Can't go wrong with any of the thorenses, 125 (a little too expensive right now, but I own two, bought when the prices were still below 180$), 145, 150, 160. 124 is outrageously priced - rather buy new.
New ones: goldring, rega, the ubiquitous technics sl 1200 - also i had tried a sl 1800 - too much motor noise through direct drive. Belt drives in my experience are more quiet.
New ones: goldring, rega, the ubiquitous technics sl 1200 - also i had tried a sl 1800 - too much motor noise through direct drive. Belt drives in my experience are more quiet.
That's right up my alley.. I wish I had more time to do a little research but I may try and sneak a bid in there anyway. Thanks.
I don't know how common they are on the other side of the pond, but here I would get a Lenco L75/78. Best bargain in audio.
I second the small Thorens decks, TD-150 and TD-160, if the price is right. They are very common.
If you are willing to spend more money, I would consider this American classic. Might be worth scouting one with an SME 3009 arm. It costs more, but will be cheaper than upgrading later on.
I second the small Thorens decks, TD-150 and TD-160, if the price is right. They are very common.
If you are willing to spend more money, I would consider this American classic. Might be worth scouting one with an SME 3009 arm. It costs more, but will be cheaper than upgrading later on.
From what I hear from friends and from way back when I lived acroos the pond - lenco's are very good, but again - the prices are rising because of talk.
The problem: very few lenco's here, and the shipping from europe is simply not affordable. Especially from GB - I think they hand deliver. They must, to justify their rates.
The problem: very few lenco's here, and the shipping from europe is simply not affordable. Especially from GB - I think they hand deliver. They must, to justify their rates.
Indeed, you do not want to import a Lenco deck. The whole deal with the Lencos and the small Thorens is that you can pick them up for under $100. And the fact that they are very good decks.
Thanks for the tips guys. Seems I'll have no trouble getting something reasonable.
I didn't mean to hijack the thread, but if it makes the thread starter feel better, there may be one more person enjoying records again....
Marc🙂
I didn't mean to hijack the thread, but if it makes the thread starter feel better, there may be one more person enjoying records again....
Marc🙂
yes...it's good. mostly
got most of it together. A NAD (rega P2) with a Linn Basic Plus arm and a Grado black to start. My pre is an old Technics receiver with pre outs
. Hoping to grab a Forte model 2.
I have a problem and could use a bit of advice. With my arm on the rest it's quiet. when I swing the arm over the platter I get hum. The closer to the spindle, the louder the hum. It's there with the motor off and worse when the motor is on.
The arm ground is grounded to the 'pre amp' ground. The arm uses a 5 pin din type connector with 5 pins. I am assuming one of them is earth. There is also a groung ring pigtail by the din connector coming from the rca cable on the tt end. I assume this is to ground the table if necessary?? Any idea where the noise could be from?
Thanks!
got most of it together. A NAD (rega P2) with a Linn Basic Plus arm and a Grado black to start. My pre is an old Technics receiver with pre outs
. Hoping to grab a Forte model 2. I have a problem and could use a bit of advice. With my arm on the rest it's quiet. when I swing the arm over the platter I get hum. The closer to the spindle, the louder the hum. It's there with the motor off and worse when the motor is on.
The arm ground is grounded to the 'pre amp' ground. The arm uses a 5 pin din type connector with 5 pins. I am assuming one of them is earth. There is also a groung ring pigtail by the din connector coming from the rca cable on the tt end. I assume this is to ground the table if necessary?? Any idea where the noise could be from?
Thanks!
Attachments
try removing the seperayte ground from the preamp and hear what happens. But - do it with the volume on low..
Instead of a grado - I really urge you to try a denon dl 103, beats the shures and goldrings I have/had (and they were in the 350$ range). You can get it on ebay from spain for 148$ now - I got two now....
only problem: you need an mc preamp/step up, or go with the 160.
Instead of a grado - I really urge you to try a denon dl 103, beats the shures and goldrings I have/had (and they were in the 350$ range). You can get it on ebay from spain for 148$ now - I got two now....
only problem: you need an mc preamp/step up, or go with the 160.
audio-kraut said:
D'oh! that was easy...it worked! I never thought it.
