Why Audiophiles Are Shopping for Vintage Turntables

[Frank Dernie]

For example, if we assume the "vinyl process" can improve perceived stereo imaging, why?

About 20-25 years ago a friend of mine who is a consultant in the audio business decided to try to evaluate which aspects of LP replay were nice.
He added artefacts, digitally (which would nullify the experiment in the heads of flat earthers I suppose), one at a time to hear the effect.
The very poor crosstalk was inaudible. As long as it was >25dB it was fine. This was a shock.
Adding noise increased the apparent stereo image and more so if the noise was modulated by the music. This was a surprise to me too.
A small amount of compression (normal for LPs) increased the ambient clues, obviously I suppose since the quiet bits were amplified relative to the music. This is moot now that the loudness war means pop CDs are compressed to death, and more than LP releases, ironically.
FWIW
I have speculated that this added noise increasing stereo width and depth is why some gadgets such as earthing systems like Entreq, advertised as reducing noise but actually increasing it, may be popular.

 

[Sal1950]

I have speculated that this added noise increasing stereo width and depth is why some gadgets such as earthing systems like Entreq, advertised as reducing noise but actually increasing it, may be popular.

A good speculation IMO, as it comes from the manufacturer.

 

[Frank Dernie]

A good speculation IMO, as it comes from the manufacturer.

????
What comes from the manufacturer?
The only thing I have seen from them is a claim to reduce noise.

 

[anmpr1]

About 20-25 years ago a friend of mine who is a consultant in the audio business decided to try to evaluate which aspects of LP replay were nice. He added artefacts, digitally...

Bob Carver marketed a box that would muck up the digital signal in order to make it more 'analog'. The Digital Time Lens. I never heard it, but Bob was always doing stuff like that.

I'm surprised that no one in consumer space has marketed add-on digital 'filters' to emulate expensive cartridges. A Koetsu or Ortofon SPU switch, It would be easy enough to do, I think. There are a lot of pro oriented plug-ins for various open reel machines and tape formulations; I recently saw a cassette emulator.

 

[mhardy6647]

Bob Carver marketed a box that would muck up the digital signal in order to make it more 'analog'. The Digital Time Lens. I never heard it, but Bob was always doing stuff like that.

I'm surprised that no one in consumer space has marketed add-on digital 'filters' to emulate expensive cartridges. A Koetsu or Ortofon SPU switch, It would be easy enough to do, I think. There are a lot of pro oriented plug-ins for various open reel machines and tape formulations; I recently saw a cassette emulator.

I had one of those Carver CD players with the 'digital time lens' (which, to me, seemed like something appropriated from a bad Dr. Who storyline ) that I found at the dump. It sounded -- a little different -- with the DTL button engaged. Not better, nor worse -- but different. Subtly.

... and, of course, digital amplifier (and effects) emulators are de rigueur in the 'creator' (performing musician, e.g., guitarist) ranks.

 

[Dimitri]

Bob Carver marketed a box that would muck up the digital signal in order to make it more 'analog'. The Digital Time Lens. I never heard it, but Bob was always doing stuff like that.

I'm surprised that no one in consumer space has marketed add-on digital 'filters' to emulate expensive cartridges. A Koetsu or Ortofon SPU switch, It would be easy enough to do, I think. There are a lot of pro oriented plug-ins for various open reel machines and tape formulations; I recently saw a cassette emulator.

The time lens didn't impress me. Sonic holgraphy on the other hand, does have some WOW! moments.

 

[Dimitri]

The very poor crosstalk was inaudible. As long as it was >25dB it was fine. This was a shock.

Cartridges have around 25-30 dB @ 1KHz and all bets are off above that.
FM stereo receivers and more importantly FM encoders used to hover around 30-35 dB separation (on a good day, @ 1KHz).
Add some chanel phase confusion due to cartridge inadequacy and you have a "wide soundstage" effect.
Same thing happens with FM reception with borderline signal. It sounds wide and hissy. You turn it to mono , the hiss goes away and you are hearing the music comin out of a tunnel right in front of you.
Unfortunately I was used to that. Newer receivers auto blend the high frequencies when reception is "hissy" so you don't have a choice.

