The Courteous Vinyl Playback Discussion

[krabapple]

There have been a number of threads started that seem to descend into vinyl bashing, bullying, and lack of respect. The title of this thread should set the tone. If your are tempted to post here in a “Tellarite” manner - Trekkies will recognize this reference - don’t do it here. Instead start a “Tellarite” mutual insults thread where those “Tellarite” urges will be appreciated.

Andorian perspective: My people are a violent race. But vee haf no quarrel vith the courteous vinyl.

 

[aagstn]

Just listened to a flexi disc. Deal with it audiophiles

I got one of these in a 7 inch box set I bought last year and it was fun to throw it on. Brought back memories of playing records that came in magazines or cut off the back of cereal boxes.

 

[MattHooper]

If you can condense that long winded, and I am sure well-intentioned, prose down to one or two questions, I will attempt to provide a rational answer.

I’m suggesting that strict policing and over-zealous interpretations of informal or positive vinyl comments as being out of bounds or requiring automatic denunciation or pushback (or demands for rigorous evidence), was responsible for much of the friction in “ that other thread” and so I don’t think you want to go down that route if this is to actually be a vinyl-friendly and courteous thread.

So:

1. I’m wondering if you agree with me that goat79’s comment was rather anodyne and acceptable in this thread: he was simply describing his experience of being pleasantly surprised by vinyl playback with his new turntable (a positive comment). And that even his brief, informal speculation and wondering why he’s finding himself preferring vinyl playback, is also completely within bounds. He was not berating digital nor declaring the objective superiority of vinyl. Agree?


2. In this thread I wanted to mention my experience of surprisingly enjoying the Rush remastered vinyl albums more than the CD versions I’ve been listening to for years.
Just exactly where would you draw the line in terms of demanding any such informal positive comments about vinyl need to be accompanied by science or measurements or whatever? Do subjective impressions of the different mastering, or different perceived sonic characteristics (eg less bass in the vinyl but drums pop more) go out of bounds? All that amounts to the question : Where are you drawing the line here?

 

[EJ3]

Newman, with respect,

Goat76 was not arguing for or about vinyl superiority over digital. He was simply reporting being pleasantly surprised by the experience of vinyl playback, and specifically said even if speculating he didn’t know why.

As per the OP this is a thread for not bashing vinyl and goat76 was clearly not “berating” digital at all, nor some declaration that vinyl was superior.

In a thread devoted to positive discussion about vinyl, not tolerating goats casual self report of how getting a turntable has pleasantly impacted his listening and pushing back against it seems the type of “Tellarite“ that was a constant source of friction in the “other thread” and that this thread means to avoid.

I thought this thread was going be more relaxed. If it is, I think we need to relax




I suggest that would be best realized by relaxing somewhat the demand that a vinyl conversation has to remain entirely technical and that no informal discussion or impressions are allowed without supplying scientific evidence.

We already have plenty of threads that discuss vinyl in a purely technical fashion.
It seems to be a looser and more open thread like this can include both technical discussion as well as informal expressions of appreciation or one’s experience playing records, am I right?

For instance, I was going to mention one of my earliest pleasant experiences when I got back into buying vinyl was how much I enjoyed the Rush re-releases/remasters.
I presume that would be OK? But part of the experience also included that I was re-buying on vinyl the same Rush albums that I’d been listening to for decades on CD, and I was surprised to find myself enjoying the records more. Would that be out of bounds?
Or describing what seems to be the differences? eg the bass doesn’t seem as deep on the vinyl but things like Peart’s drums seem to pop out of the mix a little more. Where is the line drawn where you can’t say such things or they can’t be accompanied without scientific back up or measurements?

It seems to me if we make this thread so strict that every single anecdote or subjective comment is going to be pounced upon “ because technical evidence has not been supplied” that’s more likely to cause friction.

Now if somebody drops in declaring the objective superiority of vinyl, or “why digital sux” that seems to me where are such lines are reasonably drawn.

Whereas in a vinyl-friendly thread some informal expressions of enjoying vinyl, even mentioning enjoying a record versus a digital version on one’s system, or even finding oneself enjoying playing records more than one’s digital source, would be entirely OK in a vinyl-friendly thread.

ASR is actually full of subjective/informal comments on sound quality, and other subjects, and that’s one reason why it is more welcoming than a place like hydrogen audio - whose strict “ data only and no subjective discussion or language allowed “ is so offputting to many audiophiles, and seem the caricature of a Spock-like data only obsession.

Along those lines the majority here are quite capable of understanding that informal discussions and subjective reports are not substitutes for rigorous, reliable knowledge gathering methods, and they are not taken as such…. they are taken with the obvious caveats. And if some such comments are mingled in this thread there’s no need for constant reminding otherwise.

Am I right that you would generally agree with this?

And am I right that if I discussed playing my rush records in the way I described above would be acceptable? And also that goat76’s comment should not be viewed as unacceptable, but taken as it was… a casual informal report of being pleasantly surprised by vinyl playback, and that even brief speculation in trying to understand his perception wasn’t an attack on digital or some broadside about vinyl superiority?

Cheers.

Correct: People just need to recognize & follow the INTENT of the instructions (to be COURTIUOS) and not take things literally (such as that it applies to anyone other than the OP [or the other commenters] {themselves}) in the thread:
First: Please follow the intent of the instructions:

Then, DO NOT CHARGE in with a SEMI-BILLIGERANT attitude (which can cause):

and just enjoy the fact that others are enjoying the hobby (with whatever gear and for whatever reason(s):

 

[Bob from Florida]

I’m suggesting that strict policing and over-zealous interpretations of informal or positive vinyl comments as being out of bounds or requiring automatic denunciation or pushback (or demands for rigorous evidence), was responsible for much of the friction in “ that other thread” and so I don’t think you want to go down that route if this is to actually be a vinyl-friendly and courteous thread.

So:

1. I’m wondering if you agree with me that goat79’s comment was rather anodyne and acceptable in this thread: he was simply describing his experience of being pleasantly surprised by vinyl playback with his new turntable (a positive comment). And that even his brief, informal speculation and wondering why he’s finding himself preferring vinyl playback, is also completely within bounds. He was not berating digital nor declaring the objective superiority of vinyl. Agree?


2. In this thread I wanted to mention my experience of surprisingly enjoying the Rush remastered vinyl albums more than the CD versions I’ve been listening to for years.
Just exactly where would you draw the line in terms of demanding any such informal positive comments about vinyl need to be accompanied by science or measurements or whatever? Do subjective impressions of the different mastering, or different perceived sonic characteristics (eg less bass in the vinyl but drums pop more) go out of bounds? All that amounts to the question : Where are you drawing the line here?

Q1 - I had no objection to @goat76 posting what was posted. Did not bother me at all.

Q2 - Vinyl is not digital - if we ignore the master may be digital. What is in the grooves is analog - gray area versus ones and zero's. So, subjective observations are to be expected in moderation.

MattHooper and Newman have crossed swords a number of times on the now "historical" complete waste of time thread not to be spoken of henceforth. The only hard line to be drawn is not to turn this thread into another "circus".

 

[MattHooper]

Q1 - I had no objection to @goat76 posting what was posted. Did not bother me at all.

Q2 - Vinyl is not digital - if we ignore the master may be digital. What is in the grooves is analog - gray area versus ones and zero's. So, subjective observations are to be expected in moderation.

MattHooper and Newman have crossed swords a number of times on the now "historical" complete waste of time thread not to be spoken of henceforth. The only hard line to be drawn is not to turn this thread into another "circus".

OK, thanks that fits with my understanding of the spirit of the thread. Cheers.

 

[Newman]

Q1 - I had no objection to @goat76 posting what was posted. Did not bother me at all.

Q2 - Vinyl is not digital - if we ignore the master may be digital. What is in the grooves is analog - gray area versus ones and zero's. So, subjective observations are to be expected in moderation.

...The only hard line to be drawn is not to turn this thread into another "circus".

Sure thing, Bob, but someone is trying to butter you up into allowing this thread to be dominated by high subjectivity, eventually.

If you set the lines early, everything remains clean, clear and nice.

OTOH this inquisition into exactly how far the lines can be crossed ..."how about this post? How about that post?" ... inch by inch ... is the famous Salami Tactics from Yes Prime Minister.

If you say yes to some subjectivity, then you will find yourself saying yes to a little bit more, then a bit more.... and I know exactly how that ends. We don't even want to name the threads...Rick locks the threads... Let's not. It's not ASR.

Rick has set his expectations. They are clear enough. People pushing against the margins to find out how far they can go...they are not doing the right thing. Not here on ASR.

Can we please keep it clean and simple? Because like Rick said in this thread, about this thread: if you are going to tolerate subjectivity, then you are going to have to tolerate it being criticised for lacking objectivity. Because this is ASR. And you are going to need to recognise, when that happens, that the critics are not the ones who are being the problem. Or discourteous. And like Rick also said: ASR is not really the place for it.

A thread about how to make vinyl sound its best, with objective evidence that it works, is a fantastic idea for a thread! I love it!

cheers

 

[Thomas_A]

I think a technical setup thread was removed since it was argued that there were enough vinyl threads already. But I would say it would be good to have one to summarise setup guides (with measurements to back it up). There is a lot of measurements in the "Fun... thread", but it is certainly not a "Red thread".

 

[goat76]

Newman, with respect,

Goat76 was not arguing for or about vinyl superiority over digital. He was simply reporting being pleasantly surprised by the experience of vinyl playback, and specifically said even if speculating he didn’t know why.

As per the OP this is a thread for not bashing vinyl and goat76 was clearly not “berating” digital at all, nor some declaration that vinyl was superior.

In a thread devoted to positive discussion about vinyl, not tolerating goats casual self report of how getting a turntable has pleasantly impacted his listening and pushing back against it seems the type of “Tellarite“ that was a constant source of friction in the “other thread” and that this thread means to avoid.

I thought this thread was going be more relaxed. If it is, I think we need to relax

You are correct; I never said vinyl is technically superior. I just wanted to report that there's "something" with the vinyl playback that, in my subjective experience, makes it a little bit more pleasant-sounding, and a bit more convincing-sounding on vinyl compared to the same album in digital form. I don't believe the vinyl playback is "digging out" any extra information from the recordings. Instead, I think there is something added in the vinyl playback, which is probably technically inferior to the perfect digital playback, but I think it adds some sort of "perfect imperfections" to the playback that makes it pleasant to my ear. I'm not sure what it is, but if I'm allowed to speculate, my first thought is that it is some sort of harmonic distortion that makes it more "organic-sounding" (for the lack of finding another short description).

 

[mike70]

i think we need to have a more open mind to the subjective facets (when they aren't relative to sound quality specifically) because are inherent to us and much more for vinyl.

think about it: if the format is more expensive, more inconvenient and objectively inferior ... why are you using it? 2 points on that:

- is inferior, but enough (i mean, is not a spica radio and with some work without audible disturbing noises, blah blah)
- i like it (i mean, i like the experience)

Done, what's the problem with that? i'm saying vinyl is superior? no, no and no.
So, please, grab a cup of coffee and if you enjoy the thread, join us.

For me, is much more simpler than a "tiny madness" that i'm reading in the last times.
Subjectivity about sound quality? go to Stereophile.
Subjectivity about the experience to share the format ... is forbidden? i think it's not, so, let it flow.

 

[Bob from Florida]

Alrighty then, back to discussing vinyl playback.

I have owned 4 turntables- not counting the JC Penney’s cheap turntable that came with my first stereo rack purchased back in 1981. The first “serious” table was a Dual turntable complete with an $18 Grado cartridge. Unfortunately, that combo hummed due to electromagnetic coupling between the AC drive motor and the cartridge. I used it for a couple of years before replacing it with a Merrill Heirloom table with a Micro Seiki 507 MK2 arm with a Garrett Brothers P77 cartridge. This combo did not hum and worked well for nearly 40 years until the outboard motor controller died. Table number 3 was a Clearaudio Performance DC with Satisfy Carbon arm. I put a number of upgrades on it before deciding to try a direct drive table. Number 4 is a Technics SL-1300G and will likely be never replaced, assuming it doesn’t break down before I do.

The only 2 I have done any measurements on are the Clearaudio and the Technics. My Waxwing preamp has a function to measure speed based on one click per rotation with the needle in the runout track. I could get close to 33.33 or 45 on the Clearaudio, but it would be slightly different every time and be tempting to tweak the speed pot. The Technics measures exactly 33.33 and 45 every time and no belts to replace- ever!

Technics SL-1300G turntable/arm Lab Report

The SL-1300G weighs an extra 1.5kg over the more affordable SL-1200GR2 [HFN Sep ’24] despite both models sharing the same coreless DC motor and overall 453x173x372mm (WHD) footprint. The former’s heftier BMC chassis and die-cast alloy platter with brass top layer – 3.6kg versus the SL-1200GR2’s...

www.hifinews.com

Subjectively, I enjoyed the last three more than the Dual - hard to ignore a “humming” turntable. The Technics is my favorite and final choice due to practicality, looks, and measurable published performance.

Let’s talk about our choices for a while, as usual, in a courteous manner.

