A new "budget king" turntable?

Some folks are very sensitive to wow and flutter variations. Others not so much.. 0.2% and piano and violin music can be heard? Your probably right, but I would have to LISTEN to find out. My point is, audition what a person is considering. . .

I had a Stanton STR8-80X as a second 'table, and I was not bothered by any audible wow and flutter despite its 0.2% specification. A friend of mine bought the Music Hall USB-1, which has an even worse 0.25% spec, and we didn't hear any problems while auditioning it at the shop or when enjoying records at his home. Another poster had mentioned piano and violin music as being particularly problematic, but that type of music makes up a fair percentage of my collection and listening time (a consequence of my mother's love of violin and the piano lessons I took in my youth). I don't doubt that some people are more sensitive to this issue than I am, so, as you pointed out, audition first if possible, but I know that for me a 0.2% w&f spec is nothing to be concerned about.
 
Oh yeah I forgot, country of origin instantly dictates the quality. Let us not forget that not all reviews of the Orbit have been positive either.
SSaxdude there's an easy answer as to why this Fluance turntable isn't getting any attention, due to a very high likelihood that it was built in China by Hanpin, not USA made like the U-Turn. A review from an AV sight?
Not all of the Orbit is made in the US. According the this article, the Orbit's motor is made in CHINA.:eek:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/business...s-make-turn/UFCdBsPetM8PTxqXpIUilK/story.html
 
I had a Stanton STR8-80X as a second 'table, and I was not bothered by any audible wow and flutter despite its 0.2% specification. A friend of mine bought the Music Hall USB-1, which has an even worse 0.25% spec, and we didn't hear any problems while auditioning it at the shop or when enjoying records at his home. Another poster had mentioned piano and violin music as being particularly problematic, but that type of music makes up a fair percentage of my collection and listening time (a consequence of my mother's love of violin and the piano lessons I took in my youth). I don't doubt that some people are more sensitive to this issue than I am, so, as you pointed out, audition first if possible, but I know that for me a 0.2% w&f spec is nothing to be concerned about.


Exactly!! We all hear differently, that's why there are many different types of tables :)
 
Are you being serious? One guy says something so its the truth? I say the earth is flat, you gonna believe me? 'Cos it's so.
So you believe the earth is flat?

I do put stock in reviewers that have good gear, that have taken measurements and offer reasoned opinions. Maybe you don't. That is your prerogative and likely you won't ever buy that turntable, hear it or take measurements. So why would I hold your opinion more valid than someone that has?
 
The U-Turn is offering and delivering a lot more quality/performance for the price point than the tables made by Hanpin. U-Turn isn't faking it with a lot of poorly designed and executed features with hardly any effort at quality control.

I've owned U-Turn orbits twice. I pick them up used for great prices and flip them to my friends wanting to get into records. They don't have any problem with QC. They make a great product for the money.

- Woody
 
I had a Stanton STR8-80X as a second 'table, and I was not bothered by any audible wow and flutter despite its 0.2% specification. A friend of mine bought the Music Hall USB-1, which has an even worse 0.25% spec, and we didn't hear any problems while auditioning it at the shop or when enjoying records at his home. Another poster had mentioned piano and violin music as being particularly problematic, but that type of music makes up a fair percentage of my collection and listening time (a consequence of my mother's love of violin and the piano lessons I took in my youth). I don't doubt that some people are more sensitive to this issue than I am, so, as you pointed out, audition first if possible, but I know that for me a 0.2% w&f spec is nothing to be concerned about.
And again. Fluance offers a free home trial. You can send it back and get your money back.

Why do I keep banging on about this company? It's simple.. they sort of have an unfortunate name. They sort of have an undeserved reputation as white van.

But I've owned so many of their products. Don't let the price fool you. These guys do entry level like nobody else. Are they KEF? Are they McIntosh? No. They're not.. but their gear leaves everyone at the pricepoint that they sell in the dust. For example the Andrew Jones pioneers. The budget favorite everyone and myself loves. They match it. Maybe no star power attached. And as a fellow Yorkshireman... I love Andrew Jones and what he's doing for budget audio. I swear this company gets so much undeserved abuse. They make good.. not earth shattering audiophile gear.. but damn good gear at absolute rock bottom prices. Anyone with a small budget but an interest in sound quality. Fluance is where I would say you go to.

And sorry, I quoted you but my post is not directed at you.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the ad. Now, back to business.

I think anybody can hear wow and flutter when listening critically, the issue is more whether it bothers them, not that it is inaudible. It is perfectly possibly for that wonderful creation, the human brain, to block out imperfections in performance, in fact, the whole idea of stereo is brain trickery. However, that doesn't stop wow and flutter from being a distortion, and therefore not desirably in the hifi world.

Unfortunately anything that's been recorded on analogue tape is liable to have a level of wow and flutter. You can clearly hear this in some of the Beatles recordings, when they started playing around in the recording studio. Some may be intentional, but it is there and audible in digital files as well as analogue media. Given that records themselves can also produce wow and flutter simple through having the hole in the middle slightly offset, or worn, the best way to minimise wow and flutter is by having the turntable speed remaining as constant as possible, and it is that for which you pay a lot.

