How much do you value your vinyl collection? [Archive]

Les Adams

04-27-2008, 02:59 PM

(I was not sure where to post this thread, but I guess it might be of interest to all, so "general audio" seemed appropriate!)

I pose this question because I recently started to realise the monetary value of certain records in my collection and decided to sell them on Ebay. I was quite astounded at how much some items were worth.

Back in the 1970’s I was an avid record buyer with particular interest in progressive rock. My interests in those days were hi-fi and music, I did not care or know much about labels and “first pressings”. These as you may know are records pressed with the first “stamper” and apparently are often the best quality as they are as close to the original as you could get. Certain labels are very collectable too. Virtually anything on the Vertigo “Swirl” label is worth money, particularly if it is a “UK first pressing”.

My interest in the value of rare or unusual pressing was kindled while surfing the net and discovering that the very early pressings of Pink Floyd’s “Dark Side Of The Moon” had a solid blue triangle on the label (as opposed to later pressings that had a blue outlined triangle) and the sleeve was very dark blue not black. These early copies are very collectable. I discovered I had that version and auctioned it on Ebay. To my astonishment it sold to a collector in America for £205.00! I have since seen an identical but virtually unplayed copy go for £570.00!

I soon discovered that quite a few records in my collection were very valuable indeed. For example I had a near mint condition copy of the album “Asylum” by Cressida on the Vertigo “Swirl” label. I put that on Ebay and it raised £367.00

I also had first pressings of Beatles, Stones and other UK progressive rock albums that were rare or collectable issues. In total, I have raised almost 2000 pounds in 3 weeks by selling them off. I have replaced the ones I still wanted with CD equivalents. The Cressida album on CD cost me £9.95, which makes a profit of £357.05 on that one item! And still have the music! The CD is the re-mastered version and sounds better than the vinyl I sold. I also replaced the Dark side of the moon with a 180g anniversary vinyl version for £20.00 – a profit of £185.00!

So the question is, given the potential value of some of your old vinyl, would you be tempted to sell it? Does it matter to you if you have the “Solid Blue Triangle” on the label of your Floyd album, or would you sell it, buy a new one on CD (or vinyl) and reap the profits?

As it happens I decided to buy a Nikon Digital camera with some of the money, but isn’t this a great way to make some money and upgrade your system? Assuming of course you have some records to sell !!

Feanor

04-27-2008, 03:48 PM

...
So the question is, given the potential value of some of your old vinyl, would you be tempted to sell it? Does it matter to you if you have the “Solid Blue Triangle” on the label of your Floyd album, or would you sell it, buy a new one on CD (or vinyl) and reap the profits?
...

My old vinyl is nothing but clutter. I basically never listen to it. I would be happy to sell it for a few buck. I have only one LP that mgiht be worth a little more than garage sale value; that would be my original addition of Carlos Kleiber's Beethven 5th Symphony.

O'Shag

04-27-2008, 10:13 PM

pixelthis

04-27-2008, 11:25 PM

I have a copy of Ricki lee jones(original master series) and the best price I saw was
20 bucks on EBAY. Certainly wouldnt sell it for that
And that copy of the first edition of HONKEY CHATEU by Elton John before he became a "sir", mom got me that one on my 14th birthday, wouldnt part with that either.
My collection has shrunk, thanks to water damage to quite a few when my brother had them (tornado).
The LA WOMAN issue with the yellow window , the first issue of exiles on main street,
the first issue of diamond dogs
But I still have fleetwood mac, Bob James, Gill-scott Heron, Led zeppelin, about eighty
all told.
And most have memories attached, and while we audio types treasure records it seems that the market doesnt.
Dont think I am going to be tempted by an offers of riches anytime soon that will even
come close to make me consider giving up on these memories :1:

Feanor

04-28-2008, 02:45 AM

Such a pity. With a good quality phonostage, TT and cartridge, the sound of vinyl can be magical. Most well-recorded vinyl LPs can make for a much more intimate listening experience, where the meaning of the music comes through. For Classical music vinyl excels. There is less homogenization, which is important given that an orchestra has many instruments that play on large soundstage. But again - it depends on the rig. Vinyl definitely requires more care, and its much more expensive too get a decent rig set up.

Sure, classical LPs can sound very fine. And doubtless a better analog kit will make them sound better. But to imply that analog is inherently superior for air and soundstage is invalid, IMO.

I have many murky-sounding CDs; I also have many with superb transparency, soundstage, and detail. It's the recording process that makes the most difference, not the medium. This applies to CD versus SACD too.

Les Adams

04-28-2008, 08:17 AM

My old vinyl is nothing but clutter. I basically never listen to it. I would be happy to sell it for a few buck. I have only one LP that mgiht be worth a little more than garage sale value; that would be my original addition of Carlos Kleiber's Beethven 5th Symphony.

You might be surprised that some of that "old clutter" may be worth a buck or two. Some of my old vinyl only raised £10-15 but I was never going to play those particular discs again or had already replaced them with CD's, so I asked myself if it was cash I found in a draw, would I put it back and not spend it? No brainer!

A bit of research into which pressings you have (especially if you bought them when they first came out and may be "first pressings" will tell you what you have.

My old Beatles vinyl albums raised a total of £287 and I have them all on CD!

As far as it being a waste is concerned, they went to good homes where they will be appreciated! I got a great new camera and some money to spend! No waste there!

Feanor

04-28-2008, 08:30 AM

You might be surprised that some of that "old clutter" may be worth a buck or two. Some of my old vinyl only raised £10-15 but I was never going to play those particular discs again or had already replaced them with CD's, so I asked myself if it was cash I found in a draw, would I put it back and not spend it? No brainer!

A bit of research into which pressings you have (especially if you bought them when they first came out and may be "first pressings" will tell you what you have.
...

Thanks, Les,

Yes, I'll do a little research. I probably have a few original or early pressings, and like you, I'd rather scoop some cash than hang on to these technology relics.

Brett A

04-28-2008, 12:23 PM

I have a few LPs that are worth more that the typical $2-$10.

Bob Dylan's Highway 61 w/ alternate "From a Buick"
Bob Dylan's G.H. Vol 1 w/Milton Glasser Poster.
I've got a few original pressing Beefheart records and a couple oddities from his catalog.
I have a handful of NM bop-era jazz records that are worth $30 each or-so.

Generally though, I think the value of this stuff has dropped since the advent of online auctions---things aren't so rare anymore. I mean if someone wants a copy of Highway 61 with the alt. Buick track, they don't have to wait too long to buy it. No hunting.

Although I'm sure online auctions work to drive the value of some items up, I think generally , for my stuff, it's been down.

I've regretted letting go of valuable vinyl in the past. I'm pretty much committed to keeping it for my own enjoyment.

O'Shag

04-28-2008, 12:35 PM

Sure, classical LPs can sound very fine. And doubtless a better analog kit will make them sound better. But to imply that analog is inherently superior for air and soundstage is invalid, IMO.

I have many murky-sounding CDs; I also have many with superb transparency, soundstage, and detail. It's the recording process that makes the most difference, not the medium. This applies to CD versus SACD too.

OUH ARRRR Scrooge. :crazy:

Own up Feanor. You've probably never even heard a good analogue rig. If you think the record player you have is capable of reproducing analogue in its full glory - think again. I have a setup sufficiently capable of extracting very good performance from both digital media and vinyl. I can tell you categorically that certain aspects of vinyl easily trounce any digital media you care to mention. Homogenization is an area where vinyl so clearly excels over cd. There is greater seperation and air around instruments. The sound blooms as it does in real life. There is much more natural definition without any artificial edginess. Trouble is, you've never heard a good vinyl reproduction system, so I think you should reserve your criticism until such time as you have. :skep:

Feanor

04-28-2008, 03:36 PM

OUH ARRRR Scrooge. :crazy:

Own up Feanor. You've probably never even heard a good analogue rig. If you think the record player you have is capable of reproducing analogue in its full glory - think again. I have a setup sufficiently capable of extracting very good performance from both digital media and vinyl. I can tell you categorically that certain aspects of vinyl easily trounce any digital media you care to mention. Homogenization is an area where vinyl so clearly excels over cd. There is greater seperation and air around instruments. The sound blooms as it does in real life. There is much more natural definition without any artificial edginess. Trouble is, you've never heard a good vinyl reproduction system, so I think you should reserve your criticism until such time as you have. :skep:

Quite right, I've never listened to a $10k vinyl rig at any length. Bully for you that you have such a rig. Lacking in objectivity as I might be, it pisses me off to be told by audio snobs and braggarts that I'm ignorant because I don't have an expensive enough system to appreciate this or that aspect of audio. :dita:

My own hi-fi experience goes back almost 15 years before the advent of CD and at one time I have a reasonably good analog setup. I gave up on because LPs were such a big pain in the butt from a usability point of view and that is still a big part of why I'm not interested in vinyl.

We agree on this: it takes sizable investment to achieve of the putative advantages of vinyl. I rule it out on that score too: I simply have much better uses for my limited funds than to buy an expensive analog kit.

Finally I'm mainly a classical music listener. The availability of new classical on LP is essentially nil, and I'm not interest rumaging yard sales for the odd, scratchy, disgustingly dirty, old LP.

Les Adams

04-28-2008, 04:10 PM

OUH ARRRR Scrooge. :crazy:

Own up Feanor. You've probably never even heard a good analogue rig. If you think the record player you have is capable of reproducing analogue in its full glory - think again. I have a setup sufficiently capable of extracting very good performance from both digital media and vinyl. I can tell you categorically that certain aspects of vinyl easily trounce any digital media you care to mention. Homogenization is an area where vinyl so clearly excels over cd. There is greater seperation and air around instruments. The sound blooms as it does in real life. There is much more natural definition without any artificial edginess. Trouble is, you've never heard a good vinyl reproduction system, so I think you should reserve your criticism until such time as you have. :skep:

We seem to have gone off topic a bit here, but what the heck!

O'Shag, I believe my analogue system is pretty good (feel free to comment by looking at the spec below, you may disagree), but I have to say that ticks and pops which are inherent in the medium are partly what spoils it for me. After getting used to the virtual background silence of CD which allows me to listen to the music without dirtaction by the offending noise of vinyl, I am finding myself enjoying the cd more. The ticks and pops become rather like someone eating pocorn behind me when I am trying to enjoy a good film at the cinema!

Also, I don't believe it is as clear cut as one medium being better than the other. Having replaced some of my vinyl with CD's, I have found merits and drawbacks with both. I depends purely on the pressings. Some CD's I have bought quite definately sound better in terms of clarity, soundstage and overall presentation than the vinyl pressings and there are examples where the reverse is true. No matter how good your analogue or digital system is, it can only be as good as the recording and pressing you are playing.

O'Shag

04-28-2008, 04:40 PM

We seem to have gone off topic a bit here, but what the heck!

O'Shag, I believe my analogue system is pretty good (feel free to comment by looking at the spec below, you may disagree), but I have to say that ticks and pops which are inherent in the medium are partly what spoils it for me. After getting used to the virtual background silence of CD which allows me to listen to the music without dirtaction by the offending noise of vinyl, I am finding myself enjoying the cd more. The ticks and pops become rather like someone eating pocorn behind me when I am trying to enjoy a good film at the cinema!

Also, I don't believe it is as clear cut as one medium being better than the other. Having replaced some of my vinyl with CD's, I have found merits and drawbacks with both. I depends purely on the pressings. Some CD's I have bought quite definately sound better in terms of clarity, soundstage and overall presentation than the vinyl pressings and there are examples where the reverse is true. No matter how good your analogue or digital system is, it can only be as good as the recording and pressing you are playing.

Les, forgive me, I don't mean to condescend in the least.

Yes, clicks and pops, but not in well cared for or worn out records. Most of my records are silent. There's no doubt that vinyl is a much more finicky medium than CD. The potential for extraordinary performance is not so readily accessed, but in its highest form, analogue decimates CD. I know it because I've heard it. I wouldn't be so stupid to say it otherwise and I owe no special allegiance to vinyl. I won't harp on about it anyway. I only responded to Feanor as I did because his initial response (which he later modified) to what I said (in all friendliness) was rude and uncalled for. I am too experienced in Hi-Fi to talk humbug for a start.