 

[mike70]

my first turntable was an automatic cheap Garrard (i don't even remember the model), then a Lenco L75, a Garrard 401 (a beauty / tank turntable) and finally the 1200 mk2 in the eighties. That turntable was the reference point for me (even the 401 is really something special), after that, i only used Technics quartz drive tts.

in the 90s, i sold the mk2 with many records (yes :-( ) and get a cheaper technics SL-Q2 only to play something now and then.
In 2010s i get back "strong" to vinyl with the Q2 and some years ago i bought the 1200mk7 ... without regrets. Obviously it have some economies in the construction compared to the vintage mk2 (buttons, lift lever, ...), but the motor is improved (coreless, digital speed control), less resonance platter, etc.

Today, vinyl is my first format for music and i also use streaming to "background music".

 

[spiral scratch]

I think a technical setup thread was removed since it was argued that there were enough vinyl threads already. But I would say it would be good to have one to summarise setup guides (with measurements to back it up). There is a lot of measurements in the "Fun... thread", but it is certainly not a "Red thread".

Actually there were some informative posts in this thread but it meanders from more informative discussion to people talking about liking to play records and how they prefer the sound.

I'm not sure what you mean by, "red thread".

 

[Thomas_A]

Actually there were some informative posts in this thread but it meanders from more informative discussion to people talking about liking to play records and how they prefer the sound.

I'm not sure what you mean by, "red thread".

Does English use "red thread" as expression for theme?

In Swedish the expression "röd tråd" (literally "red thread") is used to describe that something follows a theme. For instance, if a piece of text has a "red thread", it's written with a consistent

english.stackexchange.com

 

[EJ3]

Of course, this is just my opinion: In the My first TT (Bought along wit my ADVENT 300 receiver in 1977), was a (Connoisseur BD2/A belt drive (England origin [from AR Sugden & Co). Arthur Sugden was a genius, the Connoisseur was a jewel in the rough, and at the time one of the best, if not the best TT value in audio.
Along for the ride was a Sugden supplied Perspex cover and a SHURE Cart (Shure M75EJ Type 2 mounted on the SAU2 arm.
The basic deck is competent, if a little quirky:
Provided the motor suspension is properly set up, that is, good rubber and correct pulley height, the drive is reliable.
It was cheap, even then, but a brilliant bit of engineering. Keep size down? use a 10 platter. Keep motor noise down? use a feeble motor (how much effort is needed to maintain speed?) and have a little rubber button on the start switch to flick the platter in the right direction when you turn on and apply a brake when you turn off. Reduce stiction in the p/u arm? drop the (extremely thin) signal cable through the pivot axis to minimize drag and angle the gimbals at 45/135 deg. instead of 0/90 - head shell rotation is minimal and as a bonus anti-skate is achieved just by hanging a weight off the inner gimbal. Damp out tonearm resonance? use squidgy stuff to mount the counterweight instead of metal-to-metal. Arm effective mass still a bit high (so use an amp with a decent subsonic roll-off)
Its Achilles heel, was its simplicity. It was reasonable reliable, but it did suffer from one major issue. The primary issue was the motor mounting support. Over time the rubber cradle would perish and had to be replaced from time to time. An additional rubber band was also use to keep the motor stable during start up and again this band failed on countless occasions. And the drive belt also required replacing from time to time (as with all belt drive turntables).
I used this until 2001 (upgrading SHURE's along the way [always the top of the live V series]and still have it).
At the time: Everyone who heard mine found the sound stunningly good.

It had essentially the same performance and specification as the BD1 unit.

The main differences are the larger platform and integral with this is the lift / lower mechanism for the pick-up arm.

The BD2 is designed for sprung anti-vibrational mounting.

Specifications​

Drive motor: synchronous constant speed 375rpm at 60Hz

Speeds: 33.33 and 45rpm (manual change)

Platter: 10 1/4" (26cm) lathe turned aluminum casting with precision ground spindle and phosphor bronze bearing

Drive: precision ground round section rubber belt

Performance: considerably exceeds broadcast specifications (at the time) for turntables in respect of hum, rumble, wow and flutter

Rumble: -60dB

Hum: -80dB

Wow and flutter: less than 0.1%

My next TT (and current one):

Technics SL-M3​

Quartz Controlled Direct-Drive Fully-Automatic Turntable System (1984-1988)

