Why do records sound so much better than digital?

[rdenney]

I see that but I don't see ths forum as the place for it to be done.
Nothing genuinely new has come out about playing records for decades and most of what was known about record manufacture and playing when I was involved almost 50 years ago is just as true today.
There are plenty of places to read about record players, almost every hifi forum in English in fact, and IMO, it would be a shame for this forum to join in when it is a nice logical place of relative calm and good sense for the time being.

I get that, Frank, but the signal/noise ratio is fairly low on those other forums, to be honest. But a bigger issue is that a lot of what was available in studies 50 years ago isn't available any more, or at least it isn't easy to find.

Example: I have an Audio Technica AT-440mla cartridge. This cartridge is known to be "bright", and taming the emphasized treble requires using the correct capacitive loading. Fine. But what is "correct", and how does frequency response change with capacitive loading. On other forums, I only get anecdotes without sufficient detail to tell me how to set up my own system. So, I have to do measurements myself. But wait! The test records I might use are crap, so I'm wasting my time. Some say the Thorens cables are great, some say they are crap, but I haven't see any measurements of them (I just bought a new-old capacitance meter so I can make my own measurements, but haven't gotten to it yet). I'm using the phono preamp in my Adcom GFP565, which at the time was considered one of the best phono preamps available in active preamps that mortals could afford. But the measurements of that preamp only included RIAA accuracy--nothing to support the poetry. The cartridge doesn't sound bright to me, but maybe my 62-year-old ears are applying the necessary EQ.

There's lots of information about how to repair the suspension on an old Thorens table like mine. There's lots of stuff on how to service the bearings. There are lots of articles about how to install different tonearms, or how to tweak the factory tonearm. There are lots of statements that the factory tonearm is poor, but this is not backed up by any data that I can find. There are lots of warnings about using the published compliance, because it is measured at different frequencies than the popular formulas use, but the solution is "multiply by two or so." There's lots of poetry about dust cover up, dust cover down, dust cover removed, etc., but I don't see any test results to show what these differences are and the importance of the effect. There are those who proclaim the wonderfulness of external power supplies for these, and I think there are advantages to using them, the main one being fine speed control and the secondary benefit being able to use the 45-RPM step on the pulley (which is larger and therefore will suffer less hysteresis and wear). But that is just supposition--nobody out there has put those power supplies on a scope to determine if their sine wave is clean enough to drive an inductive motor with minimal noise. Mine works well enough, I suppose, but that's just more FUD.

You were in the industry--knowledge you take for granted may not be as available or as easy to find as you think. I've spent quite a lot of effort exploring those topics on other forums, and 99% of the time I'm yelling at the computer--just answer the **** question! I own a lot of vinyl records, and even if I only ever play them once to record them to the computer, I want to do it on a system that is as optimal as possible.

Even the luminaries on this forum are complaining about having to resort to subjective language to describe their own turntable usage.

Rick "yes, mixing two threads" Denney

 

[Frank Dernie]

This is what interests me about it, and I'm sure several others here. There's nothin mentally challenging for me in a manufacturer squeezing another dB of SINAD out of their DAC implementation. I'm fully aware that there's no trail-blazing in records; just re-learning things beginning to be lost in time.

I don't think the topic is counter to logic, calm, or good sense. I'm not aware of many (any?) places to discuss record players today that aren't dominated by nonsense. Would be nice to have one.

Yes I find DAC measurements largely pointless too.
My concern is that record players are spectacularly complicated with strong cross effects which won't be properly revealed by measurement particularly easily or clearly.
Here are a few things off the top of my head which will effect the sound of a record player which are not universally applicable for all examples of arms, cartridges or turntables.
Effect of the support - it will effect some turntables more and/or differently than others.
Cartridges with a lot of damping will excite the arm at higher frequency which will have a different effect on different arms, so no such thing as an absolute cartridge or arm measurement is actually possible.
Some arms which are fine with one cartridge may have problems with another and whilst a tendency may be evident the whole point of measurement is lost if it isn't widely applicable IMO.

OTOH the influence of some things, different stylus profiles and tracking distortion for example, is calculable to a level of accuracy way beyond the accuracy of test records, so objective testing is sort of pointless. Just use the data.

I am pretty relaxed about having quite a lot of LPs and just playing them, accepting them for what they are, I do realise I am a bit fortunate to have a selection of good quality record players to play them on though and decades of experience setting them up and servicing them.

It just seems an apparently simple question with a huge spectrum of complex answer.

 

[Bob from Florida]

I see that but I don't see ths forum as the place for it to be done.
Nothing genuinely new has come out about playing records for decades and most of what was known about record manufacture and playing when I was involved almost 50 years ago is just as true today.
There are plenty of places to read about record players, almost every hifi forum in English in fact, and IMO, it would be a shame for this forum to join in when it is a nice logical place of relative calm and good sense for the time being.

The top of the page on this forum site has the below.

WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Looks like audio discussion is encouraged. I don't see anything about inclusion or exclusion of a particular format.

 

[DSJR]

Servicing Thorens suspensions - Now, where do I begin

Actually, from the mid 70's Td160 models, Thorens put a hole in the top plate, sub chassis at the nine o'clock position as viewed from the top and viewed through one of the outer platter 'keyholes,' these holes do help to get the sub chassis centred - the later decks had cam washers under the springs to tilt the sub chassis around and about - takes some practise though. Earlier models are more tricky and my TD125 (which I should have kept), had a bent spring (from the factory?) which didn't help... I did a much modified TD150 recently which had been butchered by numerous former keepers and it was all but impossible to get a clean bounce...

 

[Leporello]

The top of the page on this forum site has the below.

WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Looks like audio discussion is encouraged. I don't see anything about inclusion or exclusion of a particular format.

On the other hand it could be argued that vinyl and turntables will not advance the art of audio in any way. True, vinyl is experiencing a small scale renaissance but its popularity is mainly based on nostalgia and several misconceptions of audio reproduction. It is very much a part of faith based audio, hardly a fertile ground for quality audio discussion.

 

[rdenney]

Servicing Thorens suspensions - Now, where do I begin

Actually, from the mid 70's Td160 models, Thorens put a hole in the top plate, sub chassis at the nine o'clock position as viewed from the top and viewed through one of the outer platter 'keyholes,' these holes do help to get the sub chassis centred - the later decks had cam washers under the springs to tilt the sub chassis around and about - takes some practise though. Earlier models are more tricky and my TD125 (which I should have kept), had a bent spring (from the factory?) which didn't help... I did a much modified TD150 recently which had been butchered by numerous former keepers and it was all but impossible to get a clean bounce...

Yes, I get a squeaky bounce on my TD166, and what you have said already gives me something to try that I don't recall seeing elsewhere. It may be a bent spring, too. Clearly it is a spring that is rubbing something where it shouldn't.

Rick "only squeaks on larger excursions, though" Denney

 

[Robin L]

The top of the page on this forum site has the below.

WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Looks like audio discussion is encouraged. I don't see anything about inclusion or exclusion of a particular format.

Also note that this forum has a very high bias towards measurements. So anything related to LPs, including the reproduction devices for LPs, will be looked down upon by the hoi polloi of this group on account of the poor measurements that are baked into the media. The noise floor of a phono preamp at is best isn't as good as a $150 DAC, but the actual noise floor is going to be determined by the rumble of the turntable and the record surfaces, which will [almost] always be worse than the phone pre. Similarly, the distortion of the phono pre is probably going to be better than the distortion of the phono cartridge, while distortion of the LP will be determined by other factors, added on top of the distortion of the preamp and the cartridge, with the distortion of the LP increasing as the stylus approaches the deadwax.

