two. I think they have 60 day returns. If you don't like it they'll send you a return label, and either you try something else out, or they'll refund your money. It's not that complicated, and it's really the only way to be sure.

If you listen to everyone and their brother, you are likely to be more confused than edified. Remember, like other things, everyone has an opinion. Trust your own judgement.

 

[Angsty]

Are there any particular components that you think stand out?

The SL-1200GR and Puffin will keep you happy and are within your stated budget. Both perform well.

For a return to vinyl, I’d recommend an elliptical stylus versus a Shibata or fine line out of the gate. Ellipticals are easier to setup for good sound. Also would stay with moving magnet instead of moving coil, with a replaceable stylus. Later cartridge upgrades are always possible.

The Nagaoka MP-200 fits the bill and is slightly warmer than the Ortofon 2M Blue. The MP-300 is a step up in detail and is about the same price as the 2M Black on Amazon (U.S.). Lots of other elliptical choices, but I’ve heard very few people ever complain about how the MP-200 sounds. Some people complain about the purple color.

 

[levimax]

I’d recommend an elliptical stylus versus a Shibata or fine line out of the gate. Ellipticals are easier to setup for good sound.

To me one of the best things about a Technics TT is their "S" tone arm. Just set the overhang and you are done with alignment and that includes Shibata or fine line, it is literally minutes vs hours especially when you are learning, you are also much less likely to damage the stylus during set up. For second hand records I find the fine line profiles better as in many cases they ride in a different part of the groove which is hopefully undamaged. As mentioned lots of opinions but an AT VM540ML is a popular choice for good reasons, it will match the Technics GR tone arm, it is a fine line stylus profile, price is reasonable, and the inevitable FR hump can easily be tamed with the Puffin's EQ.

 

[Angsty]

The things I’d warn about with the advanced styli are that they can be more sensitive to both VTA/SRA and azimuth than ellipticals. SRA can be readily managed on the SL-1200.
Azimuth requires an additional adjustable head shell.

These are just extra variables to manage more carefully than with ellipticals, which may not be the best thing for a newbie.

 

[AaronJ]

The things I’d warn about with the advanced styli are that they can be more sensitive to both VTA/SRA and azimuth than ellipticals. SRA can be readily managed on the SL-1200.
Azimuth requires an additional adjustable head shell.

These are just extra variables to manage more carefully than with ellipticals, which may not be the best thing for a newbie.

FWIW the headshell shipping on the SL-100C has adjustable azimuth. I’d expect the entire line is shipping with that headshell.

 

[MattHooper]

Oh absolutely! Thank you for pointing this out...
There is no real _need_ for a turntable setup .. and getting one perhaps does not even make (logical) sense

One may as well say “ it makes no sense to go skiing” or “go on a vacation ” or “ it makes no sense to go out to dinner since you can always cook at home.”

Doing things (you can afford) which bring you pleasure is the very essence of “making sense.”

 

[MattHooper]

I do have some records but it is more for the physical medium relally.
I am just not sure if digital mastering is negative to me. Recording is digital since the 80s. I would think digial master "improves" LPs (at least it reduces copy to copy variation).
.. but I also understand those that disagree.

It all depends on what you get out of playing records.

Some people have a view that if a record had a digital master it's not worth owning. I personally do not subscribe to this analog-purity-test.

A record either sounds good or it doesn't. Records from analog masters can sound crap, so can ones from digital masters. There's nothing that guarantees some sort of sound quality just because a record came from an analog master. I have tons of records that came from digital masters that sound fantastic!

And the thing is, even records that came from digital masters will tend to sound somewhat different from the CD or streaming version. There are just aspects of vinyl cutting/mastering/reproduction that tends to alter the sound to a larger or smaller degree. And one can even prefer the end result on vinyl over the digital version. I have a number of records that came from the same original digital masters as my CD version, and often I still prefer the vinyl sound.

And of course, for many the sound is just one part (or even not a big part) of why they get in to records. If, like many people, you just find records and turntables to be more compelling as physical objects over swiping through playlists on your iphone, and you find joy in having a physical music collection, then whether a record had a digital master or not wouldn't be a deciding factor on anything. Certain the vast majority of young people enjoying their newfound vinyl hobby don't know a thing about the provenance of digital or analog masters in their collection. But they get a huge kick out of vinyl.

 

[Cote Dazur]

I’d say you should forget vinyl. I gave it up after almost 50 years and I’ve never been happier.

Sounds like a great bunch of components, but do you really want to have 5K+ USD invested in a vinyl playback system in 2022?

A thread with a legitimate question regarding best practice in listening to music via records on a TT would not be complete without a few post from people who obviously are not interested in listening to music via records on a TT. Do you guy's think I should go on a thread asking if one wine or an other is a better match to a particular dish, stating that I stopped consuming alcohol 10 years ago and I’ve never been happier and I am saving a lot of money.

