Turntables - help me understand the appeal?

[Zog]

If you look at post #3 in this thread I gave a numberless breakdown of how I would rate my experience, putting entirely made up numbers on it now I'd say it's something like the following.

10% are better on vinyl.
20% are a tie.
40% are slightly worse on vinyl.
30% are clearly better digitally.

I'd be interested in how others would score it.

It is about 50 - 50 for me. What I find particularly annoying is companies - DG, RCA, all of them - releasing music that was mastered for one format on another format but make no allowance for the different format. Le Sacre by Abbado with the LSO is a case in point. Fab on LP but lifeless on CD. Dylana Jensen's Sibelius Violin Concerto with Ormandy and the Philadelphia is another example. Recently I bought Don't Let the Kids Win by Sydney girl Julia Jacklin on CD and LP. The CD is well worth a listen. Really brassed off about that one as the LP is truly crap. I am going to put the LP over a bowl and leave it in the sun. Then at least I can use the LP as a frisbee.
I have a mild preference for Adele's 21 on LP. I tend to prefer the sound of a Cello on vinyl for some reason; strings in general I think. Some music is better on CD just because of the music and an example is Ashkenazy's orchestration of Pictures at an Exhibition. In Bydlo there is a swell in the orchestra followed by an almighty crash. The dynamic range of the CD is needed. Without it the climax is diminished.

 

[Soniclife]

It is about 50 - 50 for me.

Interesting there is no middle ground for you.

 

[Sal1950]

It is about 50 - 50 for me.

 

[levimax]

If you look at post #3 in this thread I gave a numberless breakdown of how I would rate my experience, putting entirely made up numbers on it now I'd say it's something like the following.

10% are better on vinyl.
20% are a tie.
40% are slightly worse on vinyl.
30% are clearly better digitally.

I'd be interested in how others would score it.

I would say your percentages are close to what I have found but it is subjective and complicated as I find myself often "preferring" the vinyl version of the "tie"and "slightly worse" category due to mastering and sometimes to familiarity i.e. I grew up listening to the vinyl version on the radio. Since I find both the vinyl and digital versions of a lot of older music I listen to as "lacking in sound quality" I usually give the nod to "the original" and I enjoy buying used original vinyl pressings. At the end of the day I listen about 50-50 digital-vinyl.

 

[LTig]

[..]Again...the point isn't that the vinyl is more accurate, or that technically speaking kludgy steps are not involved in making vinyl. I'm talking about how it actually comes out sounding. Compared to the digital versions, the vinyl does not sound rolled off - in fact it often sounds more vivid and airy. Bass quality is often terrific, in fact often with a denser more punchy sound.

I second the bass quality. Rock music often has an appleasing punchy quality the CD does not deliver. I experience this both with my TT, a Linn LP12, Lingo (old), Ekos (old), VdH MC1 Special, and a very good and heavy Sansui direct drive TT with standard arm and a simple Shure MM pickup at a friends home which he got used 10 years ago (when vinyl was no hype as today) for almost nothing.

However this bass is not accurate - when playing very good classical recordings the big drums have a big and punchy but kind of smeared sound on vinyl while on CD you hear much more details instead of the punch. I can live with both representations, and getting more punch on CD needs just a little EQ ...

Also a cheap TT will not deliver such pleasing bass, you have to invest more.

 

[Sal1950]

Why does vinyl sound that way?
https://www.gottagrooverecords.com/vinyl-mastering/

 

[Zerimas]

I like turntables because they are fun to play with? Regardless of the merits (or I think it would be more appropriate to say "demerits") of vinyl my Sony PS-X800 is an impressive piece of technology/engineering. I have a lot of fun with it. I also like LaserDiscs. They are inferior to what is available now, but the jackets look nice and my LD player makes cute noises and has flashing lights when it is attempting spin up one of those massive discs. It is like it has soul and it is trying be my friend.

 

[Hypnotoad]

I like turntables because they are fun to play with? Regardless of the merits (or I think it would be more appropriate to say "demerits") of vinyl my Sony PS-X800 is an impressive piece of technology/engineering. I have a lot of fun with it. I also like LaserDiscs. They are inferior to what is available now, but the jackets look nice and my LD player makes cute noises and has flashing lights when it is attempting spin up one of those massive discs. It is like it has soul and it is trying be my friend.

It's the same reason people buy a vintage E-Type Jag for example, sure more modern cars may perform better, but it's a nice feeling to revive some fine engineering from yesteryear. I see no reason why both vinyl and digital can't co-exist.

