It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 25498 times.

TheChairGuy

Indeed, it can.

My honest belief is that vinyl playback is inferior to CD playback - all things considered and budget not considered.  My plan was to put together a analog front end that would provide maximum enjoyment for minimal investment...and allow me to enjoy my stockpile of 200 albums gathering dust in the past year.

I live in California - my rent for 3 months is about what the 'average' audiophile has in equipment costs.  Also, I'm just built fairly prudently - I pay myself (my family) first; and feed my obsessions secondarily.  

That said, I am dumbfoundingly pleased with what was cooked up for about $400.00....including (used) $150.00 Nitty Gritty record cleaner.  It's an obsession partly fulfilled by a very admirably restrained budget.

My 25 year-old $50.00 JVC direct drive model (from ebay) is far more pleasant to listen to them my prior Thorens TD-316.....with the latest Shure V15 cartridge that had.  The JVC has the redoubtedly excellent Audio Technica AT-440ml ($95.00).

I carefully balanced the arm, lubricated the tonearm bearing (smartly located away from the tonearm) with Tufoil, and damped the arm, plinth and underside with about 9 lbs. of Plast-i-Clay and constrained layer damping. Shielded the motor with a few snips of ERS Clothe and shielded the platter with an 8 x 8" square of ERS Clothe.  Re-tubed my preamp with some used Telefunken 12ax7's and Sovtek 6922's in the phono stage. No doubt, the TT fed by clean AC provided by the BPT-2 is positively affecting it's performance, as well.

It's a face that maybe only a Daddy can love....but my little friend is right now playing Cowboy Junkies 'Trinity Session' and it's fabulous. Far better than the digital conversion of it to CD.

I do not believe that digital playaback of similar dollars would equal this in pleasure....not 100% certain of that, but largely of that belief.

So, here is my ugly duckling, super sounding TT.....










srb

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #1 on: 14 Nov 2005, 04:22 am »
Quote
My honest belief is that vinyl playback is inferior to CD playback


After reading the rest of your post, It seems you meant to say "My honest belief is that vinyl playback is SUPERIOR to CD playback"?

Folsom

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #2 on: 14 Nov 2005, 05:08 am »
Honestly though, Vinyl is superior to CD playback on a budget..... The best Vinyl turntables range from what.... $300-3000..... You can easily spend $1000 on a DAC alone, or more, just to approach the grade a not even so great Vinyl album has.

I sure lack the funds to get a $1000 DAC, $300+ CD/SACD/DVD player with $200 worth of modding.... Then all the extra cables etc.... While my mmf-5 cost me $550 (not that I have a needle right now haha, I am so stupid) and it rocks my world. I hear a DISTINCT DIFFERENCE with my $15 Tangban full range drivers. It is like seeing the light for the first time.....

lcrim

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #3 on: 14 Nov 2005, 04:22 pm »
Chair Guy, Its good to hear that others are rediscovering vinyl playback.  I notice that you were wise enough to realize that clean records make an enormous difference in sound quality, as you also purchased a record cleaning machine that uses a vacuum.
I wanted to also overstate another point, that I can find real treasures in used vinyl for a few bucks.  A lot less than the cost of a new CD.
Vinyl is lots more work.  You do have to clean things and get up and change or turn the record over every 25 minute or so and set up is tricky.
Its more like a relationship ,you get out of it what you put into it.

TheChairGuy

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #4 on: 14 Nov 2005, 05:46 pm »
To be sure, my version of vinyl vs. CD playback ain't a fair one here: I have $4500.00 invested in CD and $400.00 in vinyl. But, I've been at enough shootouts and shows over the years to know that CD is just more capable overall.  

Nonetheless, this $400.00 vinyl investment made is astoundingly good. It just sounds good - no price considered.  

I had an Audioquest mat, and on top of that I cut a 12" round piece of my own version of Non-Felt mat....which is nothing more than a PVC and Polyester pad used for such things as dish liners and rug underlays.  Available widely - Supermarkets, Hardware stores, IKEA's - under Rubbermaid or Grip-Tex lables, primarily. I chose a thin version of this so that my VTA would be right...the JVC does not have adjustable VTA arm height.  The mat sounds good (I think cost was $4.99 for the roll  ) - you'll just might want to try it    :)

I am looking long and hard at the Boston Audio mat for $195.00....seems to be a most verifiable upgrade for many.

