I know I'm going to hate myself for asking this but what precisely was wrong with those two units? Was there a moving magnet cartridge with higher tracking capabilities and if so, what was it? What is the purpose of a turntable but to rotate the disc and do it quietly? Did the 721 have a noise issue I never noticed? Was it the elliptical stylus?
It certainly wasn't because I didn't turn it up. I'm sure my slightly modified Hafler DH-101, Technics SH9010 (OPA2134s replaced all the 4558s) and Adcom GFA-555 also fail as well. Sorry.
G²
Live in your own little dream world. Why do 98% of the worlds top studios, engineers and producers record digitaly when they have the time and money to do whatever they want?
Because it sounds better than tape, which sounds better than vinyl.
Now lets watch the contrary OPINIONS fly. I will take the opinions of the pros over the smoes every time, so if you have ever recorded or mixed a gold record lets hear your opinion.
Because it sounds better than tape, which sounds better than vinyl.
Now lets watch the contrary OPINIONS fly. I will take the opinions of the pros over the smoes every time, so if you have ever recorded or mixed a gold record lets hear your opinion.
Shure V15 tracks like crazy, but doesn't sound all that great. Dual made nice convienient auto-changers but won't win very many sonic shootouts.
dave
They question should be "why, when digital recording is so much cheaper, more capable when it comes to post-processing, and knocking at the door of top analog quality, do the 2% that persist still exist at all"
Most recording is done digitally but they aren't recording at 16/44 -- CD quality. Even low budget studios record at 24/96, and the really good ones at 24/384. At this data density, the delta becomes very small vrs something like a Studer 2" 1/2 track (price one of those suckers out, some with custom electronics).
All internal processing is done with 80 bits. The biggest reason for recording digitally is that it is easy to manipulate with the possibility of little degradation after the initial ADC.
Analog recordings can be very good... but they also usually have to be simple, ie little or no post processing. One of the biggest issues with analog recording is getting tape.
dave
Hi,
I´d say that Vynil and CD (16Bit/44.1kHz) reside on similar levels. Both can be fun with advantages and disadvantages on both sides. The newer digital high clocked high resolution formats are clearly better (stated that the possible quality of the system isn´t wasted by the sound engineer).
Those systems show this special ´analogue´ quality one likes about Vynil, but preserves all other merits of digital systems.
jauu
Calvin
I´d say that Vynil and CD (16Bit/44.1kHz) reside on similar levels. Both can be fun with advantages and disadvantages on both sides. The newer digital high clocked high resolution formats are clearly better (stated that the possible quality of the system isn´t wasted by the sound engineer).
Those systems show this special ´analogue´ quality one likes about Vynil, but preserves all other merits of digital systems.
jauu
Calvin
The Dual 721 is a direct drive semi auto with a 3.3 lb. platter that can't change a disc. Like a Thorens, it uses a counter balanced arm that applies tracking force with springs meaning the CG is in the middle of the gimbal. It can operate upside down but more importantly, it is insensitive to being physically jostled. The counter weight is anti-resonant and coupled with the anti-static damper brush on the cartridge, it will play most discs that are 'warped' and can't be played on more expensive gear. Nothing pisses it off. When I had a CD and LP of the same material, they were very similar but the LP surface noise and occasional tick was not a good thing. The V15 V stylus is mechanically tuned to 33 KHz with a corresponding rolloff in the coils (when properly loaded) to yield flat response. The jump from a type III to type IV was the first time I noticed a serious improvement between many cartridges of the day. The jump from type IV to type V was significantly bigger. It was the smoothest sounding cartridge I ever owned and I owned a lot. Almost no discs back then would mistrack as the type V could keep up with the cutters of the day. I have no idea how much better the cutters are now compared to then but I don't care as I'm not doing more vinyl.
Purely out of curiosity, has anyone ever cut a test disc with a 1KHz square wave? While a square wave from a CD may seem a bit lame, given an upper limit of 20KHz, that's how a square wave is supposed to be according to the math. I only mention this because the square wave has to have the right amplitude and phase (group delay) response to be square. I would think if the response on an LP was good, manufacturers would promote this as something good. Since they don't, I can only conclude that it isn't good and they want it ignored.
I still have the 'early' one. It is not junk.
BTW I got mine in '76 and converted to 2010 dollars that around $1200
DUAL 721Turntable
G²
Last edited:
Why? The same reason I still work on analog broadcast VTRs. In my case because somebody wants to play the old tapes. They look surprisingly good but don't hold a candle to a digital HD VTR.
