Destroyer,
If you just look at the cost of a new turntable that and audiophile would purchase and the cost of an upscale cartridge alone I don't know how you can say that is more cost effective than a digital playback system? The cartridges that John is touting as being good to excellent are nothing to sneeze at for sure in cost. And a newer turntable with a great arm and either direct drive or a rubber band drive isn't cheap either. Now if you are just talking an average turntable you can get for a few hundred dollars and a simple $100.00 cartridge I can imagine the howls of disappointment and criticism of how you can't get that they are here sound out of that type of equipment. And now add in a great preamp for that turntable and how many thousands do you want to spend to get into the lower range of good vinyl playback? I still have an older Technics turntable and also a Dual turntable but that just wouldn't put me anywhere near the upper level of sound quality being spoken of with vinyl. Now add in what is the cost of a new vinyl pressing and you are spending some serious cash I'd say. Even the DIY turntable projects I have followed here on the site end up costing some serious money for the platter, plinth, bearing, motor and arm and all the other accessories before you get to the cartridge. Is it really worth going down that road today, I don't think so.
If you just look at the cost of a new turntable that and audiophile would purchase and the cost of an upscale cartridge alone I don't know how you can say that is more cost effective than a digital playback system? The cartridges that John is touting as being good to excellent are nothing to sneeze at for sure in cost. And a newer turntable with a great arm and either direct drive or a rubber band drive isn't cheap either. Now if you are just talking an average turntable you can get for a few hundred dollars and a simple $100.00 cartridge I can imagine the howls of disappointment and criticism of how you can't get that they are here sound out of that type of equipment. And now add in a great preamp for that turntable and how many thousands do you want to spend to get into the lower range of good vinyl playback? I still have an older Technics turntable and also a Dual turntable but that just wouldn't put me anywhere near the upper level of sound quality being spoken of with vinyl. Now add in what is the cost of a new vinyl pressing and you are spending some serious cash I'd say. Even the DIY turntable projects I have followed here on the site end up costing some serious money for the platter, plinth, bearing, motor and arm and all the other accessories before you get to the cartridge. Is it really worth going down that road today, I don't think so.
I speculate that in part its down to lack-lustre PSRR from the Vref. To get the lowest noise the DAC part is an array of lowish value resistors fed from a reference voltage. The purity of that reference will be crucial. I see it as significant that for the latest generation chip ESS have designed and produced their very own voltage regulator for Vref.
Maybe the associated equipment was more of a problem? Most DAC'S reek with fatigue when I hear them...
Kinderman, it's my opinion that an awful lot of people are trying to squeeze whisky from rocks, by spending so much on vinyl when they just simply don't have their cartridge setup remotely well to begin with or want it to overcome shortfalls elsewhere in the stereo so it's easier to say you require big bucks stuff to even play. (Yes it's nice, but required? Eh...)
My table is cheap, so is my preamp. But I have a Herbies mat, adjusted cartridge, and it sits on top of a floating piece of plywood on about 3" of sand. I'm using my own interconnects that are unshielded (yes I get a little hum without music playing, but I have yet to find shielded ones that don't sound like suffocation). The preamp I added a custom filter on DC, replaced input caps with BG N.
OH but if you don't DIY? Actually the bigger influences on sound for changes I made are the Herbies mat $70, and cartridge adjustment (can cost as little as free). The sound from there has been more dependent on the rest of the system that isn't the source. By comparrison I use a Bel Canto CD1 for digital; it makes Oppo's sound like a thrift store find. It however had an MSRP at $5k. Comparable sound to my vinyl source could be had for under $1k (Which Many People Would prefer). The real trouble is getting a good amp on a budget!
Maybe you could get decent digital with a $500 Oppo, and $2000 Benchmark DAC (maybe). That's still a lot more than $620~1k. But let's say compare an MSB DAC to vinyl... ouch.
Or the uncomfortable part (and I hear you raging) about buying a quality, competently designed, used *mid-fi* (pricewise) Adcom/Parasound - level amp for a couple hundred and a good USB soundcard (if you're cool using a computer for your source) or something like the $200-300 Marantz CDP that is delightfully solid. Done, next.