What I don't understand, is that I've always been polite to Feanor and others.

O'Shag

04-28-2008, 04:47 PM

Quite right, I've never listened to a $10k vinyl rig at any length. Bully for you that you have such a rig. Lacking in objectivity as I might be, it pisses me off to be told by audio snobs and braggarts that I'm ignorant because I don't have an expensive enough system to appreciate this or that aspect of audio. :dita:

My own hi-fi experience goes back almost 15 years before the advent of CD and at one time I have a reasonably good analog setup. I gave up on because LPs were such a big pain in the butt from a usability point of view and that is still a big part of why I'm not interested in vinyl.

We agree on this: it takes sizable investment to achieve of the putative advantages of vinyl. I rule it out on that score too: I simply have much better uses for my limited funds than to buy an expensive analog kit.

Finally I'm mainly a classical music listener. The availability of new classical on LP is essentially nil, and I'm not interest rumaging yard sales for the odd, scratchy, disgustingly dirty, old LP.

Cantankerous old git, just because I have some decent audio equipment, I'm a braggart and audio snob? Just how little do you have to have in order to not be an audio snob?

I've always shown you the utmost respect and tried to be friendly - always. I have NEVER been condescending to anyone on this site. But your attitude is for shyte. The inital response you gave was agressive and disrespectful -FOR WHAT REASON!! How have I offended you in the past?? THAT is why I responded as I did. Because I will not put up will foggy old gits that get mad for nothing.

pixelthis

04-29-2008, 12:19 AM

Cantankerous old git, just because I have some decent audio equipment, I'm a braggart and audio snob? Just how little do you have to have in order to not be an audio snob?

I've always shown you the utmost respect and tried to be friendly - always. I have NEVER been condescending to anyone on this site. But your attitude is for shyte. The inital response you gave was agressive and disrespectful -FOR WHAT REASON!! How have I offended you in the past?? THAT is why I responded as I did. Because I will not put up will foggy old gits that get mad for nothing.

the thing is, that after the inital honeymoon with CD was over , vinyl types started appearing that claimed that vinyl was superiour to CD, a claim that is patently rediculous.
Recording engineers, experts, professionals of all types proclaim the inherent
superiority of CD and still you hear from "audiophile" types that think they have discovered something "new".
What you dont understand is that in 1975, seven years before the advent of CD, I was
listening to records, on Duals, gerards, you name it.
I currently have two turntables, one from the early eighties and one from the mid eighties,
both technics, one direct drive, one belt.
There is no reason these cant play a record as well as a new 5,000 rig, playing a record , despite what the marketing dept of whatever fancy rig you bought will tell you, is
rather straightfoward.
Your fancy rig works pretty much the same way as my two decade old platter, which pretty much works the same as a platter from the fifties.
CD is better, SACD is even BETTER, and while I still enjoy my albums, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE MEDIUM IS LIMITED.
I think that if analog types want to invest thousands in a obsolete medium with no future,
then more power to em, and to the sharks that will sell them overpriced toys
that wont outperform a twenty year old player :1:

Feanor

04-29-2008, 05:08 AM

...
I've always shown you the utmost respect and tried to be friendly - always. I have NEVER been condescending to anyone on this site. But your attitude is for shyte. The inital response you gave was agressive and disrespectful -FOR WHAT REASON!! ....

First let me say I accept that it wasn't your intention to be condescending. But it's all the other guy's perception: we can say things innocently that are misperceived by others. Sometimes candor must be tempered with sensitivity. I ought to know; I've been guilty of excessive candor too often over the years with regrettable consequences.

As for my original "humbug" remark, well maybe that was an instance of excessive candor too: sorry about that. As to why, because it is my opinion based on 35 years of audio experience. Hence I found your assertion that I don't know what I'm talking about because my equipment isn't good enough, to be offensive. Here's a clue: audiophiles with (relatively) modest systems really hate this line of argument; sometimes there's a grain of truth, more often it's just attempt by the audiophile snob to put his opinions beyond the criticism of others.

O'Shag

04-29-2008, 01:02 PM

the thing is, that after the inital honeymoon with CD was over , vinyl types started appearing that claimed that vinyl was superiour to CD, a claim that is patently rediculous.
Recording engineers, experts, professionals of all types proclaim the inherent
superiority of CD and still you hear from "audiophile" types that think they have discovered something "new".
What you dont understand is that in 1975, seven years before the advent of CD, I was
listening to records, on Duals, gerards, you name it.
I currently have two turntables, one from the early eighties and one from the mid eighties,
both technics, one direct drive, one belt.
There is no reason these cant play a record as well as a new 5,000 rig, playing a record , despite what the marketing dept of whatever fancy rig you bought will tell you, is
rather straightfoward.
Your fancy rig works pretty much the same way as my two decade old platter, which pretty much works the same as a platter from the fifties.
CD is better, SACD is even BETTER, and while I still enjoy my albums, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE MEDIUM IS LIMITED.
I think that if analog types want to invest thousands in a obsolete medium with no future,
then more power to em, and to the sharks that will sell them overpriced toys
that wont outperform a twenty year old player :1:

:mad2: C'mon PixelTwit - Vinyl is totally and utterly a mechanical medium. The signal produced from todays MC cartridges is minute. Noises which you may not perceive are easily picked up by the system and translate into distortion. The rig and the phonstage is critical. Unlike digital media, where a crappy player can produce ok results, a crappy record player will just make horrible noise. Have you ever heard a good modern-day vinyl reproduction system, or are you just saying that all vinyl rigs sound the same because its somehow intimidating to consider that it may not be the case?

Why did I ever stick up for you? Sir Terrence is right, you are a moron of the highest order. :dita: Jeez, morons are starting to come out of the woodwork around here..

O'Shag

04-29-2008, 01:07 PM

Feanor

04-29-2008, 03:35 PM

As far as I'm concerned, you owe me an apology Feanor, because you levelled comments at me that were desrespectful and undeserved without any provocation. I would have expected that from PixelThis who is obviously talking out his arse inthis case, but not from you. But I couldn't care less if you give an apology or not. Until then, I will continue to consider you a cantakerous old git and will offer no further response to you.

Yes, of course I'm a cantankerous old git. But you've had all the apology you're going to get from me. Recall I did apologize for my "humbug" remark. Other than that, I explained why your subsequent comments were offensive to me. Apparently the explanation when over your head. I'd say it's you who owes me and the other members an apology.

pixelthis

04-30-2008, 12:03 AM

:mad2: C'mon PixelTwit - Vinyl is totally and utterly a mechanical medium. The signal produced from todays MC cartridges is minute. Noises which you may not perceive are easily picked up by the system and translate into distortion. The rig and the phonstage is critical. Unlike digital media, where a crappy player can produce ok results, a crappy record player will just make horrible noise. Have you ever heard a good modern-day vinyl reproduction system, or are you just saying that all vinyl rigs sound the same because its somehow intimidating to consider that it may not be the case?

Why did I ever stick up for you? Sir Terrence is right, you are a moron of the highest order. :dita: Jeez, morons are starting to come out of the woodwork around here..

YOU STOOD UP FOR ME because you knew I was right, like I'm right now.
Vinyl is a "mechanical" medium. Whats your point?
And theres that buzzphrase again, "a modern reproduction system"
Well, what is so amazing about this "modern" reproduction system?
You know why turntables last so long? Because good ones are built really well,
and materials science hasnt advanced that much.
"Modern" record players have been improved, but the improvements have been incremental, at best, the rest is purely marketing.
Its the old law of diminishing returns rearing its ugly head again.
Buy yourself a music hall with a preinstalled cart, to increase its performance
by even 20% is going to cost thousands, and a german shepard would be hard pressed to tell the difference.
Your problem is that you bought the hype about a "modern" reproduction system,
I was 25 years when CD was introduced, what do you think I listened to before then?
None of the "modern" reproduction "systems" are much different than the "old"
reproduction systems.
The ball bearings, belts, servo controls, sure a "modern" player looks nice, and I bet it sounds really great, but I bet you would be hard pressed to pick one outta a lineup blindfolded.
I have seen it all, a turntable that used a friggin laser for a stylist, linear tracking,
"snakearm" and straightarm, you name it (my Pioneer snakearm was very nice, BTW)
and marketing flapdoodle doesnt impress me too much.
There was a thing going around in the eighties called an "airplane", actually it was a ponzi
get rich scheme, basically a chain letter.
Doesnt matter if it was called a "airplane"
And the marketing dept might call it a "modern" reproduction system, its still
a flippin turntable, and yes I have seen them, and several hundred more just like it, and have owned dozens
So dont tell the grizzled war vet that he doesnt know how to dodge a bullet, okay? :1:

Les Adams

04-30-2008, 01:51 AM

Les, forgive me, I don't mean to condescend in the least.

Yes, clicks and pops, but not in well cared for or worn out records. Most of my records are silent. There's no doubt that vinyl is a much more finicky medium than CD. The potential for extraordinary performance is not so readily accessed, but in its highest form, analogue decimates CD. I know it because I've heard it. I wouldn't be so stupid to say it otherwise and I owe no special allegiance to vinyl. I won't harp on about it anyway. I only responded to Feanor as I did because his initial response (which he later modified) to what I said (in all friendliness) was rude and uncalled for. I am too experienced in Hi-Fi to talk humbug for a start.

What I don't understand, is that I've always been polite to Feanor and others.

Ok, I agree to a point about vinyl, except that even well cared for records still mysteriously pick up ticks and pops. The 180g seem less prone to this for some reason. I do look after my records meticulously. Most of the records I sold recently were in near mint condition, even under bright light they had only minor swirls where they had been taken in and out of the sleeve and played like new. But there is always some noise and I guess I have got used to the absolute silence of digital media as I certainly don't recall being unduly bothered by background noise on vinyly when it was all I played.

As far as the personal matters on here are concerned, it is a great shame because I started a topic that I thought would generate some interesting comment about THE VALUE OF RECORDS and was curious to know who would and who would not sell their vinyl and replace it with CD if they found they could make some money. It was not intended to be a vinyl vs cd debate although I guess that is partly relevent.

I was certainly not expecting to come here and read all this name calling and agression. If I knew my posting this, or any other topic on here would result in unpleasantness I wouldn't have bothered. In fact it makes me feel like not bothering again. Who started it and who said what doesn't matter, but if there is a problem maybe there could be a less pulic way to sort it out and leave these pages to reasoned discussion and opinion as intended. Of course there are going to be differences of opinoin, it would be boring if there were not, but can we at least stay on topic and not get so personal, after all, its only hi-fi, nobody's life or reputation depends on it. Life is too short.

Can we get back to the topic now please?

emaidel

04-30-2008, 03:51 AM

In keeping on topic, I have to admit that, when I moved from New York to Denver in 1993, I threw out at least 300 records. Most were albums I hadn't played in many years, and with music I didn't much care for anymore. The "dump" included all of my mono LP's, and I don't regret getting rid of most of them (I still rue the day I threw out my one and only Peggy Lee album, with her classic, "Fever").

Most of those discarded were all of the albums I had on the Command label, most of those on the London Phase 4 label, all of my Ventures albums and all of those by Martin Denny. I learned years later that the Martin Denny albums were fetchng somewhere around $40 each, and in that respect, I wish I had kept them.

I still have over 800 LP's and play some of them some of the time. Would I sell them? Perhaps, but only if the album turned out to be worth a lot of money.

The topic, and the "LP vs. CD" argument are linked in that the decision to keep records is likely tied into whether or not one prefers the sound of a record to that of a duplicate CD. I'm one of those who prefers the CD, especially now that I have a really superb CD player (the Marantz SA-8001) that has virtually eliminated all the negatives that people once attributed to CD's (harshness, steely-sounding strings, etc.)

