Those who have TT

[poppachubby]

I still have about 300 LPs in my closet which I collected thru the 80's, but there is no way they can replace their remaster CD version.

What a shame Smokey, you should build some shelving and display them. Adds a nice dimension with the gear I think, even if they're not being played. I hope you have them in proper sleeves for storage. Smokey, love your LP's. Or, you could categorically list them and email it to me, with a plan to sell at a greatly reduced "AR" rate...

[frenchmon]

Years ago in the 80's I got out of the hobby and sold all of my albums. I had a huge jazz and Rock collection. I never stopped listening to music, just got rid of all my gear and albums and CD's. Now that I'm married and have nothing to do but be a hubby, a father, church and work, I've been back in for about 9 years but I've not be interested in albums and tables until recently. My pops passed about 15 years ago and moms is up there in age and is sick. My dad had a ton of blues albums and 45's that are in fair to good condition that just sits, and I thought I would go over there and get them, so if I decide to get them, I'm going to need a table. I like the Marantz new table, but its kinda pricey, but it can be had at Accessories4less at about $800 if I can snatch it up before someone else does.Would I need a phono preamp, and what can I expect to pay for a good needle and cables? And whats a good TT in the $300-$600 range. Thanks.

frenchmon

[frenchmon]

popaC....I got up at 2am CT and got to work about 3:30 CT and noticed you where still on line....do you sleep?

frenchom

[02audionoob]

Years ago in the 80's I got out of the hobby and sold all of my albums. I had a huge jazz and Rock collection. I never stopped listening to music, just got rid of all my gear and albums and CD's. Now that I'm married and have nothing to do,but be a hubby a father, church and work, I've been back in for about 9 years but I've not be interested in albums and tables until recently. My pops passed about 15 years ago and moms is up there in age and is sick. My dad had a ton of blues albums and 45's that are in fair to good condition that just sits, and I thought I would go over there and get them, so if I decide to get them, I'm going to need a table. I like the Marantz new table, but its kinda pricey, but it can be had at Accessories4less at about $800 if I can snatch it up before someone else does.Would I need a phone preamp, and what can I expect to pay for a good needle and cables? And what a good TT in the $300-$600 range. Thanks.

frenchmon

Here's a good start for cartridges at $430:

http://www.needledoctor.com/Dynavect...2&category=370

With that Rotel preamp it looks like you have phono inputs, so you wouldn't necessarily need a separate phono preamp. $300-$600 at new prices is a tight budget for turntables, but you could have a look at Pro-Ject, Rega and Music Hall entry level in that range.

http://www.needledoctor.com/Online-S...ect-Turntables
http://www.needledoctor.com/Online-S...all-Turntables
http://www.needledoctor.com/Online-S...ega-Turntables

On the low end, you might even want to consider the Denon DP-300F if you're going thrifty. Clearaudio or VPI is a great place to start if you're aiming high.

http://www.needledoctor.com/Denon-DP...2&category=348

http://www.needledoctor.com/Clearaud...2&category=347

http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=VPSC9


You could upgrade the cartridge on the Denon and have a decent setup.

http://www.needledoctor.com/Denon-DL...2&category=369

[poppachubby]

popaC....I got up at 2am CT and got to work about 3:30 CT and noticed you where still on line....do you sleep?

frenchom

Starting early this week....OT.

[E-Stat]

The problem is that no matter how good TT is, you are still handicaped by the format itself. Vinyls have much lower dynamics (ratio of loudest to softest note) than CDs, and they have much higher noise ratio than CD also. And old saying apply here that..."you can not do better than what the source is feeding the system".

Yes and no. Like Yogi Berra used to say "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is". There are quite a few CDs whose mastering exhibits lower dynamic range that well recorded analog. Also, at very low levels, Redbook doesn't have enough bits firing and goes deaf. That's where 24 bit recordings are superior. Analog can resolve musical content down the floor - even in the face of hiss and surface noise.

Having said that, I am not a vinyl bigot. OTOH, to say that exceptional recordings played back on exceptional gear have less dynamic range than any CD is simply not true.

rw

[Geoffcin]

The real problem with CD's is not the format, but the engineering that goes into he recordings. While technically correct that CD COULD have a greater dynamic range than an LP record, a sampling of what's out there will make you really wonder. Fully 90% of CD's available today were mastered to be played in a car, and are mastered specifically to compress the music for maximum output, NOT dynamic range. Because of this most modern mastered CD's RARELY have 20dB of dynamic range, most average about 10-15dB!

