View Poll Results: Do you prefer anolog, digital or both?
Love the sound of Vinyl i am old school anolog at heart.
11
27.50%
CD's are great why bother with vinyl
6
15.00%
SACD's are by far the best
2
5.00%
Enjoy both anolog and digital formats
21
52.50%
What are you crazy
1
2.50%
I listen to an Ipod exclusively
3
7.50%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 40. You may not vote on this poll
First thread!! analog or digital?
09-06-2010, 12:05 AM
#16
Super Moderator
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Needs More Cowbell
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Do you mean not mentioned as an alternative to vinyl or digital/CD? I have opinions on that. First, unlike turntables, I believe virtually no one is manufacturing reel to reel recorders for home use anymore. You would need to find a vintage deck to restore (I have a Teac 3300-10 if you're interested 
). Also, nobody is producing pre-recorded reel to reel tapes so you're making your own recordings; which begs the question of why? As a way to store a music collection, tape is an expensive and not particularly durable format. Plus to get decent fidelity you need to record at a minimum of 7 1/2 ips which means an 1800 foot 1mil tape is good for 90 minutes of music (both sides). That's a lot of tape if you have a lot of music. Finally, because of it's linear configuration, unlike vinyl or digital, it's a pain to access a given selection on tape with all the winding, rewinding, etc.
In the day, and until quality cassette decks came along with Dolby B & C and dbx noise reduction, and metal cassete tape formulations, a good reel to reel deck was the only way to copy music. I used mine to record off FM or make "party" reels from records. With 10" (3600') capacity I could get 90 minutes of music before I had to flip the reel which was a lot better than flipping vinyl every 20-30 minutes. Today, unless you've got a recording studio, I don't see the point of tape for the average audiophile. My $.02.
). Also, nobody is producing pre-recorded reel to reel tapes so you're making your own recordings; which begs the question of why? As a way to store a music collection, tape is an expensive and not particularly durable format. Plus to get decent fidelity you need to record at a minimum of 7 1/2 ips which means an 1800 foot 1mil tape is good for 90 minutes of music (both sides). That's a lot of tape if you have a lot of music. Finally, because of it's linear configuration, unlike vinyl or digital, it's a pain to access a given selection on tape with all the winding, rewinding, etc.In the day, and until quality cassette decks came along with Dolby B & C and dbx noise reduction, and metal cassete tape formulations, a good reel to reel deck was the only way to copy music. I used mine to record off FM or make "party" reels from records. With 10" (3600') capacity I could get 90 minutes of music before I had to flip the reel which was a lot better than flipping vinyl every 20-30 minutes. Today, unless you've got a recording studio, I don't see the point of tape for the average audiophile. My $.02.
My first exposure was my father's Roberts reel to reel with a Cross Field head. I learned about magnetics at the local library trying to figure out how it worked.
Went on to design magnetic media testers (for just about every format known), designed 1/2" digital linear tape drives and even stored music on 4mm and 8mm helical scan before CD's were mainstream.
Tape is all but gone and forgotten now, which is a bit of a shame IMHO.
09-06-2010, 12:28 AM
#17
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
mdrums, first pick a price range. Way too many choices.
What kind of turntable/arm do you have? Low mass arms work best with light cartridges. Depending on your table you may be able to source heavier counter weights.
What are you using for pre? You need to try and match impedence and output. Do you want moving magnet or moving coil, will your pre handle it?
Good all around cartridges right now are the Denon DL103's and Ortofon 2M Blue or Red. They should run around 200-300, and are very nice. Just read up on their attributes (brighter vs. warmer sounding) and pick what you prefer. That's just 2 choices, many more at lower and higher price points.
Whatever you get, set up is key! An average cartridge with good set up will sound better than a great one with a bad set up.
What kind of turntable/arm do you have? Low mass arms work best with light cartridges. Depending on your table you may be able to source heavier counter weights.
What are you using for pre? You need to try and match impedence and output. Do you want moving magnet or moving coil, will your pre handle it?
Good all around cartridges right now are the Denon DL103's and Ortofon 2M Blue or Red. They should run around 200-300, and are very nice. Just read up on their attributes (brighter vs. warmer sounding) and pick what you prefer. That's just 2 choices, many more at lower and higher price points.