Vinyl these days is more an art form than a high fidelity sound source, although until forty years ago when most of us were young it was the best we could get apart from some seriously good live FM broadcasts the BBC

Even though, digital files are superior to any analog medium, a fortiori an older, archaic, medium like LP, "Vinyl" is still more than an art form. There is so many other bottle necks in what we use to reproduce music at home, than a properly set up TT playing a well mastered LP is not that far behind the digital file that it will be instantly recognized as inferior. If one is only interested at what is best today, then yes, digital files all the way, no contest. But to listen to music, in an elaborate sound system in a dedicated room, immersing one self in a great rendition of whatever music you are into, then, same as 40 years ago, a properly set up TT playing a well mastered LP will take you there.
Is a DAC with a SINAD of 140db technically superior to a DAC with a lower SINAD, yes.
Can they both play great music, yes. If they don't, it is more than probable not because of the SINAD level differences.
Some time technically superior is not all that matters when the goal is to enjoy the music and feel the emotions it can communicate.

 

[Avp1]

It all depends on what you get out of playing records.

Some people have a view that if a record had a digital master it's not worth owning. I personally do not subscribe to this analog-purity-test.

A record either sounds good or it doesn't. Records from analog masters can sound crap, so can ones from digital masters. There's nothing that guarantees some sort of sound quality just because a record came from an analog master. I have tons of records that came from digital masters that sound fantastic!

If there is a digital master - I would like to get a copy as download or through streaming. There is no need for vinyl distribution for that.

When master is analogue, than copy I can get is either on vinyl or RTR tape. This is what I expect to hear.

 

[Avp1]

Is a DAC with a SINAD of 140db technically superior to a DAC with a lower SINAD, yes.
Can they both play great music, yes. If they don't, it is more than probable not because of the SINAD level differences.
Some time technically superior is not all that matters when the goal is to enjoy the music and feel the emotions it can communicate.

SINAD is only a SYMPTOM of DAC's deficiency. Thus not, it does not sound good because it has bad SINAC, but because something is not right with it comparing with SOTA level.

 

[MattHooper]

If there is a digital master - I would like to get a copy as download or through streaming. There is no need for vinyl distribution for that.

Curious what you "need" vinyl for then?

When master is analogue, than copy I can get is either on vinyl or RTR tape. This is what I expect to hear.

But even from an analogue master, a digital version is still likely to be at least as accurate, likely more, than either the vinyl or RTR copy. So...why is it any more "necessary" or desirable to get the vinyl or RTR copy in any case? (If you care about accuracy).

As I mentioned, the vinyl copy will always sound at least somewhat different - both from the analog master and from a digital master - so why not just go on how a record sounds? A record either sounds good (to you) or it doesn't, whatever the original master.

 

[Avp1]

Curious what you "need" vinyl for then?

I believe already answered that question somewhere on this forum: I only buy vintage records made when digital technology was not yet available. Even re-issues are almost never made from the same master as original. And I want to hear that original sound, not a modern version of it.

 

[MattHooper]

I believe already answered that question somewhere on this forum: I only buy vintage records made when digital technology was not yet available. Even re-issues are almost never made from the same master as original. And I want to hear that original sound, not a modern version of it.

Ok, cool.

 

[mppix]

I believe already answered that question somewhere on this forum: I only buy vintage records made when digital technology was not yet available. Even re-issues are almost never made from the same master as original. And I want to hear that original sound, not a modern version of it.

I think this is understandable. However masters are usually not the same for different media. I think we can at least debate if digital/streaming Masters are better than vinyl masters..

 

[BJL]

I think this is understandable. However masters are usually not the same for different media. I think we can at least debate if digital/streaming Masters are better than vinyl masters..

I don't believe that as a general rule it is possible to conclude as a general rule that digital masters are better or worse than vinyl masters. In my opinion, well mastered recordings sound great, digital or vinyl, and the reverse. As a case in point, the Tom Petty Album "Mudcrutch" was released on both vinyl and CD, but the vinyl copy came with a CD derived from the vinyl master (it was never sold separately). The CD that came with the record was intentionally higher quality as compared with the commercial CD, which was compressed and loud. Putting it another way, The CD that came with the LP sounded like the LP (without the disadvantages of vinyl). The NY Times published an article on this release, the mastering, and the general topic of mastering CDs that is worth reading: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/business/media/23petty.html?searchResultPosition=2 For anyone interested in Tom Petty, the follow up mini live album also came with a CD mastered to the standards of the LP.