Larry/lcrim - the problem with those $1.00 vinyl treasures is that, too often, they have been beat to shit by a dime store record player and some ham-fisted operator. Fully half, if not more, of those $1.00 'beauties' I've picked up at Salvation Army et al, sound like crap.  The grooves are worn to hell...no matter how much Bugtussel I spray on it, how many times I clean it in the Nitty Gritty and preserve it with Last.  It still sounds like crap - as do my wife's old records.

At least when you pay $8.00 for a used CD, 9 of 10 times it works fine and you only evaluate it based on it's music contect, not wear.

I must say that, despite the pain of finding one of those vinyl beauties-in-a-haystack, it's still kinda' fun digging thru the piles when time allows for it   :wink: 8)

Viva la diference  :!:

BobM

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #5 on: 14 Nov 2005, 06:01 pm »
The difference between $400 in vinyl and $1400 in vinyl is pretty amazing, and likely to meet or beat your CD rig. Now imagine putting your vinyl on equal footing with your CD's, and I mean including phono stage and cartridge. You won't be saying CD Rules anymore, at least not for recordings that have the same mastering.

I do believe SOME CD's sound better than viny, but that is usually due to over compression and bad mastering on the vinyl rather than anything else the medium has to offer.

Enjoy,
Bob

TheChairGuy

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #6 on: 14 Nov 2005, 06:16 pm »
Quote from: BobM
The difference between $400 in vinyl and $1400 in vinyl is pretty amazing, and likely to meet or beat your CD rig. Now imagine putting your vinyl on equal footing with your CD's, and I mean including phono stage and cartridge. You won't be saying CD Rules anymore, at least not for recordings that have the same mastering.

I do believe SOME CD's sound better than viny, but that is usually due to over compression and bad mastering on the vinyl rather than anything else the medium has to offer.

Enjoy,
Bob


Yep, I've definitely considered this.

I'll see if things change if I upgrade the mat, enhance the isolation underneath (it's on a mass-weighted Target rack and the TT sits on 4 sorbothane 'puds' and they on a 30 lb granite slab now), and upgrade cartridge and phono stage.

Perhaps you're right - but I've heard some awful trick and expensive vinyl setups at shows and they fall short of the best CD playback.  Removing the spinning disc, and running the digital information from hard drives, seems an even less expensive and better way to achieve superior CD playback these days...well on par with similar money spent on great vinyl playback.

S/N ratio, stereo separation, lack of pops and clicks, greater dynamic range and frequency response of CD's make for superior playback...I just think it needs a bit of more fine tuning to finally best analog conclusively.

Nonetheless, what I'm hearing from my $400 experiment is far better than I ever expected.

philipp

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #7 on: 14 Nov 2005, 06:46 pm »
My first "real" stereo in 1994 included a NAD604 CD player. I had a decent little vinyl collection at the time and my dealer convinced me to get a Rega Planar 2 with the Rega Bias cartridge. Each item cost me $300 at the time. Much to my dealer's dismay, I thought the NAD sounded better than the Rega, especially in the sense of dynamics.

Last summer, it was time to retire the old NAD and I bought a Cambridge Audio 604C for $460. It's a lovely CD player. Listening to CDs leaves me grinning with joy! Then it was time to find a replacement for the Rega since the gap between my enjoyment of records and CDs was only widening.

I shopped around for a while and then had the good fortune of acquiring a used Well Tempered Record Player with a Goldring Eroica cartridge for only $800. The sweet part is that the dealer gave me $200 credit for my old Rega. No one was willing to give me a dime for my old NAD CD player! That dropped the cost to $600, comparable to the new CD player.

To get to the main point of this post, I now understand why audiophiles still think vinyl is superior to digital. My records on this turntable sound spectacular, full bodied, vibrant, with dynamics that leave me breathless. It's superior to my CD player in every way. I was inspired to buy a VPI record cleaner the other day. I'm awaiting the arrival of cleaning fluids and record sleeves before I wash my collection. From what I've read out here on the web, it will make my records sound much better.