On the other hand. well mastered CD's, espcially HDCD encoded ones are simply stunning. I give you my Dave Brubeck Quartet "Time Out" in HDCD. Nobody who has ever heard it on my CD player would even guess that CD could sound so real. Unfortunately CD's mastered like this are 1 in 1/1000, and usually command much greater prices than a standard redbook CD. I give you JVC's XRCD's as a example;

http://www.elusivedisc.com/products.asp?dept=859

What's really sad is that the XRCD tech has nothing to do with the playback side! When mastered to it's highest standards CD is a high fidelity medium.

[poppachubby]

Great stuff Geoff, but what are your thoughts about CD vs vinyl? Personally, I don't know enough of the science behind it. All I can comment on is what my two ears hear. I have no bone to pick with CD, I just haven't had much use as of late for a disc.

As I sit here listening to The Beatle's "Blue" LP, I feel bad for any audio type who hasn't had the chance to experience the upside of vinyl.

[blackraven]

Most XRCD's are wonderful sounding. I own about 6 so far. The Mastering process is fantastic. Also having the right DAC or CDP make a world of difference.

[Geoffcin]

OK, here's the real problem with audiophilia and CD. The better your system, the more infuriated you get when you hear how poor the CD you just bought sounds. I have hundreds of CD's that I can rock out to in the car, but put them on my audio rig and it's a disaster. Bright, thin, compressed sound. So, for the most part NO, I'm not happy with CD.

FWIW; I was an early adopter of DVD-Audio too. I've got about 25 of them, and while for the most part they are better than their CD cousins, only a few of the re-issues went back to the master tapes and re-engineered them to sound better. What a waste too, as DVD-Audio had so much going for it. I blame it on the record execs and bean counters. You can add the RIAA in there too. Their collective motto is; "Quality standards be damned as long as we make max $$$!"

[blackraven]

OK, here's the real problem with audiophilia and CD. The better your system, the more infuriated you get when you hear how poor the CD you just bought sounds. I have hundreds of CD's that I can rock out to in the car, but put them on my audio rig and it's a disaster. Bright, thin, compressed sound. So, for the most part NO, I'm not happy with CD.
"

I couldn't agree more! There are certain CD's I won't play on my main system They sound better on my monitor audio's and vintage Technics integrated amp or in my car where the resolution and detail are not as much of an issue. My main system is too revealing of poorly recorded or mastered CD's

[Mr Peabody]

Comparing same title CD & LP really isn't apples to apples because of the various players and tables and variables. I've had several CD's that sounded worse than the same title LP because the transfer just wasn't done properly. One such album is Traffic's Mr. Fantasy. The CD has the vocals off in one channel, the LP is more balanced and better frequency response. This could have been due to how CD's were originally transferred from the master done for LP or each could have come from an entirely different master. The version of Mr Fantasy on their Best Of is more in line now with the album. I still prefer the vinyl version of Low Spark Of High Heeled Boys on vinyl over even the remaster from the Best Of.

I cannot convey strongly enough that there is a huge difference between the types of mass market turntables we had back in the day of the LP and a "higher end" turntable. Rega is the only high end table I've owned so I can't speak to Clearwater, Music Hall or whatever. The sound I got from my Rega was an entirely higher level of fidelity than I knew was possible from turntables. So if some one likes the sound of vinyl and they use just a regular turntable like Pioneer, Techniques etc you will really be amazed with what you hear from a higher performance table.

[02audionoob]

So if some one likes the sound of vinyl and they use just a regular turntable like Pioneer, Techniques etc you will really be amazed with what you hear from a higher performance table.

You'd get some aggressive responses on that comment if you posted it at AK.

[poppachubby]

My tables are limited sonically in the big picture, but that doesn't mean that they don't sound great too. My main problem is if I make a big jump with a TT, I will have a great sounding table and a system that would be 75% in need of upgrading.

[Mr Peabody]

True, Poppa, and 02AN, I didn't say those table weren't worth listening to just it can be better, much better. My prior TT was a Pioneer PL-51. I had it for many years and was better than many other mass brand tables. The Rega P2 I auditioned and obviously the P3 i own are an entirely hirer level of fidelity. Those at the other site couldn't understand unless they've heard a higher end TT.

[Smokey]

What a shame Smokey, you should build some shelving and display them. Adds a nice dimension with the gear I think, even if they're not being played. I hope you have them in proper sleeves for storage. Smokey, love your LP's. Or, you could categorically list them and email it to me, with a plan to sell at a greatly reduced "AR" rate...

I like to display them to show off, but space is problem. The space is occupied by DVDs which I have roughly the same numbers.

I would say that most LPs are in pristine condition (and some are even unwrapped) and always kept in sleeves unless playing them. Got lucky because in early 80's, the record stores were practically giving LP away (for $3.99) to make room for CDs, and every week cherry picked from store inventory.