Spend the rest on speakers and (if the missus is persuaded) room treatments.
Most mid-tier Adcom and Parasound that I know are single-ended. I'm all for balanced inputs, don't get me wrong. But we're talking budget. Or go pro amps! I just figured most people fawning over obscure TT's and cartridges would go rather apoplectic at their mention.
The over-emphasis on electronics, and underemphasis on speakers/room among this community (which harps on sound quality) is utterly baffling.
The solution to lack of balanced is to go via transformers. Easy(*) to make a pair (this is DIY after all) on a shoestring budget.
And do you wish to learn or prefer the bafflement to continue?
* - perhaps 'easy' is overly glib. Its time-consuming work unless one has a winding machine. Fortunately such machines aren't expensive but they are considerably dearer than the raw materials for the transformers.
Last edited:
Agreed, entirely.
Learning on this thread occurs in random bursts. Primarily on noise over any other topic. Usually scope traces are involved. Most everything else, myself included, is posturing.
And why would the additional complexity and unbalanced to balanced to unbalanced circuitry make the sound better? Its not that difficult to make unbalanced systems work really well. Well executed differential in and balanced out is not trivial (except perhaps with the THAT chips). If you have real ground problems its a bandaid. If you have long (100'+) runs its helpful. 10" runs from box to box would benefit from the least extra stuff I would think.
Common-mode noise from the computer's SMPSU gets imposed on the audio signal when sent across an unbalanced line. The audibility depends on the front-end of the amp, opamp front-ends being most susceptible IME.
There are DAC's and DAC kits with full isolation if needed. E.G. Isolated XMOS 768kHz DXD DSD512(DSD1024) high-quality USB to I2S/DSD PCB - DIYINHK While its possible to make small improvements on these kits I don't think its worth the time to try.
I was just like you once upon a time. I worked at Alesis from '90 to '01. Think I didn't get a belly full of digital there day in and out? Countless hours over ELEVEN YEARS I have in component level modding digital wonder boxes at Alesis. Also heard all manner bit/sample enhanced redbook, high res, 1 bit.... you name it between working at ALesis and AES presentations, NAMM, T.H.E Show.... I still have a ML9600 and a Proceed DAP - both modded. A good vinyl pressing with a nice cart is pretty quiet and way out weighs the sloughing off of the low level upper harmonic detail mixed in with the unavoidable switching noise that digital brings.
Last edited:
Robert, you are 'a breath of fresh air'! I have worked with digital sound reproduction from the early days, (1968 at Ampex), 1973 (with delay lines for the GD), 74 (Phillips Research Lab demo 14 bits, 50KHz), 1977 improved digital (13+3bit) up to 100KHz clock, 1979 (a side by side comparison with Soundstream digital recording (16bit, 50+KHz clock), and later comparisons in 1984+ with the Wilson Ultramaster (30ips, full track vs digital), etc, etc. Every time I have been somewhat disappointed. I know that sometimes digital can sound really good, but not always. I just keep that in mind when having these discussions. PS I do not expect any of you to invest in the highest quality phono playback, it is just too expensive, but don't think that your inexpensive phono playback system sounds as good as the best that can be had.
I'm not sure what you mean in your first sentence. Your second sentence, yes - for sure. That was NOT my experience with the ESS DAC. Rather the opposite. It was smooth and not aggressive, not fatiguing. It's not a sound that may people are used to, at least with digital.
As stated in a recent post, there may be PSU problems. The chip version I used had a super regulator for the analog supply. It's built around an opamp.
Hi John,
There are more people than you could guess that own some very expensive phono playback systems. Most often it's only about how much $$$ was flushed down the toilet. However, there are some other folks who do know what they are doing beyond just you.