I don't usually find myself sharing these opinions with other because, frankly, you have to spend substantial amounts of money to hear vinyl in all its glory. I'm sure I'll try out a nice DAC some day to see if I can bring my CDs up the same levels as my records, but I'm having a lot of fun rediscovering vinyl. Especially when I can buy so much for pocket change, like the practically unplayed copy of Sade's "Promise" I found at Goodwill for $1.99. I also have two record stores that sell much of their used vinyl for $3.60 each in very nice shape. I sure can't find any CDs at that price.

lcrim

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #8 on: 14 Nov 2005, 07:19 pm »
Jeez Chair Guy I compliment you and you kick me. :D
I have three vinyl setups now and my attitude about costs are more in line w/ BobM and Philipp.  BTW, I would kill to find a used Well Tempered for that price.  I envy you.
I have to agree w/ the notion that if you spent as much on analog as you did on that digital source, end to end, the analog would be better.  
I just discovered the Jolida JD-9 phono section and it sounds spectacular for $450, you can certainly spend a lot more for less quality.  A decent record cleaner is almost mandatory.  The Well Tempered is an awfully good TT/arm and as I mentioned above, I'd love to get my hands on one but they are rarely available used.  The AT is a nice inexpensive cart but there are some stunning cartridges available @ reasonable prices.
I am about to try out PC audio but remember to factor a PC into the cost as you will need a dedicated PC to do it properly.
Used vinyl can be found cheap, I personally never spend much above 4$ and the better your rig the less prone it is to surface noise.  If you like the sound of vinyl, I think you are willing to forgive the occassional crackle and pop.

TheChairGuy

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #9 on: 14 Nov 2005, 08:37 pm »
Quote from: lcrim
Jeez Chair Guy I compliment you and you kick me. :D


No kick intended Larry - sorry if it sounded even remotely like it  :)

Hey, speaking of the Well-Tempered unit...I seem to remember a conversation with Kevin Haskins of DIY Cable a while back and an intriguing $1000.00 vinyle setup he came up with in conjunction with a well known audiophile turntable maker.  Hope I'm not prematurely spilling the beans on this for Kevin - but I'd watch for an announcement from his soon on what could be the cat's meow in $1000.00 TT's.

I don't think I'm ruining too much of the surprise as he announced this the other day:

"Stay tuned soon because we have something for the analog lovers in the works also."  

Hi 'philipp', thanks for your thoughts on the subject  :wink:

Anybody have experience with the Boston Audio Mat 1 out there?

Carlman

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #10 on: 14 Nov 2005, 09:03 pm »
I recently sold my Pro-Ject and a lot of my vinyl because of the cost and issues that Chairguy has mentioned.. Plus, I'm too young to have a big collection of vinyl.. and I don't really know what I'm missing in terms of out of print musicians.  

To me, it took about 2,k in the vinyl front-end to 'get it' for me and rival digital playback.  The only time I've heard vinyl sound better than audio PC is with the Eastern Electric Minimax phonostage with good tubes, connected to my Pro-Ject RM4 using a Dynavector 10x5.  That particular combo was quite good.  And at 2,k+ it should be.  At $600, the Audio PC sounded 99% as good and offers many conveniences.

Anyway, CONGRATS to you Mr. Chair!  I hope to get a cheap but good solution implemented for 'novelty listening' in the future...  Maybe things will work out as well for me as they have for you... :)

-C

TheChairGuy

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #11 on: 14 Nov 2005, 10:58 pm »
Based on this very positive $400.00 experiment I may look to judicuously upgrade over time.  

I think that both the A-T cartridge and phono stage could be upgraded and significantly change the outcome of things.

I think what I have here is a well spent $400.00...something that would have bested my CD playback as recently as 4 years ago, but bested handily since.  But, at more than 10x the outlay to get there  :(

Spending another $1000.00 on vinyl equipment in the next several months might well traverse much of that difference I now hear in the two.  Anyhow, I'm certainly open to it  :drums:

Folsom

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #12 on: 14 Nov 2005, 11:01 pm »
Quote from: Carlman
I don't really know what I'm missing in terms of out of print musicians.