In a measurements oriented group, this sort of performance [and the Rube Goldberg complexity of LP replay] will draw derision from those aware of the poor performance standards of LP reproduction.

 

[rdenney]

On the other hand it could be argued that vinyl and turntables will not advance the art of audio in any way. True, vinyl is experiencing a small scale renaissance but its popularity is mainly based on nostalgia and several misconceptions of audio reproduction. It is very much a part of faith based audio, hardly a fertile ground for quality audio discussion.

Nostalgic, perhaps. But there are many, many users of vinyl playback, evidenced at length in this and other threads, who are not demonstrating faith-based misconceptions at all.

Look, people have stuff and they want it to work as best it can. They apply constraints based on how they approach the hobby, but last I studied optimization theory, constraints and objective functions ain't the same thing. If we really only want to talk what can be fully optimized barring constraints, the topics become very boring:

DACs: Typically transparent even at low price points. Really nothing much more to talk about. But they are easy to measure so they get measured.
Amps: Often transparent, even into difficult loads, at surprisingly low price points. And if we lower the standard to what most people can actually hear playing real music, the population of audibly transparent amps extends far beyond the small handful at the left end of Amir's SINAD chart.
Speakers: We know a lot more than we used to about what makes a speaker sound good in a given room. Still stuff to be done here, but experimentation is expensive and difficult.
Headphones and headamps: Pardon me while I take a snooze. Give me a decent and inexpensive pair of headphones and I don't care beyond that. Headphones excite my tinnitus far more than speakers do, even at lower listening levels than with the speakers.
Rooms: They are what they are, and subject to much greater variation than those turntables, yet we still talk a lot about them.
Preamps: Get a DAC with a preamp in it. Don't need a phono preamp because phonographs are so...crappy.
CD's: Who plays CD's any more? Irrelevant. Just get a subscription. Don't have fast internet? Want to enjoy the library you've already paid for? Not my problem.
Vintage equipment: That's Restorer_John's domain--nobody else needs to pay attention to vintage stuff

I mean, this gets pretty boring if we only talk about stuff that has S/N over 100 dB.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Vinyl demonstrates to us that the quality we think we need is a lot higher than what we actually need to enjoy music playback. It also demonstrates that limiting audio discussions only to what pushes boundaries is no more broadly relevant than limiting it only to, say, vintage equipment.

Rick "the perfect is the enemy of the good" Denney

 

[DSJR]

Yes, I get a squeaky bounce on my TD166, and what you have said already gives me something to try that I don't recall seeing elsewhere. It may be a bent spring, too. Clearly it is a spring that is rubbing something where it shouldn't.

Rick "only squeaks on larger excursions, though" Denney

What's the model guv'nor? TD166 - DUH!!! May be worth finding a cast inner platter with correct size spindle but I'm being anal here...

Make sure the plinth is level - very important on these as not level tilts the top-heavy suspension over a bit. With deck level, gently hold the centre spindle and move it back and forth and side to side - there should be some lateral free movement with no binding. Make sure the belt is a Thorens or Thakker one - third party types are thicker, pull the suspension a little more and also, prevent the speed change parts working, which was one of the things wrong with mine when I inherited it (the former keeper didn't know about belt differences). Trouble is, this 160mk2 runs slightly fast (like most Regas) on the stock belt but spot on with the third party one (it's physics and maths as to why I gather). Being Linn trained, I can sort these out fairly quickly with a little reminding practise, but it can take the less experienced ages to sort (when I started with the Lp12, no two were the same and they each needed something different doing to them to work properly - they're much better these days thank gawd). The motor block to switch cables can foul the sub chassis so check these and also the tonearm exit wires must be carefully dressed - original 160 plinths have a proper anchorage point for said cable but third party 'upgraded' ones don't and this is daft and critical for correct suspension operation. The cueing device cable must be clear as well.