Another member, JohnMichael, said that my turntable would probably get dusty now that I've purchased this SACD player, and he's right - I haven't played a record since I got it. So, the temptation to sell off some of my record collection is even greater now.

jjp735i

04-30-2008, 08:56 AM

It's funny I came across this tread. I argue ( in fun ) with a friend about turntables all the time. Me having a Yamaha p-550 and him having some high end what ya call it that cost 5000 or so. Then we argue about albums and CD's. Our biggest argument is that he can hear more sounds then I can on the same audio source. Everyones hearing starts to degrad at 40. Audio Geeks, which I call them say they can hear everything better then us poor smucks that will never have or even if I did have the money a 40,000 dollar system just to listen to vinyl.

I'm sorry, but really think if you put a well kept album on my system it will sound pretty darn close to what the artist meant it to sound like. Pops are albums that were not kept very well. Our of the 300 albums I have I would have to say 250 of them are pop free and they are mostly all from the 70,s and 80's.

I have to say I have always been anal about my albums in keeping them clean and stored,

Just my 2 cents.

jjp

basite

04-30-2008, 10:50 AM

Your fancy rig works pretty much the same way as my two decade old platter, which pretty much works the same as a platter from the fifties.
CD is better, SACD is even BETTER, and while I still enjoy my albums, I UNDERSTAND THAT THE MEDIUM IS LIMITED.
I think that if analog types want to invest thousands in a obsolete medium with no future,
then more power to em, and to the sharks that will sell them overpriced toys
that wont outperform a twenty year old player :1:

yeah, I know...

but your cd player also works on that very same way. based on a 30 year old technology, which was based on even older technology.

same for your amp, speakers, ...

and if you say that the 'overpriced toys' won't outperform the twenty year old player, you're actually also saying that the 'overpriced cd/sacd player', won't outperform the $20 crap from circuit city.

and yes, technically seen, vinyl is inferior to CD, but I've learned not only to trust the specs. I believe my ears, and my ears currently say that vinyl sounds better. No wait, technically seen 'better' isn't the right word, 'nicer', or 'more pleasant', 'more pleasing', 'more enjoyable'...

and isn't 'enjoying the music' what we strive for? well, in that case, I pick vinyl.

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

pixelthis

04-30-2008, 11:54 PM

pixelthis

05-01-2008, 12:00 AM

yeah, I know...

but your cd player also works on that very same way. based on a 30 year old technology, which was based on even older technology.

same for your amp, speakers, ...

and if you say that the 'overpriced toys' won't outperform the twenty year old player, you're actually also saying that the 'overpriced cd/sacd player', won't outperform the $20 crap from circuit city.

and yes, technically seen, vinyl is inferior to CD, but I've learned not only to trust the specs. I believe my ears, and my ears currently say that vinyl sounds better. No wait, technically seen 'better' isn't the right word, 'nicer', or 'more pleasant', 'more pleasing', 'more enjoyable'...

and isn't 'enjoying the music' what we strive for? well, in that case, I pick vinyl.

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

Well, good for you, but you are wrong on a few counts.
CD tech has advanced quite a bit, not just the player but the CD.
Anyone who listened to early CD will tell you that.
AND WHILE "20$ crap" from CC will sound half decent hooked up to decent gear,
its totally dependent on your setup, if you use high end dacs on a prepro or the like then
your CD player just has to spin the disc and read the ones and zeros.
This is why, if you have great dacs in your processor, an expensive CD player is a waste
of money, get a five disc changer, all you need is a transport, get one that saves trips to the player to change the disc :1:

basite

05-01-2008, 03:24 AM

Well, good for you, but you are wrong on a few counts.
CD tech has advanced quite a bit, not just the player but the CD.
Anyone who listened to early CD will tell you that.
AND WHILE "20$ crap" from CC will sound half decent hooked up to decent gear,
its totally dependent on your setup, if you use high end dacs on a prepro or the like then
your CD player just has to spin the disc and read the ones and zeros.
This is why, if you have great dacs in your processor, an expensive CD player is a waste
of money, get a five disc changer, all you need is a transport, get one that saves trips to the player to change the disc :1:

oh yes, that's why they make $30k+ transports...

everything matters.

ever heard a setup with a great transport, and a great dac, and a great pre and poweramp?

you think to linear, to basic overall IMHO. Listen to things before judging something is a waste of money.

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

emaidel

05-01-2008, 04:16 AM

I too disagree with the concept of a basic, low-cost transport with a good sounding DAC as the way to go. In my experience, better CD players also do a better job of tracking certain discs than lesser transports do.

My latest purchase of the Marantz SA-8001 SACD player not only has signifiicantly improved the sound of all my CD's (some to far greater extents than others), but plays certain discs that either woudn't play at all, or did so with some difficulty on my older setup. I purchased the Robert Shaw performance of "A Brahms' Requiem" on Telarc and went through several replacement discs before I could get one to play without incessant "ticking" on my Adcom GCD-600/GDA-600 combo. Two discs from amazon.com were unlistenable, and then a replacement direct from Telarc played, but still with annoying tick-tick-tick throughout a number of the tracks. As this was the only disc in my entire collection that did this, I just assumed it was a bad run on the part of Telarc.

When I connected the 8001, the very first disc I played was the Brahm's Requiem. Not only was I stunned at how much better it sounded than before, but the disc plays absolutely perfectly now, with none of the annoying ticks that so annoyed me before. I suspect that any of the discs I returned probably would have played just as well, though I can't be sure of that.

And, why does the 8001 sound so good? Is it due to the transport, or the built-in DAC? I suspect it's largely the DAC, but I also believe that the transport plays quite a part too.

I could have improved the sound of my Adcom GCD-600 by replacing the GDA-600 with a better DAC, but still had the annoying problem I described above. I'm glad I didn't go that route.

Jim Clark

05-01-2008, 06:53 AM

To be truthful, I probably have CDs that more valuable than most of my vinyl collection. I'm a music listener though, not a music collector. To my mind the biggest distinction is that I don't sell off stuff, period. Directly related to that, since I'm not a collector, I don't really research the value of anything I have sitting around. Probably not the best move should an insurance claim ever need to be filed : )

If I happen across some information that addresses the value of something I have, it's kinda wild to think that someone would pay that much for a title in a particular format but since I'm not interested in selling the wonder is short lived.

One thing I've noticed is that in the market of non stop reissues stuff that was once "collectible" isn't so much once the reissues come out. Light Bulb Sun by Porcupine Tree on CD was the latest one I heard about. Not being a Porcupine Tree fan I might have been tempted to sell that one had I known about it in time : )

jc

dean_martin

05-01-2008, 11:34 AM

I gave my brother a copy of Exodus on MoFi before their last death and resurrection and it's still sealed. He doesn't have a turntable, but he's a "collector" of anything that interests him. I bug him all the time about bringing it over to have a listen. He won't. I wish I had picked up 2 copies.

Woochifer

05-01-2008, 03:15 PM

Been a while since I've looked up the price lists for some of my LPs. A lot of the stuff in my collection is pretty rare, particularly the audiophile pressings and 12" remixes (many of which were never issued on CD). Some of the more interesting items that I still have include ...

Pink Floyd - The Dark Side of the Moon (Mobile Fidelity Original Master Recording)
I've seen this LP fetch upwards of $200 on the collector's markets. It's very much considered a holy grail item, even though the latest 200g pressings from last year purportedly rival the MoFi pressings in sound quality. The quality of the MoFi pressing is amazing and sounds better than any of the CD versions I've done A/B comparisons with. Have yet to do an A/B comparison between the MoFi LP and the SACD, but that should be interesting.

Genesis - Three Sides Live (UK pressing)
This is a misnomer because the UK LP version actually has four live sides, including sets with Steve Hackett. The US version has studio material on the fourth side, and this material was initially issued in the UK on a separate EP. Once the CD came out, all versions of this album, including the UK version, went with the American track list. The live sets on side 4 of that original UK LP issue have never reappeared.

The Who - Who's Next (Deutsche Grammaphon pressing)
DG had a reputation for issuing stellar LP pressings, and they began producing limited edition pressings for several rock bands in the late-70s and early-80s. One of these bands was The Who, for whom DG reissued their entire studio album output. These albums have been popular with collectors, although my particular copy of this album actually sounds like crap -- inner groove distortion galore. I would have returned this album when I bought it, but the store had sold all of their DG copies for The Who and no more were coming in. This is one rare LP that I would probably be willing to part with.

Supertramp - Cannonball (Direct-to-disc 12" single)
45RPM 12" single done direct-to-disc -- very unusual for a mainstream rock studio album, but apparently Supertramp chose to record this song using a single live-in-studio take. Master disc cutter Bernie Grundman captured the session. The dynamics on this vinyl version are great with almost pin-point perfect imaging on the horn section and noticeably better sound quality than the CD version.

Pat Metheny Group - DG/ECM pressings
I have all of the PMG LPs from Pat Metheny Group through First Circle on Deutsche Grammophon pressings. The music is great, and these pressings are absolutely immaculate -- spot centered with minimal surface noise. Warner originally handled ECM's U.S. distribution, and those LPs had decent pressing quality. But, the quality went up markedly when ECM switched to Polygram as their U.S. distributor, and had the LPs pressed by the DG facilities in Germany. No idea how much these are worth, but they are relatively rare because most of Pat Metheny's ECM-era albums were pressed by Warner. The DG pressings were only produced for a short time.

James Newton Howard and Friends (Sheffield Lab direct-to-disc)
For years, this was practically a mandatory demo item at high end audio shows. Up to that time, this was probably the most aggressively recorded drum and percussion I'd ever heard, and it remains one of the most realistic recordings for drum, percussion, and keyboards (acoustic and digital) out there. Like all direct-to-disc LPs, this is a rarity due to limited production. Sheffield made these direct disc LPs even more valuable by purposely mastering the CDs from noisy backup tapes. Sheffield Lab was anti-digital to the extreme, and were accused of purposely making inferior CDs just to promote their agenda. The CDs are still available, and while they sound good, their sound quality is nowhere near as optimal as the LPs.

jrhymeammo

05-01-2008, 04:48 PM

pixelthis

05-01-2008, 09:49 PM

oh yes, that's why they make $30k+ transports...

everything matters.

ever heard a setup with a great transport, and a great dac, and a great pre and poweramp?

you think to linear, to basic overall IMHO. Listen to things before judging something is a waste of money.

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

Not really, some things matter not at all.
You are rather young, so I will forgive your relative ignorance of facts of life, you're pretty smart you'll learn.
For instance, theres always someone willing to spend 30k on a transport,
doesnt mean its worth it, nessesariliy, just means that if theres someone dumb enough to buy such a thing theres someone willing to make a buck off of him.
I HAVE HEARD ALL KINDS OF CD transports and dacs, truth is that a transport just have to read all of the info on the disc, a twelve dollar GPX portable player has to read the same info as a Linn handbuilt job, and both basically read it the same way, a Linn might be more reliable, stable, and pretty, but thats about it.
TRUTH is the way a CD is authored , and the album on it produced, has more to do with its sound than the transport.
A lousey disc will be just as lousey on a 30k "transport" as a 20$ portable fresh off of the boat from China :1:

basite

05-02-2008, 01:35 AM

Not really, some things matter not at all.
You are rather young, so I will forgive your relative ignorance of facts of life, you're pretty smart you'll learn.
For instance, theres always someone willing to spend 30k on a transport,
doesnt mean its worth it, nessesariliy, just means that if theres someone dumb enough to buy such a thing theres someone willing to make a buck off of him.
I HAVE HEARD ALL KINDS OF CD transports and dacs, truth is that a transport just have to read all of the info on the disc, a twelve dollar GPX portable player has to read the same info as a Linn handbuilt job, and both basically read it the same way, a Linn might be more reliable, stable, and pretty, but thats about it.
TRUTH is the way a CD is authored , and the album on it produced, has more to do with its sound than the transport.
A lousey disc will be just as lousey on a 30k "transport" as a 20$ portable fresh off of the boat from China :1:

true, I'm young and i'll learn.

but obviously you're old and have never learned.

tell me, if you say the cheap player, used as a transport, with a good dac is as good as a expensive dedicated transport, with the same dac, then why do they sound SO VERY DIFFERENT, and this meaning the expensive transport sounds WAAAAY BETTER?

they have to do the same job in readin stuff, true. That's like saying a lada is equal to a rolls royce. after all, they just have to do the same job, drive, and they both do so, so what's the difference?

transports do the reading part, ever thought about the fact that there is more information on the disc than you'd expect? information that a cheap player won't read, or will misplace it, or jitter? and transports can be noisy.

A few weeks ago I heard a Metronome transport (looked pretty weird, but anyways), the thing cost €35k, the dac connected to it cost €19k. for a quick comparison, they hooked up another cheap transport. It was A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE, I tell you. The immense energy the transport could place in the room, how fast and detailed it was, how much more I heard with the expensive one compared to the cheap one.

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

emaidel

05-02-2008, 03:28 AM

Pixie's posts always seem to come from an orifice on his body at the other end than where his mouth is, and what he's posted here is no different. He just KNOWS whatever he claims to, and totally disregards any evidence or experience to disprove him. Basite and I have each provided conclusive proof that a transport makes a difference, but...

Oh well, it's still fun to see how ridiculous he seems each time something else comes out of his, ah, er, orifice.

Feanor

05-02-2008, 03:39 AM

E-Stat

05-02-2008, 07:28 AM

tell me, if you say the cheap player, used as a transport, with a good dac is as good as a expensive dedicated transport, with the same dac, then why do they sound SO VERY DIFFERENT, and this meaning the expensive transport sounds WAAAAY BETTER?
When one's opinion is based upon speculation, all you get are speculative answers. I've heard the Burmester 969/970 combo at length in a really nice system vs. my GamuT CD-1. Yes, Virginia it does make a difference. :)

rw

Feanor

05-02-2008, 08:35 AM

Not really, some things matter not at all.
You are rather young, so I will forgive your relative ignorance of facts of life, you're pretty smart you'll learn.
...:1:

The way I heard it, the process of reading pits on a CD is actually an analog process -- technically quite different from reading 1/0 from hard disk. The slightest scratch or fingerpring is liley to cause a misread. Error correction can attempt to correct misreads but, as I understand, isn't always able to do so perfectly. Also, "jitter", (timing errors), can be introduced by the transport; such jitter can be removed by reclocking the signal but not all DACs do this. So apparently there is scope for one transport to be better than another by reading more accurately and//or introducing less jitter.

The fact that the CD can be misread is the theoretical basis for surface treatments, green markers, stabalizer mats, etc. that are tauted to improve sound quality. Also, as I understand it, some player/transports read the CD multiple times. Thus they can discard, say, the one read in three that differs from the others, hence error correction process have less to do and bit-prefect delivery to downstream processes, (DAC), is more likely.

The advantage of decent computer ripping programs have over cheap transports is that they can reread the CD when any error is detected. Since they aren't constrained to real-time, programs can read a CD as many times as necessary -- once Exact Audio Copy (EAC) took over an hour :eek6: to read a very badly scratched disc I fed it!

Computers can take the output from the rip program and store it bit-perfectly; subsequently they are able to extract information bit-perfectly from storage and pass it to downstream processes. But computers aren't inevidably better than players because bit errors (rarely) or jitter (more often) can be insinuated after the data has been read and sent on its way.

SlumpBuster

05-02-2008, 09:45 AM

Oh, boy, this is really devolving into vinyl vs digital. meh. To each there own.

To my mind the biggest distinction is that I don't sell off stuff, period.

I know, right? I've never even thrown out anything, unless it was broken. I can't sell/discard stuff because I might want to listen to it. Sure I haven't played it in years, but I still might want to listen to it. How much would it suck if this weren't there to listen to.

As to value, I know I've actually got some pretty valuable rare stuff. But, it's so specific that it would be difficult to sell for top dollar, even with eBay. I've got alot of Touch and Go vinyl from the 80s. There's probably some guy out there willing to pay hundreds bucks for my pristine Scratch Acid debut EP. But what are the odds we would cross paths even on ebay? I'd never part with it anyway. If I sold it then I could never hear "She Said" again the way it was originally heard. I wanna hear it the way it sounded in the dorm rooms of the mid 80s.

Other probably very valuable stuff that I would never part with:

Lots of The Damned in good condition, including 10" EPs and various promo materials.
Lots of Cocteau Twins 12" and 7"
More Touch and Go records from Killdozer, Die Kruzen, Rapeman, ect.
Not very mainstream, but very valuable to punk, hardcore, and grunge fans.

In a gross genre swing, I've actually been picking up a lot of metal lately because it is getting harder to find, especially the various censored covers. There are alot of rare Scorpions covers that were censored, including an infamous one for Virgin Killer, but, you would have to be a fool to seek that one out, and no I do not have it. That one can get bid up very high on ebay, unless of course ebay discovers it and cancels the auction. But I do have original covers for In Trance and Love at First Sting, and am always on the look out for the original covers of Taken By Force and Lovedrive. If your curious Wikipedia has all the various censored covers, including Vigin Killer, but it is not safe for work. Then there are covers like Poison (Open Up and Say Ahh) and Wasp (Animal - F**k Like A Beast). They don't fetch alot of money in comparison with the Butcher Cover, but they are fun to collect.

GMichael

05-02-2008, 10:16 AM

I used to have a rather large collection of LP's. Somewhere around 3k. One day, the wife decided that they were taking up too much room. When I came home I panicked that they were gone. Then relived as she told me that she had only moved them. Then back to panic when she told me of their new location, behind the furnace.
As you can guess, I no longer value my LP collection.
Anyone want an old Technics TT for cheap?:thumbsup:

SlumpBuster

05-02-2008, 10:27 AM

jrhymeammo

05-03-2008, 05:48 PM

A well-record LP will whip a badly recorded CD or SACD any day.

That's a subtle way to smack us in da face. :hand:

pixelthis

05-03-2008, 08:06 PM

true, I'm young and i'll learn.

but obviously you're old and have never learned.

[QUOTE]tell me, if you say the cheap player, used as a transport, with a good dac is as good as a expensive dedicated transport, with the same dac, then why do they sound SO VERY DIFFERENT, and this meaning the expensive transport sounds WAAAAY BETTER?

Of course a cheap transport wont be as good as an expensive one, but you'd be surprized
at how little difference there is. This has been proved time and again in double blind tests
If a transport is that important then why do most "high end" CD players use rather low grade transports from Sony, etc?
MARANTZ has their own dedicated transport in their SACD player, and thought that was so special they advertise it, because it goes against the custom of using generic drives , even in more expensive players

they have to do the same job in readin stuff, true. That's like saying a lada is equal to a rolls royce. after all, they just have to do the same job, drive, and they both do so, so what's the difference?

My point exactly.
THE question to ask is that if a Rolls is so "special" then why does it have a GM
transmission?

transports do the reading part, ever thought about the fact that there is more information on the disc than you'd expect? information that a cheap player won't read, or will misplace it, or jitter? and transports can be noisy.

There is no "extra" information, in fact even cheap players "oversample" to get a good read.
If a player doesnt read all of the info on the disc then its malfunctioning, and you will be able to tell easily

A few weeks ago I heard a Metronome transport (looked pretty weird, but anyways), the thing cost €35k, the dac connected to it cost €19k. for a quick comparison, they hooked up another cheap transport. It was A WORLD OF DIFFERENCE, I tell you. The immense energy the transport could place in the room, how fast and detailed it was, how much more I heard with the expensive one compared to the cheap one.

And the difference was mostly between your ears, not in them.

do you know why turntables suddenly became so popular?
Because audiophile snobs couldnt stand the fact that a cheap CD player, with proper dacs and gear, could sound as good as an expensive one.
A TURNTABLE has to be expensive in order to overcome the deficicencies in the medium, and the difference is still not that great.
One of the best CD players you can buy is a five disc yamaha, and you dont have to keep
getting up to change discs.
The absolute best isnt a single tray, its a five tray, its quite easy to make one of those.
Onkyo, MARANTZ, several make five disc changers, and the only diff between them and a single tray is price, single for some reason cost more in spite of the fact that they are inconveinent.
WHEN I had a Yamaha five disc I shot down a lot of "fancy" players with a blindfold
(and pissed a lot off in the process)
And being old I have learned.
Mainly how to seperate hype from reality, when you learn just how hard it is to get by you will learn also, mainly not to waste precious resources on hype and whats "supposed" to sound good, as opposed to what does sound good for the right price :1:

basite

05-04-2008, 03:07 AM

Of course a cheap transport wont be as good as an expensive one, but you'd be surprized
at how little difference there is. This has been proved time and again in double blind tests
If a transport is that important then why do most "high end" CD players use rather low grade transports from Sony, etc?
MARANTZ has their own dedicated transport in their SACD player, and thought that was so special they advertise it, because it goes against the custom of using generic drives , even in more expensive players

weird, because Marantz uses Philips transports in most of their models...
and don't forget Sony made exotic players too, in which were really good transports of their own.

My point exactly.
THE question to ask is that if a Rolls is so "special" then why does it have a GM
transmission?

it's based on a GM transmission. that's not the same. and that was a while ago, since 2000, they're under BMW, and before that, they were from VW/audi group...

There is no "extra" information, in fact even cheap players "oversample" to get a good read.
If a player doesnt read all of the info on the disc then its malfunctioning, and you will be able to tell easily

there is no information that is not read, but there is tons of information that just isn't heard with a cheap transport, or with a cheap dac.
an expensive DAC with a cheap transport will sound good, but you won't hear everything.

And the difference was mostly between your ears, not in them.

do you know why turntables suddenly became so popular?
Because audiophile snobs couldnt stand the fact that a cheap CD player, with proper dacs and gear, could sound as good as an expensive one.
A TURNTABLE has to be expensive in order to overcome the deficicencies in the medium, and the difference is still not that great.
One of the best CD players you can buy is a five disc yamaha, and you dont have to keep
getting up to change discs.
The absolute best isnt a single tray, its a five tray, its quite easy to make one of those.
Onkyo, MARANTZ, several make five disc changers, and the only diff between them and a single tray is price, single for some reason cost more in spite of the fact that they are inconveinent.
WHEN I had a Yamaha five disc I shot down a lot of "fancy" players with a blindfold
(and pissed a lot off in the process)
And being old I have learned.
Mainly how to seperate hype from reality, when you learn just how hard it is to get by you will learn also, mainly not to waste precious resources on hype and whats "supposed" to sound good, as opposed to what does sound good for the right price :1:

for me, the turntable became popular because I realized that my not overly expensive tt sounded better to my ears than my cd player.

oh, and a 5 disc changer is more convenient. That's all it is. On the other hand, it's unstable: real high end manufacturers spend lots of money in a transport that is quiet, solid and extremely stable. I last heared a Accuphase transport. The housing to suspend the actual transport alone weighed 18kg(not the outer case, just the part that suspends the actual transport). and was made out of solid cast steel. it could withstand a bomb impact, so to speak. your yamaha 5 disc changer, on the other hand, has a HUGE tray, in which houses a platter carrying 5 cd's, and you can tell me whatever you want, but that thing won't be stable at all.

it's probably also noisy, since it's unstable it will make noise. and will suffer from vibrations (and yes, you might say that that's all voodoo, and digital won't be influenced by vibrations, well, I experienced different.)

and 'several make 5 disc changers' still doesn't make it good.
diahatshu, lada, kia, sanyongg, several make (cheap, bad) cars too, and that doesn't make them good.

by your logic, wonder why there are no high end 5 disc changers...

exactly, because it's impossible to make one that would outperform a high end single tray cd player costing the same.

in your system it won't make much of a difference, even if you used the most exotic transport in your system, the run of the mill DAC's in your receiver won't be able to do it justice. With a system like yours, and your close minded view on high end gear, convenience is what I'd be looking for too...