Whatever you get, set up is key! An average cartridge with good set up will sound better than a great one with a bad set up.
09-06-2010, 12:32 AM
#18
Race Director
Mike, you might find this link interesting.
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RC-Cartridges.html
I'd be interested in comments on this topic too. I'm still using a Shure v15 Type4 in my vintage AR and a B&O MM3 in my Beogram, which although they were basically new spares that I had and track and sound great to me, they are obviously not the answer to your question. My preamps have always been set up for MM cartridges and have never bought the head amp or transformer needed to try a supposedly superior MC cartridge.
http://www.high-endaudio.com/RC-Cartridges.html
I'd be interested in comments on this topic too. I'm still using a Shure v15 Type4 in my vintage AR and a B&O MM3 in my Beogram, which although they were basically new spares that I had and track and sound great to me, they are obviously not the answer to your question. My preamps have always been set up for MM cartridges and have never bought the head amp or transformer needed to try a supposedly superior MC cartridge.
09-06-2010, 12:55 AM
#19
Race Director
I just like magnetic tape.
My first exposure was my father's Roberts reel to reel with a Cross Field head. I learned about magnetics at the local library trying to figure out how it worked.
Went on to design magnetic media testers (for just about every format known), designed 1/2" digital linear tape drives and even stored music on 4mm and 8mm helical scan before CD's were mainstream.
Tape is all but gone and forgotten now, which is a bit of a shame IMHO.
My first exposure was my father's Roberts reel to reel with a Cross Field head. I learned about magnetics at the local library trying to figure out how it worked.
Went on to design magnetic media testers (for just about every format known), designed 1/2" digital linear tape drives and even stored music on 4mm and 8mm helical scan before CD's were mainstream.
Tape is all but gone and forgotten now, which is a bit of a shame IMHO.
09-06-2010, 11:18 AM
#20
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
I am glad to see while I was away this kept moving.
To answer some of the questions. I first heard the 1st generation CD's back so far I don't recall how long ago it was. (early 80's) 1st generation players were expensive, complicated and very little music was available . I have CD's from way back when although about 300 or so of my CD's were stolen back in the early 90's. I have telarc CD's and LP's which I find give me the best comparison in sound quality especially since they are the same music both originated from digital recordings. The MOFI gold CD's against the MOFI LP's are also an interesting comparison.
I have listened to tables and CD players in all price ranges. I have a friend who will argue that a $20 used Playstation 1 will sound as good as a high end player. This may be true depending on what your system is comprised of I am still not convinced.
I have spent extensive time listening to both high end tables and CD players. Some players and tables were well into the $20k range and above. To me the best Esoteric, Ayre, Mission, Sim Audio and other players still lack what I feel a comparable table will offer. But that is my opinion. You also have to consider that they are now finding the plastics used in CD's are not holding up as well as expected.
I omitted tape because prerecorded cassette tapes were never very good and I consider tape only as good as the input you are using to record. I have a nice vintage Tandberg 10XD reel and a Nakamichi 680ZX Cassette player. These were both great sounding players but only if you had a good input to make a recording from. The other issue is additional interconnects which can result in signal loss, the tape used (Maxell 10" back coated tape was expensive) Although it did make for great party mixes.
I agree there is a very finicky side to TT's but IMO worth the down side. I find I listen to music I wouldn't normally listen to. Occasionally there is an artist I like that has a really bad song on it but for the most part the less popular songs are enjoyable. The best CD players I have heard offer a nice sound but are missing the subtitles that really bring the music to life.
I decided to jump back into vinyl because of the format and sound. At this time only CD and SACD offer a non compressed listening digital format. If you want to get involved with DAC's and record your CD's on computer so you aren't listening in real time I find this can sound as good as Vinyl and better than the original CD sounds can be controlled by your Iphone but is far too much work spent on recording and not enough listening. I also feel it looses a lot of the interaction of music selection and pleasure i get from playing LP's.
Yes I have spent a lot of time and money finding the right phono pre, VPI record cleaner, table, arm, cartridge, speed controller and cables. My first cartridge back in was a Benz. The nice thing about some of these cartridge companies is they offer upgrade options. Many times the trade in value of the cartridge can be worth more towards an upgrade than the initial purchase price.