In their case they believe it's more 'fill in the blank'.
You say analog works best with little or no processing. Why is _that_? Because there IS degradation of the signal on each pass and it adds up and not in a good way. You say it's better and it's worse at the same time so which is it?
G²
Auto... all that junk underneath to move the arm. And the direct drive. I've got one of those downstairs. And the better belt drive. Useless because they came with the pre-mounted Ortophon cartridges, and a replacement cartridge carrier (handy, but a real lame design, the cartridge flopping around on the end of the arm -- the rest of the arm is nice) costs more than the TT is worth. Worth the <$10 invested to have the parts on hand. And the dustcovers always make good parts trays in a pinch.
As i said, i can understand why you think the best of CD is better than the best of vinyl when your reference is set so low. If you ignore the plastic USB TTs, you probably can't buy a TT that won't handily outperform (sonically) that TT today.
dave
Any advantage the best analog tape recorders have is quickly lost if it has to go thru more than a couple rounds of generation loss.
But do keep in mind that in the recording studio they are not using CD quality files but much higher resolution. It isn't until the CD is being prepped for reproduction that the data is decimated. One cannot use what the recording studios use to defend CD resolution. Largely because studios don't use it because it is not good enuff.
dave
Judging by the regular polls on recording engineers forums at least half the studios record 24bit 44.1 or 48kHz and the other half uses 24bit/88.2 or 96kHz. Virtually no one uses 24/192 and it is generally regarded as a waste of disk space and computer power. According to Dan Lavry any sample rate above 64k is a waste and counter productive though his convertors support 96k, mostly because 64k is non-standard.
Other subjects that come up on a regular basis are subjects like 'Why does tape sound so much better', 'How can I add that tape magic to digital?' etc and things along the line of 'Where to get new tape?' or 'Is used tape ok to use?'.
The most common DAW (Logic Audio) does its internal processing using 32bit floating point. George Massenburgs plug-ins (some of the best available) use 48 or 52bit processing but not many are using them (cost). The most popular (Waves, Native) mostly only support up to 96k. I suspect them to use 32bit processing internally.
I should have said that process intense stuff (multiplies & divides) uses 80-bit internal...
from the Logic FAQ
When i was programming, and you called the FPU to do a long float its internal process was 80 bits.
dave
Sure they have- it was on most test records, and cartridge reviews back in the day routinely showed the square wave response. Typically, the cartridge would overlay the square wave with ringing (with MCs, it was particularly severe). The very best cartridges would show the cutter head ringing from the test record mastering.
A bit OT but the 1 series is the only BMW I would ever consider buying.
It is fairly decent looking, all the others range from average to downright hideous (especially the X6) and (like any man would) I leave the convertibles to girls and hair dressers.
But the main problem with BMWs is the drivers! Good cars but once you own one everybody will think you are a typical BMW driver and most of them are p***ks.
It is fairly decent looking, all the others range from average to downright hideous (especially the X6) and (like any man would) I leave the convertibles to girls and hair dressers.
But the main problem with BMWs is the drivers! Good cars but once you own one everybody will think you are a typical BMW driver and most of them are p***ks.
You seem to contradict yourself.
(i'm a prikc, but the Lamborghini space frame M1 is the only Bavarian i fancy)
Reminds me, i need to see if i have one of those that hasn't been junked for just that purpose. I'm saving the 1215 for the godson's "my 1st TT" and the 1019 is waiting for a 78 RPM cartridge to show up.
dave
I dunno , been exposed to the cream of the crop on rigs costing tens of thousands, both Digital and analog and the analog wins hands down..
I mean there are few comparisons in audio where there is consensus and every time we do these analog vs digital , analog comes out on top unanimously by all involved ( most listening are into digital ). The material necessary to top digital is limited , i must admit but getting better every year as more and more labels are being released on analog disc ..
I will also admit that only a few of my digital disc are unlistenable , while 50% of my analog ( old LP's) are barely listenable.... But the good ones .. 😱
I mean there are few comparisons in audio where there is consensus and every time we do these analog vs digital , analog comes out on top unanimously by all involved ( most listening are into digital ). The material necessary to top digital is limited , i must admit but getting better every year as more and more labels are being released on analog disc ..
I will also admit that only a few of my digital disc are unlistenable , while 50% of my analog ( old LP's) are barely listenable.... But the good ones .. 😱
This has been my experience as well, on a couple of systems costing many hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Hell, they're even better on my system, which is a few Hundred dollars (but quite revealing for what it is).
Best Regards,
TerryO
- Status
- Not open for further replies.