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

bobsticks

05-04-2008, 01:45 PM

My vinyl collection is truly invaluable.

Woochifer

05-04-2008, 02:15 PM

Well, it's NOT time for me to start another rant on how LP is much more superior than digital medium. But you might want to try a modern LOMC cartridge before setting down to your conclusion. To me, most of MM and HOMC cartridges are NOISY and lack in macro and micro-dynamics. But I think I'll reserve my opinion for another time....

I think it's very important for "Music Lovers' to have basic knowledge of "Music Collectors". It certainly helps to know what to look out for.

For instance, any Jazz LP by Pablo offers great music and fidelity. They are pressed on flimpsy wax, and sold for under $5 NM. I always value cheap LP with great music and fidelity. Orignal BN, Verve, Impulse is always nice though:thumbsup:

Though my interest for classical music is growing, my knowledge is very limited. But, based on what I've read, it seems that Late 60's to Late 70's British/Dutch pressings on Decca, London, Argo LPs are superb and consistant.
Look for a letter "G" in the dead wax.

Regards,
JRA

With the smaller labels though, the pressing quality can really vary depending on which outsource manufacturer they used to press their LPs. When I lived in L.A., I used to buy a lot of jazz LPs from now defunct labels like Intima, Passport, Pausa, Spindletop, and Nova. I remember that they would sometimes have to move the production around to different pressing houses depending on capacity, and the quality could change noticeably from one production run to the next.

pixelthis

05-04-2008, 09:38 PM

The way I heard it, the process of reading pits on a CD is actually an analog process -- technically quite different from reading 1/0 from hard disk. The slightest scratch or fingerpring is liley to cause a misread. Error correction can attempt to correct misreads but, as I understand, isn't always able to do so perfectly. Also, "jitter", (timing errors), can be introduced by the transport; such jitter can be removed by reclocking the signal but not all DACs do this. So apparently there is scope for one transport to be better than another by reading more accurately and//or introducing less jitter.
The fact that the CD can be misread is the theoretical basis for surface treatments, green markers, stabalizer mats, etc. that are tauted to improve sound quality. Also, as I understand it, some player/transports read the CD multiple times. Thus they can discard, say, the one read in three that differs from the others, hence error correction process have less to do and bit-prefect delivery to downstream processes, (DAC), is more likely.

The advantage of decent computer ripping programs have over cheap transports is that they can reread the CD when any error is detected. Since they aren't constrained to real-time, programs can read a CD as many times as necessary -- once Exact Audio Copy (EAC) took over an hour :eek6: to read a very badly scratched disc I fed it!

Computers can take the output from the rip program and store it bit-perfectly; subsequently they are able to extract information bit-perfectly from storage and pass it to downstream processes. But computers aren't inevidably better than players because bit errors (rarely) or jitter (more often) can be insinuated after the data has been read and sent on its way.

THEN by definition a HD is an analog process, since its a "head" reading a disc
magnetically.
And computers CAN store a music selection bit perfect, which is why they are slowly supplanting CD, and will eventually, for this and other reasons :1:

pixelthis

05-04-2008, 10:06 PM

weird, because Marantz uses Philips transports in most of their models...
and don't forget Sony made exotic players too, in which were really good transports of their own.

I would like to see one of these "exotic" players.
And Marantz used a proprietary drive in their 799$ sacd player

there is no information that is not read, but there is tons of information that just isn't heard with a cheap transport, or with a cheap dac.an expensive DAC with a cheap transport will sound good, but you won't hear everything.

In which case the player will be malfunctioning.
A cheap player will read the same information as an expensive one.
its not like a TT where some resolution will be lost by a bad cart, all information is read by a CD drive

oh, and a 5 disc changer is more convenient. That's all it is. On the other hand, it's unstable: real high end manufacturers spend lots of money in a transport that is quiet, solid and extremely stable. I last heared a Accuphase transport. The housing to suspend the actual transport alone weighed 18kg(not the outer case, just the part that suspends the actual transport). and was made out of solid cast steel. it could withstand a bomb impact, so to speak. your yamaha 5 disc changer, on the other hand, has a HUGE tray, in which houses a platter carrying 5 cd's, and you can tell me whatever you want, but that thing won't be stable at all.

This is a typical rant of someone who doesnt know about five disc changers, or how they are built.
THE TRAY is not the PLAYER, that is in the back and (usually) on the right side,
it actually grips the CD , AND IS EXTREMELY STABLE.
This is why you're able to change discs when one is playing.
So, in actuality the five disc is really a SINGLE DISC in operation.
A changer actually costs more to make, so manufacturers perpetuate the notion that
there is something inherently more stable in a single disc player.
Actually it costs less to make, which is their interest.
And I am not interested in a player that can surrive a "bomb" impact, if a bomb goes off I dont wont to be near it.
Just like I dont want to pay for overengineering, I dont need such a thing, it wont sound any better so why pay for it?

it's probably also noisy, since it's unstable it will make noise. and will suffer from vibrations (and yes, you might say that that's all voodoo, and digital won't be influenced by vibrations, well, I experienced different.)

Modern changers are very quiet, and digital wont be affected, and your "experience" is again between your ears

and 'several make 5 disc changers' still doesn't make it good. [Qdiahatshu, lada, kia, sanyongg, several make (cheap, bad) cars too, and that doesn't make them good.
by your logic, wonder why there are no high end 5 disc changers...

All of those manufacturers make quality cars, by your "logic" we should all be driving Lexus

exactly, because it's impossible to make one that would outperform a high end single tray cd player costing the same.

Not true, but a "high end" changer isnt made much because marketing has sold the high end crowd on the premise that making a "high end" changer is difficult, if not impossible.
This allows them to use cheaper single tray designs.
But you will not be able to tell a 300$ Onkyo changer (rather expensive in my book)
from a 3000$ dollar linn with a blindfold on

in your system it won't make much of a difference, even if you used the most exotic transport in your system, the run of the mill DAC's in your receiver won't be able to do it justice. With a system like yours, and your close minded view on high end gear, convenience is what I'd be looking for too...

Well, not everybody can afford a MAC.
But my 1200 buck receiver has 192 khz dacs, and a very quite preamp section,
its often used as a preamp, and 1200 bucks isnt cheap for a receiver, really.
The main limitaton in my system is amplication, receiver amps arent the best.
Maybe I can get my daddy to buy me a "mac" someday :1:

Keep them spinning,
Bert.[/QUOTE]

pixelthis

05-04-2008, 10:08 PM

jjp735i

05-05-2008, 06:06 AM

[QUOTE=basite]true, I'm young and i'll learn.

but obviously you're old and have never learned.

Of course a cheap transport wont be as good as an expensive one, but you'd be surprized
at how little difference there is. This has been proved time and again in double blind tests
If a transport is that important then why do most "high end" CD players use rather low grade transports from Sony, etc?
MARANTZ has their own dedicated transport in their SACD player, and thought that was so special they advertise it, because it goes against the custom of using generic drives , even in more expensive players

My point exactly.
THE question to ask is that if a Rolls is so "special" then why does it have a GM
transmission?

There is no "extra" information, in fact even cheap players "oversample" to get a good read.
If a player doesnt read all of the info on the disc then its malfunctioning, and you will be able to tell easily

And the difference was mostly between your ears, not in them.

do you know why turntables suddenly became so popular?
Because audiophile snobs couldnt stand the fact that a cheap CD player, with proper dacs and gear, could sound as good as an expensive one.
A TURNTABLE has to be expensive in order to overcome the deficicencies in the medium, and the difference is still not that great.
One of the best CD players you can buy is a five disc yamaha, and you dont have to keep
getting up to change discs.
The absolute best isnt a single tray, its a five tray, its quite easy to make one of those.
Onkyo, MARANTZ, several make five disc changers, and the only diff between them and a single tray is price, single for some reason cost more in spite of the fact that they are inconveinent.
WHEN I had a Yamaha five disc I shot down a lot of "fancy" players with a blindfold
(and pissed a lot off in the process)
And being old I have learned.
Mainly how to seperate hype from reality, when you learn just how hard it is to get by you will learn also, mainly not to waste precious resources on hype and whats "supposed" to sound good, as opposed to what does sound good for the right price :1:

I have a Yamaha 5 disc player. I think it's a CD-909, actually found it in a dumpster. I have to say it will play any cd I have without error. I have yet to stick one in it that has failed. I could never afford a $1000.oo or up cd player, nor would I probably want to spend that much on one. I think it sounds terrific. I am bias to yamaha though. My 2 channel and surround system is all Yamaha except for my Pioneer HPM - 100's.

I think with todays technology a decent cd player will produce the same sound as a very expencive one.
I could be wrong, but I still beleive that it's still in the original recording of the CD that makes the difference. You can tell that easily from playing one cd to the next. Some just sound nicer.

Just my two cents.

jjp

basite

05-05-2008, 07:09 AM

I would like to see one of these "exotic" players.
And Marantz used a proprietary drive in their 799$ sacd player

pick one, these are just the absolute top players...

5000 series (http://www.thevintageknob.org/SONY/sonyvault/X5000/5000.html)
SCD1 (http://www.thevintageknob.org/SONY/sonyesprit/SCD1/SCD1.html)
scd 777ES (http://www.thevintageknob.org/SONY/sonyes/SCD777ES/SCD777ES.html)
cdpr10 & DASR10 (http://www.thevintageknob.org/SONY/sonyesprit/CDPR10DASR10/CDPR10DASR10.html)

most of these are like unobtainium now, so expect dazzling prices...
They're very high regarded because of their extremely high quality and sound quality.

and look, all of them are single trays...

wanna see an exotic Yamaha cd player too?
here's one:
CDX 10000 (http://www.thevintageknob.org/YAMAHA/CDX10000/CDX10000.html)

another single tray, yes :)

gotta mean something huh,
you gonna say you know better than a whole lot of very intelligent engineers, who have been thinking of how to design the best cd player?
right, I didn't think so..

and here, digital high end at it's best. Accuphase.

DP65 (http://www.thevintageknob.org/ACCUPHASE/DP65/DP65.html)

and another single tray.
you could say that it's out of production now, but check their current products too, good luck finding a changer...

in fact, I haven't found any 'high end' cd changer yet...

and no, that $300 is not what I mean with 'high end'.

In which case the player will be malfunctioning.
A cheap player will read the same information as an expensive one.
its not like a TT where some resolution will be lost by a bad cart, all information is read by a CD drive

so, still, why do they sound so different?
If I remember correctly, you agreed that there was a (according to you 'small') difference between transports...

And I am not interested in a player that can surrive a "bomb" impact, if a bomb goes off I dont wont to be near it.
Just like I dont want to pay for overengineering, I dont need such a thing, it wont sound any better so why pay for it?

you missed the part 'so to speak', it wasn't ment literally...

And I don't pay for overengineering, I pay for quality, and quality still comes at a price, especially in the long run.

All of those manufacturers make quality cars, by your "logic" we should all be driving Lexus

I don't know, but have you ever seen a 'quality' lada? I sure haven't...
the other brands, they make 'showable' vehicles, but they still are not 'quality cars'...

But you will not be able to tell a 300$ Onkyo changer (rather expensive in my book)
from a 3000$ dollar linn with a blindfold on

$300 is 'expensive', just not in this hobby, where $300 for a cd player is pretty much at the bottom of the pricelist..

and I've done the blindfolded test multiple times, between players costing around the afromentioned $300, as well as players costing much more than $3000, and all players in between.

I was able to pick almost every last one of them out, and I never placed a cheap one in the expensive category, and vice versa.

