That's nice! What FM Acoustic do you have? I believe that there is a phono that costs several $$$$ and it is well regarded as one of the best sounding phono in the planet!
I didn't have a chance to audition that...lucky you! The Vitus phono is stunning too.
I would be curious to know what is your opinion on that!
Also nice VPI! Do you have Classic 1, 2 or 3?
You know it is actually feasible to convert the belt drive to Pulley drive? It is quite easy (also you can check my post on motor turntable at the end I explain briefly how to do it...that comes straight from VPI). If you are interested just let me know I can give you some tips. 😉
😎
VPI classic 2, the FMA phono stage belongs to a friend who also has dCS digital not sure the model now, but it looks exactly like the current one but without the pop and click function.
Not modding the VPI, moving onto another table , well after the new speakers arrive ... 🙂
regards,
Not modding the VPI, moving onto another table , well after the new speakers arrive ... 🙂
regards,
What Table are you going to upgrade. I have my self a VPI Classic 3 with Linear tonearm. sounds fantastic.
I also had a Classic 1 and 2 and every time the upgrade was huge, just FYI.
The pulley upgrade is not negligible, as it takes you very close to the performance of the VPI Direct Drive that is a $30K TT.
Just something to keep in mind. Upgrade really costs you little money to do it and not very complicated.
The hardest part is to source proper oring and get a special speed control system implemented as my SDS wouldn't be suitable for that.
Also you can use the special speed control and replace your SDS and lower dramatically the noise level of the motor and increase resolution and speed accuracy by much!
I also had a Classic 1 and 2 and every time the upgrade was huge, just FYI.
The pulley upgrade is not negligible, as it takes you very close to the performance of the VPI Direct Drive that is a $30K TT.
Just something to keep in mind. Upgrade really costs you little money to do it and not very complicated.
The hardest part is to source proper oring and get a special speed control system implemented as my SDS wouldn't be suitable for that.
Also you can use the special speed control and replace your SDS and lower dramatically the noise level of the motor and increase resolution and speed accuracy by much!
Analog for me...
Lenco with aftermarket bearing, top plate and idler currently in plywood plinth ( before loosing my stuff to fire had the same in Slate, limestone combo)
Zu 103 Schick arm, Cinemag SUT, Hagerman Coronet phono pre (had a better Coronet 2 before)
Pre is a Modright slw 9.0 se, amps are wright 2A3 mono block
Speakers Lowther tiny alnico open baffle (PMA6 and Tone Tubby 12's) with and 2 15" infinite baffle subs in 2 side walls (4 15's).
Cheers
Ed
Lenco with aftermarket bearing, top plate and idler currently in plywood plinth ( before loosing my stuff to fire had the same in Slate, limestone combo)
Zu 103 Schick arm, Cinemag SUT, Hagerman Coronet phono pre (had a better Coronet 2 before)
Pre is a Modright slw 9.0 se, amps are wright 2A3 mono block
Speakers Lowther tiny alnico open baffle (PMA6 and Tone Tubby 12's) with and 2 15" infinite baffle subs in 2 side walls (4 15's).
Cheers
Ed
I mean I can't really express any real/solid opinion on your set up since I don't know the majority of your stuff.
It seems a good mid level system with preference on tubes, therefore softer type of sound.
This is my thought on this: live music ain't soft at all! However a lot of people seems to still lean toward softer sound reproduction (for this, please read the review on Stereophile for the $150K Lamm tube power amp).
This personal preference, will definitely bring the user to prefer Vinyl over anything and especially mid level vinyl will tend to sound excessively warm and full body.
IMHO, this subjective preference, will take you very far from the real reproduction!
Contrary, a modern Hi-rez source won't be warm at all!! It's just isn't!! Current digital music tend to be more like the real thing, it's not soft not too harsh either (obviously it is not perfect either).
So if somebody like to hear warmth, soft bass, little smoother sound, the digital hi-rez will sound "bad".
I think this is a possible theory!
Nevertheless, if you do do try to research for ultimate speed and realm dynamic, then you will steer away mostly from tube system and vintage vinyl. It is just the opposite cup of tea.
Again, reading the article on Stereophile, will help explain my theory from a more professional standpoint (obviously I am not as knowledgeable as the redactor not as good as him putting words out) !
Hope this makes sense!
When someone can show data from an analog system that has distortion and noise (including wow, scrape flutter, pitch stability, tracing distortion, HD and IM, frequency response, noise floor, resolution...) that can compare to a 16/44 system, people can take the claims of analog "superiority" more seriously.
Like I said, I've run analog stuff through the digital chain using a pretty good system, and blind/level-matched couldn't hear the difference. I seriously doubt you could do that the other way. 😀
Like I said, I've run analog stuff through the digital chain using a pretty good system, and blind/level-matched couldn't hear the difference. I seriously doubt you could do that the other way. 😀
I don't follow you! It is easy to proove distortion speed, flutter and so on an anlalogue.