(1 review)

with linear tracking tonearm

Specifications​

Type: fully automatic

Drive method: direct drive

Motor: brushless DC motor

Drive control method: quartz phase locked control

Platter: 325mm, 2.5kg, aluminum die-cast

Pitch control: +-6% range

Speeds: 33 and 45rpm

Wow and flutter: 0.022% WRMS

Rumble: -82dB

Tonearm: dynamically-balanced linear tracking

Effective length: 238mm

Effective mass: 13g (including cartridge)

Cartridge: moving magnet

Replacement stylus: EPS-33ES

Dimensions: 526 x 205 x 425mm

Weight: 15kg

Not much to say about this one except:
The T4P has it's own particular specifications (VS the somewhat generic P-Mount term).
The P-mount arrangement preceded the Matsushita (Technics) proposal for adoption of their T4P standard, which specified use of the P-mount method for affixing the cartridge to the tonearm, along with standardization of a number of technical variables, including:

• Cartridge weight
• Tracking force
• Compliance
• Plug length
• Screw hole placement
• Stylus position

The idea, effectively, was to create a plug and play cartridge and tonearm...no need to fiddle with tracking force, VTA, alignment, anti-skate, etc.

In practical terms, this means, for example, a non-T4P (but still P-mount) cartridge might require a different tracking force...which could be a challenge on a tonearm designed to the T4P standard. Or it might have different physical dimensions, resulting in incorrect VTA when used on a T4P tonearm.

I use various SHURE V-15 equivalent P-Mount T4P PHONO CARTs , as well as the original Technics cart (those running at 1.25 gram TF) and a GRADO GOLD3 (GOLD 3) running at 1.5 gram TF.
It works well and sounds (to me) great.

And my third TT (also in current use) & running a SHURE IV
(and yes, I use it for stacking records, just as the engineers intended):

Description​

With the 1229, Dual has achieved what many audio experts have called the no-compromise automatic.

The most dramatic example of this is the mode selector that shifts the entire tonearm base - down for single play, up for multiple play.

Thus the stylus tracks at precisely the correct angle in both modes of play.

The 8 3/4 inch tonearm, the longest of any automatic, tracks flawlessly at as low as 0.25 gram.

Other 1229 features include 12 inch a dynamically balanced 7lb platter, powerful continuous pole / synchronous motor, built in illuminated strobe with adjustable viewing angle and a calibrated tracking pressure dial.

The unit has 3 speeds with one semitone pitch variation on all three speeds and the torsionally rigid, extra-long all-metal tonearm features four-point Gimbal type bearing.

Specifications​

Drive: synchronous continuous-pole motor with radial elastic suspension

Platter: non-magnetic, dynamically balanced, weighing 3,1kg

Speeds: 33.33, 45 and 78rpm

Pitch control variation: 6%

Speed accuracy deviation: +-0.06%

Signal to noise ratio: -63dB weighted

Tonearm: extra-long, torsionally rigid metal arm, in 4-point gimbal suspension, with skeletal head design

Cartridge holder: removable, accepts all 1/2" cartridges from 1 to 12g

Dimensions: 376 x 308mm

Weight: 7.2kg

If you take a little time using two small metric scales and a strong lighted magnifier to see if the overhang and angle adjustments are accurate, and a test record to check anti-skate and tracking force, then you'll have one awesome sounding turntable. I've had good results using 1 to 1.25 grams tracking force, even with bass drum playback.

One day, far in the future (maybe), I'll get some measurement gear and test these last 2 out. But, in the mean time, I'll just enjoy them.

 

[lini]

Thomas: Over here that's still a pretty popular term - so one can har or read "(...) zieht sich durch wie ein roter Faden" quite often.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

 

[Thomas_A]

Thomas: Over here that's still a pretty popular term - so one can har or read "(...) zieht sich durch wie ein roter Faden" quite often.

Greetings from Munich!

Manfred / lini

Yes it exists in several languages- but I guess it is a bit unknown to english native readers so one have to google the expression to know the meaning.

 

[Cote Dazur]

I finally bought a turntable a few months ago

Thank you for sharing your experience and how it makes you fell.
Is it your first TT?

I started my TT journey beginning of the 80’s, was mostly listening to FM and tape before that.
My first was a Beogram 4000 with parallel tracking.
Then I switched to what would be my TT for the rest of my life. LP12.
As it is an upgradable design and I was a lot more gullible then, I changed arms, cartridge, grommets, power supply, as me dealers and friends were telling what was better about it and sure enough I could hear it as well and tell the world about it.
I stopped at Arkiv, Ekos, circus and Dirak.
I am still enjoying it after all those years, so in retrospect, it was money well spent.
I recently put a cartridge on a second turntable that was given to me, AT 95 on Technics sl d2, on my second system.
They both play well enough to make me appreciate and enjoy the music on my records.
Having 2 dedicated music room with very well positioned seat and speakers and selecting well produced music has, in my opinion a much larger role on how the music is presented than choosing the source format.