 

[anmpr1]

Same thing happens with FM reception with borderline signal. It sounds wide and hissy. You turn it to mono , the hiss goes away and you are hearing the music coming out of a tunnel right in front of you.

That's a great description. Brings back the memories. I used open reel tape to catch broadcasts from a local college station. Met opera and such. Signal was low powered and distant, even with an outdoor antenna. I always had the tuner switched to mono because you could never tell when the stereo signal would go bad. How I hated FM. At least as much as I hated open reel.

 

[Sal1950]

The only thing I have seen from them is a claim to reduce noise.

Yep, that's what I was referring to..
They always have some inflated claims to make.

 

[mhardy6647]

My son shared this with me earlier today

https://thehardtimes.net/blog/when-...ogether-to-make-him-feel-stupid-and-inferior/

 

[Dimitri]

My son shared this with me earlier today

https://thehardtimes.net/blog/when-...ogether-to-make-him-feel-stupid-and-inferior/

Someone who is looking for "vinyls" ,maybe, deserves it

 

[Robin L]

My son shared this with me earlier today

https://thehardtimes.net/blog/when-...ogether-to-make-him-feel-stupid-and-inferior/

Some things never change:

 

[Robin L]

Back when I lusted for all things LP, this was my fantasy tonearm. Funny how things have changed. The price of this tonearm is no longer considered absurd but the arm is unobtanium, at least all by its lonesome:

https://www.hifinews.com/content/worlds-best-tonearm

 

[mhardy6647]

Currently (2020 CE), I'd lust after one of these arms -- but I'd have to sell a kidney.

http://thomas-schick.com/en/produkte/12-schick-arm

 

[Sal1950]

 

[Victor Martell]

Lots to unpack in the thread - but as a vinyl aficionado and a reasonable person, just wanted to point out a couple of things:

1) There is a difference between those of us that know our stuff and those for which vinyl is a fashion statement. Pls do not put us in the same box - I too cringe at those hipsters with Dancette or Crosley turntables that go on and on about the fullness of the sound.

2) We do not delude ourselves - specs and measurements do not lie - digital is objectively better than vinyl. We just made a lifestyle choice because we like to do it. Matter of personal choice - I find it fun to get a new cart and take the time to align it etc - yet I consider weekend motorcycle tinkering dumb. Yet that is ONLY my opinion, on both cases - I do not try to convince everyone to move to vinyl, and even less, do not yammer about its "superiority". I also admit that the motorcycle tinkerer might be right if she/he calls spending an afternoon or more aligning a cart dumb. Sure. Just remember we can also be called dumb for owning audio systems... given that you can just use your phone to listen to music; most regular people will agree with that one!

3) It is just more fun to me - pls respect that, same as I respect and have never insulted motorcycle tinkerers - my comment above is my personal opinion, which up until know I have kept to myself - only using it as illustration point.

4) And it is more fun IMHO opinion because of many of the reasons stated in this thread; the tacticle experience, the pride of ownership, the hunt for rare stuff (although I do not partake of that one - mostly new audiophile pressings for me) and yes, how is more conductive to full album listening. And yes, we do not need to be told that you could do that on any format. Again, we are not dumb, you know.. I do full albums ONLY for ANY listening, be it LP, Digital Disc, local files or Streaming.
Vinyl is well, just more conductive to it, since in vinyl, skipping, picking and choosing tracks was done with 45s, no LPs

5) The other issue is this - I am an skeptic and I believe I have the discipline to be an skeptic with myself too. All things being equal - that means assuming that you can achieve perfectly silent vinyl playback, no surface noise, ticks, pops, etc - very hard to impossible, but let's assume is doable; all things being equal I am also skeptical of my ears - probably won't be able to pick a difference. Both digital (even redbook) and vinyl are good enough for my battered hearing. So sometimes I pick the fun way.