Yep, Denon, the issue is that the Grado is within my budget right now.
I'm looking at the forte pre for 2 reasons. I love Nelson Pass, and it has a mm/mc section that I have heard sound quite nice.
Thanks audio-krout, it was so simple I missed it blindly.
Marc
Edit: I have to comment. So far anything that was originally produced on vinyl sounds better than the CD version. The music is actually listenable. Either vinyl really does sound better <or> I need a new cd player <or> the studios wrecked the mastering to cd. Either way, I'm happy, and my friends think I've lost my mind.
Records...are you nuts! Where's the remote!
Thanks also to the thread starter.
well vinyl is addictive
I agree just yesterday i picked up a classical guitar LP of Lurindo Almeida recorded 1957 with some ware but no scatches ( original pressing) cleaned it with isopropal alchohol and hugh ammounts of junk were played out of the groves shibata/parabolic stylii tend to sweep the dirt out, and you know what i couldn;t believe how good it sounded this record is about
50 years old!!!!!!
i would not be to worried about your shure M-92
some of the older cartidges sound very good regardless of price!!!!!
i have had one well respected moving magnet which wasn't cheap and was surprised at how boring it was!!!!!!
i have an el-cheapo older cartrdge at the moment an excel
es-70 well it was made in legions just had the standard es-70 conical stylii
but they made a es-70x4 with a shibata ( for Quad cd-4)the relacement stylii
are cheap at Canadian Astatic and it sounds great and a cheap way to spinn lots of discs!!!!!
happy listening
I agree just yesterday i picked up a classical guitar LP of Lurindo Almeida recorded 1957 with some ware but no scatches ( original pressing) cleaned it with isopropal alchohol and hugh ammounts of junk were played out of the groves shibata/parabolic stylii tend to sweep the dirt out, and you know what i couldn;t believe how good it sounded this record is about
50 years old!!!!!!
i would not be to worried about your shure M-92
some of the older cartidges sound very good regardless of price!!!!!
i have had one well respected moving magnet which wasn't cheap and was surprised at how boring it was!!!!!!
i have an el-cheapo older cartrdge at the moment an excel
es-70 well it was made in legions just had the standard es-70 conical stylii
but they made a es-70x4 with a shibata ( for Quad cd-4)the relacement stylii
are cheap at Canadian Astatic and it sounds great and a cheap way to spinn lots of discs!!!!!
happy listening
I went back to records in about 1996, after a 16 year hiatus.
Sounded good, some records way better than the cd, some comparable, none actually worse.
Fiddled around with equipment and after 10 years I am now at a point were LP beats cd anytime, and it is even with some surface noise more fun to listen to Lp and almost an adiction now.
The secret - an arm/cartridge combination that works.
One arm - an old sme 3009/2 with a denon dl 103, the other an airbearing MG1 with the denon dl 103. One on an transcriptors I own since '71, one on a thorens td 125.
Both combinations pick up very little surface noise compared to any other system/arm combination that I had before and seems to retrieve just about everything useful that is inscribed in the groove.
As preamps I use old studio phono preamps that go on ebay for usually around 50$. I especially like the stanton 310b, which I have outfitted with an alps 100kohm stereo pot to change input resistance. This pre has 66dB gain, so great for MC.
Some new op amps when needed and voila, they just work fine. They usually have very low noise, and to help I install the t'former in a remotely located box.
Sounded good, some records way better than the cd, some comparable, none actually worse.
Fiddled around with equipment and after 10 years I am now at a point were LP beats cd anytime, and it is even with some surface noise more fun to listen to Lp and almost an adiction now.
The secret - an arm/cartridge combination that works.
One arm - an old sme 3009/2 with a denon dl 103, the other an airbearing MG1 with the denon dl 103. One on an transcriptors I own since '71, one on a thorens td 125.
Both combinations pick up very little surface noise compared to any other system/arm combination that I had before and seems to retrieve just about everything useful that is inscribed in the groove.
