Budget turntable under $500

Verdinut

Verdinut

Audioholic Spartan
Some of the Living Stereo sessions were recorded in three channels. The multi[channel SACDs of these are in a word, Awesome.
Some of the Mercury Living Presence SACDs were also recorded in three-channel stereo and the sound is amazing. IMO, they are even better than most of the RCA Living Stereo SACDs.
 
Mikado463

Mikado463

Audioholic Spartan
Okay @Mikado463 just what do you get for that additional 5x investment? What do you define/quantify that extra level aside from consumer fetishism?
Lovin, the added investment buys better RCM, cartridge, phono-pre. Whether you want to believe that will make a difference is up to you
 
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Lovin, the added investment buys better RCM, cartridge, phono-pre. Whether you want to believe that will make a difference is up to you
I don't believe I guess and am certainly not going to spend any more on vinyl in my lifetime, whether gear or black pizza....
 
killdozzer

killdozzer

Audioholic Samurai
Whether you want to believe that will make a difference is up to you
And this is my problem. 5k - very real : whether there's enough improvement - belief.

The fact that one might need 5k to get to a 500$ CD-player level reproduction, as you said, might be seen as a good counterargument for vinyl.

I read all the posts in this thread and it seems to me that it comes down to owning a TT because some recordings haven't yet or never will be (if the master is lost) properly transferred to CD. This might be a good reason, but for me it wouldn't justify 5k for TT.

There's a thread on how to choose a good TT here at Audioholics. It was very nice and a surprise to see Floyd Toole putting in his two bits (and this is an understatement of the year:D:D). That gentleman has so much merit, and BTW he got that merit for trying to stay true to the sound itself and not the style or appeal of audio gear and certainly not those "if you believe it, it will be there" approaches to the subject, that, with full respect of your life choices, I'd take his advice.

I'll paraphrase his words: building it expensive is just another way of building it good (as in: it doesn't have to be expensive).

And: a lot of CD's sound bad because they were burned from masters that were prepared for vinyl (as in distorted for vinyl to mitigate the shortcomings of the technology itself).

So, through a bitter irony, a lot of these "vinyl is true to the sound/nature/original etc. music lovers might face the fact that, although they see themselves as true to the word, a lot of original masters were lost because of that exact same technology they hold close to their hearts.

At one point you agreed with someone saying it's about mastering only to say Getz is for vinyl a post or two later. These two claims go against each other unless you used the name Getz as a metonymy.

Personally, I don't have a favourite medium, but I do like records and I grew up with records (I'm left with no TT at the moment, I'll get one). I think a huge deal about records lies with the romantic appeal of the ritual of playing them. I respect this romantic appeal, only I don't respect it more than accuracy. (this is where worldviews start so I'm not getting into that).

I think it's fundamentally wrong to ascribe emotional involvement to a piece of gear. Emotional involvement is inside of you.

This is the damage done by marketing IMHO.

People who speak for all those "not accurate or worse measurements can sound better to me" type of stances like to call "emotional" into the debate and I've noticed that through this they imagine themselves as being more life-like, human, of flash and blood. I think this is false, although I might be just as wrong. I think everything emotional lies with the artist (together with the producer or the sound master) and the listener. Emotional is in people. I think that accuracy is the least we can strive for to honor the artist. This is why I think that it is the "flat frequency response gear" and "accurate gear" lot are actually on the right track.

This is too long. Sorry for that. I see the time is ripe to post an "audio worldview" type of comment in some less serious thread.;)
 
T

Tankman

Audioholic
I went from vinyl to digital for good reasons. I've heard even "better" rigs than mine and they still sounded like....vinyl. Vinyl has limitations and inherent noise that I just don't feel is worth it. Maybe it depends on what recordings you like most. I find there are well produced recordings on both vinyl and digital. I think digital easily outstrips vinyl without much expense. YMMV.
Have you had the opportunity to hear Vinyl done up right? Not talking about your average vinyl setup with low end gear or even mid level gear. Both digital and vinyl in a A/B test? I have it blew CD digital out the door! Totally agree with your statement that digital easily outstrips vinyl, on low end gear even mid level gear. Lots would disagree with you about vinyl.
 
S

sterling shoote

Audioholic Field Marshall
That's fine sterling but the fact that you proclaim to have been in the business of making radio commercials should indicate that you understand the art of 'mastering' and for that both analog and digital have had their fair share of good and bad.

As for my ignorance, I don't claim to be the rocket scientist that you are but my 'acquaintance with the subject' is good enough to know that both digital and analog have their place. I've been involved with both longer than most on here.

I think overall most here have taken my stance that analog is the end all, that's is not what I'm trying to point out. there are good entry level analog rigs (like which have been talked about here) and there are others that do in fact bring it to another level. Simply put it costs a lot more to do analog well than it does digital ....... and I do like both !
You apparently have not been "involved" enough to understand much of anything, as you're from a liberal world where facts can not get in the way of emotion. It's childish, like your arguments here. BTW, there's a support group, or safe place for you, that you may want to visit, it's the Vinyl Engine forum. You'll find plenty of emotion there, with few facts to disturb you. You'll fit right in there, very comfortably.
 