Just get a test record and run all the analysis. Unfortunately this won't be a match for 24/196 hi-rez digital.
I think superiority goes beyond measurements in this case.
About your test, you said you have converted a vinyl to digital with different formats?
Can you explain further?
Just get a test record and run all the analysis. Unfortunately this won't be a match for 24/196 hi-rez digital.
I think superiority goes beyond measurements in this case.
About your test, you said you have converted a vinyl to digital with different formats?
Can you explain further?
I've run bypass tests at 16/44 using analog source material and feeds from my mike preamp - the goal of the medium is audible transparency, and 16/44 achieves that (for playback- you need to do better for the original recording for reasons that have been previously discussed).
It's up to the musician, recording engineer, producer, and mastering engineer to get the sonics to "sound good" for their intended audience. All the medium can do is faithfully transmit what they put out.
I don't listen to "toobs," I listen to music. Much more interesting to me.
It's up to the musician, recording engineer, producer, and mastering engineer to get the sonics to "sound good" for their intended audience. All the medium can do is faithfully transmit what they put out.
I don't listen to "toobs," I listen to music. Much more interesting to me.
Our Audio Club did much the same experiment several years ago and most people got it 50% correct (coin-flip odds), with a few exceptions (2 or 3 individuals) that did "much" better (ie., statistically significant) than that. All of them had spent a good part of the previous day listening to the test rig and evidently figured out what to listen for. There seemed to me ( at half way through the test) that there was a very subtle difference in the upper midrange /lower treble frequencies. I was already over half way through the test, but when my elvaluation sheet was scored, my accuracy had started improving from that point on.
What was proved was that using good equiptment, most (untrained?) people will be unable (in that test enviornment) to determine unconverted music from the processed music (ie., the Null Hypothesis). The secondary finding is that there is gear available that can do a very good job of conversion back and forth from analog and digital).
Last edited:
I do not expect to reproduce a live performance in my home.
I expect to have correct pitch, timbre, tone etc.
As for dynamics, well, in my opinion its not lacking from this combo.
As mentioned above with all recorded music we are at the mercy of the final mixing engineer most of the time.
I do have to admit in my old age I may not listen at the levels I did when 20 years old😀
Despite her friendship with Morgan Jones, the toobs do not impress my wife. I'm not sure what the opposite of "impress" is, but whatever it is, that's her.
This is what it's about. People listen to one quality vs. another, and decide that one is superior to the other. Asked why, they can't really explain it, except in general terms - but their hearing system had no trouble picking it up. If one goes to some effort, then you can 'learn' what is occurring in the sound being picked up the ear - those frequencies mentioned are the key indicators.
But, there is a real danger here!! Once you tune your hearing into discerning these differences, there is a likelihood that from then on your hearing will automatically seek out these identifying characteristics - and you'll no longer be satisfied with sound that you used to think was "OK", 😉, 😀 ...
Applause😉
I can sit and read with my digital side playing music, With an lp on I always get distracted, put down the book and get into the music, so on my rig vinyl still does it best.
I am seeking to find the same level with digital.
I've not succeeded with SACD, DSF or 24192 PCM, vinyl with its admitted imperfections still does it for me. Second choice (and sometimes close) is SACD through my modified SCD-777ES.
I always find my preference varies album to album. Some recent pressings which were obviously digitally recorded, sound little or no different to me than a well done FLAC file of the same album. Some of my older pressings sound stunning, several by the likes of Ry Cooder or Dire Straits totally wipe the floor with their digital equivalents. Sadly however too many of my old 60's & 70's albums sound bloody awful no matter what format they are 😉
One exception is the latest live offering from Joe Bonamassa (live in Vienna) it's excellent on vinyl, the CD version comes pretty close, but not quite as good IMO
One exception is the latest live offering from Joe Bonamassa (live in Vienna) it's excellent on vinyl, the CD version comes pretty close, but not quite as good IMO
Another way of looking at it is that it's easy to tweak analogue to 'nicefy' the sound - mask the less pleasant elements in the recording. It's much less clear how to do this, satisfactorily, in digital - generally the only useful long term solution is to totally clean up the sound, a much more difficult and long winded exercise ...
Here again this proves my point! Vinyl at this level of things and with this frame of mind just please listeners who hear what they want to hear, makes no sense.
The hobby and pleasure of hi-end is to be as least colored and most revealing as possible! Digital stars doing that to some extent at mid/low level and some users just don't like to get closer to what was recorded and end up preferring vinyl gears, mostly vintage, where they can start tweaking accordingly to what they want to hear.
At high level, clearly vinyl sounds more like digital in the good sense.
To many users here, my strong recommendation would be to go listen to hi end gears and start understanding what's great about those things and then go back to their home system and start steering toward that direction, little by little.
This is, at least, what helped me to develop a better ear and to begin understanding what gear is good and what is poor.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.