Well, not everybody can afford a MAC.
But my 1200 buck receiver has 192 khz dacs, and a very quite preamp section,
its often used as a preamp, and 1200 bucks isnt cheap for a receiver, really.
The main limitaton in my system is amplication, receiver amps arent the best.
Maybe I can get my daddy to buy me a "mac" someday :1:

oh, hey, my $70 does too. in fact, it has 5 of them. having 192khz dac's is just a small part of what matters.
and no, $1200 is not cheap for a receiver, but it's not overly expensive too (well, for as far as receivers go...), it's pretty middle of the range...

a 1986/88 Meridian 206 for example will be miles ahead of your changer in sound quality (as well as build quality, I think...), and the DAC's in your receiver. And it's only got 16 bit dac's!

oh hey, and I payed my mac myself, every last penny of it. Dad payed a little part in advance, just to make sure the dealer reserved the amp for me, and I payed that little part back...
I bought it SECONDHAND for €1600, it's nearly 11 years old now...

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

E-Stat

05-05-2008, 07:59 AM

IBut you will not be able to tell a 300$ Onkyo changer (rather expensive in my book) from a 3000$ dollar linn with a blindfold on...
I find that actually making such comparisons far more fulfilling and enlightening than merely speculating about them. It's like the difference between enjoying an attractive woman in bed vs. merely thinking about it. Sometimes you really ought to give experience a try. You might find that like Basite and I, you might like it. :)

rw

Bernd

05-05-2008, 08:07 AM

My vinyl collection is truly invaluable.

I believe so.:dita:

basite

05-05-2008, 08:12 AM

My vinyl collection is truly invaluable.

I believe so.:dita:

well, time to change that eh bobs :p

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

SlumpBuster

05-05-2008, 05:24 PM

This thread is like an Egyptian airliner... its been hi-jacked. I think that you should have to name at least one LP you listened to in the last 24 hours in order to post in this thread. I'll start: In the last 3 hours - Fly by Night, Defenders of the Faith, High and Dry.

bobsticks

05-05-2008, 06:48 PM

I listened to the cd version of "Mule Variations" while staring at the LP's cover and drinking paint thinner...

jrhymeammo

05-05-2008, 07:01 PM

I listened to the cd version of "Mule Variations" while staring at the LP's cover and drinking paint thinner...
You SOB.
Is this your way of saying that you need another package?

JRA

bobsticks

05-05-2008, 07:17 PM

hehehe

O'Shag

05-05-2008, 10:36 PM

I have lots'n lots of old LPs. I bought many of them from the Goodwill store for 50cents each. I avoid the ones in bad shape. I have many gems picked up for next to nothing. Mose Allison performing live at the Lighthouse in Hermosa Beach is a perfect example. This 40-odd year old record was never opened until I got it. I can't properly convey the sense of realism when I play this record. It transports me to the venue. I feel the ambience, the air of the space, the energy. I am in the crowd. Mose Allison is in front of me. More than this, I really feel the music. Of the several hundreds of Cds/SACDs I own, many are effective at 'getting my groove on', but not one can do it in the same was as many of my records do. As has been proven in Sean of the Dead, records can make lethal weapons if by some weird stroke of fate most people start turning into zombies.

pixelthis

05-06-2008, 01:35 AM

I find that actually making such comparisons far more fulfilling and enlightening than merely speculating about them. It's like the difference between enjoying an attractive woman in bed vs. merely thinking about it. Sometimes you really ought to give experience a try. You might find that like Basite and I, you might like it. :)

rw

I HAVE TRIED, and like the experience with a beautiful woman the experience is transitory.
You either get tired of her or she gets old.
But its fitting you talk about "beautiful" women, most get their beauty courtesy of
the cosmetics company, there are few truely beautiful women out there.
SAME WITH AUDIO EQUIPMENT, the "beauty" is quite often the marketing dept
putting lipstick on a pig.
Its the same old law of deminishing returns, the last ten grand you spend on something will give you the least improvement than the first grand.
If you want to spend a grand on a CD player that is different from a 200 dollar CD player
in ways only a German shepard can tell, be my guest if it makes you happy.
But be warned "beautiful women" have litle patience with wasting such sums when you could be spending it on them
And if you had ever been with a truely beautiful woman you'd know that :1:

emaidel

05-06-2008, 03:56 AM

If you want to spend a grand on a CD player that is different from a 200 dollar CD player
in ways only a German shepard can tell, be my guest if it makes you happy.
:

I, and quite a few others here at AR, have spent that "grand," and are far better off for having done so. In my case, the Marantz SA-8001 SACD player ($899.99) has provided me with countless hours of sonic delights, allowing me to hear many instruments and details for the first time, and making my CD library something to continue to listen to to hear how much better they all sound now. Sometimes the differences are subtle, but most of the times, it all but knocks me over. And, I'm not a German shepard either.

'Tis a pity you keep posting such nonsensical drivel. You really have no idea how much better a good CD player can sound, and as long as you keep saying that there's no difference between one and a $200 cheapie, you're only further illustrating your total ignorance. Do you get some sort of perverted pleasure out of making yourself look ridiculous?

E-Stat

05-06-2008, 06:07 AM

I HAVE TRIED, and like the experience with a beautiful woman the experience is transitory.
You either get tired of her or she gets old.
But its fitting you talk about "beautiful" women, most get their beauty courtesy of
the cosmetics company, there are few truely beautiful women out there.
SAME WITH AUDIO EQUIPMENT, the "beauty" is quite often the marketing dept
putting lipstick on a pig.
Ok. I guess it sucks to be you. Sorry to hear that. The marketing department certainly didn't put any lipstick on my gear. The big black speakers with the metal frames? The black tube amps / preamp with no 3-D backlit multi-color indicators? Do you have any points that are based upon fact?

If you want to spend a grand on a CD player that is different from a 200 dollar CD player in ways only a German shepard can tell, be my guest if it makes you happy.
The really sad part is your continued speculation bears little resemblance to the truth. At age 51, I do not hear much above about 14k. On the other hand, there are countless cues found in recordings that begin to suggest the live, unamplified event found at frequencies significantly lower than a dog whistle. Such takes more than a *cheapie* player to exploit.

But be warned "beautiful women" have litle patience with wasting such sums when you could be spending it on them
And if you had ever been with a truely beautiful woman you'd know that :1:
Boy, ever the pessimist. Her hobbies (like collecting shiny rocks) get equal weighting with mine. Why is it that your posts in every thread always end up with you complaining about something?

Back to the thread topic, yes I truly value my vinyl collection as well. It contains decades of many happy memories having begun the collection when I was a kid. Quite a few discs are irreplaceable. Recent spins? Grand Canyon Suite, Deeper Reasons by Liz Story, and The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway by Genesis.

rw

Bernd

05-06-2008, 06:56 AM

[QUOTE=E-Stat]. Recent spins? [i]The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway by Genesis.

rw[/QUOTE

Their finest hour. And the inspiration I needed for that all important first disc to go on the platter tonight. Damn fine choice.:smilewinkgrin:

E-Stat

05-06-2008, 07:08 AM

Their finest hour. And the inspiration I needed for that all important first disc to go on the platter tonight. Damn fine choice.:smilewinkgrin:
Lots of good stuff indeed. For some reason, The Lamia is playing in my head. I can hear Gabriel carefully punctuate each phrase.

The scent grows richer.
He knows he must be near.
He finds the long passageway lit by chandelier.
Each step he takes the perfumes change from familiar fragrance to flavors strange.
A magnificent chamber meets his eye...
(cue haunting synth melody)

Or something like that!

rw

basite

05-06-2008, 07:22 AM

I HAVE TRIED, and like the experience with a beautiful woman the experience is transitory.
You either get tired of her or she gets old.
But its fitting you talk about "beautiful" women, most get their beauty courtesy of
the cosmetics company, there are few truely beautiful women out there.
SAME WITH AUDIO EQUIPMENT, the "beauty" is quite often the marketing dept
putting lipstick on a pig.
Its the same old law of deminishing returns, the last ten grand you spend on something will give you the least improvement than the first grand.

yeah, I quite agree with E-stat, I guess it sucks to be you :)

and actually, the cheap products often get more of the 'lipstick' treatement than more expensive products...

yeah, my Mcintosh is an exeption here, but of course, the black front/blue meters are there trademark...
I'd still buy a Mcintosh if it didn't have the blue lights you know...

and you definately hear an improvement with the next 10k you spend, and it's a pretty big improvement...

anyways, let's get back to the original question :)

although my vinyl collection is still small, and not worth that much (no special pressings, 180g ed, ...), I still value it alot, I don't think I could live without it, in fact...
it's not worth much money, but there's a good deal of personal value in them (or emotional value or however you should say it...)

keep them spinning,
Bert.

pixelthis

05-07-2008, 12:57 AM

I, and quite a few others here at AR, have spent that "grand," and are far better off for having done so. In my case, the Marantz SA-8001 SACD player ($899.99) has provided me with countless hours of sonic delights, allowing me to hear many instruments and details for the first time, and making my CD library something to continue to listen to to hear how much better they all sound now. Sometimes the differences are subtle, but most of the times, it all but knocks me over. And, I'm not a German shepard either.

'Tis a pity you keep posting such nonsensical drivel. You really have no idea how much better a good CD player can sound, and as long as you keep saying that there's no difference between one and a $200 cheapie, you're only further illustrating your total ignorance. Do you get some sort of perverted pleasure out of making yourself look ridiculous?

You're the one who called me a nazi, which is why I IGNORE YOU, since I DESPISE
anti-semitism or any kind of bigotry and dont apprieciate being lumped in with some of the worst mass murderers in history.
But I CANT RESIST HERE, see I am considering a player that is the same as yours,
that is the Marantz with the custom drive that I WAS TALKING ABOUT.
Is it better than a 200 dollar one? MAYBE, probably, but you can get a Cambridge for 300
bucks you know.
the point being that a 2,000 linn is better than your 900 dollar unit (which is considered cheap by some) in very small ways, and you couldnt double the performance if you spent a million dollars on a CD player.
In other words, LIKE I SAID , after the first grand it takes thousands to get a substantial improvement, whats so controversial about that ?
Its common HT or audiophile knowledge.
And the only place people have argured about it is on THIS site for some reason :1:

basite

05-07-2008, 03:18 AM

the point being that a 2,000 linn is better than your 900 dollar unit (which is considered cheap by some) in very small ways, and you couldnt double the performance if you spent a million dollars on a CD player.
In other words, LIKE I SAID , after the first grand it takes thousands to get a substantial improvement, whats so controversial about that ?

that it's not true IMHO...

I find big differences between players costing 1 grand and 2 grand...

and 900 is not cheap, but it isn't overly expensive neither.
those are considered normal prices in this hobby...

Keep them spinning,
Bert.

emaidel

05-07-2008, 04:04 AM

You're the one who called me a nazi

I can't believe you still believe this. We had a neo-nazi banned from this site, and aside from his obvious anti-semitic remarks (that were becoming increasingly inflammatory), many of his posts were flat out inane, just as many of yours are. I suggested that you might be next to go, not because you're a nazi, but because of the nature of what you have to say most of the time. If you believe that such a comparison is because I think you're a nazi, then you've really got your head screwed on at the wrong end.

And STOP using CAPS all the time where they don't belong! It's the internet equivalent of shouting, looks ridiculous, and makes reading your posts annoying.

Woochifer

05-07-2008, 07:09 PM

I can't believe you still believe this. We had a neo-nazi banned from this site, and aside from his obvious anti-semitic remarks (that were becoming increasingly inflammatory), many of his posts were flat out inane, just as many of yours are. I suggested that you might be next to go, not because you're a nazi, but because of the nature of what you have to say most of the time. If you believe that such a comparison is because I think you're a nazi, then you've really got your head screwed on at the wrong end.