Auditioning a turntable really only tells part of the story, you do need to see the specifications to know just how good a turntable is, and it's always best to start with one whose figures are the lowest available for that price. You'll get a level of wow and flutter anyway for the reasons mentioned, the point is to reduce it to a level where it becomes not noticeable in critical listening.
 
If my JVC QL7 died, I'd pick up one of these as a temporary table until I saved up for a Pioneer PLX1000. I thought I'd have to though a recap fixed the speed issues. Can't help but love the look of this table. I daresay it's better than the current Denon DP300F which I ran for a while. That was okay is. Sounded great with an Empire 2000 E/III carry on it.
 
Life is much too short to spend it listening to "budget" turntables. You don't have to spend a ton of cash to get a good table and cartridge. You owe it to yourself if you really love music.
 
Thanks for the ad. Now, back to business.
If you re-read the original post, I think you'll find that promoting Fluance and its products is the business of this thread.

I think anybody can hear wow and flutter when listening critically, the issue is more whether it bothers them, not that it is inaudible. It is perfectly possibly for that wonderful creation, the human brain, to block out imperfections in performance, in fact, the whole idea of stereo is brain trickery. However, that doesn't stop wow and flutter from being a distortion, and therefore not desirably in the hifi world.
The OP gave us a link to a review plus question and answer specifically about wow and flutter, and that reviewer said, "I did not detect any wow or flutter in the listening tests. . . I did not hear anything that I would identify as wow and/or flutter in the Fluance turntable." In other words, it was inaudible. My experience with similarly-spec'd Stanton and Music Hall 'tables was the same--any wow and flutter present was not audible to me.

I think the whole business of specifications and standards presupposes that there exists some threshold of performance where a particular distortion becomes problematic. For example, to meet DIN 45 500 standard for speed accuracy, a turntable would need to be not more than 1.5% fast nor more than 1% slow. Gramophone's review of the standards approved this particular one, saying that this level of speed inaccuracy would not be discernible by most people. The DIN standard for w&f was 0.2%, which Gramophone also said was "quite respectable."

Of course, the test conditions matter, too, and the .2% spec of my Stanton was not the same as the .2% of the DIN standard. Like the Music Hall, Stanton used JIS WTD standards, not DIN. From specifications on products that list multiple test conditions, DIN numbers are consistently higher than JIS WTD; for example, one product that I found both specs listed for had DIN w&f as 0.1% and the JIS WTD as .07%. Fluance does not identify the test conditions they used to come up with their 0.2% figure, but if it's like several other current budget offerings, it likely does not meet the old DIN 45 500 standards. Nevertheless, if reviewers and customers don't hear a problem, like I didn't with my Stanton, then I'd say it's not a problem.

Auditioning a turntable really only tells part of the story, you do need to see the specifications to know just how good a turntable is, and it's always best to start with one whose figures are the lowest available for that price. You'll get a level of wow and flutter anyway for the reasons mentioned, the point is to reduce it to a level where it becomes not noticeable in critical listening.
I would argue that auditioning tells the whole story, not just part of it. If one goal is to have wow and flutter low enough that it is not noticeable, the only way to prove that to yourself is by listening to see if you can notice it. I believe it is specifications that tell only part of the story, and they are sometimes misleading, as demonstrated by this review excerpt from Sound and Vision that compared a Rega P1, Music Hall MMF 2.2, and Technics SL1200:

"As someone who regularly plays solo piano music on vinyl, dynamic "wow" is something I've grown sensitive to. If a turntable doesn't provide sufficient motor torque or platter inertia, the drag on the record from the needle in the groove can actually cause a small variation in the platter speed that will sour the pitch ever so slightly, making instruments sound less than perfectly in tune. This effect is especially easy to hear when a pianist bangs out a big chord. (For me, an instrument has to sound like it's perfectly in tune or I'll soon be reaching for my CD stacks.)

A German EMI LP of Mozart piano sonatas played by Andor Foldes showed that while all three turntables could keeps things in tune quite well, the two belt-drive models clearly outpaced the Technics. This held especially true for the Rega, which displayed a near CD-like (in a good way!) sense of stability. Such results may seem to be at odds with the vanishingly low wow and flutter numbers in Technics’ published specs, but those measurements are made using steady signals and don’t take dynamics into account. While the Rega proved to be the pitch-stability king, I also found that the Music Hall’s transparent reproduction gave the clearest insight into the piano’s tone, as well as the space that the recording was made in." http://www.soundandvision.com/content/face-best-turntable-budget-page-4#VWwKqhHzOceXuiUC.97