There should be absolutely no need to remove the springs and take it from one who knows, you'll have a devil of a job if you do and then need to centre it all up - the grommets ain't like an LP12 and designed to be rotated... if you stand the deck on coffee jars or tall tins with bottom off, exercise the suspension and gently touch each spring one at a time to discover which is squeaking

All good fun init? Hope it puts you lot off vinyl for life!!!!!

 

[JP]

Yes I find DAC measurements largely pointless too.
My concern is that record players are spectacularly complicated with strong cross effects which won't be properly revealed by measurement particularly easily or clearly.

Exactly. A bonafide challenge.

It just seems an apparently simple question with a huge spectrum of complex answer.

I'd think the audience here, at least the interested regulars, full well know there's very little that's simple about vinyl. It's the complexity that I personally find interesting. I understand a lot of this is very old-hat to you, but you've knowledge on the subject that nearly no one else does.

In a measurements oriented group, this sort of performance [and the Rube Goldberg complexity of LP replay] will draw derision from those aware of the poor performance standards of LP reproduction.

I can see the propensity for derision from the 'uninterested informed' for the 'uninformed' (sadly), but doubtful there would be derision toward the 'interested informed'. Thus far I've only seen one person who is completely uninterested in vinyl feel the need to regularly say so in vinyl threads, albeit in a rather benign manner, and those that feel the need to be derisive likely won't be so selective in what they target. Other's simply don't participate in what doesn't interest them, though it's appreciated when they lend experience and insight.

 

[rdenney]

What's the model guv'nor? TD166 - DUH!!! May be worth finding a cast inner platter with correct size spindle but I'm being anal here...

Make sure the plinth is level - very important on these as not level tilts the top-heavy suspension over a bit. With deck level, gently hold the centre spindle and move it back and forth and side to side - there should be some lateral free movement with no binding. Make sure the belt is a Thorens or Thakker one - third party types are thicker, pull the suspension a little more and also, prevent the speed change parts working, which was one of the things wrong with mine when I inherited it (the former keeper didn't know about belt differences). Trouble is, this 160mk2 runs slightly fast (like most Regas) on the stock belt but spot on with the third party one (it's physics and maths as to why I gather). Being Linn trained, I can sort these out fairly quickly with a little reminding practise, but it can take the less experienced ages to sort (when I started with the Lp12, no two were the same and they each needed something different doing to them to work properly - they're much better these days thank gawd). The motor block to switch cables can foul the sub chassis so check these and also the tonearm exit wires must be carefully dressed - original 160 plinths have a proper anchorage point for said cable but third party 'upgraded' ones don't and this is daft and critical for correct suspension operation. The cueing device cable must be clear as well.

There should be absolutely no need to remove the springs and take it from one who knows, you'll have a devil of a job if you do and then need to centre it all up - the grommets ain't like an LP12 and designed to be rotated... if you stand the deck on coffee jars or tall tins with bottom off, exercise the suspension and gently touch each spring one at a time to discover which is squeaking

All good fun init? Hope it puts you lot off vinyl for life!!!!!

1. Level plinth. Check. I replaced the feet with adjustable feet, and have a bubble level permanently residing on the deck top, so I can check the platter easily.
2. Free lateral movement. Check.
3. Proper Thorens-branded belt. Check. The speed derailleur works fine, but I leave it on the 45RPM end of the pulley and use a Music Hall power supply to change the speed to 33.3 using by reducing the frequency of the AC power. That also allowed me to adjust the speed.
4. I've checked the cables and wires under the deck but I will check those again.
5. Cueing device is clear. Check.
6. Centering the springs--D'OH! I carefully set their level, but didn't realize they were on eccentric cams for centering.

I also carefully adjusted the bearings on the TP-11Mk3 tonearm. And I spent a couple of hours very carefully mounting the cartridge, not that I have any idea how sensitive the outcome is to that. Antiskate is a bit tricky with that tonearm. I finally adjusted to adjust the channel levels, and that's given me the best results so far.