I would not venture to say just out of print musicians.... Creedence Clearwater Revival on CD sucks if you ask me, however on Vinyl it has a grand sound, clearly defined insterments and vocals. When you listen to CCR on CD, at least the originals, they are awful, you have to turn your volume up significantly, you get no where fast. I have only listened to a small bit of remasters, I found them to be far from impressive, and the ones I tried would only play on select things.

If PC audio, which is what I have been doing, and CD playback is so great, why do some voices sound flat to me..... I would not rule Vinyl out. Granted Vinyl is mostly effective in a certain ranges of money. You say it took two thousand dollars to rival CD, how much was the CD setup? I have about seven hundred tops into my Vinyl, and it makes my PC audio efforts look like squat. I would venture to say that I have spent around six hundred on CD's easily..... I have spent about fourty dollars on Vinyl, and have around 3/9th the amount of Vinyl to CD so far.... I spent $1.67 on windshield spray wash for a car, and have used old beaten pure cotton, to hand clean the Vinyl. The difference between cleaned and not is where it is at.... Yeah I know a cleaning machine would work a little better and be way easier. Still though, when you have a record shop selling used to about new from $3-9 a pop, not warped.... Pick up collections at garage sales that where stored ok.... Not every one beat the piss out of their Vinyl, many people took care of them the best they knew how, even if it was just a D4 bottle and a cloth, vertically stored. The worst part so far is just flipping the record, but I am more then happy to for the sound.

One day down the road I will throw in a Tube pre-amp, and a subwoofer. Then perhaps upgrade to a better amplifier.

Tone Deaf

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #13 on: 15 Nov 2005, 09:12 am »
I'm a dyed-in-the-wool vinyl enthusiast, no interest in CDs at all.  Vinyl sounds better, with the caveat that it must be a decent pressing.  

CCW come from the golden days of vinyl when poor pressings were rare.  My experience is that 60s & 70s records almost always sound terrific, even with the odd scratch & a little worn.  Mid to late 80s records were/are awful.  Thin bendy records that sound...well, thin and bendy as it happens.  The inner tracks seem barely audible over the scuzz and distortion, & I admit, even on my cheap player, CD sounds preferable.


Junk shop records from 60s/70s are a pretty safe bet, you should be able to see any damage that would render them useless.  When I was 4 my dad gave me a Tex Ritter LP from 1969 - I was into cowboys!  I played it on my battery operated Fisher Price & kept it in my toybox for years.  It turned up in the attic a while ago, & although scratched it sounds perfectly listenable on my Linn Son.  It  In fact, a lot like modern alt country.  Anyone know if Tex is still around??

TD

Rocket

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #14 on: 15 Nov 2005, 11:32 am »
Hi Guys,

Have you ever listened to pink floyds 'dark side of the moon' on vinyl and then listened to the cd version?

Enough said.

Regards

Rod

skrivis

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 808
It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #15 on: 15 Nov 2005, 04:30 pm »
Quote from: Rocket
Hi Guys,

Have you ever listened to pink floyds 'dark side of the moon' on vinyl and then listened to the cd version?

Enough said.

Regards

Rod


Quite true. The CD version is superior. The vinyl version just shows up the limitations of the record pressing process.

JoshK

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #16 on: 15 Nov 2005, 04:51 pm »
Well I find the LP vs CD debate boring usually and much like SS vs Tube debates.  There are too many caveats to make any conclusions.  I find that I agree though with a lot said in this thread.

I have been into LPs for only a short while and I am of the CD generation but grew up listening to my dad's LPs at least some of the time.  I think a lot has to do with ERA and genre of the recording in determining which media sounds better.

My findings for the music I like and own:
1) 60's and early seventies classic rock, vinyl is clearly more listenable
2) 80's vinyl is fairly hit and miss, but same with the CDs
3) 90's modern rock usually sounds better on CD than LP releases, but not always
4) current modern rock and indie rock that is released on both media is usually quite close and hard to call, but can go one way or the other depending on what your priorities are.
5) I generally don't like jazz, but the few recordings I have are clearly better on LP.  
6) Classical = ?? as I don't own same recordings on both media

With the exception of classical there is litttle or no music prior to the 60's that I am familiar with and care for, again I don't like jazz in general.

skrivis

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 808
It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #17 on: 15 Nov 2005, 05:06 pm »
Quote from: JoshK
Well I find the LP vs CD debate boring usually and much like SS vs Tube debates.  There are too many caveats to make any conclusions.  I find that I agree though with a lot said in this thread.

I have been into LPs for only a short while and I am of the CD generation but grew up listening to my dad's LPs at least some of the time.  I think a lot has to do with ERA and genre of the recording in determining which media sounds better.

My findings for the music I like and own:
1) 60's and early seventies ...


I do have quite a bit of old vinyl, and lacquer too. Some of it may never be placed on CD, so the question is moot as to which would be better. :)

It's just that, for things like imaging, soundstage, dynamics, timbre, distortion - I find CD sounds better.

I think they are both now mature technologies. Digital, for me, sounds better. YMMV.

philipp

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #18 on: 15 Nov 2005, 05:42 pm »
I agree with others here that it's difficult to say in any objective way that one format is better than the other. As I suggested in my earlier post, much of a person's opinion is informed by the quality of their equipment. When I owned the Rega, I "knew" that CDs sounded better than vinyl. Now, I feel the opposite is true.

**However** that observation only holds true with a comparison of the same recording in both formats, and only on recordings made before 1990. Like JoshK, I think current recordings sound wonderful in both formats. I like to buy the current LPs for two reasons: 1) my turntable sounds better than my CD player and 2) I enjoy the big beautiful covers.

Unlike some vinyl fans, I would never avoid CDs. My God, to think of all the wonderful music that's come out in the last 15 years that I'd never get to enjoy!

And to add to JoshK's opinions (being a big jazz and classical fan), here's my take.

Jazz: old Blue Notes sound better on 60s-70s vinyl -- and having Reid Miles's stunning cover designs in full size is alone worth the money. The new RVG CD remasters are OK, but kind of harsh in the highs. Columbia and Atlantic(Rhino) reissues are quite good. The "Original Jazz Classics" (Prestige/Contemporary/Riverside/etc.) sound better on 60s-70s vinyl. Almost all of the other labels from 50s-80s sound better on vinyl, unless their recording quality wasn't so hot to begin with (like ESP or Sun Ra's label) or unless you simply can't find them/afford them, and then I'd go with CD.

Classical: older classical records can be found for so little money that it makes no sense to spend the bucks for CD reissues. Newer digital recordings sound phenomenal but, of course, it's the performers and performance that matters with classical and you would not want to limit yourself to only recent work. However, any classical fan who would pass on hearing Mikhail Pletnev or the Takacs Quartet simply because of the CD format is nuts.

Folsom

It can be achieved for US$400.00....but $610.06 is better
« Reply #19 on: 16 Nov 2005, 05:13 am »
Quote from: skrivis
I do have quite a bit of old vinyl, and lacquer too. Some of it may never be placed on CD, so the question is moot as to which would be better. :)

It's just that, for things like imaging, soundstage, dynamics, timbre, distortion - I find CD sounds better.

I think they are both now mature technologies. Digital, for me, sounds better. YMMV.


Yeah but if you consider how CD's are recorded..... There is a lot of artificial soundstage and imaging attributes. If you where to here the same band in a bar, concert, or live acoustical performance, you never hear the extreme end of what you do on CD's. When you can clearly hear drumming of the drums, going from one side to the other, you know it is from the microphone or what ever right next to it. When you hear a band in any way it is never that up close or prevelant of the distinct location of where the sound is coming from.

Now what I think makes Vinyl stand out is when you can feel the emotion in the voice..... When you can feel how powerful a voice the singer has. The guitar and drums, they sound so fluid, magical, clear, there is just some thing that makes it sound full. I like that.... I will trade CD attributes for the Vinyl that reminds me of the live music that I love (well some times it is from a live show).