Anyone had like a $800 turntable and upgraded to a $2,000 plus turntable and notice much difference?

[Chrispy]

(I'm presuming you mean by "defective vinyl in the first place" that vinyl is inherently "defective" - a strongly compromised source)


This has been answered many times here but...

A lot of people get pleasure out of the various conceptual and tactile aspects of collecting and playing records, and out of owning turntables.
IF you are one of those people, and find yourself playing lots of records and you ALSO enjoy good sound, then it makes sense to start maximizing the potential of vinyl playback too.

As I've mentioned, I find records on my turntable to sound, generally speaking, as mind-blowing as my digital music. So for me I don't find I'm "slumming it" sonically when spinning records and, adding in the other factors that make playing records satisfying, I feel like I'm getting more out of the experience when playing records than playing my digital content. (Not that I don't absolutely love lots of the stuff I have on digital too).

Just the technical side mostly. Pleasure/subjective experience can get weird.

 

[MattHooper]

Just the technical side mostly. Pleasure/subjective experience can get weird.

Sure, I understand.

I think the consensus here is generally that good vinyl playback can sound excellent, but most don't care for the work involved in playing records, in getting them to sound acceptable, and of course the technical liabilities relative to digital.

I'd never recommend to someone else that they go nuts like I did in terms of buying a turntable like mine.

 

[CinDyment]

Why would one care about better playing of defective vinyl in the first place? Many still think Linn is top of the heap in any case.....the whole thing with vinyl is so fraught with issues it's just hard to keep it in mind as a go-to source.

Because the material is more important than the media.

 

[Angsty]

Because the material is more important than the media.

I find the notion of "why vinyl" to be amusing. For some reason, it's hard for the technology and convenience-minded to understand that vinyl can simply be fun. Why collect loads of DACs with slightly inaudibly better SINAD? Because people enjoy it as a hobby.

I participate on a vinyl-centric forum where I'm always amazed by the people who have record collections in the tens of thousands of discs, but have invested comparably little in their playback systems. I admit I'm more of a gearhead than most on that forum, but the people there love music and love the tactile experience of vinyl.

 

[CinDyment]

I find the notion of "why vinyl" to be amusing. For some reason, it's hard for the technology and convenience-minded to understand that vinyl can simply be fun. Why collect loads of DACs with slightly inaudibly better SINAD? Because people enjoy it as a hobby.

I participate on a vinyl-centric forum where I'm always amazed by the people who have record collections in the tens of thousands of discs, but have invested comparably little in their playback systems. I admit I'm more of a gearhead than most on that forum, but the people there love music and love the tactile experience of vinyl.

In some of those collections, I figure some records are played once and never again.

Of course this also speaks to diminishing returns. Is a $10-50K turntable really as much better than say a $1-2K turntable as claimed by "many"? Certainly phono-pre prices rapidly approach laughable. The RIAA curve is not hard, effectively perfect op-amps are not cheap (and it does not take much to be effectively perfect with vinyl), the power draw makes the power supply easy. For an MM pre, there is little justification for a high price though I think more money for catridge matching makes sense (if you know what you are doing). MC is a little harder, but not "hard".

 

[Angsty]

Is a $10-50K turntable really as much better than say a $1-2K turntable as claimed by "many"?

Not really, if you trust the measurements by Paul Miller in Hifi News. But, I can also say the same thing about DACs, where performance gains level off before $1000 but prices can keep going to the stratosphere. The dCS Vivaldi Apex DAC is priced at US $34,000 and it’s likely not the most expensive on the market.

Certainly phono-pre prices rapidly approach laughable. The RIAA curve is not hard, effectively perfect op-amps are not cheap (and it does not take much to be effectively perfect with vinyl), the power draw makes the power supply easy. For an MM pre, there is little justification for a high price though I think more money for catridge matching makes sense (if you know what you are doing). MC is a little harder, but not "hard".

My favorite phono retails for $1400 and is a well-engineered, op-amp based model: the Sutherland Insight. Ron Sutherland is a no-nonsense, meticulous engineer. He sells less and more expensive models, but the Insight is flexible and high-performing without “flash”. The same basic phono amplifier design has been in production since 2007, with different power supplies.

I might be able to find a phono that performs equally well with my MC cartridges for less cash. But, I’m comfortable with my discounted purchase and I do have pride of ownership of such a well-crafted, artisinal product.

 

[Balle Clorin]

Turntable technology peaked in the mid-80s. The advent of CD and digital meant that R&D evaporated. The so-called "high-end" turntables today do not compare to what you could get back then. Look at specifications if you don't believe me and be wary of anything without them.

Here are some wow and flutter measurements for my old Clearaudio Concept:

View attachment 192521

It's nothing special, and frankly poor compared to something from the 1980s. This is a $2300 turntable. Sign up at vinylengine and download the manual for your Dual. The specs are probably better. (But this doesn't mean it can't be cleaned and serviced for optimal performance.) That said, this should all be inaudible. Some people say under 0.1% and others under 0.06% are the limits of human hearing.