As preamps I use old studio phono preamps that go on ebay for usually around 50$. I especially like the stanton 310b, which I have outfitted with an alps 100kohm stereo pot to change input resistance. This pre has 66dB gain, so great for MC.
Some new op amps when needed and voila, they just work fine. They usually have very low noise, and to help I install the t'former in a remotely located box.
ps., a caution: I just have completed a test between a mission 7000 cd player from the '80's and a pioneer 59 avi, pioneer directly linked to a behringer src2496 via spdif, the mission to a bryston preamp and from there to the src.
Result - I could NOT hear a difference in the very nearfield (had to sit close to the speakers to switch) between the mission and the pioneer. NADA, zilch . They sounded on a keb mo cd exactly the same.
Don 't blame it on the src - I can hear the difference between a shure V15xMR and a shure Ultr 500 easily through my setup. Tested blind with a friend last year.
I listen with kef 104/2 speakers, deq 2496 and from there to a bryston 4Bst
Result - I could NOT hear a difference in the very nearfield (had to sit close to the speakers to switch) between the mission and the pioneer. NADA, zilch . They sounded on a keb mo cd exactly the same.
Don 't blame it on the src - I can hear the difference between a shure V15xMR and a shure Ultr 500 easily through my setup. Tested blind with a friend last year.
I listen with kef 104/2 speakers, deq 2496 and from there to a bryston 4Bst
Are you saying that a cd player upgrade probably won't improve things much? If so, I'm inclined to agree. Analog and digital both seem to have their ups and downs.
I am curious if anyone has both the cd and lp of dire straits 'brothers in arms'. The cd sounds exceptionally good to me and I wonder what a comparison to lp would bring. Same for Grusin's 'one of a kind'.
yes, in a roundabout way...
I compared the dire straits Lp with the cd several years ago, and found at the time that in the cd, when listening at close range, you could hear some noise almost like a sawtooth signal.
This made the LP much more palatable to me, and I have never listened to the cd since.
Radio Shack
Ya want a laugh? Go to Radio Shack now and ask for a cartridge, or a 12AV7. You have questions and their answer is no. If it isn't a phone, game or gadget they don't have it. It's a shame too, because I remember when it use to be fun going there needing some odd ball part and how the salesman saw that as a challenge and wouldn't give up until he found what you needed and he generally knew what he was talking about. Oh the good old days.
Ya want a laugh? Go to Radio Shack now and ask for a cartridge, or a 12AV7. You have questions and their answer is no. If it isn't a phone, game or gadget they don't have it. It's a shame too, because I remember when it use to be fun going there needing some odd ball part and how the salesman saw that as a challenge and wouldn't give up until he found what you needed and he generally knew what he was talking about. Oh the good old days.
vinyl vs digital
I made some comparisons recently. Generally it would appear that if the original studio recording was analogue and released on vinyl then it is superior to a digital recording released on ANY type of silver disk or on vinyl. An analouge studio recording provides better bass and an acoustic space (depth, width, height) in which exists a sound rich in harmonics. Digital by comparison is flat and 2 dimensional.
Madonna - "just like a virgin" vinyl LP, recorded by SONY digital in 1987. The LP sounds just like a CD - a nice sound but not acoustically rich. Same for a Clannad LP, comapred to the CD. The LP sound has a height, width and depth that the CD cannot match.
Same for Neil Young, Harvest. Even a 192KHz/24 bit DVD-Audio is inferior to the LP - flat and uninteresting by comparison. None of the few DVD-Audio disks that I have have any acoustic whatsoever (in stereo that is). It's a very strange unnatural musical experience.
So, for a rich and exciting sound, lots tuneful bass, analogue-recorded LPs are the only source ?! Second-hand LPs are way cheaper too! Clean them for best sound.
I made some comparisons recently. Generally it would appear that if the original studio recording was analogue and released on vinyl then it is superior to a digital recording released on ANY type of silver disk or on vinyl. An analouge studio recording provides better bass and an acoustic space (depth, width, height) in which exists a sound rich in harmonics. Digital by comparison is flat and 2 dimensional.
