A Couple of Turntable Questions...

[PearlcorderS701]

Calling all cars...

 

[highfigh]

Calling all cars...

What, exactly, hasn't been answered?

 

[Pyrrho]

People who want modern things don't buy turntables. So tradition prevails. If you don't like "Phono", get a CD player, or better yet, get an iPod. Frankly, calling them "turntables" is letting enough modernism into the whole thing, so youngsters like you ought to be satisfied. The player is a phonograph, and it is the platter on which you stick the record and its mechanism that is the turntable portion (the tonearm is not strictly part of the turntable, though people now use the word "turntable" to refer to the whole thing). A turntable is also used to turn trains around:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turntable_(rail)

One could probably also call the mechanism that rotates a CD a turntable, which would lead to all sorts of confusion (a turntable is simply a rotating platform). It is best to refer to the thing as a phonograph or gramophone (in reference to the British upstarts who came out with such a thing years after the Americans made phonographs, so if you like newfangled words, call it a "gramophone").

First of all, you have no idea how old I am -- so the moniker "youngster" is frankly insulting and simply inaccurate here. To add to that, I DO NOT use iPODs or any such nonsense to listen to my music -- AT ALL. So, that wasn't accurate either. Secondly, I DO own a CD player, and that has nothing to do with why I was questioning the "PHONO" label on gear (actually, I own a Marantz CD changer, as evidenced in my signature). Why would I have to buy a CD player just because I don't like the word "Phono" to describe the turntable input? I don't get that...

All I was really asking was why manufacturers continue to use the reference of "PHONO" to describe the turntable inputs on modern day electronics, that's all; it seemed like the "Phonograph" that the reference was undoubtedly based on is honestly prehistoric in sentiment.

It was a lighthearted post, not intended to be taken too seriously.

Simply put, there is no reason to change the name of the input after all of these years. If they did, then it would be confusing to people who are used to the old name, and then when young people bought vintage gear, they would be confused by the old name because they would have learned the new name. Basically, unless there is a compelling reason to relabel things, they ought not be relabeled. There is no compelling reason for manufacturers to rename the phono input on audio gear. The fact that you personally don't like it is not a compelling reason to manufacturers (or anyone else).

And as I lightheartedly pointed out, "turntable" is not a more accurate term for what is hooked up to the phono input. The turntable portion of a phonograph player is not wired up to the input at all; it is the cartridge that is connected to wires in the tone arm that are connected to the output connection of the phonograph. So it would make more sense to call it "cartridge" than "turntable", though it would make the most sense to simply call it what it has been commonly called for many decades.

 

[TLS Guy]

It was a lighthearted post, not intended to be taken too seriously.

We need all the lighthearted posts we can get round this bloke to keep us all from going over the edge!

 

[mtrycrafts]

..

Just to wet the appetite, what is this?

And this?

They are antiques

 

[TLS Guy]

They are antiques

Yes, and also the birth of our hobby. The first Hi-Fi speaker. The first is a picture of Paul Voight"s corner horn speaker and the console contains his electronics.

The other speaker is a later Voight horn. These items are considered the birth of Hi-Fidelity reproduction. Date pre world war II mid thirties. Very cutting edge then. Voight formed with Donald Chave the Lowther company. It is till in business today and is arguably the worlds oldest Hi-Fidelity audio company.

Some how it has so escaped the clutches of the Chinese.

 

[audiofox]

Yes, and also the birth of our hobby. The first Hi-Fi speaker. The first is a picture of Paul Voight"s corner horn speaker and the console contains his electronics.

The other speaker is a later Voight horn. These items are considered the birth of Hi-Fidelity reproduction. Date pre world war II mid thirties. Very cutting edge then. Voight formed with Donald Chave the Lowther company. It is till in business today and is arguably the worlds oldest Hi-Fidelity audio company.

Some how it has so escaped the clutches of the Chinese.

The speaker on the left looks a lot like the JBL Hartsfield from the 1950s, which is also vintage" (as am I!):

 

[PearlcorderS701]

What, exactly, hasn't been answered?

Well, I was getting to the angle which was suggested in a couple of posts back regarding a low-output cart not being suitable for my 8555's phono input...

I just hope, if I get the table I want which is the Technics SL-1200, that its output will be compatible with my receiver's phono input...

 

[PearlcorderS701]

It was a lighthearted post, not intended to be taken too seriously.

No problem; I just didn't react well to the reference of "you youngsters" because I'm honestly not a "kid" who doesn't know the difference between well-made gear and an iPod dock -- I would never play my music through a device such as that, so I just wanted to let you know I was not as young as you may have thought I was, and that I didn't fall off a stereo receiver melon truck just yesterday...

Simply put, there is no reason to change the name of the input after all of these years. If they did, then it would be confusing to people who are used to the old name, and then when young people bought vintage gear, they would be confused by the old name because they would have learned the new name. Basically, unless there is a compelling reason to relabel things, they ought not be relabeled. There is no compelling reason for manufacturers to rename the phono input on audio gear. The fact that you personally don't like it is not a compelling reason to manufacturers (or anyone else).

