Those who have TT

[davetruestory]

[QUOTE=frenchmon]This saturday one of the local hifi shops here in St.Louis had a audio clinic. So I decided to go. In one of the rooms they had the new 15 series Rotel amp/preamp/RotelCDP driving the new B&W CDN9 speakers. But I was more interested in the new TT by Marantz which really is a Clearaudio TT made for Marantz. I asked the salesman to fire up the TT so he did. Now I owned a TT and had about a few hundred albums back in the 80's, so I was very familiar with the Chicago album that he played. The sound was awful. I mean it sounded like it was a cheap TT from the 80's....it was not clear or transparent at all. Now that TT cost $1700. Not having heard aTTt sense the 80's, I was thinking of getting back into albums... I was also under the impression that TT's of today where just as clear as digital. Am I wrong?

frenchmon[Life is messy like good analog player, you like it not because is clear and sterile, but because is real passionate, ugly and beatifull. ]

[daviethek]

good discussion with a gentlemanly tone.

Like many here, I have only recently been getting back into vinyl. I thought I would get back the same way I left, with Mid-Fi gear. After playing around with it for a year or so, I have come full circle, back to the conclusion I had before I returned to vinyl.

In a few specific instances, vinyl has for me been more involving and musical. However, that's not true in all cases because it just plain depends on the quality of the recording. I have recently purchased vinyl that sounds almost as bad as the most compressed, hurridly assembled CD's of the 80's. Getting back into vinyl is in many ways a trip through the assembly line of recorded music. You can hear music that was hastly assembled and put on the street for the sake of profit, music that was slowly and carefully recorded and some that was painfuly overtweaked (early steely dan).
I will be honest and say that most of my favorite music was so because of the way it made me feel when played through my system. This is a very personal experience and different for everyone. Many CD's of the last 10 years have outstanding quality. For example, I see no need to purchase Diana Krall on vinyl. I do however see the need to purchase the Dead or Miles Davis on vinyl. Whatever gets you moving is what matters, and for music, it is both vinyl and digital for me. keep it spinning. and for arguments sake, I would say that up to a certain price point,
( maybe 800.00 cart and table) a case can be made for either direct drive or belt drive. In the more expensive and revealing systems, belt seems to be the designers choice for higher levels of vibration control presumably. I don't know, I still dwell in the Mid-Fi bracket, but I have got my eye on something better. as always.

[manlystanley]

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've had the same thing. As I go and upgrade my system, I need to prune my CD collection--Because they just sound flat.

[stratman672001]

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

The only "problem" with the original Led Zep CD pressings is that they used second gen safeties instead of the master tapes and no extraneous EQ was added.
I found the Zep remasters to sound kind of harsh in comparison to the original pressings. Of course my Mobile Fidelity vinyl pressing of II beat all CD versions... Hammer of the gods indeed