Madonna - "just like a virgin" vinyl LP, recorded by SONY digital in 1987. The LP sounds just like a CD - a nice sound but not acoustically rich. Same for a Clannad LP, comapred to the CD. The LP sound has a height, width and depth that the CD cannot match.
Same for Neil Young, Harvest. Even a 192KHz/24 bit DVD-Audio is inferior to the LP - flat and uninteresting by comparison. None of the few DVD-Audio disks that I have have any acoustic whatsoever (in stereo that is). It's a very strange unnatural musical experience.
So, for a rich and exciting sound, lots tuneful bass, analogue-recorded LPs are the only source ?! Second-hand LPs are way cheaper too! Clean them for best sound.
LP's ido tend to agree
WELL,
i have found an interesting example the early TELARC recordings
were done at 50K sampling a bit above 44.2k and sound good on CD
but do sound better on the LP version. And this is weird I have done
transferers of some LP's i listen to a lot to preserve them!!!!!!!
the ones i would play to death they are not overly processed ( DEclicked mainly )and they sound like LP's not CD's
I suspect that commercial operations go all out for no noise and suck
the life out of them transfering to digital, digital has one major advantage if you do it yourself you control the process it also makes some unlistenable recordings listenable!!!!!!!
but Vinyl still seems better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WELL,
i have found an interesting example the early TELARC recordings
were done at 50K sampling a bit above 44.2k and sound good on CD
but do sound better on the LP version. And this is weird I have done
transferers of some LP's i listen to a lot to preserve them!!!!!!!
the ones i would play to death they are not overly processed ( DEclicked mainly )and they sound like LP's not CD's
I suspect that commercial operations go all out for no noise and suck
the life out of them transfering to digital, digital has one major advantage if you do it yourself you control the process it also makes some unlistenable recordings listenable!!!!!!!
but Vinyl still seems better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
remasters
Also digital remasters by and large sound a lot worse than the original CDs!
So it must be digital over-processing and/or inferior mastering equipment. An obsession with removing noise (tape hiss), cloth ears, and never listening to live music is a bad combination for any sound engineer.
I might give that a go one day - transferring LPs to DVD-Audio and 24/96. See what happens.
It's that big acoustic that I miss with CDs etc.
Interestingly the CD layer of SACD (if originally recorded with DSD and not PCM) is musical, eg. Linn recordings. DG PCM transfers to SACD are bleughh!
Also digital remasters by and large sound a lot worse than the original CDs!
So it must be digital over-processing and/or inferior mastering equipment. An obsession with removing noise (tape hiss), cloth ears, and never listening to live music is a bad combination for any sound engineer.
I might give that a go one day - transferring LPs to DVD-Audio and 24/96. See what happens.
It's that big acoustic that I miss with CDs etc.
Interestingly the CD layer of SACD (if originally recorded with DSD and not PCM) is musical, eg. Linn recordings. DG PCM transfers to SACD are bleughh!
Re: remasters
Interesting point WRT remasters.
I recently got Led Zep III dig remaster and it clearly has more
resolution; you can hear more going on in there, but the
involvement factor is definately down a bit. The overall sound
appears more washed out and lean. Some of the goodness seems
gone. Sorry for lack of a better description.
The original, however flawed, somehow sounds just more -right-
I have found this with quite a few remasters, but not all.
I'd love to know what converters and processign they are using
on the remastered stuff.
Cheers
Terry
modder said:
Interesting point WRT remasters.
I recently got Led Zep III dig remaster and it clearly has more
resolution; you can hear more going on in there, but the
involvement factor is definately down a bit. The overall sound
appears more washed out and lean. Some of the goodness seems
gone. Sorry for lack of a better description.
The original, however flawed, somehow sounds just more -right-
I have found this with quite a few remasters, but not all.
I'd love to know what converters and processign they are using
on the remastered stuff.
Cheers
Terry
- Status
- Not open for further replies.