That last sentence gets to another issue, and that is that there is a lot more to pleasurable vinyl listening than low w&f. I agree with the OP that if funds are limited, there's no reason not to consider a budget model like the Fluance, but even he said that if he had to build a new system for himself, it would be with something better. I am able to enjoy music played on budget decks like those I had mentioned previously in this thread, but they've been secondary turntables or purchased with special features in mind for a particular application (e.g., the STR8-80 was primarily for 78's; a DP-300F's automatic operation made it a good choice for falling asleep in the bedroom while listening to music). At a little higher price level, I've been very impressed with the Rega RP3 I bought last year. Hi-Fi Choice's review included, "The RP3 is contagiously musical and even though there were bigger turntables in our listening room, this was the one we kept coming back to, not something that happens very often. In the end, we were frankly astonished at just how good this new Planar 3 is. Its predecessor had similar timing skills, but was nowhere near as revealing nor dynamic – clearly the arm refinements and that double brace have had a dramatic effect. . . The quality of playing is superb and this shone through from the off, distracting us from all other considerations and resulting in a slew of record sleeves on the floor. . . Uncanny ability to get to the heart of the music." With three decades of Linn LP12 ownership behind me for comparison, I have to say I agree with Hi-Fi Choice; unlike the earlier P3-24, which I had auditioned some years back, the RP3 gives me that Linn-like ability, and compulsion, to play record after record for hour after enjoyable hour. I don't know any combination of specifications that would predict this kind of outcome, which is why I always encourage people to try to listen and compare for themselves to see what's going to please them in this hobby.
 
I think you missed the point of my post.

By the way, I've never auditioned a turntable, only bought on specs, and, to a lesser extent, reviews. The problem is that, unlike digital sources, amps or speakers, you can't really make direct comparisons as each component of a turntable has an effect on the sound.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the ad. Now, back to business.

I think anybody can hear wow and flutter when listening critically, the issue is more whether it bothers them, not that it is inaudible. It is perfectly possibly for that wonderful creation, the human brain, to block out imperfections in performance, in fact, the whole idea of stereo is brain trickery. However, that doesn't stop wow and flutter from being a distortion, and therefore not desirably in the hifi world.

Unfortunately anything that's been recorded on analogue tape is liable to have a level of wow and flutter. You can clearly hear this in some of the Beatles recordings, when they started playing around in the recording studio. Some may be intentional, but it is there and audible in digital files as well as analogue media. Given that records themselves can also produce wow and flutter simple through having the hole in the middle slightly offset, or worn, the best way to minimise wow and flutter is by having the turntable speed remaining as constant as possible, and it is that for which you pay a lot.

Auditioning a turntable really only tells part of the story, you do need to see the specifications to know just how good a turntable is, and it's always best to start with one whose figures are the lowest available for that price. You'll get a level of wow and flutter anyway for the reasons mentioned, the point is to reduce it to a level where it becomes not noticeable in critical listening.
There's a lot of distortion in audio. Everything has some distortion. Tube amps have worst distortion than solid state generally.. But a lot of people prefer tubes. Specs tell you something but not everything. It's a funny thing with people's perceptions. Science can tell you a great deal. Specs can tell you a great deal. But they're not the final arbitar of our perceptions. At the end of the day listening to gear is all that matters
 
Brilliant and very informative post there jrtrent. I too don't believe specs can tell the whole story.

If my secondary table dies, I think the Fluance 81 is at the top of my list. I suspect it could potentially outperform my Toshiba SR150C turntable anyway, if not my JVC QL7 in my main system. On the other hand the Toshiba seems to exhibit a better sense of timing than the JVC QL7
 
[...] actually having fun instead of taking it so deadly seriously. I'd like to openly apologize to the "hipsterdouche" hating community here for having fun and enjoying this hobby.

Three vinyl waves in my life.

The first two involved the Sony EX-1M console record player and a box of records I carefully dragged around from small town USA to Chicago to IL college town. I had a lot of fun playing my records during this time period.

Third wave: real job with real income; I began exploring turntables (instead of record players). Brand new, nicer records required better equipment to extract the music. Enter record cleaning machines, real cartridges, real turntables. Etc.

I became more serious about playing and taking care of my precious records, and in the process had more fun - and I'm still having more fun playing records right now - than I ever did with my previously beloved but poor quality equipment.

YMMV
 
Last edited:
Yers, important to take note that this is a good choice for a starter table. Not intended for most people here on this forum. I suspect it might outperform my secondary table (early 60's era Toshiba belt drive) though certainly won't touch my JVC QL7. Still, love the way it looks ;)

Having said that, I think I can get the best of both worlds by having a solid bamboo plinth made, and get a nice walnut burl veneer on it for my QL7. Need to save up for that.
 
Interesting..... I've not seen a single bit of negative info from anyone who's had a hands on with one of these so far.... Admittedly there's only about 3 reviews out there...... I could be tempted to replace ym secondary table with one. ;)
 
I am posting this just after a cursory reading so apologies if someone mentioned this.

Do not want to get into the fray too much - will probably lose!

Just want to comment on the 0.2% W&F - from memory the spec for the AT120 indicates "less than 0.2% WF" not "equal to" - I vaguely remember someone taking actual measures and the result being way lower than 0.2% and close to what is considered acceptable. Probably manufacturer shoots for that but cannot guarantee, given price point.

v
 
Back
Top Bottom