The right answer is what suits your needs best. I personally feel Vinyl will always be my 1st choice and some systems I have heard come very close to the sound of live music. An argument I would have argued against 20+ years ago.
Everyone enjoy the holiday and listen to some music.
To answer some of the questions. I first heard the 1st generation CD's back so far I don't recall how long ago it was. (early 80's) 1st generation players were expensive, complicated and very little music was available . I have CD's from way back when although about 300 or so of my CD's were stolen back in the early 90's. I have telarc CD's and LP's which I find give me the best comparison in sound quality especially since they are the same music both originated from digital recordings. The MOFI gold CD's against the MOFI LP's are also an interesting comparison.
I have listened to tables and CD players in all price ranges. I have a friend who will argue that a $20 used Playstation 1 will sound as good as a high end player. This may be true depending on what your system is comprised of I am still not convinced.
I have spent extensive time listening to both high end tables and CD players. Some players and tables were well into the $20k range and above. To me the best Esoteric, Ayre, Mission, Sim Audio and other players still lack what I feel a comparable table will offer. But that is my opinion. You also have to consider that they are now finding the plastics used in CD's are not holding up as well as expected.
I omitted tape because prerecorded cassette tapes were never very good and I consider tape only as good as the input you are using to record. I have a nice vintage Tandberg 10XD reel and a Nakamichi 680ZX Cassette player. These were both great sounding players but only if you had a good input to make a recording from. The other issue is additional interconnects which can result in signal loss, the tape used (Maxell 10" back coated tape was expensive) Although it did make for great party mixes.
I agree there is a very finicky side to TT's but IMO worth the down side. I find I listen to music I wouldn't normally listen to. Occasionally there is an artist I like that has a really bad song on it but for the most part the less popular songs are enjoyable. The best CD players I have heard offer a nice sound but are missing the subtitles that really bring the music to life.
I decided to jump back into vinyl because of the format and sound. At this time only CD and SACD offer a non compressed listening digital format. If you want to get involved with DAC's and record your CD's on computer so you aren't listening in real time I find this can sound as good as Vinyl and better than the original CD sounds can be controlled by your Iphone but is far too much work spent on recording and not enough listening. I also feel it looses a lot of the interaction of music selection and pleasure i get from playing LP's.
Yes I have spent a lot of time and money finding the right phono pre, VPI record cleaner, table, arm, cartridge, speed controller and cables. My first cartridge back in was a Benz. The nice thing about some of these cartridge companies is they offer upgrade options. Many times the trade in value of the cartridge can be worth more towards an upgrade than the initial purchase price.
The right answer is what suits your needs best. I personally feel Vinyl will always be my 1st choice and some systems I have heard come very close to the sound of live music. An argument I would have argued against 20+ years ago.
Everyone enjoy the holiday and listen to some music.
09-06-2010, 01:54 PM
#22
Race Director
09-06-2010, 04:08 PM
#24
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
I have both cd and lp play options...I find myself almost always playing records when sitting down to listen..The cd stuff is used more for backround music when we entertain....records are a bit of work, but I find the music they produce a more relaxing and organic...regardless of the medium, if you enjoy the musical experience, that is all that matters...
09-06-2010, 04:22 PM
#25
Race Director
Thanks Tony. It's actually a "Dynaco" ST120, a modern upgraded copy by Bob Latino of the original Dyna Stereo 70. Non-magnetic stainless steel chassis (instead of nickle plated steel) with the original markings, larger custom wound U.S. made output and power transformers, VTA driver board, and numerous other improvements. Where the original ST 70 struggled to make 35 watts per channel this amp is rated for 60 watts RMS per channel with <1% THD at rated output.
I have an original (non-working) Dyna Stereo 70 and thought about rebuilding it. But I would probably have invested as much as it cost me for the ST120 kit and ended up with an amp that wouldn't have performed as well and might have been a bit underwhelming with my power hungry vintage AR3a's.
The ST120 was fun to build, and performs beautifully. Plus I've still got the Stereo 70 if I ever feel the need to abuse my wallet some more!