Nothing more than another one of Pix's typical diversionary tactics whenever he's at the losing end of an argument (which is just about every thread that he participates in). On the HD Radio thread (http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=26777), I pointed out how to correctly calculate an inflation rate that he was too mathematically challenged to figure out for himself. Rather than thanking me or at least correcting himself, he proceeded to call me an accomplice to the greatest theft in history, and accused me of engaging in a coverup and conspiring to destroy this country! Detect a pattern at work here? :cool:

His false accusation that you called him a nazi is just more of the same. And if he can't conflate someone pointing out his idiocy into some conspiracy, he'll just pull out the lame personal attacks. This board has always had its resident court jester/whipping boy. Before it was Lexmark and his various incarnations, then you had Perv (who very well might have been the same person) and his multiple personalities, now you got pix. So long as you know his role, and treat him as such, you'll be fine! :D

jrhymeammo

05-07-2008, 07:42 PM

I

The topic, and the "LP vs. CD" argument are linked in that the decision to keep records is likely tied into whether or not one prefers the sound of a record to that of a duplicate CD. I'm one of those who prefers the CD, especially now that I have a really superb CD player (the Marantz SA-8001) that has virtually eliminated all the negatives that people once attributed to CD's (harshness, steely-sounding strings, etc.)

Another member, JohnMichael, said that my turntable would probably get dusty now that I've purchased this SACD player, and he's right - I haven't played a record since I got it. So, the temptation to sell off some of my record collection is even greater now.
Then again, here is a person who has not upgraded/updated his analog gear since the 70's. If you believe in modern technological improvement in digital palyback, then perhaps it's time you updated your LP gear, and share your experienced opinion.
SA-8001 is a decent player, but you should experience analog with LOMC with a modern deck. Of course I'm not going to criticize anyone for their taste/preference, but anyone who criticize vinyl playback with 70's and 80's gears is obsurd.

JRA

pixelthis

05-07-2008, 11:11 PM

[Woochifer]Nothing more than another one of Pix's typical diversionary tactics whenever he's at the losing end of an argument (which is just about every thread that he participates in). On the HD Radio thread (http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=26777), I pointed out how to correctly calculate an inflation rate that he was too mathematically challenged to figure out for himself. Rather than thanking me or at least correcting himself, he proceeded to call me an accomplice to the greatest theft in history, and accused me of engaging in a coverup and conspiring to destroy this country! Detect a pattern at work here? :cool:

The pattern has existed throughout history, funny money is issued without any backing ,
is quickly printed on a 24hr basis until its worthless, bankrupting the country.
USUALLY COVERED UP BY govt wonks like yourself.
Pardon me if I dont "thank you" for helping to cover up one of the greatest thefts in history,
either through collusion or outright incompetence.
And you "way of figuring out an inflation rate" is an outright LIE.
And inflation rate is simple, its how much money is printed in a year that is not backed up by ANYTHING, has nothing to do with prices, and over twenty years our currency has lost at least 80% of its value, and thats an understatement

His false accusation that you called him a nazi is just more of the same. And if he can't conflate someone pointing out his idiocy into some conspiracy, he'll just pull out the lame personal attacks. This board has always had its resident court jester/whipping boy. Before it was Lexmark and his various incarnations, then you had Perv (who very well might have been the same person) and his multiple personalities, now you got pix. So long as you know his role, and treat him as such, you'll be fine!

This isnt "false", ITS A FACT.
IMPLIED in such a way that only a coward would do so, saying that I WAS "JUST LIKE"
an anti semite nazi that was banned from this site.
LET ME ASK YOU , are you stupid enough to actually think that when the dollar is gone that your buddies in the govt will help you?
Are YOU that stupid?
MAKE PERSONAL ATTACKS ALL YOU WANT, I WILL HAVE THE LAST LAUGH, SADLY.
You just wont be man enough to admit it, but if you were a man you wouldnt have a job of covering up for the people working to undermine your country :1:

emaidel

05-08-2008, 04:32 AM

Then again, here is a person who has not upgraded/updated his analog gear since the 70's. If you believe in modern technological improvement in digital palyback, then perhaps it's time you updated your LP gear, and share your experienced opinion.
SA-8001 is a decent player, but you should experience analog with LOMC with a modern deck. Of course I'm not going to criticize anyone for their taste/preference, but anyone who criticize vinyl playback with 70's and 80's gears is obsurd.

JRA

My turntable is a Dual CS-5000. Though I only obtained it this past summer, it was last manufactured in the late 80's. It's still considered by many to be a top notch performer. Is a $300 Rega better? Frankly, I don't know, but I do know the 5000 is awfully good. I recently upgraded its performance with an Achromat mat.

Insofar as the cartridge I'm using, I don't use the Stanton Collector's Series CS-100 because I was the Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Stanton. I chose it because I like the way it sounds, and that's as compared to two Ortofon moving coil models, and the Denon DL-103. When I purchased the 5000, it came with a perfectly functioning Shure V/15 Type Vmxr, which many consider a truly fine cartridge. There was no comparison (at least in my mind) that the CS-100 considerably outperformed the V/15 V, which says a lot for it.

I think my turntable/cartridge combination is quite good, but I'll admit that newer, and far costlier, models may sound a good deal better.

Read that which you've quoted a bit more carefully, and you won't find that it's a criticism of the sound of vinyl as you suggest it is. I prefer CD's, and now SACD's to vinyl, as do many others. You may feel differently, and that's your prerogative. If I disagree, that's my prerogative too, and it's not "obsurd" in any way.

Woochifer

05-08-2008, 06:54 AM

The pattern has existed throughout history, funny money is issued without any backing ,
is quickly printed on a 24hr basis until its worthless, bankrupting the country.
USUALLY COVERED UP BY govt wonks like yourself.
Pardon me if I dont "thank you" for helping to cover up one of the greatest thefts in history,
either through collusion or outright incompetence.
And you "way of figuring out an inflation rate" is an outright LIE.
And inflation rate is simple, its how much money is printed in a year that is not backed up by ANYTHING, has nothing to do with prices, and over twenty years our currency has lost at least 80% of its value, and thats an understatement

To the court, I present EXHIBIT A -- pix's response when someone points out his deficiencies in basic math! Change the subject, repeat lies and idiocy, accuse the truthteller of lying, go into paranoid rants, etc.

And to rebuttal - if the currency has lost at least 80% of its value in 20 years, that would imply that consumer prices on average are now 5X more than they were in 1988. Aside from gas, you still haven't come up with a single example of a consumer spending category where price escalations of this magnitude have occurred. Nor have you explained how a dollar, by your calculation, can attain a negative value after 26 years or lose 1,092% of its value (a mathematical impossibility) since 1785 when the first U.S. dollars were printed. Defense is ruled incompetent, the prosecution rests ...

You really are a monument to accidental comedy!

This isnt "false", ITS A FACT.
IMPLIED in such a way that only a coward would do so, saying that I WAS "JUST LIKE"
an anti semite nazi that was banned from this site.
LET ME ASK YOU , are you stupid enough to actually think that when the dollar is gone that your buddies in the govt will help you?
Are YOU that stupid?

Hmmm, let's see, whose word do I trust more? A knowledgeable and respected poster like emaidel, or an unrepentant serial liar who can't even figure out junior high school math like pix? Tough choice! :lol:

MAKE PERSONAL ATTACKS ALL YOU WANT, I WILL HAVE THE LAST LAUGH, SADLY.
You just wont be man enough to admit it, but if you were a man you wouldnt have a job of covering up for the people working to undermine your country :1:

:out:

Woochifer

05-08-2008, 07:00 AM

My turntable is a Dual CS-5000. Though I only obtained it this past summer, it was last manufactured in the late 80's. It's still considered by many to be a top notch performer. Is a $300 Rega better? Frankly, I don't know, but I do know the 5000 is awfully good. I recently upgraded its performance with an Achromat mat.

Insofar as the cartridge I'm using, I don't use the Stanton Collector's Series CS-100 because I was the Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Stanton. I chose it because I like the way it sounds, and that's as compared to two Ortofon moving coil models, and the Denon DL-103. When I purchased the 5000, it came with a perfectly functioning Shure V/15 Type Vmxr, which many consider a truly fine cartridge. There was no comparison (at least in my mind) that the CS-100 considerably outperformed the V/15 V, which says a lot for it.

I think my turntable/cartridge combination is quite good, but I'll admit that newer, and far costlier, models may sound a good deal better.

Read that which you've quoted a bit more carefully, and you won't find that it's a criticism of the sound of vinyl as you suggest it is. I prefer CD's, and now SACD's to vinyl, as do many others. You may feel differently, and that's your prerogative. If I disagree, that's my prerogative too, and it's not "obsurd" in any way.

Ah, same turntable that I've been using for the past 18 years! Definitely a nice deck. I use an Ortofon OM30, and that performs quite well. Only drawback is that the OPS tonearm is a low mass design that works best with a high compliance cartridge. This pretty much excludes moving coil carts, and that's why the CS5000 is considered a good match for the Ortofon OM series.

FWIW, I grew up with the Stanton 681 series.

Groundbeef

05-08-2008, 07:29 AM

Hey Wooch, Pix called you a "Government Wonk".

I might have to give him a greenie for that. Only because he used the word "Wonk".

And it made me giggle. Just a little bit.

Woochifer

05-08-2008, 09:36 AM

Hey Wooch, Pix called you a "Government Wonk".

I might have to give him a greenie for that. Only because he used the word "Wonk".

And it made me giggle. Just a little bit.

More testament to pix's cluelessness, since a wonk by definition is someone who's considered an expert on and knowledgeable of public policy matters! :2:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Policy_wonk

emaidel

05-08-2008, 10:08 AM

First: To Pixie, our beloved cretin, since you will forever insist I called you a Nazi, even though I didn't, and others noted also that I didn't, here you go:

Pix, you're a Nazi.

So there. Never mind I don't believe for a minute that you are, were, or ever will be a Nazi, but at least now when you continue to claim that I called you one you'll at least have a leg to stand on.

Second: the discussion/debate/argument over whether or not CD's or SACD's played on the Marantz SA-8001 sound better than records played on a good, modern turntable should be resolved shortly. A site mod, JohnMichael owns an SA-8001 as well as a Rega P-2 with a Benz moving coil cartridge - certainly a more modern, up to date combination than what I have. He's also updating the P-2 with an Achroplat and will be posting his results soon. In the past, he's implied that he prefers the sound from his SA-8001, suggesting to me, after I bought one, that my turntable, like his, might "just get dusty."

I look forward to his postings after his upgrade, and his comparisons between LP's and CD's.

Woochifer

05-08-2008, 10:27 AM

First: To Pixie, our beloved cretin, since you will forever insist I called you a Nazi, even though I didn't, and others noted also that I didn't, here you go:

Pix, you're a Nazi.

So there. Never mind I don't believe for a minute that you are, were, or ever will be a Nazi, but at least now when you continue to claim that I called you one you'll at least have a leg to stand on.

Oh man, you're really punching below the belt now! For all of the rightful abuse that's been tossed at pix, I don't think anyone has inflicted the kind of cruelty you've unleashed here. You're FORCING pix to be truthful by actually making one of his false accusations true! :eek: Next time he accuses you of calling him a nazi, he'll actually be committing that unnatural act (in his view) of truthtelling! What will he ever do with himself, knowing that one of his personal attacks won't be an outright lie?! You're brutal! :cool:

Woochifer

05-08-2008, 10:44 AM

Second: the discussion/debate/argument over whether or not CD's or SACD's played on the Marantz SA-8001 sound better than records played on a good, modern turntable should be resolved shortly. A site mod, JohnMichael owns an SA-8001 as well as a Rega P-2 with a Benz moving coil cartridge - certainly a more modern, up to date combination than what I have. He's also updating the P-2 with an Achroplat and will be posting his results soon. In the past, he's implied that he prefers the sound from his SA-8001, suggesting to me, after I bought one, that my turntable, like his, might "just get dusty."

I look forward to his postings after his upgrade, and his comparisons between LP's and CD's.

I prefer to discuss LP v. CD comparisons more on a case by case basis, since for every LP that beats the pants off of a CD, I can just as easily find a CD that blows away the LP version. With CDs, you have a whole generation of early releases that were very often poorly transferred, and more recent releases with the levels pegged higher thus necessitating the use of dynamic range compression. And with LPs, you not only have variations in the quality of the mastering and original recording, but also variations between individual stampers and individual pressings.

