Are records really better than CD's?

[3db]

sounds like a plug for direct drive turntables. Yet, every high end table i ever saw, read about in reviews is belt drive. I wonder why that is.

I think the whole arguement of belt drive verses direct drive is moot and that the tone arm/cartridge is the most critical part. Some old school dinosaurs even poo poo the new tables from Rega, Music Hall, and ProJect without ever hearing them. I find it halarious becuase the carbon fibre tonearms on those newer turntables will blow the Technic stalk arm completely out of the water. Just sayin.

[StevenSurprenant]

I am probably putting my foot in my mouth, but I think 3dB is correct about belt versus direct drive.

Technically and theoretically, anything you do to isolate the platter from noise and vibration can only improve the TT. Most belt drives still have the motor connected to the plinth and the platter is connected to the plinth so, even in this case, the concept is not perfect. Besides, many direct drive turn tables have a noise level of greater than 80dB, so I don't think direct versus belt is an issue.

The tone arm is another matter and, not knowing better, I think which one is better is a matter of synergy with the cartridge compliance.

PHONO Cartridge Compliance, Tonearm Mass, System Resonance, Loading of MC and MM Capacitance, RIAA Characteristic

A heavy object needs a strong spring. Likewise heavy arms are only suitable for cartridges with a sturdy cantilever. In other words: a cartridge with a low compliance figure needs a heavy arm in order to obtain a fundamental resonance in the region of 8 to 12 Hz.
A lightweight arm needs to be matched with a supple spring, in other words a very compliant spring which is the cantilever of a high-compliance cartridge.


After that, it's a matter of matching the correct preamp with the cartridge. This is also covered in the link above.

As for manual versus automatic, I assume that an automatic has added mass to the tone arm assembly, so that is a compliance issue and can be adjusted for with the correct choice in cartridges.

As for which "improvement matters the most, I'm guessing that it's the cartridge followed by the tone arm, but the best cartridge may not be the best if the tone arm compliance is incorrect for it. After that, I think the preamp is the next step and the same thing applies, like the tome arm/cartridge, the preamp has to be correct for the cartridge in use. I'm guessing here!

All this sounds logical (to me), but as JohnMichael posted, changing his motor improved the sound of his belt driven table, which I wouldn't think would be that important. I have no reason to dispute him, so that leaves me wondering.

[nobody]

Interesting thread with a couple things popping up I don't always see when the whole CD vs. vinyl debate rears its head. First, as a fan of automatic turntables, glad to see I am not alone. Manual is fine if you sit in a chair and listen all the time. But if you;'re someone who plays records while doing 100 other things and when napping nearby or anything less focused sometimes, having something that at least shuts off at the end is really nice. Auto-start is also nice for other people to operate without being afraid they are going to drop the needle or whatever. Merits of sound quality aside, for me at least some automation is close to a must-have in a turntable.

Also glad to see people being pretty level headed that yes, CD and digital will always measure better and some will prefer the sound. But, that doesn't mean vinyl can't sound great as well or that an individual won't prefer both the sound and the experience of vinyl while others may prefer the digital experience.

And for me, that's key. I have tried a few different tables, even a couple manual belt-drive types and in the end I have come back to something that provides the experience I really want out of vinyl. I like the retro aesthetic of a vintage table, and I like the automation of some older tables, and I like the ability to play 78s, even stacking them from time to time. So for me, the choice was limited to vintage tables with Dual being the most common culprit as it was the only one that let me do all of the above. I've ended up with a 1009SK, completely refurbished and I'm quite happy and can't say I have any urge to try anything else right now.

For me, what is best is about more than sound quality and when people pretend their decisions are all about sound and nothing else, I find it a bit disingenuous. We all have a variety of preferences that play into how we ultimately most enjoy music. Some people weigh other things more heavily than others. I think my feeling on this is why I found this thread interesting because while sound quality was discussed, people seem willing to admit there are other reasons as well as to why they choose what they choose to listen with.

Are record better than CDs? For me yes, absolutely. But, it is because I enjoy the total experience and not because of any sort of absolutist position on the sound or one format over the other.

[StevenSurprenant]

nobody - I curious about the JICO SAS stylus you use on your Shure. Bottom line, does it improve the sound and is it worth the investment (in your estimation)?

Thanks.

[JohnMichael]

You can hear the difference from the old motor compared to the new. I recorded two records to cd to listen in the car and after the motor change I recorded some tracks from both to hear the difference.