Here is a Sony PS-X50 I got for $80. I am in the middle of a restoration and it will improve. This is it still "off."

View attachment 192528

If you want something "good" these days you are going to have to get a Technics direct drive turntable. They are expensive now. But is it worth it?

This returns us to your question: that depends on many different things. Is your tonearm compatible with your cartridge (in terms of effective mass and compliance, for example)? How are you loading your set-up? Does your phono preamp allow you robust loading options or is it simply set to 47k ohms for example? These things affect the frequency response, which will alter what you hear. If you aren't thinking of these things you probably just want to buy something shiny and new. Isolation matters too as mentioned, but its issues are generally more obvious. More, Rega is not the way to go if that is an issue. The turntables are light and rigid.

This all being said, the medium doesn't compare to properly done digital. It's compromised and becoming obsessed with performance is a fool's errand simply because it'll never be perfect, there are too many things that can go wrong from a dried out belt to an off-center record. This doesn't mean you shouldn't try to learn about it. There are even a handful of members here with extraordinary set-ups, but they REALLY know what they are doing. I myself engage in the technical discussions here (and stay the hell away from the why is vinyl better than digital conversations).

In the end though, I think vinyl is "good enough" and is certainly enjoyable, but don't look under the hood if you are a romantic about it. I am not going to hate on anyone for spending $2000 for a fancy turntable. Aesthetics are important too. But you aren't going to get anything that is a noticeable difference. (Though the speed stability of a proper direct drive can be worth it.)

Edit: This is all assuming you have a reasonably decent turntable to begin with. The market today is so damn awful and comprised of cheap crap churned out for a quick buck. Most are made from the same parts. I recently had to purchase a new turntable for a family member and was struck by the poor measurements of turntables under $400-$500--the stuff that gets recommended in popular sources. The specs of these would be considered poor in the late 1970s. I would certainly expect any higher priced turntable to sound better than these. The cheapest turntable I can recommend is the Denon DP-400, which is $500! Otherwise I'd ecourage anyone to buy a well-spec'ed vintage turntable from a reputable source because this new stuff is not worth the money. In short: upper and middle class have collapsed.

18 present day turntables measured, including my old classic design from the early 1980s. Price range 600-150 000 Euro
Values are Peak wow&flutter, no weighting or filter and shows the peak variation during a 8 second period, Quite similar to the Iphone app WF from http://philipbroder.com/wowflutter

Using DIN filtering gives lower values

Many ways to specify speed stability, here is a comparison vs the unfitered wow&flutter=peak variation

Here is the worst turntable plotted vs time and with speed variation frequency

and the best

 

[digitalfrost]

Interesting. I don't have a direct drive table, but it seems +-0.1% is still a good result.

 

[CinDyment]

18 present day turntables measured, including my old classic design from the early 1980s. Price range 600-150 000 Euro
Values are Peak wow&flutter, no weighting or filter and shows the peak variation during a 8 second period, Quite similar to the Iphone app WF from http://philipbroder.com/wowflutter

Using DIN filtering gives lower value

Many ways to specify speed stability, here is a comparison vs the unfitered wow&flutter=peak variation


Here is the worst turntable plotted vs time and with speed variation frequency

and the best

Interesting. Have not really looked at this in some time. I got my forever turntable almost decades ago. It's art.

What I always get a good laugh out of is "audiophiles" making comments about digital clocking while a $0.10 oscillator is more than accurate enough to show speed instability in a turntable.

 

[Balle Clorin]

Interesting. I don't have a direct drive table, but it seems +-0.01% is still a good result.

View attachment 197564

0.1% think you mean. Yes below 0.1 phone app is OK. The best result I get in my DC belt drive turntable on the app you use is 0.06-0.08 on 2sigma, while the other WF app gives 0.08-0.1 and ShaknSpin gives 0.1%peak wow. I think the the length of measuring time matters, easier to get a very bad or very good result with a short time. I think the Hifinews measurements are 5-10 sec, Shaknspin is 8 sec,

 

[Thermionics]

18 present day turntables measured, including my old classic design from the early 1980s. Price range 600-150 000 Euro
Values are Peak wow&flutter, no weighting or filter and shows the peak variation during a 8 second period, Quite similar to the Iphone app WF from http://philipbroder.com/wowflutter

Using DIN filtering gives lower values



View attachment 197555

Many ways to specify speed stability, here is a comparison vs the unfitered wow&flutter=peak variation
View attachment 197558

Here is the worst turntable plotted vs time and with speed variation frequency
View attachment 197561


and the best
View attachment 197563

What are the candidate turntables, if you don't mind sharing?

 

[Balle Clorin]

I do not not think the data is fool proof enough for publicity. Some very costly ones are good and some bad. Some results are consistent with several sources , others not. Any turntable can be inconsistent in performance, An optimal belt and setup can halve the Wow, and a unfortunate setup / poor belt double it. a heavy platter is no guarantee for stable speed. I can say is that a high price is no guarantee for any higher performance. And that a Technics direct drive and other direct drives are included, suspended and not suspended turntables also. Measure before you buy. You can PM me to ask if your table is included, and I can give you the result if I have it.