 

[rdenney]

...

Let’s talk about our choices for a while, as usual, in a courteous manner.

I have also owned four turntables over the years, including the General Electric record player I had as a kid. I had that record player until my freshman year in college, and goodness knows what sort of gouging it did to the records of my youth. Many of them, however, still sound pretty good.

The first I used the longest: A Technics SL20, from 1977. Unlike most Technics turntables, this one is belt-driven, using a DC servo motor. The motor pulley is tiny, which is itself a weakness. The tonearm bearings are a little sloppy, but the tonearm is functional. I used that with a cheap Grado moving-iron cartridge for a very long time. I had tried an Ortofon Concord on it, but that Ortofon's goal is ultra-low mass with the removal of the headshell, and the bearings in that tonearm just weren't good enough for mass that low. The Grado worked better on that table. I enjoyed music on that table for decades, tracking that cartridge at 1.75 grams. I still have it, though I find it difficult to keep belts functional because of the kinks they develop with that small motor pulley when not used for a couple of months. I need to make it a practice of unhooking the belt off the motor between uses.

Then, not that long ago, I bought an old Thorens TD166II. I've pretty thoroughly rebuilt it, and it works really well. The TP11 tonearm was their budget model, but the bearings were adjustable for zero play and the operation smooth. It has an Audio Technica AT440MLb cartridge, which supposedly has a hot top octave, but I never seem to notice that. I first bought a Grado Green2 for it, because they were inexpensive, but Grado moving-iron designs pick up AC motor noise pretty readily, and I could hear the hum when the stylus was in the inside inch. Even the AT has audible hum when close to the spindle. I came into a really good deal on a Music Hall Cruise Control 2.0 and bought that to try out. It regenerates an AC waveform at 16 volts to drive turntables that use 16VAC synchronous motors, as the Thorens does. That gave me the ability to run the belt on the larger 45 RPM pulley of the motor, and slow it down electronically. I measured the waveform from that device and found it to have about 1% THD, which is actually quite a bit better than my incoming power, which is visibly distorted when viewed on a scope. That made me a fan of the concept of regenerating AC if an induction motor is the intended drive, but I certainly have nothing against servo-controlled DC motors.

And recently a Linn Axis came to me. This was a gift from an old friend who bought a newer Linn--he'd bought this Axis new in 1987 (I was with him when he bought it, and remember the comparisons we made clearly--at least the conclusions we drew from the comparison at the time). The Axis had failed because of bad capacitors in its motor control circuits, which I was able to repair. The circuit is actually quite good at controlling the motor with considerable precision and consistency. But it uses a Class A amplifier to generate the AC signal, which means it runs hot, and that is what caused the caps to eventually fail. I will use it with a proper mains power switch. I don't detect hum in the Adikt cartridge (apparently a reskinned Goldring 1012GX) that is mounted on the Basik Plus tonearm. The tonearm bearings are smooth and tight. I have not yet connected it to my main system, so I don't yet have an opinion of the cartridge with the Holman preamp. I suspect it will be very good. Reading up about the Adikt, I'm thinking the GygerII stylus isn't really giving anything up to the microline stylus in the AT, so I think I'll leave the cartridges where they are until I have a reason to do something else. I did find that the microline stylus produces less surface noise than the elliptical styluses used in the Grados.

Rick "hoping that Adikt stylus ($$$) doesn't need replacing" Denney

 

[Palmer]

Alrighty then, back to discussing vinyl playback.

I have owned 4 turntables- not counting the JC Penney’s cheap turntable that came with my first stereo rack purchased back in 1981. The first “serious” table was a Dual turntable complete with an $18 Grado cartridge. Unfortunately, that combo hummed due to electromagnetic coupling between the AC drive motor and the cartridge. I used it for a couple of years before replacing it with a Merrill Heirloom table with a Micro Seiki 507 MK2 arm with a Garrett Brothers P77 cartridge.

Had the Garrott Brothers P77 - and am always thinking of the sad story about them. Always wanted to grab Merrill parts for the AR - The Turntable, all I ended up with is the lead platter mat. Flat and love it. Still looking for a nice 2nd. Your post brings back memories, appreciate it.

Cheers