On that SA-8001, does it do multichannel SACDs or is it strictly two-channel, and does it include any kind of delay/distance setting? My three year old Sony SCD-C2000ES has begun misreading some of my hybrid discs by defaulting to the CD layer and not acknowledging the SACD layer. Fortunately, it's an ES model and has a five-year warranty, but I might start looking into alternatives if this player gets more squirrelly. Otherwise, the CD playback on that player as well was a nice improvement over my previous CD player. Apparently, Sony uses the same Burr-Brown DACs (even in its low end SACD changers) that Arcam used in its CD72 player.

O'Shag

05-08-2008, 11:22 AM

I can't believe you still believe this. We had a neo-nazi banned from this site, and aside from his obvious anti-semitic remarks (that were becoming increasingly inflammatory), many of his posts were flat out inane, just as many of yours are. I suggested that you might be next to go, not because you're a nazi, but because of the nature of what you have to say most of the time. If you believe that such a comparison is because I think you're a nazi, then you've really got your head screwed on at the wrong end.

And STOP using CAPS all the time where they don't belong! It's the internet equivalent of shouting, looks ridiculous, and makes reading your posts annoying.

Come on, enough of the nazi thing already. I don't agree with PixelThis, but this is a free country - strike that - free forum - and I support his right to give his opinion. I don't think people should be threatened with being banned just because you don't agree with what they say. As long as he doesn't get blatantly offensive in a personal way on a consistent basis. Every time I've seen him do so, he was egged on by others here - like poking a dog with a stick to get a rise out of him, so they are as much to blame. He may be wrong about the CD player, but neither you nor I are right about everything either. Jimeny Crickets, how interesting would it be and how much would we learn if everyone had to agree with one another for fear of upsetting someone. When it comes down to it emaidel, I think you have been guilty at times of being less than good-mannered, where you have stated expressely that one should have a thicker skin. Perhaps you should follow this wisdom.
In other words PixelThis, even though you have made worthwhile and interesting observations, you do tend to talk out your arse sometimes, well quite a lot actually, and you have at times pissed me off, but I wholeheartedly support your right to do so as long as you do not decend into personal insults without any provocation.

Groundbeef

05-08-2008, 01:33 PM

Come on, enough of the nazi thing already. I don't agree with PixelThis, but this is a free country - strike that - free forum - and I support his right to give his opinion. I don't think people should be threatened with being banned just because you don't agree with what they say. As long as he doesn't get blatantly offensive in a personal way on a consistent basis. Every time I've seen him do so, he was egged on by others here - like poking a dog with a stick to get a rise out of him, so they are as much to blame. He may be wrong about the CD player, but neither you nor I are right about everything either. Jimeny Crickets, how interesting would it be and how much would we learn if everyone had to agree with one another for fear of upsetting someone. When it comes down to it emaidel, I think you have been guilty at times of being less than good-mannered, where you have stated expressely that one should have a thicker skin. Perhaps you should follow this wisdom.
In other words PixelThis, even though you have made worthwhile and interesting observations, you do tend to talk out your arse sometimes, well quite a lot actually, and you have at times pissed me off, but I wholeheartedly support your right to do so as long as you do not decend into personal insults without any provocation.

You know, I'd be inclined to agree with you but in reality, Pix does plenty of stick poking himself.

Most discussions divulge into some sort of 2nd grade insult fest after about the 3rd posting by pix.

I've had my wife insulted, myself insulted, family insulted, intelligence insulted, and I'm pretty sure the dog I don't own has been dragged through the mud by that drunk, ill-informed old man.

I may not know everything on this board (most of the time I don't) but at least I don't profess too, or insult others that CLEARLY have a much higher competency in areas.

Pix is a jackass of all knowledge, and master of none of it. Read though his drivel (all of his inane postings, not just on this thread) and you will soon agree. He didn't earn that red mark near his name for just being annoying. He couples that with stupid, and you got yourself a grade A turd.

emaidel

05-08-2008, 02:14 PM

On that SA-8001, does it do multichannel SACDs or is it strictly two-channel, and does it include any kind of delay/distance setting? .

It's strictly a 2-channel unit, so no delay/distance setting. It's actually what I've been looking for for quite a long time: a fine SACD player that does an outstanding job of upgrading "ordinary," redbook CD's. It continually amazes me, and only today, I played two older Telarc discs and was mightily impressed not only with the dramatically improved fidelity, but the staggering increase in dynamic range.

And I'd better go into hiding now that I've made it possible for Pixie to complain about me calling him names and his being able to be telling the truth for once when he does. Good Lord, whatever have I done?

bobsticks

05-08-2008, 02:28 PM

Come on, enough of the nazi thing already. I don't agree with PixelThis, but this is a free country - strike that - free forum - and I support his right to give his opinion. I don't think people should be threatened with being banned just because you don't agree with what they say. As long as he doesn't get blatantly offensive in a personal way on a consistent basis. Every time I've seen him do so, he was egged on by others here - like poking a dog with a stick to get a rise out of him, so they are as much to blame. He may be wrong about the CD player, but neither you nor I are right about everything either. Jimeny Crickets, how interesting would it be and how much would we learn if everyone had to agree with one another for fear of upsetting someone. When it comes down to it emaidel, I think you have been guilty at times of being less than good-mannered, where you have stated expressely that one should have a thicker skin. Perhaps you should follow this wisdom.
In other words PixelThis, even though you have made worthwhile and interesting observations, you do tend to talk out your arse sometimes, well quite a lot actually, and you have at times pissed me off, but I wholeheartedly support your right to do so as long as you do not decend into personal insults without any provocation.

Hey Shaggy, how's it goin' on the left coast?

I was there for the thread that is being referenced, some might say even an agent provacateur, and I believe that you may be inferring things out of context. The problem isn't that emaidel called Pix a nazi, he noted that his posts were inflammatory like the Nazi's (notice possesive singular, meaning specifically like Melvin Walker's posts). Again, "posts were inflammatory" not in the sense that Pix is a nazi or was spouting fascistic rhetoric but that Pix is a fool or a troll. Emaidel has clarified this at least twice that I can think of.

The problem is that Pix has this self-victimization dealio goin' on. If he wants to be mad at the e-man for calling him a dullard or a dufus, fine, fair enough 'cause he did. But the man didn't call him a nazi, well, at least until a few posts ago out of exasperation.

FWIW, I don't feel that Pix should be banned and I agree with your libertarian standpoint that everyone has a right to be petulant. God knows I've excercised mine. You just gotta be able to seperate the stuff from "the stuff".

E-Stat

05-08-2008, 03:22 PM

I pointed out how to correctly calculate an inflation rate that he was too mathematically challenged to figure out for himself
You either grasp the concept of the time value of money with terms like present and future value - or you don't. Heck, my Palm phone has a financial calculator app where all of that can easily be quantified.

rw

O'Shag

05-08-2008, 03:27 PM

Nice one Bobs,

I admire your style and I stand corrected.

OK emaidel I got that one wrong so pardon me. I suspect your a decent guy... on weekends. :D

Groundbeef - I see your point, but in all honesty I think many get a kick out of getting a rise out of Pixel. If you keep poking the dog enough your going to get bit. I do agree though, he can come across as obnoxious on occasion, and he definitely talks out of his arse more often than not.

When its cool for cats.. its cool for cats - Squeeze. ;)

pixelthis

05-09-2008, 12:08 AM

Oh man, you're really punching below the belt now! For all of the rightful abuse that's been tossed at pix, I don't think anyone has inflicted the kind of cruelty you've unleashed here. You're FORCING pix to be truthful by actually making one of his false accusations true! :eek: Next time he accuses you of calling him a nazi, he'll actually be committing that unnatural act (in his view) of truthtelling! What will he ever do with himself, knowing that one of his personal attacks won't be an outright lie?! You're brutal! :cool:

what do you know about being "truthfull"?
You're a stat wonk for the govt, in other words a professional liar.
You wouldnt know the truth if it killed you, which its going to someday:1:

Woochifer

05-09-2008, 06:45 AM

what do you know about being "truthfull"?

Plenty, because I'm one that has the facts and the math on my side. No surprise that you refuse to acknowledge that, since you have a long track record of lying on this board just to perpetuate your lame arguments and personal attacks.

You're a stat wonk for the govt, in other words a professional liar.

Wrong again. As I've told you many times, I'm in the private sector. I just happened to trust the math acumen of professional statisticians more than some lying conspiracy theorist with a questionable grasp of junior high school level math.

I suppose that the TI and HP financial calculators that I use to calculate rates of change and time value of money, and E-Stat's Palm phone, and every spreadsheet program ever developed are part of some global conspiracy to destroy this country as well! :out:

You wouldnt know the truth if it killed you, which its going to someday:1:

Delusional to the end. So tell me again how it's possible for a dollar (or any currency for that matter) to attain negative valuation, or to have a negative absolute population or a negative number of jobs? :idea:

On second thought, maybe that's not such a great idea ... asking you to actually think logically about something for a change might constitute a fatal dose of brain activity for you! :dita:

E-Stat

05-09-2008, 01:32 PM

Then I'll put this poor hijacked thread (yes, I contributed to that, too) to rest in peace.

Waddya' say we go back to talking about audio on this forum? There are others for this OT stuff.

rw

pixelthis

05-10-2008, 09:29 PM

It's strictly a 2-channel unit, so no delay/distance setting. It's actually what I've been looking for for quite a long time: a fine SACD player that does an outstanding job of upgrading "ordinary," redbook CD's. It continually amazes me, and only today, I played two older Telarc discs and was mightily impressed not only with the dramatically improved fidelity, but the staggering increase in dynamic range.

And I'd better go into hiding now that I've made it possible for Pixie to complain about me calling him names and his being able to be telling the truth for once when he does. Good Lord, whatever have I done?

you have given me some info about one of the finalists for my rebate check, although it will be more difficult now, this player or a Bluray?
Blu still has a few jagged edges, and I am leaning towards music more and more these days, what with the state of movies these days.
Thanks, and I AM WILLING TO MOVE ON IF YOU ARE:1:

pixelthis

05-10-2008, 09:44 PM

Plenty, because I'm one that has the facts and the math on my side. No surprise that you refuse to acknowledge that, since you have a long track record of lying on this board just to perpetuate your lame arguments and personal attacks.

thats FUNNY, A PROFESSIONAL GOVT LIAR calling me a liar.
And after a personal attack on me you accuse me of same.
heres a clue, I made no ATTACK on you, stating fact is not an "attack
'

Wrong again. As I've told you many times, I'm in the private sector. I just happened to trust the math acumen of professional statisticians more than some lying conspiracy theorist with a questionable grasp of junior high school level math.

You're in the "private sector" like a military contractor is in the "private" sector

I suppose that the TI and HP financial calculators that I use to calculate rates of change and time value of money, and E-Stat's Palm phone, and every spreadsheet program ever developed are part of some global conspiracy to destroy this country as well! :out:

You can complicate things all you want, which is the purpose of all of that crap you just mentioned.
THEY are all based on the false premise that INFLATION is rising prices.
INFLATION is the printing of worthless money backed by nothing and pumping it into the money supply, thus inflating the money supply.
How much did the money supply rise last year? THATS THE INFLATION RATE.
Despite your lying protestations to the contary

Delusional to the end. So tell me again how it's possible for a dollar (or any currency for that matter) to attain negative valuation, or to have a negative absolute population or a negative number of jobs? :idea:

Why dont you ask the US mint?
they are reformulating the mix of metal that goes into a penny because it costs more
to make one than one is worth.
Same with the dollar, which is totally worthless, costs more to print than its worth, its just that people havent caught on to that yet, but like Germany in the twenties
THEY WILL

On second thought, maybe that's not such a great idea ... asking you to actually think logically about something for a change might constitute a fatal dose of brain activity for you! :dita:

yOU'RE THE ONE LYING TO COVER UP for the people who are destroying our country
as we speak, either that or you are a total moron who spent four years in college
and STILL doesnt understand even the basics of inflation.
Whats "logical" about that?
I vote for the latter, you are WAY too dumb to understand how you are being used
Brain activity? AT LEAST I HAVE ONE:1: