Turntable update needed.........perhaps, perhaps not

[highfigh]

I agree with the comment that you are comparing apples and oranges. We all know that digital provides for more dynamic range, lower noise and higher accuracy than vinyl. So they will only sound the same if someone masters the recordings to sound the same. Regardless of the playback system, two mastering jobs will sound different. Regardless of the recording system, every recording gets mastered or adjusted by a sound engineer. Apples and oranges. If you want a different viny playback system then buy one. There is no way people on the internet who have never heard your system can suggest anything meaningful.

WRT dynamic range, not necessarily- the digital file will determine the dynamic range. Many digital format recordings have had the dynamic range squeezed to about 6dB, which is far less than most LPs.

 

[Mikado463]

There is no way people on the internet who have never heard your system can suggest anything meaningful.

Not true, if you read through the posts here you would have seen those that are relevant and helpfull......

 

[lovinthehd]

And that would be similar to close to 2000 LPs, if they average 45 minutes. That's pretty good, considering the fact that the vinyl contains Carbon Black, which is the same stuff that makes car tires black and is very abrasive.

I duplicated a good % of my vinyl on CD and because this was at/near the beginning of CDs, the sound wasn't particularly great, but they were convenient and consistent. I always thought the low end was lacking some fullness that I missed and when I listen to high quality pressings on LP, it's there. Obviously, this could very well be a bias due to familiarity, but as I have posted many times, my listening is less "I care if this equipment sounds good" and "does this sound good, regardless of the format?". The bass from my setup isn't bloated, boomy or muddy and I don't use a sub, partly because it would be difficult and extremely expensive to achieve the low end that I really like.

I will say that the sound of some of the remastered music I have heard is outstanding- the original mixes in some cases were absolutely horrible, so an AB comparison would never end in the LP being preferred.

As usual, depends on the actual recording. Some talk about cd as if every recording is overly compressed, which may be true in some cases, but depends what you choose....there's vinyl that had similar issues, it wasn't always mastered well let alone the physical production issues (lps with poor vinyl quality, warps, off center, maybe too long a production run, etc). I don't recall being disappointed by cd versions very often for what I duplicated (but then with modern tech you can easily rip the vinyl into a digital version for playback purposes).

 

[fmw]

WRT dynamic range, not necessarily- the digital file will determine the dynamic range. Many digital format recordings have had the dynamic range squeezed to about 6dB, which is far less than most LPs.

Fair enough. I meant that digital is capable of more dynamic range. It is obvious in well recorded music and easily meaured..

 

[highfigh]

Fair enough. I meant that digital is capable of more dynamic range. It is obvious in well recorded music and easily meaured..

Net dynamic range, yes but apparent dynamic range, not necessarily. In digital, there's no clean signal above 0dB on the VU meters, whereas tape can go to at least +4dBVU before distortion becomes audible to some- if a digital recording passes 0VU, the wheels fall off and it sounds like crap. That leaves it in a place where the only way to make the sound seem to be louder is through processing. All other things being equal, several recordings may sound completely different if uncompressed but once the studio trickery enters the picture, one may sound much louder than others. This trickery isn't generally used in Classical music, but in other genres, it is but how much depends on the music and producer(s)/engineer(s). If an LP has a dynamic range of 70dB and a digital file/disc/tape has dynamic range of 96dB, the difference is very large but at -70dB--96dB, there's not much going on and a lot of it is obscured by ambient noise. Also, the background of a digital recording isn't always totally silent- the engineers often use something called 'dither' to obscure certain distortions and this reduces the bit depth of the file. The first time I read about this was in the early-'80s and the writer compared it to hearing noise on an LP or tape when nothing else was making any sound in the room but when a fan or there's a fire in the fireplace, the noise from those sources masked the noise in the music. This reduces the digital file's dynamic range, even if it's inaudible- if someone wanted a totally noise-free background with LPs and tapes, they could use a very good noise gate and if that's set up properly, it's functioning would be inaudible.

What Is Dither and Does It Matter?

While it may not be as popular of a tool as your trusty EQ or compressor, dithering plug-ins are essential for producing professional-sounding tracks—especially if you plan on streaming. In this blog, you'll learn about how dither works and how to use it while mastering.

www.masteringthemix.com

 

[fmw]

I certainly agree that digital is less forgiving when it comes to clipping. But I think it is an overstatement to say that everything above 0VU is a potential disaster. It would depend on how much clipping occurred and for how long. I think you can get away with your 4db in digital recording if it is instantaneous. We are pretty good at hearing distortion when it is sustained. But it can become lost in an instantaneous hit.