I'll admit that I have a modest system, but it does punch above it's weight. Not bad for a guy who had kids running around until a couple years ago. Yes, I use an Ortofon cartridge, VMS - thank you very much (they aren't moving magnet systems, so are very low mass). I have heard some MC cartridges and can't justify the extra money as they didn't sound any better. I don't own any of those today and prefer a user replaceable stylus (See, I even used the correct terminology). My current table is a stock with factory arm (no!), an old Thorens TD-125 MKII. A popular TT for sure. There is a plastic/tacky mat that bonds to the record that really improves things. It's pretty quiet, having good bearings and a well maintained servo drive.
I'm probably in the majority around here. Nothing special, but performance that is very enjoyable to be sure.
-Chris
Do you really think that last bit was necessary? Really?
There are more people than you could guess that own some very expensive phono playback systems. Most often it's only about how much $$$ was flushed down the toilet. However, there are some other folks who do know what they are doing beyond just you.
I'll admit that I have a modest system, but it does punch above it's weight. Not bad for a guy who had kids running around until a couple years ago. Yes, I use an Ortofon cartridge, VMS - thank you very much (they aren't moving magnet systems, so are very low mass). I have heard some MC cartridges and can't justify the extra money as they didn't sound any better. I don't own any of those today and prefer a user replaceable stylus (See, I even used the correct terminology). My current table is a stock with factory arm (no!), an old Thorens TD-125 MKII. A popular TT for sure. There is a plastic/tacky mat that bonds to the record that really improves things. It's pretty quiet, having good bearings and a well maintained servo drive.
I'm probably in the majority around here. Nothing special, but performance that is very enjoyable to be sure.
-Chris
No, cheap phono stuff doesn't sound as good, but I think you might be very surprised what's possible, John.
Marantz CDP comparable? Phuleze.
In the spirit of DIY. Buy Jan's silent switcher to power Salas Simplistic Preamp, or the one with active RiAA, forgot who made it, on here. Pay $70 for Herbies mat, buy used DD table (pioneer has a good one that's even avaliable new) and pack in non-hardening clay in all the free space, attach an AvA modded Grado cartridge, and buy a USB walwart adapter to power the SilentSwitcher. Oh and some RCA plugs from Radioshack and some UPOCC wire, make some cables. Viola! You've achieved a very nice analog source for less than $1k.
Marantz CDP comparable? Phuleze.
In the spirit of DIY. Buy Jan's silent switcher to power Salas Simplistic Preamp, or the one with active RiAA, forgot who made it, on here. Pay $70 for Herbies mat, buy used DD table (pioneer has a good one that's even avaliable new) and pack in non-hardening clay in all the free space, attach an AvA modded Grado cartridge, and buy a USB walwart adapter to power the SilentSwitcher. Oh and some RCA plugs from Radioshack and some UPOCC wire, make some cables. Viola! You've achieved a very nice analog source for less than $1k.
I mean the easy to hear ESS DAC may have been just fine, and the rest of the associated equipment may have lacked "bite" as you might say. It seems somewhat common that either the source or amp will have "bite" and the other is chosen to oppose it. I think it's a recipe for a midfi sound, but you see the habit at all price levels. It works as a way to build a system, but I much prefer when your equipment can swing between soft and "bite".
I know someone has the source info on distortion increasing with each LP play vs stylus shape. There is no shape, however, which prevent groove wear (=distortion increase). Walt Davies (LLNL Chemist) was a neighbor of mine (LAST) and he did the tests on wear -- used up a lot of CBS test LP's --- we looked at the data before and after and number of plays et al. If LP was perfect in every way imaginable.... this one issue alone would kill it for me. So guys.... lets see the wear/thd/IM/noise data with multiple plays and show it again. Just as a reality check.
THx-RNMarsh
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
A lot of people say they hear differences bewteen ic opamps or other analog circuits. I assume some of it could be true.
That being the case..... BenchMark designer suggested to me that most differences between DAC;s was in the analog portion.
What do we think here? [A subject for What Wrong with Opamps discussion].
THx-RNMarsh
That being the case..... BenchMark designer suggested to me that most differences between DAC;s was in the analog portion.
What do we think here? [A subject for What Wrong with Opamps discussion].
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.