And if we had to have the best sound quality or not be happy, everyone would be mortgaging their houses and buying a pair of these:

 

[watchnerd]

I see no reason why both vinyl and digital can't co-exist.

They can. And any schmoe with a enough money can buy SOTA on either platform and show what a good consumer he is.

Which is why the mic-drop, trump all y'all, biggest street cred hardcore audiophile format is reel to reel.

That requires a level of willingness to dip into the deep end of the pool that most guys who simply have fat wallets aren't willing to do. Not to mention the price of the tapes.

 

[Zerimas]

It's the same reason people buy a vintage E-Type Jag for example, sure more modern cars may perform better, but it's a nice feeling to revive some fine engineering from yesteryear. I see no reason why both vinyl and digital can't co-exist.

And if we had to have the best sound quality or not be happy, everyone would be mortgaging their houses and buying a pair of these:

I agree. I am kind a sucker for outdated, over-engineered stuff. I also collect fountain pens—despite the fact that a ballpoint pen is generally more useful. The Parker 51 is a great fountain pen (although slightly over-engineer with respect to the feed and hood because it was designed to work with Parker's awful quick-drying ink).It's also my dream to one day own a Mazda RX-7 FC (because the FC looks cooler and is way cheaper than the FD) because the Wankel rotary is totally cool (although somewhat impractical).

I do dislike stuff that never represented any kind of decent solution to any kind of problem, but somehow remains incredibly expensive. I dislike stuff like the LP12 (which is really expensive) because I don't think it was ever that good of a technical solution to the problems of vinyl playback. Even if it was OK, other stuff that followed shortly after was better and cheaper. The fact that the LP12 still persists to this day is baffling. I also don't understand why audiophiles are so obsessed with the Garrard 301. I do think idlers are kind of cool, and they have some benefits over belt-driven systems (like adequate torque), but I don't think the Garrard 301 is $2500 cool. I dunno.

 

[watchnerd]

I do dislike stuff that never represented any kind of decent solution to any kind of problem, but somehow remains incredibly expensive. I dislike stuff like the LP12 (which is really expensive) because I don't think it was ever that good of a technical solution to the problems of vinyl playback. Even if it was OK, other stuff that followed shortly after was better and cheaper.

I gather you prefer direct drives as a better technical solution for LP playback?

Or are you thinking crazy air bearing TTs?

 

[Zerimas]

I gather you prefer direct drives as a better technical solution for LP playback?

Or are you thinking crazy air bearing TTs?

I like DD (the kind with coils and magnets like an SL-1200 or whatever, not a platter attached to a motor which manufacturers nowadays also call DD).

I've never seen any air bearing TTs personally. I know they did make a "maglev" turntable recently. I am not convinced the thing actually works though. I mean it does solve the problem of bearing noise, but in all the videos I've seen the platter visibly wobbles. I mean that just generally can't be a good thing. If the manufacturers' numbers are to be believed. it would seem like that weighted on rumble on most reasonably good, vintage DD turntables is probably at or below the noise floor for the format itself. Though not DD SOTA turntable advertise an unweighted rumble of -60dB which is probably as good it needs to be (someone with more technical knowledge should chime in).

 

[watchnerd]

Though not DD SOTA turntable advertise an unweighted rumble of -60dB which is probably as good it needs to be (someone with more technical knowledge should chime in).

There are actually a lot of TT's with SNR figures better than 60 dB...VPI, Project, Michell, Avid, Technics, all have models that make that claim to do better, for example.

 

[Zerimas]

There are actually a lot of TT's with SNR figures better than 60 dB...VPI, Project, Michell, Avid, Technics, all have models that make that claim to do better, for example.

I'm referring specifically to unweighted SNR. There aren't a lot of turntables that can get those kind of figures unweighted regardless of price or vintage. With regards to weighted SNR or rumble then you're correct. Basically any Japanese DD turntable will have an SNR of 78dB or higher. Most decent belt drives will get you there too. The weighting makes a big difference with regards to figure.

 

[watchnerd]

I'm referring specifically to unweighted SNR. There aren't a lot of turntables that can get those kind of figures unweighted regardless of price or vintage. With regards to weighted SNR or rumble then you're correct. Basically any Japanese DD turntable will have an SNR of 78dB or higher. Most decent belt drives will get you there too. The weighting makes a big difference with regards to figure.

I haven't seen most manufacturers publishing unweighted SNR, so I have no idea.

But why not just snap to the weighted version that everyone uses and, in SOTA's case, claim a higher number >80?