Rick "more to fiddle with" Denney

 

[Frank Dernie]

The top of the page on this forum site has the below.

WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

Looks like audio discussion is encouraged. I don't see anything about inclusion or exclusion of a particular format.

No problem with discussions, and we have had plenty over the years. What I have taken issue with in several posts is the idea of doing official measurements here, which is futile IME as I have explained often enough.
I am out of this discussion.

 

[Wes]

The best discussions would be which albums are not available on CD or files (like the Brian Auger one I cannot find), and the thread I started for people to post which LP releases sound better than CD.

 

[JP]

... What I have taken issue with in several posts is the idea of doing official measurements here, which is futile IME as I have explained often enough...

What, like Amir measuring a turntable? Sure, far too many variables to make that remotely useful. I'd be ecstatic to see proper measurements of a phono stage.

Perhaps that's where the disconnect is; I didn't see that we were discussing official measurements, rather discussing members discussing vinyl playback.

 

[LTig]

My concern is that record players are spectacularly complicated with strong cross effects which won't be properly revealed by measurement particularly easily or clearly.
Here are a few things off the top of my head which will effect the sound of a record player which are not universally applicable for all examples of arms, cartridges or turntables.
Effect of the support - it will effect some turntables more and/or differently than others.
Cartridges with a lot of damping will excite the arm at higher frequency which will have a different effect on different arms, so no such thing as an absolute cartridge or arm measurement is actually possible.
Some arms which are fine with one cartridge may have problems with another and whilst a tendency may be evident the whole point of measurement is lost if it isn't widely applicable IMO.

OTOH the influence of some things, different stylus profiles and tracking distortion for example, is calculable to a level of accuracy way beyond the accuracy of test records, so objective testing is sort of pointless. Just use the data.

I think it would make sense to gather all the valuable knowledge in a thread in the Audio Reference Library forum.

 

[Frank Dernie]

What, like Amir measuring a turntable? Sure, far too many variables to make that remotely useful. I'd be ecstatic to see proper measurements of a phono stage.

I have been conflating this thread and the "turntable reviews" thread in my mind, they are both running at the same time and I am seeing a mix of the replies.
Mea culpa

 

[rdenney]

I have been conflating this thread and the "turntable reviews" thread in my mind, they are both running at the same time and I am seeing a mix of the replies.
Mea culpa

Me, too.

Rick “guilt as charged” Denney

 

[JP]

Hadn't seen that thread. Just read it. Agree with Frank.

 

[MRC01]

It [LP] does [sound better]. It's more dynamic, natural, live, the instruments are clearer in space, Lou Reed (who's talking as much as singing) seems like he's in the room, having a conversation with me. ...

This is a subjective impression. To me, my best LPs sound very good, but my best digital recordings sound more real.

I guess distortion sounds better.

I suspect this is the reason LP sounds better to many people: either the distortion is euphonic, or the processing applied to cut to LP (summing bass to mono, limiting levels, etc.) is euphonic.

Are you saying that the "magic" disappears for you if you digitize the output of your turntable and play that?

This is an important point. In my case, LPs I captured to high quality digital sound the same on digital. When I play them back and A/B compare against the vinyl, there is a very slight barely audible difference, but it is so subtle that it doesn't change the fact that the digital recording of the LP captures that distinctive sound, which occasionally can be magically euphonic -- at least, to me.

 

[Bob from Florida]

Just read the "turntable measurement" thread. I can sense some frustration there. Shipping turntables to Amir for testing has more than the usual shipping risks. Might be more practical to have a good table on hand for cartridge comparisons and phono stage evaluations. Something along the lines of the entry level Clearaudio tables that have the magnetic ceramic spindle bearing. That bearing "floats" the platter - which should minimize some of the vibrations from whatever the turntable is sitting on. None of the better made stuff is cheap - unless you consider the Shiit Sol. Not the most attractive table to look at - but the price is pretty good for a brand new turntable.