I have read that that mastering quality varies with the streaming services, but that the streaming services' audio quality is somewhat compromised by compression or limiting compared with high quality download services (hdTracks etc.), although I have purchased supposed "hi-res" download versions that were horribly compressed and loud, so I don't actually trust any format if I don't know who did the mastering.

 

[levimax]

I don't believe that as a general rule it is possible to conclude as a general rule that digital masters are better or worse than vinyl masters. In my opinion, well mastered recordings sound great, digital or vinyl, and the reverse. As a case in point, the Tom Petty Album "Mudcrutch" was released on both vinyl and CD, but the vinyl copy came with a CD derived from the vinyl master (it was never sold separately). The CD that came with the record was intentionally higher quality as compared with the commercial CD, which was compressed and loud. Putting it another way, The CD that came with the LP sounded like the LP (without the disadvantages of vinyl). The NY Times published an article on this release, the mastering, and the general topic of mastering CDs that is worth reading: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/business/media/23petty.html?searchResultPosition=2 For anyone interested in Tom Petty, the follow up mini live album also came with a CD mastered to the standards of the LP.

I have read that that mastering quality varies with the streaming services, but that the streaming services' audio quality is somewhat compromised by compression or limiting compared with high quality download services (hdTracks etc.), although I have purchased supposed "hi-res" download versions that were horribly compressed and loud, so I don't actually trust any format if I don't know who did the mastering.

I chase masterings of my favorite music and about the only thing I can say is that regardless of format, mastering is hit or miss. Popular music that is well recorded in the first place tends to get remastered more even though it does not need it. Early CD masterings of older music are very interesting and many of the first CD's sound great even though they used LP masters. Many of these titles were remastered very early on and some were better but many were worse. Later remasterings in general just got louder and louder but some were major improvements. There are forums that discuss masterings that can be helpful but they also contain a lot of "noise". The only reason I bother is because masterings can be quite different and effect sound quality much more than chasing SINAD.... it can also be fun.

 

[mppix]

I don't believe that as a general rule it is possible to conclude as a general rule that digital masters are better or worse than vinyl masters. In my opinion, well mastered recordings sound great, digital or vinyl, and the reverse. As a case in point, the Tom Petty Album "Mudcrutch" was released on both vinyl and CD, but the vinyl copy came with a CD derived from the vinyl master (it was never sold separately). The CD that came with the record was intentionally higher quality as compared with the commercial CD, which was compressed and loud. Putting it another way, The CD that came with the LP sounded like the LP (without the disadvantages of vinyl). The NY Times published an article on this release, the mastering, and the general topic of mastering CDs that is worth reading: https://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/23/business/media/23petty.html?searchResultPosition=2 For anyone interested in Tom Petty, the follow up mini live album also came with a CD mastered to the standards of the LP.

I have read that that mastering quality varies with the streaming services, but that the streaming services' audio quality is somewhat compromised by compression or limiting compared with high quality download services (hdTracks etc.), although I have purchased supposed "hi-res" download versions that were horribly compressed and loud, so I don't actually trust any format if I don't know who did the mastering.

Thank you for sharing the article. I suspected for a while that the max loudness of records is naturally limited and that this preserves at least some peaks (similar to highlight clipping of digital vs analog film). This preserves a min dynamic as it prevents mastering engineers form certain "sins".

Records (and high-res if remastered*) are made for "decent quality home listening" usually played at least on stereos with separate speakers. Streaming (and perhaps decreasingly CD) needs to sound good in particular on on all-in-one bluetooth and car stereos. Of course compression is of course not bad per se and it enables music on the go at least to some degree.
Now we just need to convince everybody that bluetooth/computer speakers need a lower midrange and upper bass

 

[mppix]

And the order is in:

• Puffin w. Toslink: digital processing; excellent control on input stage and (RIAA) equalization
• Technics SL-1200GR: direct-drive turntable with digital speed control; excellent specs: w&f and rumble (same as G model)
• AT740ML: "workhorse" MM cartridge that survives a needle drop (and sylus can be replaced when it doesn't); leaving MC for the future

Based on specs and measurements, it should be difficult to significantly outperform the above system. I am very curious to see if subjective performance matches this expectation. Happy to report back if there is an interest.

Thank you everybody for the detailed answers and suggestions.

 

[levimax]

And the order is in:

• Puffin w. Toslink: digital processing; excellent control on input stage and (RIAA) equalization
• Technics SL-1200GR: direct-drive turntable with digital speed control; excellent specs: w&f and rumble (same as G model)
• AT740ML: "workhorse" MM cartridge that survives a needle drop (and sylus can be replaced when it doesn't); leaving MC for the future

Based on specs and measurements, it should be difficult to significantly outperform the above system. I am very curious to see if subjective performance matches this expectation. Happy to report back if there is an interest.

Thank you everybody for the detailed answers and suggestions.

Nice.... enjoy