The old motor was loosely mounted with an O ring to minimize vibration transfer. Of course since the motor was able to move speed variations happened. The new rigid mounted motor was tuned electronically to reduce the motor's vibration. Now that Rega has minimized vibrations and speed stability the sound has improved. I took it a step further and bought the Rega power supply upgrade. I am not sure of this but it looks to me that the PSU is powered by a walwart that first converts the AC to DC. Then the unit converts back to AC for the motor and the speed control. I think the regenerated AC is much cleaner than straight from an outlet. Better speed stability, less vibrations and cleaner power have improved the sound of my table.

Belt drive vs direct drive is an interesting debate. In a belt drive table the belt does not transfer vibrations to the platter. A direct drive has the platter sitting directly on the motor's shaft. I think it would be easier to design a low vibration belt ttable than a direct drive table.

An interesting comment I read once is that a turntable's performance is more limited by internal vibration than external vibrations. The writer moved his table to another room and found little improvement. After reducing the vibrations and upgrading subplatter and bearing I am a believer in lower internal vibrations.

[StevenSurprenant]

John -

Do you think that the new motor affects the tone arm or the platter more? I just wonder because they are all connected to the plinth and it seems to me that since the tone arm has less mass that it would be the one most affected.

[JohnMichael]

John -

Do you think that the new motor affects the tone arm or the platter more? I just wonder because they are all connected to the plinth and it seems to me that since the tone arm has less mass that it would be the one most affected.

The Rega uses a light composite plinth that disperses energy quickly so I do not know if vibrations influence the tonearm. The platter is glass on top of a machined metal subplatter which sits on top of a ceramic bearing. The combined mass of the glass platter and the machined metal subplatter should be resilient to any remaining vibrations from the motor.

[JohnMichael]

One of the audio mags used to publish a great graph where you could look up your tonearm's effective mass and the weight of your cartridge. Next you would look for the compliance rating of your cartridge and you could see the frequency of the combination. I would use that scale whenever I was shopping for a new cartridge.

The arms geometry is also important. As I have posted before my Grado tracks really well in the Rega RB 250 after I switched to a lowered counterweight. This was when I had a Grado Red and when I heard the improvements I realized I finally heard the Grado magic. Of course the Sonata Statement is tracking well but even more magic to the sound.

[StevenSurprenant]

John -

Something like this?

Rega | Tonearm Mounting Distance and Alignment Information | Vinyl Engine

And this?

Vinyl Engine - Tonearm Alignment Calculator Pro

[JohnMichael]

John -

Something like this?

Rega | Tonearm Mounting Distance and Alignment Information | Vinyl Engine

And this?

Vinyl Engine - Tonearm Alignment Calculator Pro

No. It was a simple graph that had, if I remember correctly, vertical axis for tonearm mass, horizontal axis for cartridge mass and the diagonal would show suggested compliance for the ideal range. You first had to know the tonearms mass and the guide you posted would help with that but the graph I am thinking of is so simple. I think it might have appeared in Hi Fidelity. I will try to find it when I am home with my computer.

[StevenSurprenant]

I know this thread has been going for a while and for some it has exceeded the point of being interesting, but I think it's too soon to close the book on this.

I think the strongest argument is that vinyl and digital is sometimes mastered differently so one version might be preferable over another. The other argument is that vinyl has a bloated mid bass and perhaps even distortion that some people prefer. This is not what I hear. Tonally, they sound the same, there seems to be no emphasis at any frequency. Of course, records can sound different on different turntables. The difference I hear is the amount of micro detail is greater on vinyl, hence bringing the sound closer to live. This difference is not subtle. The best way to describe the difference is to ring a bell and then ring it again with your finger touching it.

Considering that myself and an ever increasing number of people are switching back to vinyl, the most important question is what are we hearing that we don't hear from digital, of perhaps it's what we hear on digital that is sending us back to analog. I don't support the idea that vinyl sounds warmer, otherwise all we would have to do is turn up the bass a little. Some people claim that they like vinyl because it lacks the digital harshness of CD's. I can agree with this too.

The other argument is that our digital playback equipment is subpar. Considering that some really good CD players sound much better than what many of us own, there is probably some truth to this.

Another thing that is very important which seems to be glossed over is that our own audio systems have varying degrees of resolution, which can account for how much change we hear from different sources. I would think that the difference between vinyl and analog would be less on a lower resolution system, assuming that the quality of the analog and digital front ends were the same.

At this point I would like to interject an observation which I have noticed. When I cut a CD to my hard drive on my computer, it sounds much better through headphones than it does from a stand alone CD player going to headphones. In fact, I might go so far as to say that it may sound better (or the same) than vinyl. BTW, I use Grado headphones.

The only thing to do at this point is to pursue this computer aspect.

Note: If running music from the computer makes all the difference than my displeasure with digital has always been the the myriad of digital equipment I've owned and heard.

I'll update my results for those interested...

Thanks again for all those who attributed to this thread.