What gave you the idea that I was suggesting that just because I don't understand the reference the manufacturers should go out and change the labels on their inputs? Why would any sane human being even assume something like that? I was just curious as to why the turntable inputs on modern day gear are still being called "PHONO" without thought to the possibility that because I think it's stodgy and prehistoric the brands should eliminate it. Furthermore, I don't think it makes any difference to the younger people today who may be re-discovering their parents' vinyl collections and getting into records what the label on the input is noted as -- in fact, I think they would even think PHONO is beyond prehistoric in sentiment and would welcome a reference like TRNTBLE or something along those lines...

And as I lightheartedly pointed out, "turntable" is not a more accurate term for what is hooked up to the phono input. The turntable portion of a phonograph player is not wired up to the input at all; it is the cartridge that is connected to wires in the tone arm that are connected to the output connection of the phonograph. So it would make more sense to call it "cartridge" than "turntable", though it would make the most sense to simply call it what it has been commonly called for many decades.

Well, your notion that the comment was "lighthearted" is relative and debatable, at least by my perspective, but moving beyond that, I understand the fact that the "turntable" is not the actual part that's hooked up to the input at all -- but as the device that's hooked up to the input, it should be referred to as such. Why not call a CD player "DAC HOOKUP" when it's connected to a preamp or receiver instead of "CD"? To me, it's the same thing; and to suggest a CD changer could easily be mistaken for a "turntable" and thus could also be hooked up to such an input just seems silly to me.

though it would make the most sense to simply call it what it has been commonly called for many decades.

That's the problem...

 

[TLS Guy]

Well, I was getting to the angle which was suggested in a couple of posts back regarding a low-output cart not being suitable for my 8555's phono input...

I just hope, if I get the table I want which is the Technics SL-1200, that its output will be compatible with my receiver's phono input...

For the last time the turntable has NOTHING to do with your question.

A gramophone deck has three components. The turntable, the pick up arm and the cartridge.

For your question we only need to consider the cartridge.

If the turntable is new order it with an MM cartridge or better buy the turntable and arm without the cartridge and install your own.

If you buy a used turntable, unless you have an operating microscope and know what you are looking at, you throw the stylus and or cartridge away. If the stylus is still available and it is a decent cartridge, a lot are not, then you get a new stylus.

If the stylus is not available, or it is a junk cartridge, the you buy and install one of these. They are the best value around and will work with your Onkyo.

End of story.

 

[highfigh]

Well, I was getting to the angle which was suggested in a couple of posts back regarding a low-output cart not being suitable for my 8555's phono input...

I just hope, if I get the table I want which is the Technics SL-1200, that its output will be compatible with my receiver's phono input...

As Mark pointed out, it's not the turntable that matters when output is considered. A tonearm has wires inside, which connect to a pair of RCA jacks or terminals that allow shielded cables to be connected to them. From the point where the cartridge connects to the headshell at the end of the tonearm, all that's between the cartridge and phono jacks is wires and jacks. You'll never see a turntable with an spec for output, impedance or capacitance- that's the realm of cartridges and phono preamps.

Calling it 'phono' because it has always been called that isn't the problem, the problem is thinking that changing the name will make sense to enough people that it will remove confusion. Worldwide, millions of people know that 'phono' is where the cables from a turntable are inserted. If, as you mentioned, the 'CD' input was called 'DAC', nobody would see a correlation because a DAC is an outboard piece or a section in a player of digital media when it has an analog output. Input locations are always named for the device, not part of the circuit. Deciding on your own that the name is "stodgy and prehistoric", won't make anyone change it. Trust me- nobody else cares enough about the name but if it was suddenly changed, manufacturers would be immediately inundated with calls about where the turntable connects, as they did when they wanted to connect a CD player to a receiver/preamp/integrated amp with Tape/Phono/Aux inputs. They didn't know what an 'Aux' was but they didn't want to plug the cables from the CD player into it.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

As Mark pointed out, it's not the turntable that matters when output is considered. A tonearm has wires inside, which connect to a pair of RCA jacks or terminals that allow shielded cables to be connected to them. From the point where the cartridge connects to the headshell at the end of the tonearm, all that's between the cartridge and phono jacks is wires and jacks. You'll never see a turntable with an spec for output, impedance or capacitance- that's the realm of cartridges and phono preamps.

Okay, I didn't phrase that last statement correctly -- I meant I hope the type of cart that an SL-1200 can accept will be compatible with my receiver...

Calling it 'phono' because it has always been called that isn't the problem, the problem is thinking that changing the name will make sense to enough people that it will remove confusion. Worldwide, millions of people know that 'phono' is where the cables from a turntable are inserted. If, as you mentioned, the 'CD' input was called 'DAC', nobody would see a correlation because a DAC is an outboard piece or a section in a player of digital media when it has an analog output. Input locations are always named for the device, not part of the circuit. Deciding on your own that the name is "stodgy and prehistoric", won't make anyone change it. Trust me- nobody else cares enough about the name but if it was suddenly changed, manufacturers would be immediately inundated with calls about where the turntable connects, as they did when they wanted to connect a CD player to a receiver/preamp/integrated amp with Tape/Phono/Aux inputs. They didn't know what an 'Aux' was but they didn't want to plug the cables from the CD player into it.

But see, that's my point -- calling the CD input "CD" is based on the DEVICE itself, as you stated clearly and which I was trying to elaborate on, which makes sense to all involved. So, my point is, why not call the "Phono" input "TRNTBLE" or something along those lines to emulate a similar situation to "CD"...

The way he was making it sound, his argument would put the name of an input referred to after the mechanism driving it -- but as we discussed here, that just doesn't make sense, and I am saying why not call the input for what it's supposed to house...that is, a turntable...

 

[3db]

Okay, I didn't phrase that last statement correctly -- I meant I hope the type of cart that an SL-1200 can accept will be compatible with my receiver... ..

Ask the person you are getting the turntable from what the make and model number is of that cartridge. If its a MM (moving magnet) , your receiver's phono input will work. If its a MC (moving coil), then you may need to purchase a seperate phono pre-amp capable of handling MC cartridges. MC have even lower output than MM.

 

[highfigh]

Okay, I didn't phrase that last statement correctly -- I meant I hope the type of cart that an SL-1200 can accept will be compatible with my receiver...

But see, that's my point -- calling the CD input "CD" is based on the DEVICE itself, as you stated clearly and which I was trying to elaborate on, which makes sense to all involved. So, my point is, why not call the "Phono" input "TRNTBLE" or something along those lines to emulate a similar situation to "CD"...

The way he was making it sound, his argument would put the name of an input referred to after the mechanism driving it -- but as we discussed here, that just doesn't make sense, and I am saying why not call the input for what it's supposed to house...that is, a turntable...

Posts 2, 6, 11, 12, 16, 20, 30 and 33 answer the question of which cartridge you need if you don't want to buy a MC preamp or have low output (even the output from high output MC carts is less than MM). Why is this bouncing off when it has been answered so many times?

As far as changing the name of the input, there's no reason for them to do that. If someone is confused about where to plug it in, they should look in the receiver's manual. 'Record Player' doesn't fit, 'TRNTBLE' takes up too much space and it's not going to be as intuitive, since 'phono' is more recognizable as part of the word 'phonograph, whether you like it, or not.

You're obsessing about something that isn't important.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Ask the person you are getting the turntable from what the make and model number is of that cartridge. If its a MM (moving magnet) , your receiver's phono input will work. If its a MC (moving coil), then you may need to purchase a seperate phono pre-amp capable of handling MC cartridges. MC have even lower output than MM.

That's pretty much what I wanted to know; thanks, dB.

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Posts 2, 6, 11, 12, 16, 20, 30 and 33 answer the question of which cartridge you need if you don't want to buy a MC preamp or have low output (even the output from high output MC carts is less than MM). Why is this bouncing off when it has been answered so many times?

Bouncing off? At any rate, I didn't see where it was "answered so many times," so my apologies for rubbing you the wrong way -- it seems dB has summed it up in his last post, but I will go back and reread the posts you reference.

As far as changing the name of the input, there's no reason for them to do that. If someone is confused about where to plug it in, they should look in the receiver's manual. 'Record Player' doesn't fit, 'TRNTBLE' takes up too much space and it's not going to be as intuitive, since 'phono' is more recognizable as part of the word 'phonograph, whether you like it, or not.

Again, you are making some of my points for me -- it's not whether I like it or not...it's the fact that it's a "recognizable part of phonograph," which, not only to me, is outdated and pathetically socially irrelevant; I don't think it should read "RECORD PLAYER" (that's a bit far fetched, wouldn't you say?) but I was simply wondering why it's been called "PHONO" all these decades. It's not a matter of someone not knowing where a turntable plugs into and needing to use a manual; that's not why I asked about this.

You're obsessing about something that isn't important.

That's an error in perception on your part -- I'm seriously not obsessing about this; I am merely curious, as a beyond-average enthusiast in the hobby (not quite an audiophile), about why it's been labeled as such all this time...it was really just for the sake of discussion.

 

[ahblaza]

Pearl,
Almost any MM cart. will work with the Onkyo phono input, I agree with TLS the Audio Techica 95E is a bargain at it's asking price and will match up good with the Onkyo, at $50 it's a no brainer, I might also suggest the Denon DL-110 which can be used with the MM phono input of the Onkyo receiver, and maybe down the road you could invest in a decent outboard preamp if you decide you like listening to vinyl. Cheers my friend.
Jeff

 

[PearlcorderS701]

Pearl,
Almost any MM cart. will work with the Onkyo phono input, I agree with TLS the Audio Techica 95E is a bargain at it's asking price and will match up good with the Onkyo, at $50 it's a no brainer, I might also suggest the Denon DL-110 which can be used with the MM phono input of the Onkyo receiver, and maybe down the road you could invest in a decent outboard preamp if you decide you like listening to vinyl. Cheers my friend.
Jeff

Thank you, Jeff. I truly appreciate the input and advice. I have heard about the Denon and its highly rated performance, but I will definitely look into the Audio Technica.

Both of these could be used on a Technics SL-1200?