How better is a Turntable compared to a CD?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#2,882
jacco vermeulen said:
Mr Beerwater,

you sure a lot of your fellow Americans do not suffer from vibro-acoustic disease ?
(no 16Hz organ pipes for me, thank you)

Pinched a conical pendulum image from Mr Russo's page =>
Click to expand...

Jacco if sometime after Xmas you want to have a pleasure trip for a weekend let me know. We can meet at the Rome airport, go and listen to the full system....
I am sure it will reset and lift your reference (in the best possible meaning of the word) of hi-fi in every way!
 
#2,884
Well, my 2 cent ,

What sounds soft on Youtube could actually sound dark in reality and what sounds bright could actually sound proper . Mic quality , positioning , reflections at said position and bandwidth limiting plays havoc to what you are hearing. The best you can say is best sounding on youtube ....t
 
#2,885
#2,888
a.wayne said:
Yes and T also took a shellacking here when his dac measured poorly , yet won the subjective war ...
Click to expand...

Ahh... does one follow from the other. T makes a DAC that measures poorly, nothing new the Wadia technique and others are full of imaging artifacts. As far as I can tell he is in the "apodizing" or a little imaging is better than brick walls camp. So what he says about LP's is questionable, you must never have been on a debate team.
 
Last edited:
#2,890
I had to laugh, this comment related to a Leo Kottke youtube video has the most (by far) thumbs up.

The poor quality actually ADDS to this for me - this song and Kottke in general have always amazed me with just how much gnarly noise he can get out of a mere acoustic guitar. Add the distortion due to the poor quality here though and the whole thing just becomes a massive wall of sound that hits you in the face like a truck. Or.. a machine gun. Amazing.
Click to expand...
 
#2,891
jacco vermeulen said:
My post wasn't intended as disapproval of the tonearm design.
Click to expand...

Don't worry I perfectly understood your comment!😉
Thinking more in general that tonearm works purely according to the inertia principle. That's why you don't see any conventional antiskating. It is imbedded into it. There is basically a self-instantaneous one...
Of course not any cartridge will work. Actually there is only one able to work perfectly: the Dynavector Karat 17DII or III.
 
#2,895
45 said:
Don't worry I perfectly understood your comment!😉
Thinking more in general that tonearm works purely according to the inertia principle. That's why you don't see any conventional antiskating. It is imbedded into it. There is basically a self-instantaneous one...
Of course not any cartridge will work. Actually there is only one able to work perfectly: the Dynavector Karat 17DII or III.
Click to expand...


A self-instantaneous, "imbedded" antiskating.

I would expect no less from a resonance free arm.
 
#2,896
Barleywater said:
Frank,

Acoustic bass, piano, tympani, cello, male voice, (the list goes on) all sound better with the bottom two registers done right.
Click to expand...
Of course they'll sound better, but the brain can adapt remarkably well if they happen to be absent, very little is subjectively lost, for me, if the rest of the spectrum is being rendered competently. I've mentioned several times in posts my heavily tweaked HT setup, with separately powered subwoofer -- because of the typical, rough and ready, setup for experimenting several times I've lost subwoofer output - a connection was knocked and dislodged - and I've happily listened for some time onward, blissfully unaware of the 'degradation' ... 😀

If I want a real bass experience then I'll visit a venue with good pipe organ - that's a thrill, because it's the genuine article, nicely balanced against the rest of the spectrum. I have a CD of Hurford on the Sydney Opera House organ, ready to go, if someone reckons they've got it right ... 🙂

Edit: I had that CD with me when auditioning studio monitors, I tried it on one of the more ambitious units - it was hilariously pathetic, sorry to say ...
 
Last edited:
#2,898
a.wayne said:
Well, my 2 cent ,

What sounds soft on Youtube could actually sound dark in reality and what sounds bright could actually sound proper . Mic quality , positioning , reflections at said position and bandwidth limiting plays havoc to what you are hearing. The best you can say is best sounding on youtube ....t
Click to expand...
What one can hear, very easily, is the distortion injected by the playback system - this comes through loud and clear. FR is another matter, but that's something that's not very important to me -- when I first listen to an unknown system the levels of distortion are what hit me in the face, if particularly bad then it's a hopeless exercise proceeding, and attempting to 'understand' what it's doing 'right' ...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom