ODS123
-
Posts
899 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Gallery
Posts posted by ODS123
-
-
1 hour ago, Tarheel said:
Didn't need a second turn table but I threw in a low ball bid on this one. Didn't get it and it later sold.
I'm giving serious thought to selling mine (pictured earlier in thread) and buying either a new SL-1200G, or SL-1200GR (more likely). I don't have a particularly good reason other than just having one that's new in the hopes that'll be the last table I'll every buy.
Not to high-jack the thread, but could anyone speculate what I'd get for my SL-1200mk2? ..It is truly like new, not a mark or mar and NO modifications other than a KAB dampener which is easily removed by a twist of screw. I suppose it's possible the set-screw left a tiny mark, but that would be it. Even the box looks new. Any guesses?? ..I bought it as NOS in 2014? Sorry if it's no appropriate to ask.
-
On 3/23/2018 at 7:26 AM, ODS123 said:
Operationally, you’ll also notice that these tables have a much more substantial feel than their comparably priced BD tables. My SL1200 (which I purchased new from B&H Photo three years ago - as new old stock) looks and feels like a $1000 component. It’s a heavy piece of gear made from metal and thick rubber (lower half of the base). By comparison, the $1000 BD tables I considered felt so light and insubstantial.
Anyway, if you go the DD route, you’ll probably have to move quickly on either the Pioneer or Technics SL1210 as these are out of production and are available only as new old stock.
Actually, ..I stand corrected. Technics has released a revised SL-1200 called the "GR". ..It's $1800. I knew they released an uber-costly 1200 (the GAE, around $5000) but was not aware of the GR. Good to see Technics resurrecting the 1200 class of TT's.
.Also, I was wrong about the Pioneer as well. ..It's purchasable directly from Pioneer via the "DJ" section of their www.pioneerelectronics.com website. ..It's $600. ..Anyway, just wanted to correct the record.
-
I realize the OP has already found a TT but for those reading this thread hoping for a recommendation, the following Technics SL1200mk2 just turned up on A-gon. It appears to be in good shape, however the seller has no feedback. ..So keep that in mind. $350 seems reasonable to me.
https://www.audiogon.com/listings/lis8ggc1-technics-sl-1200-mkii-turntables
-
1 hour ago, Shakeydeal said:
Your experiment works great for people who don't actually enjoy listening to music, i.e. active listening.
All you guys who like listening to test tones and/or those who relegate music to the background, knock yourselves out.
I listen to music incessantly. ..But I approach this hobby with a critical mind. ..I think it's hurt by a general disinterest in sorting out the real audible differences b/w gear and those that are imagined because of biases.
-
4 hours ago, Shakeydeal said:
I've had my Forte IIIs for about two weeks now. Love em.
As for cables, there are differences. All do NOT sound alike, no matter what naysayers say. Spend what you are comfortable with and buy what sounds best within your budget. They don't have to cost thousands of dollars.
Audition cables in a resolving system and you'll see what I mean.
Shakey
Well, to those who believe there are audible differences b/w cables, let me make this suggestion. Yes, it may take a few minutes to set up but you'll thank me for the money it will save you.
First, push your two speakers right next to each other. Now, take two different interconnects (or speaker cables) and have a friend or family member connect one to one channel and one to the other WITHOUT telling you which is which. ..Now, play a MONO song and switch b/w the speakers using your balance control. ..Do you hear a difference now?? You can improve this test by using a db meter to first making sure your amp outputs the same SPL (within a db or so) to each channel. ..If one channel is sufficiently louder, this will likely fool you into thinking the cable sounds different. ..But normally, you needn't bother if your pre-amp is functioning properly.
Dollars to donuts you won't hear one iota of a difference.
-
1 hour ago, efzauner said:
Lots of $5000 power cables too! Oh boy. try getting into a conversation with the reps on those types of products.. Lots of BS and real anger when you ask good questions. The same sort of response when you ask CAM people about reiki and homeopathy... its all woo.. and lots of Quantum Energy Fields!
Sure, they'll cite technical reasons that make them better but NEVER will they cite blinded listening trial data showing they are in ANY way audibly distinguishable from the power cords that are provided by the component manufacturer.
I work for a Pharma company. If one of our drug reps tried impressing a Doctor by bragging about how the biochemistry of our drug makes it better than another, the doctor (the good ones, anyway) would stop the rep and say something like, "Don't bother telling me that - we can discuss that later - first, just show me the blinded trial data that show it benefits the patient by reducing symptoms or halting/slowing disease progression. If you HAVE the data proving it makes a difference then sure, tell me how it works. ..If not, I don't need to hear about the biochemistry."
I'll say it again, the utter lack of honesty/bias controls in high-end audio controls hurts this hobby.
-
12 hours ago, Schu said:
I must be the only one that has bad luck with Thorens... never again for me.
I agree they are built it like tanks... whether or not that is a good thing is debatable.
The couple I have owned had the audacious character to horribly worbble because the motor shafts that were not parallel to the main platter
shaft.
I hope that's not representative of the entire line. If so, that's sorta unforgivable as the first and essential task of a turntable is to turn the record at a consistent 33 1/2 rpm speed. Failing that, there's no redemption for the table. Though I can't site the technical reasons, every belt-drive table I've listened to has struggled to some degree w/ this primary function. Sustained piano and violin notes will reveal this flaw quickly.
-
I’d get a used Technics SL1200mk2, a new Pioneer PLX1000 (only a few left it seems) or maybe up your spending to $2000 and get one of B&H’s last “new Old Stock” Technics SL1210mk5’s. Yes, yes, I know… people will say “$2000! ..That was a $500 TT when it went out of production!” ..Well, maybe, but at $2000 it’s still better built than comparable Belt-drive tables IMHO.I’d ignore the audiophile snobbery that surrounds DD tables. Snobs contend they are noisy and “cog”. Well, perhaps the old cheap ones did this back in the 80’s, but I’ve not heard this from any I’ve heard. With the platter turning on my Technics, , I can’t hear ANY noise or hum coming through my speakers until I’m at about 80% volume, which would be AC/DC concert level spL if I dropped the stylus. The other gripe is that it's a DJ table. Well, so what? That doesn't preclude it sounding great, and it partly explains why it's built like a tank.
By comparison, every $1000 belt-drive table I’ve heard (which, admittedly isn't every $1000 belt-drive table) has been way noisier AND struggle to maintain steady pitch. Listen to a sustained piano or violin note on one of these tables and you’ll hear what i mean - the note warbles audibly and annoyingly. I had one of these BD tables on loan and played an LP as I also played the same song on CD. ..By the end of the 9min. song, the BD table was trailing by 20 secs. ..I do the same w/ my 1200 and it’s spot on - the LP song ends at exactly the same time as the CD.
Operationally, you’ll also notice that these tables have a much more substantial feel than their comparably priced BD tables. My SL1200 (which I purchased new from B&H Photo three years ago - as new old stock) looks and feels like a $1000 component. It’s a heavy piece of gear made from metal and thick rubber (lower half of the base). By comparison, the $1000 BD tables I considered felt so light and insubstantial.
Anyway, if you go the DD route, you’ll probably have to move quickly on either the Pioneer or Technics SL1210 as these are out of production and are available only as new old stock.
here's a pic of mine. ..Using a AT 440mla cartridge
-
1
-
-
35 minutes ago, kink56 said:
I am not of the "W.W. PWK. do?" crowd.
So why have faith in his cabinet design if you don't believe he (or his engineers) knew how to design a proper cross-over?
-
Curious to know, is there a way to buy new x-overs and horn diaphrams that are EXACT replicas of the original for that production run? If it were me, I'd try restoring the speakers to their EXACT original condition, then call it a day. ..If I didn't like their sound as they were intended to sound by PWK, then I would simply conclude they are not for me.
It strikes me as strange how people at once elevate PWK to audio god status, then think they can greatly improve upon his design by endlessly switching out parts, etc..
Plus, if you want to maximize what you can sell them for, your best plan is to restore them to like new original condition. I watch a lot of gear sell on Audiogon and Ebay. The gear that fetches the most money is the gear that is NOT modified.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, kink56 said:
I took a PS Audio preamp to get serviced today. They had a Dynaco ST-70 refurbished for sale. I will try it out today with my Belles. I am expecting a magic miracle based on how everyone says I need a tube power amp to made the Belles sing rather than ring. I will report back later today or tomorrow.
I've never known an amp alone to transform a speaker from "hate it" to "love it". ..Especially nowadays when audible differences b/w amps are minute if audible at all.
-
10 minutes ago, JohnKuthe said:
Same crappy speaker outputs as my Technics!
How/why does a good powerful audio amp have crappy speaker terminals? Shoots any power low-distortion claims they make right out of the water!! Bottleneck at the speaker terminals because of crappy LOW CURRENT CARRYING CAPACITY PLASTIC LITTLE SPEAKER TERMINALS!!
John Kuthe...That is simply not true. Spring loaded terminal were used for years by many reputable mfgs inc., McIntosh. IMHO, A great deal of what we see in home audio - 1/4" faceplates, super thick speaker cables/ interconnects/ power-cords/ fancy banana-plugs, extravegant dampening-factor & low impedance claims, - and so on and so on, are all meant to confer "quality!" on gear but the fact remains that modern day amps that are operating w/ in their design limits (which is easy for LaScalas) sound pretty much the same. Bottomline: That is a perfectly fine piece of gear, despite it's humble speaker terminals. I would have no reservations having that in my house.
-
1
-
-
Anything I plug into an outlet in my home would have to be from a reputable mfg. ..Given the efficiency of your LaScalas you don't need a high-powered amp section. ..My Cornwalls begin shaking the walls when driven with more than 15-20 watts. And I think your speakers are even more efficient.
If you're on a budget and want a receiver (am/fm reception), consider this... from Crutchfield for $150. A very reputable gear company and a very reputable seller.
https://www.crutchfield.com/p_022RS202/Yamaha-R-S202.html
-
I agree with the others. Hum issues aside, I'd be afraid something so inexpensive (and from such an obscure company ) would present a fire risk. ..Is it UL listed at least?
-
16 hours ago, kink56 said:
I mean I may HATE the recording quality of the music I am listening to, but at least I want a stereo that can well REVEAL the inadequacies of said recording. I do not want a system that homogenizes the sound so that all recordings sound mediocre and pleasant. I do not want pleasant over fidelity.
I agree, I also want an audio system that is revealing and accurate. But I'm also pragmatic. ..If I sense I'd enjoy a song more by reducing the treble a tad, then I think its a good thing to be able to do so. Or sometimes it's because I've already been listening for hours and violins and trumpets are beginning to cause a bit of listening fatigue. Rather than turn all the music down, I will just reduce treble a bit. ..Some will say, "if your system ever causes fatigue, then change your system or room acoustics." ..But this is also nonsensical. REAL MUSIC can cause listening fatigue. I played clarinet for many years. Live trumpet, violins, sax, etc...played by the best musicians in the best of venues can become a bit grating after a while. As I've said in other posts, if your system NEVER causes fatigue, then it's not accurate.
And as I've already stated I adamantly believe - and I think any electrical engineer would agree - that having tone controls in the signal path does NOT audibly damage the signal. So, with that myth debunked (in my opinion, anyway), I see no reason NOT to have them. ..I feel the same way about mono/stereo selector.
-
1
-
-
30 minutes ago, dirtmudd said:
but everything is recorded in mono..
then mixed down and panned to stereo..
The point I was making is being missed here. What I'm say is: If it is true that Treble/ Bass/ Balance/ Mono are so harmful to a signal then how does a signal survive the hundreds of zero'd (or adjusted) sliders on a mixing board and come out sounding as wonderful as some of our audiophile-approved music sounds (I was using Night fly as an example.)? The fact that one happens during the recording process, and the other during the playback in our homes is totally irrelevant to my point.
This serves to debunk the nonsensical notion that any true top-quality Pre-amp or Integrated should eschew these basic features. It's my contention that these basic tools make less-than-perfect music more enjoyable to the true music lover -
On 3/14/2018 at 3:13 PM, Shakeydeal said:
Most issues people have with the sound they hear is because of room acoustics and system set up. Get that right and voila! No need for band aids......., er, tone controls.
Shakey
Not how I see it at all. Yes, use room treatments, maybe room correction software, etc. to make your room as neutral as possible. ..Still, unless I listen only to audiophile-approved recordings, I eventually come across song (or album) that can be made more listenable with a small turn of bass or treble. ..As for Mono switch, I can't tell you how many old stereo recordings sound better in mono. Still, it's a personal choice whether Tone controls or a mono switch are necessary. What is not debatable, IMHO, is whether or not the presence of these basic tools are audibly harmful to the signal. ..I submit that they absolutely ARE NOT harmful when zeroed.
-
2 hours ago, Chris A said:
If you removed all that acoustically reflective stuff between the Cornwalls (yes, the electronics cabinet, etc. moved to one side or the other well out of the way), I bet you could toe them in at least 45 degrees and significantly improve the imaging and phantom center effective width at the sweet spot.
The reason why most people don't toe their loudspeakers in more is due to all those acoustic reflections between them...
JMTC.