A manufacturer can specify a W&F number but be careful to use same definition when comparing , WRMS can be very low value but can still have a high wow, see below where- A WRMS of 0.04% is very bad indeed!!

 

[deniall83]

I've owned a Pro-Ject Debut Carbon, Well Tempered Simplex, Rega RP3, Pioneer PLX-1000, VPI Classic, Technics SL-1210GR and AT-LP140XP.

Can't say I've noticed much difference between them. The main differences being how easy they are to setup and use. The VPI was a bit of pain. Extremely heavy and fiddly. Terrible anti-skate mechanism. No dust-cover. The Technics was just a pleasure to use and set up. I bought a cheap LP140XP because frankly, it sounds the same as the Technics for a fifth of the price and I couldn't justify the cost.

 

[JP]

I do not not think the data is fool proof enough for publicity. Some very costly ones are good and some bad. Some results are consistent with several sources , others not. Any turntable can be inconsistent in performance, An optimal belt and setup can halve the Wow, and a unfortunate setup / poor belt double it.

SP-10R measuring the difference between torque setting one and five, five of each.

These were done in my basement on a 200lb maple top table with heavy duty industrial legs. The table is in the corner of the foundation, so three legs rest on foundation footers and only one on the slab. Obvious things like turning off the heating system were done to prevent as much vibration as possible. Not the most ideal environment, but the best I can do ATM.

The measurements were taken sequentially following a timed script - each cycle was as close to identical as possible being done manually. The measurements were indexed from the starting sample of the capture to a specific time in to the track to ensure the same part (close enough) of the track was captured, and that it was far enough in that the arm was likely stable.

Measured with MI, no weighting.

 

[Bob from Florida]

SP-10R measuring the difference between torque setting one and five, five of each.

These were done in my basement on a 200lb maple top table with heavy duty industrial legs. The table is in the corner of the foundation, so three legs rest on foundation footers and only one on the slab. Obvious things like turning off the heating system were done to prevent as much vibration as possible. Not the most ideal environment, but the best I can do ATM.

The measurements were taken sequentially following a timed script - each cycle was as close to identical as possible being done manually. The measurements were indexed from the starting sample of the capture to a specific time in to the track to ensure the same part (close enough) of the track was captured, and that it was far enough in that the arm was likely stable.

Measured with MI, no weighting.

View attachment 197943

Thanks for posting. Can you go into more detail on how the measurements were done? Assume I don’t know any acronyms, please. Also, the Philip Broder app was mentioned by another poster - do you have any experience with it terms of accuracy versus your process? Thanks.

 

[Balle Clorin]

Measured with MI, no weighting.

MI? what kind of measuring tool is that?

 

[Balle Clorin]

Regarding accuracy

iphone apps:

Wow Flutter | Philip Broder

This one shows 0.24% average speed when speed is actually 33 1/3 on strobedisk and ShaknSpin https://shaknspin.wordpress.com/
The peak WF in the plot is quite similar to Shaknspin 0.08 when Shaknspin shows 0.1 Peak W&F

This is also nice,gives about the same result on turntable 0.08% 2Sigma wow

The android RPM app shows lower speed but speed variation is similar to the rest 0.08 2Ssigma W%F

 

[Sophoheilip]

If you used the same cartridge and phono amp, I am wondering how much of a difference would you notice between a mid level turntable and a higher end turntable. I would think part of the difference would be less vibrations? Hence the reason I purchased a Isoacoustic zaZen vibration reduction table for my turntable.

I have done it the other way around. Purchased a Planar 10 with Apheta 3. Started to quickly doubting all this expensive turntable clutter manufacturers (maybe with exception of SME and EMT, but much to expensive for spinning some plastic).
So I bought a Technics SL1200 and a Denon DL103. As lucky as before and I don't mind the cats sitting on the dust cover. I always felt my heart drop into my guts, when the platter was starting to tip over under their weight.

 

[JP]

Thanks for posting. Can you go into more detail on how the measurements were done? Assume I don’t know any acronyms, please. Also, the Philip Broder app was mentioned by another poster - do you have any experience with it terms of accuracy versus your process? Thanks.

Center the record, record the W&F track, analyze it. Nothing special aside from trying to ensure each measurement was consistent as the point of that exercise was 1) duplicate an odd finding from a reviewer (couldn't) and 2) show how variable these measurements really are.

W&F isn't a very useful measurement to me as it can obscure issues. When I work on 'tables I want to see the FM demodulated spectra. For quick assessment I'll do a polar plot.

MI? what kind of measuring tool is that?

Multi-Instrument.

 

[Bob from Florida]

When I work on 'tables I want to see the FM demodulated spectra. For quick assessment I'll do a polar plot.



Multi-Instrument.

Fast Fourier Transform useful?