Last edited:
S

sterling shoote

Audioholic Field Marshall
Have you had the opportunity to hear Vinyl done up right? Not talking about your average vinyl setup with low end gear or even mid level gear. Both digital and vinyl in a A/B test? I have it blew CD digital out the door! Totally agree with your statement that digital easily outstrips vinyl, on low end gear even mid level gear. Lots would disagree with you about vinyl.
Have you ever heard analog tape done up right? I'm talking about analog tape masters from which a record is produced? Surely you would not doubt that it would sound better than the record, right? After all, at the least, no pops and clicks and, perhaps, greater fidelity. Thing is, those tapes have noise, which must be addressed by analog or digital noise reduction methods, all adversely effecting a good outcome. So, when analog recordings are factually and aurally compared and contrasted with digital recordings, the clearly superior recording technology is unmasked; and, it is not analog.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, DAT recorders, pretty much wiped out analog reel to reel back in the early 1990's for a multitude of reasons, the foremost being better sound. I still have a pair of Sony PCM-7010's hooked up to a Sony RM-D7200 edit controller, which I use today, not for the nostalgia of it, but for the magnificent sound, that, so far, has not been surpassed as I've heard it from any later technology, or warmed over earlier technologies.
24641850610_4da97510b2_z.jpg
 
Last edited:
T

Tankman

Audioholic
Have you ever heard analog tape done up right? I'm talking about analog tape masters from which a record is produced? Surely you would not doubt that it would sound better than the record, right? After all, at the least, no pops and clicks and, perhaps, greater fidelity. Thing is, those tapes have noise, which must be addressed by analog or digital noise reduction methods, all adversely effecting a good outcome. So, when analog recordings are factually and aurally compared and contrasted with digital recordings, the clearly superior recording technology is unmasked; and, it is not analog.

As I mentioned in an earlier post, DAT recorders, pretty much wiped out analog reel to reel back in the early 1990's for a multitude of reasons, the foremost being better sound. I still have a pair of Sony PCM-7010's hooked up to a Sony RM-D7200 edit controller, which I use today, not for the nostalgia of it, but for the magnificent sound, that, so far, has not been surpassed as I've heard it from any later technology, or warmed over earlier technologies.View attachment 21050
Nice post! I enjoyed the read. Very valid point you made about the noise level in with just a analog source ,sometimes with tape, or be it vinyl. But no I haven't heard tape on a very high end system. No vinyl,tape,analog is not the end-all of best, even tubes. My point about vinyl blowing CD out the door when done right over digital? I stand by my statement. Vinyl done upright with a 180g virgin vinyl pressed black red green and white. The noise,Wow and flutter Rumble and so on will not be heard. The song reproduction from a well done upright vinyl system is astonishing. Same applies to tape or digital tape. I have heard it, was a piece of gear in the mix digital to help remove some of the noise or all of it sure there was. and without it. still blew digital CD Source out the door. Dynamics can be overrated sometimes you know. Agree totally digital CD strips vinyl it reveal the noise factor with analog. End result at the speakers is analog, I guess some CD player or digital source be it streaming music or whatever has much better DACs in the gear to help the Source sound more like analog...;)
 
Last edited:
lovinthehd

lovinthehd

Audioholic Jedi
Have you had the opportunity to hear Vinyl done up right? Not talking about your average vinyl setup with low end gear or even mid level gear. Both digital and vinyl in a A/B test? I have it blew CD digital out the door! Totally agree with your statement that digital easily outstrips vinyl, on low end gear even mid level gear. Lots would disagree with you about vinyl.
Some recordings are quite good, no doubt. I could care less who agrees with me as to use of vinyl, and I do continue to use it occasionally...I just don't put it on a pedestal.
 
3db

3db

Audioholic Slumlord
Can we get this thread back on track and stop the emotional bickering as to the preference of the mediums. Two points here; one does not need 5K to make vinyl sound very very good. I thought of my Tom Petty's Mojo example when it dawned on me that all my recent purchases of blues music from the George Mitchel series on vinyl from "Fat Possum records" sound equally good on the 320MPS download as the vinyl version. My 2nd point is just enjoy the music that's on the medium. :)
 
T

Tankman

Audioholic
Can we get this thread back on track and stop the emotional bickering as to the preference of the mediums. Two points here; one does not need 5K to make vinyl sound very very good. I thought of my Tom Petty's Mojo example when it dawned on me that all my recent purchases of blues music from the George Mitchel series on vinyl from "Fat Possum records" sound equally good on the 320MPS download as the vinyl version. My 2nd point is just enjoy the music that's on the medium. :)
Well said, now I have a post to go delete. My emotions get the best of me with this hobby sometimes.lolo..:mad:..:confused:...:D..gotta just love the music first! Never trust a man who doesn't like music I always say.:D

Mike.
 
newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top