Chris
That is probably true. ..But it was hard enough getting my wife to allow these speakers into the room. ..If I pulled them further into the room - or try to relocate this built-in cabinet - I'd likely come home one day to find them gone
(Not really... my wife is absolutely wonderful about my audio gear. ..but i don't want to push my luck!)
-
1
-
-
definitely toe-in, but not 45 degrees. To my ears, and in my particular room, they seem to sound best aimed so that they converge (meaning, a line extended straight out from each tweeter) somewhere around 3 feet behind me.
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, willland said:
Could definitely be a solution for someone wanting to add a mono switch to their system.
One of the ageless arguments for NO tone/ Bal or Mono control is the idea that it shortens the signal path, reduces the number of breaks and keeps the signal purer. But this seems like total nonsense to me. Check out this pic of the mixing board Donald Fagen used in mixing "The Nightly" - an album roundly praised for its sound quality. If literally hundreds of sliders, switches, and pots didn't ruin the signal when recording this incredible sounding album in the studio then having tone/ balance/ mono controls on our integrated amps (or pre-amps) won't do an iota of damage to the signal in our home systems.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, Rivernuggets said:
Emotiva has their TA-100. Tone, Balance, Mute, and Mono.
Looks to be a great choice (great build quality for the price!!) but unfortunately the MONO button is only for the tuner. ..I actually researched buying this for a bedroom system.
From the manual:
"Note: The Mono/St setting ONLY affects stereo FM broadcasts. It does NOT convert other types of stereo audio inputs on the TA-100 to monaural."
-
2 hours ago, Schu said:
But one thing is certain, there is enough equipment for every listener to build a system that they personally can love and feel satisfied with.
Well, not if the listener wants tone/balance/mono controls. That's my point. ..As far I'm aware nowadays only McIntosh, Luxman, Accuphase, and Anthem offer all of these and these brands are prohibitively expensive for most people. I miss the days when pretty much all integrateds had these features.
I guess I miss the Golden Days of Audio
My dad had this integrated.
-
3
-
-
Looking at Stereophiles latest "500 Recommended Components" I was struck by how few of the recommended Integrated Amplifiers have tone controls and next to none of them have a mono mode. ..And some don't even have a balance control. WTH?
I much prefer integrated amps these days. ..Fewer cables means fewer connections; fewer connections means fewer opportunities for grounding and hum/buzz issues. There may have been a time that separates made sense but I think that day has passed. My most recent separates were a Bryston 3BSST amp and BP25 pre, and its noise floor and signal bleed (hearing one input on another) was higher than every integrated I've ever had. Plus, as much of my music is the product of rather imperfect recording techniques, I insist on having simple tone controls (bass/treble), mono switch and a balance control. The argument against these controls has been that they deteriorate the signal, but I believe this to be a myth. ..Usually, they're left at zero doing no harm, but when listening to an overly dull or bright album, or if my dishes are rattling in the cupboards, I find a slight tweaking of one or both to be enough to make the song more enjoyable. And Mono?? Absolutely indispensable when listening to old music that dates back to when Stereo mixing was misunderstood - like old Beatles music where the music comes out of one speaker and voices from the other. ..Listening to mono is way better than poorly mixed stereo.
I think gear mfgs. want us to believe that eschewing these basic features keeps the signal "purer" but I think this is nonensense (ever see a mixing board used to make our some of our "audiophile approved" music? ..Literally hundreds of signal breaks). Fewer controls/ switches just means less engineering/ mfg. expense. ..Am I alone in thinking this?
-
1
-
-
True story: ..Wanting to impress a friend with how well my system images, I played Light My Fire by Patricia Barber. ..After a few minutes I said, "Doesn't it sound like she's right there (pointing), here in the room with us?" ..He said, "Sure does, now can we ask her to leave.?" ..I guess I should have picked some better music.
..Sometimes as audiophiles we become enamored with a particular artist/album/song for the wrong reasons.
Once again, great music that images poorly is still great music, poor music that images great is still poor music.
(Not really... my wife is absolutely wonderful about my audio gear. ..but i don't want to push my luck!)
My dad had this integrated.
Turntable Recommendations
in 2-Channel Home Audio
Posted
I completely agree. It's what I discovered when I shopped for a TT four years ago to replace my 15 yr old Ariston Icon.. ..Not to offend, but the belt-drives that I looked at seemed to be little more than a plank of wood, a bearing, an out-sourced motor, a rubber-band and an out-sourced tonearm. No suspension to speak of. ..Just a simple device that appeared to take little engineering know how. ..Compare that to a Technics SL-1200, which seems like a substantial component.