I have an original (non-working) Dyna Stereo 70 and thought about rebuilding it. But I would probably have invested as much as it cost me for the ST120 kit and ended up with an amp that wouldn't have performed as well and might have been a bit underwhelming with my power hungry vintage AR3a's.
The ST120 was fun to build, and performs beautifully. Plus I've still got the Stereo 70 if I ever feel the need to abuse my wallet some more!
Last edited by Mike in CA; 09-06-2010 at 06:45 PM.
09-06-2010, 06:10 PM
#26
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Very nice. How's that AR sound on the glass? I had my table on glass, then on a sandbox, and now sandbox with a granite instead of wood floater. That way I have the vibration damping control of the sand and clear highs of the granite (I hope...) The stand is anchored to the wall.
09-06-2010, 06:43 PM
#27
Race Director
Very nice. How's that AR sound on the glass? I had my table on glass, then on a sandbox, and now sandbox with a granite instead of wood floater. That way I have the vibration damping control of the sand and clear highs of the granite (I hope...) The stand is anchored to the wall.
I've never tried the hammer trick, but I have rapped on the top plate with my knuckles while a record was playing, with no discernable effect.
Last edited by Mike in CA; 09-06-2010 at 10:17 PM.
09-07-2010, 10:15 AM
#28
Race Director
Thanks Tony....I have a Techniques SL1200 DJ turntable. It is very heavy, solid built, accurate motor. I use to have a Rega Planer table back in the 80's-90's and sold it because this Techniques was just better. Right now I have an 27 year old Stanton EEE681 cartridge. I use this table through a McIntosh Pre-amp. I'd like to budget myself to around $200 or so.
mdrums, first pick a price range. Way too many choices.
What kind of turntable/arm do you have? Low mass arms work best with light cartridges. Depending on your table you may be able to source heavier counter weights.
What are you using for pre? You need to try and match impedence and output. Do you want moving magnet or moving coil, will your pre handle it?
Good all around cartridges right now are the Denon DL103's and Ortofon 2M Blue or Red. They should run around 200-300, and are very nice. Just read up on their attributes (brighter vs. warmer sounding) and pick what you prefer. That's just 2 choices, many more at lower and higher price points.
Whatever you get, set up is key! An average cartridge with good set up will sound better than a great one with a bad set up.
What kind of turntable/arm do you have? Low mass arms work best with light cartridges. Depending on your table you may be able to source heavier counter weights.
What are you using for pre? You need to try and match impedence and output. Do you want moving magnet or moving coil, will your pre handle it?
Good all around cartridges right now are the Denon DL103's and Ortofon 2M Blue or Red. They should run around 200-300, and are very nice. Just read up on their attributes (brighter vs. warmer sounding) and pick what you prefer. That's just 2 choices, many more at lower and higher price points.
Whatever you get, set up is key! An average cartridge with good set up will sound better than a great one with a bad set up.
09-07-2010, 10:38 AM
#29
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
mwc951 & Mike,
Nice vintage equipment. The Yamaha, Marantz, Pioneer, AR eq of that era was some well built product
I agree the Dynaco & Hafler kits were fun projects I built a few of the ST-70's and later the D-200's which I modified and made into mono amps. Still have the D-200's floating around but sold off the ST-70 and ST-80 I had.
Nice vintage equipment. The Yamaha, Marantz, Pioneer, AR eq of that era was some well built product
I agree the Dynaco & Hafler kits were fun projects I built a few of the ST-70's and later the D-200's which I modified and made into mono amps. Still have the D-200's floating around but sold off the ST-70 and ST-80 I had.
09-07-2010, 01:46 PM
#30
Race Director
mwc951 & Mike,
Nice vintage equipment. The Yamaha, Marantz, Pioneer, AR eq of that era was some well built product
I agree the Dynaco & Hafler kits were fun projects I built a few of the ST-70's and later the D-200's which I modified and made into mono amps. Still have the D-200's floating around but sold off the ST-70 and ST-80 I had.
Nice vintage equipment. The Yamaha, Marantz, Pioneer, AR eq of that era was some well built product
I agree the Dynaco & Hafler kits were fun projects I built a few of the ST-70's and later the D-200's which I modified and made into mono amps. Still have the D-200's floating around but sold off the ST-70 and ST-80 I had.