Have kept them for over 20 years, and probably will keep them forever as they bring back alot of nostalgic memories. Sorry Pop

There are quite a few CDs whose mastering exhibits lower dynamic range that well recorded analog. Also, at very low levels, Redbook doesn't have enough bits firing and goes deaf. That's where 24 bit recordings are superior. Analog can resolve musical content down the floor - even in the face of hiss and surface noise.

I agree that some CD are not up to their standards, but would you blame that on CD format or the company that is doing the mastering as pretty much the same thing can be said for LPs.

But you have a point the red book bits (16bits) does not capture all of recording resolution and this might be an area where LP are superior. The problem I see is that LPs have so many other shortcomings that resolution superiority get lost between them.

Fully 90% of CD's available today were mastered to be played in a car, and are mastered specifically to compress the music for maximum output, NOT dynamic range. Because of this most modern mastered CD's RARELY have 20dB of dynamic range, most average about 10-15dB!

That dynamic range sound awfully low. Any links to prove your point

[Geoffcin]

I agree that some CD are not up to their standards, but would you blame that on CD format or the company that is doing the mastering as pretty much the same thing can be said for LPs.

That dynamic range sound awfully low. Any links to prove your point

CD Compression Depression Music Industry Idiocracy
by Dan Banquer

http://www.audioholics.com/education...ion-depression

Quote;

"I just didn’t think you could actually compress music to a 3 db dynamic range. Once again I connect my oscilloscope and sure enough I see plenty of peaks digitally limited and going right to 0dbfs with a healthy amount of intersample peaking going above that. I find that with material such as this using the digital attenuator on the Winamp EQ set to –3 db (which actually measures –2.75 db) makes material like this somewhat less obnoxious, but I am left with the sad conclusion that hyper compression has come to Jazz."




Whatever Happened to Dynamic Range on Compact Discs?
By George Graham

http://georgegraham.com/compress.html


Quote;

"My CD player has a digital level display, and I am also able to take the digital output of a CD and run it into a computer editing system allowing statistical study of audio levels, and I am constantly appalled at how many CDs spent most of their time in the top 3-4 db of the 90 db available, with absolute digital maximum level being reached very frequently -- sometimes on every beat. Sophisticated digital compressors alleviate the all the horrible distortion that would normally happen from hitting the digital "brick wall," but nuances and the "airy" quality of the recording are murdered."



What Happened To Dynamic Range?

By Bob Speer

http://www.cdmasteringservices.com/dynamicrange.htm

In regard to CD technology quote;

"Rather than use this new technology to take advantage of it's wide dynamic range, the music industry went in the opposite direction. They decided that louder is better. Suddenly, we found ourselves in a race to see whose CD was the loudest. The only way to make CDs louder was to keep compressing the signal more and more. That's where we are today. Everyone's trying to make their CD sound louder than everyone else's. The term that is used for this process is called, hot. Yes, most of today's music is recorded hot. The net result, distortion with a beat."

http://www.cdmasteringservices.com/dynamicrange.htm



FWIW; I think that the continued reliance on obsolete playback technology will soon be at an end. With the breakthroughs in lossless digital storage I think both CD and LP will soon go the way of 8-track and wax cylinders.

[atomicAdam]

What a shame Smokey, you should build some shelving and display them. Adds a nice dimension with the gear I think, even if they're not being played. I hope you have them in proper sleeves for storage. Smokey, love your LP's. Or, you could categorically list them and email it to me, with a plan to sell at a greatly reduced "AR" rate...

I like this plan. I move to second it. If they aren't being used, it is time to pass them along to someone who will use them. Music is for sharing, not for storing.

[E-Stat]

I agree that some CD are not up to their standards, but would you blame that on CD format or the company that is doing the mastering as pretty much the same thing can be said for LPs...But you have a point the red book bits (16bits) does not capture all of recording resolution and this might be an area where LP are superior.

It's still a fundamental limitation of the Redbook format. I don't *blame* the engineers who arrived at the format because, unlike the analog domain, there was a huge fence (700 MB disc capacity at the time) they had to work around.

The problem I see is that LPs have so many other shortcomings that resolution superiority get lost between them.

There is no question they are far more inconvenient. I have two turntables because I've built my collection over the last 40 years and kept the rig I purchased when I was a teenager (Ariston RD-11s / SME 3009) when I bought a newer one. Of all the listening I do during the day on the computer, in the afternoon or weekends in the garage or anytime with the main system, I probably listen to vinyl no more than 10% of the time.

rw

[poppachubby]

It's still a fundamental limitation of the Redbook format. I don't *blame* the engineers who arrived at the format because, unlike the analog domain, there was a huge fence (700 MB disc capacity at the time) they had to work around.