6) So yeah yeah - we get it, lots of things wrong with it - it is just fun to do. That is all. This is not about subjective/objetive. Well, only if you are on the objective side! - pretty sure there are also subjective audiophiles that yammer about the superiority of vinyl - but we don't listen to those here! hehe

Remember No. 5 above? I said, "sometimes". Right now listening to JRiver playing some Prestige era Miles, 44.1 KHz 16 bit, whole album, the whole way thru. Which reminds me, it's 4:00 AM in CA. Should get some sleep.



v

 

[anmpr1]

When looking for a vintage record player one has to be very careful. Many quality units that once could be had for throw-away dollars are now commanding relatively high prices. Plus, they are all old and consequently most will require some level of service.

My latest acquisition is a Dual 704 circa 1977. Direct drive. It shows few signs of wear and no abuse. The original cartridge supplied with the deck (Shure V-15 III) looks to have little service, and sounds better than I remember them. This machine came with a bad hum I traced to a faulty RCA connection. That was easily fixed. Tonearm bearings are smooth and tight. No play. The wobbly 'anti-resonant' spring loaded counterweight died after 40+ years--now it's just a regular weight. I'll look around for a NOS counterweight, but that is not a priority. Headshell sleds are still available.

If I was looking for an older Dual I'd try and find something simple. But all Duals are complex in one way or another. 704 is semi-auto; that is, the tonearm must be placed above lead-in groove and lowered. It raises at the end of the record and the machine shuts off. The 721 model from that era is fully automatic, possibly more desirable, and certainly more complex.

Cosmetically 704/721 appear to be a step down from the previous Dual 701. Cost saving on Dual's part? However the tonearm is better in that VTA can be adjusted. I don't think that was possible on the 701. Nevertheless I suspect that a fully serviced 701 in top condition would be more desirable. The 704/721 were the last Duals that, at least for me, I'd search out. The next generation used the ULM (Ultra Low Mass) arm that was essentially wedded to a special OEM Ortofon cartridge. In any case you don't see them on the second hand market much.

 

[anmpr1]

Back when I lusted for all things LP, this was my fantasy tonearm. Funny how things have changed. The price of this tonearm is no longer considered absurd but the arm is unobtanium, at least all by its lonesome:

Three things. When this came out it signaled the price is no object model for tonearms. At least that's how I remember it (although I'm sure there were others). Not saying it wasn't the best, or close to the best. It's just that price-wise I no longer spoke SME's language.

Next, as a cartridge junkie I didn't care if folks said that removable headshells were not the way to go, sonically. Changing cartridges on a fixed headshell tonearm was not what I wanted to do. I didn't follow SME after the Series III (with removable wand)--I presume that they made a Series V with removable shell? I saw a picture of what seemed to be one.

Finally, SME going out of the stand-alone retail tonearm business had to give the second hand market a big boost.

 

[Victor Martell]

LaserDisc

Responding to old comment - but this one made me think - Laserdisc is something that I knew of but did not really know, so I was actually surprised to recently learn that Laserdiscs were analogue! - I am so used to equate optical with digital that never even occurred to me this was possible. Also learned that the characteristics of LaserDisc audio were not fantastic, roughly equivalent to FM Stereo sound - which makes sense, to save bandwidth for video.

But that got me thinking - it is interesting to imagine an alternate history where some company decided to ditch video and turn LaserDisc into the ultimate analogue reproduction technology - solving many issues of both vinyl and reel-to-reel. Now imagine that it was a success - wonder what the audio world would look like now.


v

 

[Robin L]

Responding to old comment - but this one made me think - Laserdisc is something that I knew of but did not really know, so I was actually surprised to recently learn that Laserdiscs were analogue! - I am so used to equate optical with digital that never even occurred to me this was possible. Also learned that the characteristics of LaserDisc audio were not fantastic, roughly equivalent to FM Stereo sound - which makes sense, to save bandwidth for video.

But that got me thinking - it is interesting to imagine an alternate history where some company decided to ditch video and turn LaserDisc into the ultimate analogue reproduction technology - solving many issues of both vinyl and reel-to-reel. Now imagine that it was a success - wonder what the audio world would look like now.


v

For those who collect for the sake of collecting, it would have been a boon. Big format, plenty of room for cover art, having video too would have been great for Discos and other multi-media environments.

But most folks will be glad to stream, or have their music collection easily fit in their pockets. That wouldn't change.