Yes digital doesn't eliminate all noise. It just eliminates the analog tape hiss and the noise related to a stylus contacting a vinyl groove. Controlling ambient noise has more to do with mic type and placement than the medium onto which we record in my experience. I have some experience at recording live music. I have recorded to an Ampex tape deck, a Panasonic DAT and to a hard drive. Great recordings can happen with both analog and digital but I prefer digital at both ends of the music reproduction chain.

I've been involved in audio since I was a boy the 1950's so I was involved way before digital recording. I had a HiFi system before stereo arrived thanks to my father. I still have a record collection and a turntable (two of them actually). I rarely use them because I have dubbed most of my vinyl collection to digital and I stopped buying vinyl decades ago. I find digital to be superior in every respect and feel that I lose nothing when listening to a well made dub. I think we probably agree for the most part.

 

[sterling shoote]

You know I have been playing The Rolling Stones half speed master record on my Dual CS 5000 turntable with the Audioacoustic ZenII stabilizer and it sounds great. I recently changed my stylus with a new Grado gold one. I compared it to the CD and I definitely like it better than the CD.

So I'm thinking to myself, do I really need to upgrade my turntable and cartridge? How much of a difference am I going to hear? How much of a difference will I hear with a more expensive phono preamp compared to what is in my NAD preamp? Do I really need to spend more money when I am happy with what I have?

For curiosity sake, I'm thinking about getting something like the $500 Parasound phone preamp and then spend money on expensive RCA cables and do a A/B with what I already have. If the improvement is less than 5%, I could send it back. If the improvement is more than 5%, keep it and just stick with my turntable for now.

On the forums there is this push to always get new and improved, but sometimes we have to draw the line and just say, you know what, I'm really happy with what I have.

5 years ago, having been exposed to a disease called boredom, I became delusional enough that I purchased a Technics SL-1210GR Turntable, thinking its feature set would surely enhance my LP listening pleasure over that from my then 44 year old Sony PS-4750. At any rate, experimentation suggested that the $1,700 spent on the Technics did not deliver a better listening experience in any manner, although it did promote recognition for a preference for certain cartridges, which were part of my turntable evaluation scheme. The bottom-line is I discovered my old Shure V15 Type III Cartridge fitted with a Jico SAS-B Stylus Assembly, whether mounted to the Sony or the Technics, delivered a natural lifelike tone from LPs, which, on occasion, either rivaled or surpassed entertainment from any digital means to recorded music. This new found pleasure from LPs was only crushed by snap, crackle, and pop LP defects, which was enough of a distraction to cause me to completely abandon any notion I had for returning to LP media and now all of my discretionary income goes to buying 5.1 hybrid SACDs. Thus, my two turntables are one too many and are mostly only fired up now to enjoy LPs I have inherited from my mother-in-law. My thoughts on the whole matter of Record Players in this age, is they are a novelty, yet I understand the belief of those who pour unbelievable amounts of money into it, that some sort of satisfaction is going to materialize from their expenditure. So, to the OP, I'd advise this, if you can stomach snap, crackle, and pop then consider a turntable which can easily accommodate cartridge interchange to permit indulgence in cartridge evaluation, since it's the cartridge which most effects your impression of what you hear from an LP.

 

[Mikado463]

5 years ago, having been exposed to a disease called boredom, I became delusional enough that I purchased a Technics SL-1210GR Turntable, thinking its feature set would surely enhance my LP listening pleasure over that from my then 44 year old Sony PS-4750. At any rate, experimentation suggested that the $1,700 spent on the Technics did not deliver a better listening experience in any manner, although it did promote recognition for a preference for certain cartridges, which were part of my turntable evaluation scheme. The bottom-line is I discovered my old Shure V15 Type III Cartridge fitted with a Jico SAS-B Stylus Assembly, whether mounted to the Sony or the Technics, delivered a natural lifelike tone from LPs, which, on occasion, either rivaled or surpassed entertainment from any digital means to recorded music. This new found pleasure from LPs was only crushed by snap, crackle, and pop LP defects, which was enough of a distraction to cause me to completely abandon any notion I had for returning to LP media and now all of my discretionary income goes to buying 5.1 hybrid SACDs. Thus, my two turntables are one too many and are mostly only fired up now to enjoy LPs I have inherited from my mother-in-law. My thoughts on the whole matter of Record Players in this age, is they are a novelty, yet I understand the belief of those who pour unbelievable amounts of money into it, that some sort of satisfaction is going to materialize from their expenditure. So, to the OP, I'd advise this, if you can stomach snap, crackle, and pop then consider a turntable which can easily accommodate cartridge interchange to permit indulgence in cartridge evaluation, since it's the cartridge which most effects your impression of what you hear from an LP. View attachment 54510

Sterlings above post brings up a very valid point......

If one is to seriously embrace LP playback and hope to enjoy it with a max amount of satisfaction then 'cleanliness is next to Godliness' and IMO a good RCM is a must. FWIW I utilize a VPI 16.5 and a Degrittor ultrsonic.

 

[highfigh]

I certainly agree that digital is less forgiving when it comes to clipping. But I think it is an overstatement to say that everything above 0VU is a potential disaster. It would depend on how much clipping occurred and for how long. I think you can get away with your 4db in digital recording if it is instantaneous. We are pretty good at hearing distortion when it is sustained. But it can become lost in an instantaneous hit.

Yes digital doesn't eliminate all noise. It just eliminates the analog tape hiss and the noise related to a stylus contacting a vinyl groove. Controlling ambient noise has more to do with mic type and placement than the medium onto which we record in my experience. I have some experience at recording live music. I have recorded to an Ampex tape deck, a Panasonic DAT and to a hard drive. Great recordings can happen with both analog and digital but I prefer digital at both ends of the music reproduction chain.

I've been involved in audio since I was a boy the 1950's so I was involved way before digital recording. I had a HiFi system before stereo arrived thanks to my father. I still have a record collection and a turntable (two of them actually). I rarely use them because I have dubbed most of my vinyl collection to digital and I stopped buying vinyl decades ago. I find digital to be superior in every respect and feel that I lose nothing when listening to a well made dub. I think we probably agree for the most part.

AFAIK, the digital format doesn't have a way to record higher than 0VU because it would require more than 16 bits and that was the original consumer format, so it goes bad immediately even with error correction unless, as you wrote, it's only a short transient. I have heard short duration distortion in digital audio and it wouldn't have been from overdriving the input to the playback equipment. They also used to say that digital doesn't have a way to express noise, but here we are.

What software did you use for your vinyl and how did you eliminate the noise?

 

[highfigh]

Sterlings above post brings up a very valid point......

If one is to seriously embrace LP playback and hope to enjoy it with a max amount of satisfaction then 'cleanliness is next to Godliness' and IMO a good RCM is a must. FWIW I utilize a VPI 16.5 and a Degrittor ultrsonic.

Here ya go- I did some work on an older Nitty Gritty record cleaner- inside, it looked like a bad science fair project. All of the wires were red, they had crudely cut a piece of 4x4 to support the bottle used to hold the cleaning fluid, they had cut the bottom of the bottle to allow screwing it to the block and sealed it with Silicone, it was noise as all get out and did a bad job of cleaning.

Nitty Gritty Record Cleaner - Page 2

elusivedisc.com

The cleaner borrowed by the owner of the Nitty Gritty was a joke- it had two spinning paint roller covers like the ones in the photo, presumably to remove some of the liquid but they barely made contact with the record surfaces.

 

[highfigh]

I think some people are viewing vinyl as if it was "sent from god' and is somehow perfect. Well, nothing is perfect and I think that anyone who uses a turntable needs to manage their expectations- clicks & pops are part of the experience, especially when the LPs are handled as badly as I have seen. I usually don't buy used LPs and the few I have bought were extremely clean. If the surface isn't shiny and dark, I won't consider it.

 

[sterling shoote]

Sterlings above post brings up a very valid point......

If one is to seriously embrace LP playback and hope to enjoy it with a max amount of satisfaction then 'cleanliness is next to Godliness' and IMO a good RCM is a must. FWIW I utilize a VPI 16.5 and a Degrittor ultrsonic.

Yeah, no doubt about the need for some means to clean records, yet the pops from defective product are what precludes me from continued indulgence in the medium.Just a month ago I purchased three new LPs from Barnes & Noble Book Sellers. All of these were grossly defective. One even had musical content in the run out groove, making me think B& N must be getting less than Grade A albums from distributors. At any rate, knowing that LPs can indeed be manufactured without any defect I just can not purchase while manufacturers evade quality control.

 

[highfigh]

Yeah, no doubt about the need for some means to clean records, yet the pops from defective product are what precludes me from continued indulgence in the medium.Just a month ago I purchased three new LPs from Barnes & Noble Book Sellers. All of these were grossly defective. One even had musical content in the run out groove, making me think B& N must be getting less than Grade A albums from distributors. At any rate, knowing that LPs can indeed be manufactured without any defect I just can not purchase while manufacturers evade quality control.

But the distributors have no control over the cutting process- they're the ones who screwed up the pitch of the groove and made the music continue into the lead out. That's a QC problem that should have been caught.

 

[fmw]

AFAIK, the digital format doesn't have a way to record higher than 0VU because it would require more than 16 bits and that was the original consumer format, so it goes bad immediately even with error correction unless, as you wrote, it's only a short transient. I have heard short duration distortion in digital audio and it wouldn't have been from overdriving the input to the playback equipment. They also used to say that digital doesn't have a way to express noise, but here we are.

What software did you use for your vinyl and how did you eliminate the noise?

I didn't eliminate the noise. It came along with the music on the dubs. They are pretty accurate dubs. I was doing some live music recording in those days and I used a Panasonic DAT to make the dubs. The signal went from the preamp directly to the DAT. I copied them to hard drive later on.

 

[sterling shoote]

But the distributors have no control over the cutting process- they're the ones who screwed up the pitch of the groove and made the music continue into the lead out. That's a QC problem that should have been caught.

Yes, correct, yet my experience does suggest distributors must be culpable in the matter. That's to say, they have some sort of interest in buying defective production for resell. Just too many defective LPs from B & N to not be suspicious. At any rate I am now looking at the Mobile Fidelity catalog hoping to see something there that might entertain.

 

[highfigh]

Yes, correct, yet my experience does suggest distributors must be culpable in the matter. That's to say, they have some sort of interest in buying defective production for resell. Just too many defective LPs from B & N to not be suspicious. At any rate I am now looking at the Mobile Fidelity catalog hoping to see something there that might entertain.

I seriously doubt anyone from B&N has checked any of their LPs unless they're buying them. Even the original LPs had problems- I bought one in the late-'70s that had a chunk of cardboard that was visible from both sides and some were made from stamping plates that were old and dead.

 

[Eppie]

I didn't eliminate the noise. It came along with the music on the dubs. They are pretty accurate dubs. I was doing some live music recording in those days and I used a Panasonic DAT to make the dubs. The signal went from the preamp directly to the DAT. I copied them to hard drive later on.

Removing noise from a dub is a fine art without a properly tuned noise gate. I used AudioMagic software which is no longer on the web. It had pop and click filters but any aggressiveness in the settings would affect the dub badly and muffle the audio. For any nasty pops or scratches, WaveRepair was a great tool. Once recorded as a WAV file, I could edit the content directly and completely remove a scratch from an LP. You can likely imagine just how time consuming that process was for one song, let alone a whole album. Needless to say, I did not convert that many LPs and preferred listening to music over hours spent editing WAV files.

 

[sterling shoote]

I seriously doubt anyone from B&N has checked any of their LPs unless they're buying them. Even the original LPs had problems- I bought one in the late-'70s that had a chunk of cardboard that was visible from both sides and some were made from stamping plates that were old and dead.

I'm certain B&N does not check or even care about my observation. For the last 5 years I have regularly returned defective albums to B&H for cash refund and I've always been accommodated by B&N, meaning no questions asked and a big smile from clerks too. It's like they know some of their albums are destined to come back, and, perhaps they have no skin in the game to care about the reality of my claims. At any rate, the disappointment, frequency and inconvenience of returns has now prompted me to look outside of my neighborhood for LPs, although I am not looking hard, since I am occupied right now with SACD searches for music I think I might enjoy.

 

[fmw]

Removing noise from a dub is a fine art without a properly tuned noise gate. I used AudioMagic software which is no longer on the web. It had pop and click filters but any aggressiveness in the settings would affect the dub badly and muffle the audio. For any nasty pops or scratches, WaveRepair was a great tool. Once recorded as a WAV file, I could edit the content directly and completely remove a scratch from an LP. You can likely imagine just how time consuming that process was for one song, let alone a whole album. Needless to say, I did not convert that many LPs and preferred listening to music over hours spent editing WAV files.

I spent 30 years listening to vinyl and got used to all the noise. It doesn't bother me that much. I always took good care of my records. I didn't dub to a computer but rather to a digital audio tape unit directly. I had a digital mixer and the most common processors - compresser, limiter, EQ and so forth but no click and pop filter.
Listening to the music is what audio is all about.

 

[sterling shoote]

Removing noise from a dub is a fine art without a properly tuned noise gate. I used AudioMagic software which is no longer on the web. It had pop and click filters but any aggressiveness in the settings would affect the dub badly and muffle the audio. For any nasty pops or scratches, WaveRepair was a great tool. Once recorded as a WAV file, I could edit the content directly and completely remove a scratch from an LP. You can likely imagine just how time consuming that process was for one song, let alone a whole album. Needless to say, I did not convert that many LPs and preferred listening to music over hours spent editing WAV files.

I used to remove pops satisfactorily from LPs with a Roxio recording program. But no point to that now, since I can just download most any LP in my collection from Apple Music and generally the Apple Music download sounds overall better in all manner that better can be discerned.