 

[Zerimas]

I haven't seen most manufacturers publishing unweighted SNR, so I have no idea.

But why not just snap to the weighted version that everyone uses and, in SOTA's case, claim a higher number >80?

I have no idea. Most manufacturers don't publish unweighted rumble. Probably for marketing reasons, but also the fact that frequency does matter with respect to the audibility. SOTA is probably the only manufacturer I can think of that does publish unweighted rumble.

Weighted rumble is kind of annoying in some regards because there have been a bunch of different standards over the years. If you look at old catalogs and literature most manufacturers do specify which standard they used though. I don't know how much the choice of standard affects the figure. I also don't know what the most "correct" or newest weighting standard would even be.

 

[Zog]

I do dislike stuff that never represented any kind of decent solution to any kind of problem, but somehow remains incredibly expensive. I dislike stuff like the LP12 (which is really expensive) because I don't think it was ever that good of a technical solution to the problems of vinyl playback. Even if it was OK, other stuff that followed shortly after was better and cheaper. The fact that the LP12 still persists to this day is baffling. I also don't understand why audiophiles are so obsessed with the Garrard 301. I do think idlers are kind of cool, and they have some benefits over belt-driven systems (like adequate torque), but I don't think the Garrard 301 is $2500 cool. I dunno.

LP12 and Garrard - baffling to be sure. Words like Iconic, and Classic, are much used. They need to be because these creations have little else going for them apart from nostalgia.
PS: With you on the fountain pens too!

 

[watchnerd]

LP12 and Garrard - baffling to be sure. Words like Iconic, and Classic, are much used. They need to be because these creations have little else going for them apart from nostalgia.
PS: With you on the fountain pens too!

Not only is it still around, it's still a Stereophile Recommended Component, in Class B, with the mag saying,
"experience leads us to expect high Class B performance—superbly low measured rumble, excellent speed stability, and very good musical involvement—from an entry-level LP12, while previous incarnations of the full-Monty LP12 have delivered true Class A sound. As HR writes of his '80s-era LP12 with Valhalla power-supply board, "the LP12 is an established benchmark for audiophile-quality LP playback."

The longevity of the LP12 may have exceeded even the LS3/5A and the original Quad ESLs.

Meanwhile, my far cooler looking Michell Gyro SE (I'm not saying it *is* better, but it's better looking as a work of art), was dropped from Stereophile Recommended Components years ago, with one of their typical "haven't reviewed it in too long" excuses.

 

[Zerimas]

LP12 and Garrard - baffling to be sure. Words like Iconic, and Classic, are much used. They need to be because these creations have little else going for them apart from nostalgia.
PS: With you on the fountain pens too!

The Parker 51 is enduring classic for a good reason. As far as fountain pens go the Aerometric version of the 51 is basically indestructible. It is basically the only pen that you can find that has been sitting around for 40 years totally unused that can be made to work with almost nothing that more than bit of cleaning. Then there is stuff like the Mont Blanc 149 which expensive, but seems kind of unremarkable. I tried one in a store and there was nothing interesting about it.

The LP12 is mystifying. You can spend about $3000 on their TOTL "subchassis", which is just machined aluminum with some holes drilled in it. I am a clumsy person with no skills whatsoever. However, I am almost reasonably sure that I could make the same thing with a big enough piece aluminum, a milling machine and a drill press by hand. Presumably they they just CNC it. Hell, I can almost buy the machinery (and probably get someone to program it) and the materials and make one myself for roughly the same cost.

The Garrard 301 (and the 401 which is basically the same) seem to do pretty well, possibly even extremely well, for the time period they were made (roughly 1954–1976, although by 1976 their performance would be pretty lacklustre compared to what would be available and absolutely destroyed compared what would come to market in the following years). In 2019 I don't see the appeal of them at all. Now, if I could pick up a 301 for $50 at any junk store I might see the appeal of them. However, for them to command the prices that they do is baffling.

I am pretty the LP12 has always been overpriced and under-engineered since its inception. Amir talks about "selling the concept not performance" in his Totaldac d1-six review. Ivor Tiefenbrun has been doing that pretty much since the LP12 was introduced. Though probably not the first, Linn-Sondek came up with the whole "PRaT" thing and capitalized on selling people stuff based on "feeling" rather than objective performance.

 

[Wombat]

For AS(audio version of BS):

https://www.amazon.com/Non-Toxic-Silicone-Cleanse-Phthalates-Mikacare/dp/B074BQFPXG