Do You Still Own A Turntable?

Aw get bent .... then put a 2p on your stylus!

Theres nothing like listening to a good single whilst sitting by a blazing open fire ...burning cd's! :)

Theres nothing wrong with being a coal miner! :P

TGI(drink-fuelled)F!

Technics SL-QL1 for me

I think vinyl sounds better if you can afford good kit to play it on. If you're limited to a couple of hundred, then digital sounds less bad. I got rid of my old turntable because the motor wore out & the groans from it drowned out any music. I have a replacement, but it's only one for digitising albums, not much quality.

I found that vinyl does wear out over time, if played a lot (I got through 3 copies of Floyd's "Final Cut"), and can be damaged more easily than digital media, but there is something about the sound that makes digital seem lifeless. Maybe it's just psychological. It would be interesting to do some blind listening tests.

The thing I miss most is having the artwork at a decent size. Some album covers (Yes, Rare Bird, Lighthouse) had fantastic artwork, which loses all its impact when reduced to CD size.

I use to own a turntable. I got rid of it due to cost of replacing needle, space and general inconvenience. I turned all my vinyl into mp3 and am currently selling or giving away my vinyl collection. It's up to people how they choose to listen to music and no one has the right to preach which is best! If I had the time, space and money then I'd probably have kept the turntable and records. However I prefer mp3 format as it's quick, easy, cheap and does not consume precious space.

The point about MP3 is that it may sound reasonable thru an MP 3 player bit sounds truly dreadful thru a basic hi-fi system

I have a Dual CS-505 deluxe, with the black ash surround and perspex lid. Bought from new, decades ago, but now languishing and suffering from a broken pitch-control belt. A Pro-Ject Debut SE has replaced it for now. Both have had various combinations of cartridges, amps and speakers. The convenience of a CD player has relegated the vinyl to more of a nostalgic role these days, but I still enjoy picking out an LP Gem, running the carbon-fibre anti-static brush over the surface and sitting back. Coupled with a remote control on the amp, for volume, it's still a great way to relax as Tomita's 'Snowflakes are Dancing' fills the room.

I can't agree with that.

It sounds perfectly acceptable through a Denon AVR-1910 surround sound amplifier and KEF speakers (a bit more than a basic system), just as long as the bit-rate is sufficiently high.

Crackles, hisses and jumps sound truly awful on any system.

[Deleted by the author on 30 Aug 2012 17:05:19 BDT]

I am just a fan of music, not a snobbish audiophile.

I get fed up with people boasting about how good and expensive their systems are, when the most important thing is the music itself.

I'm sure that any artist would just be glad that you choose to listen to them, no matter how you decide to do it; whether it be vinyl, cd, mp3 or on a tinny cheap transistor radio.

So what if you can afford to waste money on a high-end system? That money is not going into the pockets of those who produce the music, nor will it help develop up-and-coming artists, and they are the ones that really matter.

I would always prefer to be able to buy more music and support those artists who deserve it than help support the companies that cater for those who believe that their ears are better than the rest of ours.

(And before you start mentioning the large record labels, at least 50% of my collection is from small independants).

As for hi-def downloads, I will always go for lossless if it is offered, even at extra cost, but will take the best I can get.

@ Peter Southwood. Many bands do care how you listen to them. Contracts these days invariably contain minimum bit-rate output & vinyl release. In fact Lou Reed went on strike over the use of minimum bit MP3.
"So what if you can afford to waste money on a high-end system?" A truly ridiculous statement if ever I heard one. As with all thing's it is hardly a waste of money but a discipline we seem to have lost to buy the best quality possible, even if involves patience and hard work and applies whether it's a Hifi system; dishwashers; cars; TVs etc. etc.
Your comments "I would always prefer to be able to buy more music and support those artists who deserve it than help support the companies that cater for those who believe that their ears are better than the rest of ours". &
"As for hi-def downloads, I will always go for lossless if it is offered, even at extra cost, but will take the best I can get." Completely contradict each other.

I don't think anyone's 'preaching which is best' here. This is after all, a discussion forum.
Many people are regretting having parted with their old vinyl collections and others do swear by vinyl for it's 'presence'. Vinyl and it's predecessors have many downsides. Bulk, breakability, surface noise and quality deterioration to name the main ones. To say that artists don't care how their music is heard and listened to is not strictly true. They spend much time and money getting their recordings as perfect as possible (serious musicians I mean). They do this for a reason. When broadcasting there is a firm commitment to play the best quality reproduction you can find and musicians rightly expect this to be the case. Having said that it would be an easy argument to introduce here that speed variations of turntables meant that in general household use a vinyl recording seldom got played at the precise speed of the original and it would be churlish of me to mention the loudspeaker failings of cheap domestic systems, another subject I could drivel on about for hours. Only the most serious of audiophiles ever cared for their vinyl collections in an almost OCD fashion. I used vinyl as a tool in my work and consequently I can't say that above and beyond basic care and housekeeping practice that my singles were treated as well as they could have been. I migrated to CD as soon as they became available simply for ease of use and storage combined with superior (hiss and scratch-free) sound for broadcasting. Digital recordings have made life easier still and if you understand the parameters involved in FM broadcasting you will know that there is a 'quality ceiling' set by those engineering limits.
If you you're not happy with compressed audio formats why not try ripping a CD to raw WAVE format (.wav) and hear the difference. Please remember that old studio master recordings being re-released for CD compilations were recorded onto 8 track magnetic tape in the studio and consequently there is another 'quality ceiling' for you to contemplate.

As it was deleted by the author, I will tell you the reason behind this post - IM Hall stated that "You are the one preaching. I suggest you read the discussion on hi def downloads because you really know very little about this subject"; a truly snobbish comment in my opinion, especially after his comment of "The point about MP3 is that it may sound reasonable thru an MP 3 player bit sounds truly dreadful thru a basic hi-fi system"! I can only wonder why he deleted his comment.

Also, my two comments do NOT contradict one another; it is just stating that money is better spent on the artists. I can buy several lossless albums for the cost of the cheapest turntable.

Many up-and-coming bands do just care that you listen, and maybe later, when they become well known enough for decent investment, they will then care about putting their music out on expensive vinyl; until then, they will self record, self produce and self release in a digital format, and it will be the only way to listen to them; and that is what the music industry needs, not the same old rubbish that the companies decide you have got tho hear.

I'll bet those same bands are pretty horrified at the widespread practice of buying a cd to rip into lossless and then selling it on ebay/zon/play .................. so cheapskates like me can buy it cheaper. We're killing music you know!

Self-releasing via internet downloads won't be the saviour of music because, with the exception of established artists who go down that route, how will the punters find out the stuff is available - it won't have a big ad campaign and radio probably won't put it on any playlists (the odd genuine Peel-like music-fan DJ with control over their own programming excepted)?

I'm not at all interested in up and coming bands. My tastes are classical, folk and the odd bit of 60s/70s rock. If I want to listen to (say) The Sixteen or John Rutter-I want to listen at the highest standard possible and that means vinyl or high end CD player. I will not be investing in computer based material (other than my iPod) until material equivalent to SACD becomes widely available. This is why there has been an increase in sales of vinyl. As for digital downloads (and I am told this applies especially to new bands) the risk of file sharing means that they will get no income from their songs whilst younger consumers enjoy the music without paying for it. Buy a vinyl LP from the same band and they have an income.

...and speed bumps cause the needle to jump out of the groove. How annoying eh.

Can anyone tell me how digital audio sounds when converted to a vinyl pressing? The question 'have you got a turntable?' has gone shooting off down the old analog v digital argument. A huge percentage of new bands would never had got the chance to get studio time on their hobby budgets. Nowadays you can do the whole job on a laptop and it can sound as good as a professional studio recording of twenty years ago. (It can also sound dreadful lol)

DAT -to- VINYL was the industry standard for years, was it not?

Not familiar with that concept I wiki'd it and found this :-
"DAT was used professionally in the 1990s by the professional audio recording industry as part of an emerging all-digital production chain also including digital multi-track recorders and digital mixing consoles that was used to create a fully digital recording." DAT was introduced in 1987 I am kinda going back to earlier times 60's and 70's when I talk of master tapes. I've been around too long.

This discussion wanders a bit doesn't it? In fact all forums do. Turntables wasn't it.

Since CDs and mp3 spread like a virus in my hometown all retail outlets have closed down one by one and I can't get replacement styli for my Shure cartridge. Any advice?

Are you lot aware that for the price of a second hand 911 a turntable can be bought from a manufacturer in Japan that plays vinyl using laser tracking i.e. no physical contact. It reads from parts of the groove that are still virgin so even old worn vinyl plays like new.

zap, but it does answer your question, doesn't it? "Can anyone tell me how digital audio sounds when converted to a vinyl pressing?" I'm sure you have bought or listened to a vinyl record released in the last 26 years well I'm pretty sure DAT would have been involved in the process, so you can answer your own question. Which I would say is the same for those 60/70's recordings.........from amazing to terrible depending on the quality of the studio; engineering; factory and vinyl quality.

Stylo, yes mate that's an easy one. There is a wonderful company in Wales that specialise in cartridges and styli, even if what you want no longer exists they will cross-reference your equipment and supply you with one that matches.

http://www.diamondstylus.co.uk/

It's an address every turntable owner should file away for future reference.

Click onto the stylus replacement service (DSC) and away you go. I have found them to be very helpful by phone as well.
BTW just close (bottom right hand corner) the annoying 'site under control' pop-up whenever it appears
Hope that helps
MC

My 25 year old+ Systemdek IIX/Linn Basik/Linn K9 has served only the most limited purpose for several years of being a flat surface on which to pile up cds (I'm surprised and grateful the lid didn't cave in) and having bought a new amp without a phono input I was beginning to wonder if I should put it into storage. However I looked round for a relatively cheap phono pre-amp and managed to find a brand new in box Cambridge 651p Blk for the princely sum of £70 I thought I'd better hook it all up. Did that, replaced the oil in the bearing well of the deck, switched it all on, having marvelled at the fact the rubber belt hadn't disintegrated, and dropped the needle on Ride With The Rasses by Prince Lincoln, an album which has as far as I know never been out on cd. Didn't know what to expect but ............... it's glorious! Inconvenient, faffy, a teensy bit crackly (always looked after my vinyl the youngest album of which must be 20+ years old) but undeniably glorious. Not sure it beats the sound of my Audiolab 8000CDQ but it comes close. That said I don't see me buying any more vinyl. Now, must get some early ZZ Top on without the reverb and synth-drums they added to the cd versions.