There is no question they are far more inconvenient. I have two turntables because I've built my collection over the last 40 years and kept the rig I purchased when I was a teenager (Ariston RD-11s / SME 3009) when I bought a newer one. Of all the listening I do during the day on the computer, in the afternoon or weekends in the garage or anytime with the main system, I probably listen to vinyl no more than 10% of the time.

rw

It's certainly not an on-the-go format. But it gives back so much if you are willing to take the time. I spend the rest of my day between my portable or digital files form the comp.

[Smokey]

Geoffcin, couldn’t you find more longer links

After glancing over the links, all I have to say is that is a shame. Especially in George Graham link where he mentioned that several prominent mastering engineers have complained that they are being pushed to make the CDs they work on as loud as possible. Which mean over compression and lower dynamics. Money over matter wins again.

It's still a fundamental limitation of the Redbook format. I don't *blame* the engineers who arrived at the format because, unlike the analog domain, there was a huge fence (700 MB disc capacity at the time) they had to work around.

I Don't knwo if you remember this or not, but back in 80's the first pressing of Ledd Zepplin albums on CDs sounded so bad because the same master for LP were used to press CDs. But once th remastered CD came out under the supervision of Page himself, the sound quality was like night and day compare with earlier CDs.

So if a CD sound bad, the first blame should go the engineer-not the format

[RGA]

Don't conclude that because something is expensive it is going to be good. I have heard a $2500 Clearaudio that did not impress me in the least. Though it looked gorgeous - really a shame that something so good looking was so very underwhelming. But a lot of audio is like that. Also to be fair if they ran the TT into a Rotel preamp you're not getting a very good phono stage. There are numerous things that can affect turntables - poor cartridge alignment very common especially with dealers who play lip service to vinyl.

[frenchmon]

Don't conclude that because something is expensive it is going to be good. I have heard a $2500 Clearaudio that did not impress me in the least. Though it looked gorgeous - really a shame that something so good looking was so very underwhelming. But a lot of audio is like that. Also to be fair if they ran the TT into a Rotel preamp you're not getting a very good phono stage. There are numerous things that can affect turntables - poor cartridge alignment very common especially with dealers who play lip service to vinyl.

I suppose you are right. I've heard the same thing about some of the expensive Thorens TT's.
But the Marantz TT was so beautiful I would hope that it was not the problem.

frenchmon

[Woochifer]

JM and Geoffcin got it right, there are plenty of variables to consider with vinyl playback, all of which have a very consequential effect on the sound.

Unlike with CDs, which start at a relatively high baseline for basic audio performance even on entry level components, the performance for LP playback starts at a much lower level when using entry level TTs and cartridges. In my experience, swapping out transports, DACs, cabling, etc. with CD playback generally makes for subtle differences. In contrast, switching out a cartridge or adjusting the tonearm can fundamentally change how an LP sounds.

With all these differences, there's no credible way that anyone can claim that a CD playback will ALWAYS sound better than an LP, or vice versa. With some older recordings for example, the recordings were optimized for vinyl transfer. When these same recordings got transferred to CD, they would sound shrill and harsh. Differences in the mastering process alone dictates that the LP version will often sound better than the CD version. One can cite the CD format's technical specs, but the reality is not as cut and dry as that.

Remastered CDs had to be released because so many first generation transfers sounded horrible and did not account for the original recordings getting optimized for the vinyl medium. Unfortunately nowadays, a CD remaster or new release will often do nothing more than boost the levels close to the digital zero. In order to do that, the recording has to be compressed during the mastering process, as Geoffcin pointed out. The debut release by Mudcrutch actually touts the vinyl version as being mastered using a "fuller range" of the recording, all but admitting that the CD version was purposely compressed so that it sounds louder.

The irony is that back in the LP heyday, mass market releases were often heavily compressed in order to prevent mistracking (accounting for the inferior tracking of most low end record players). With most LP purchasers no longer using low end equipment (like portable record changers or all-in-one systems), the mastering engineers can now cut a greater amount of dynamic range into the LPs.

[squidboyw]

I'm just a fat little white boy, but I must concur with those who say that the system Frenchmon heard had improper setup issues; or since it was all new equipment, it was still not broken in.

I have replaced cartridges on the different tables I have owned, and frequently it takes 50 - 75 hours of use for a cartridge to come into its own. It could also be an issue of the platform the table was placed on or what it was near, in terms of other equipment.

As stated above in so many words, vinyl playback is not the simple close and play like CD is; it can be and is a pain in the butt to really get it right. But by the same token, I have heard very very few digital play back systems that can compete with a well set up LP system. I'm not the Big Dog in my neighborhood, when it comes to stereo systems; I have what I think of as a reasonable system, but I've seen and heard better. And I'm not anti-CD/SACD/Audio DVD. The fact remains, when I want to sit down at the end of the day, let my trouble run away, and let my soul recover from whatever malady has befallen me, its vinyl I turn to, and not CD.