wushuliu
Super Member
These kinds of circuits, like with DACs are improving at an impressive pace whilst dropping in price. Can't dismiss them like you could even three years ago much less ten.
AT-LP120 and Technics Sl-1200 MK2
- Thread starter arcorob
- Start date
- Status
These kinds of circuits, like with DACs are improving at an impressive pace whilst dropping in price. Can't dismiss them like you could even three years ago much less ten.
gusten
Addicted Member
What we are hearing from these TTs is variation in frequency response, maybe a little difference in distortion, a difference in hum and noise floor.
There is no difference in how other components reacts to those differences, one TT will not be favoured in respect to the other, the TTs will always in a reasonably good system, like this, compromize themselves.
It´s a total misthinking that the 'soundstream' from one TT is handled differently than from the other, of course it isn´t, whatever other components there are, they cannot differentiate between good and bad, they just process what comes to them, equally.
gusten
There is no difference in how other components reacts to those differences, one TT will not be favoured in respect to the other, the TTs will always in a reasonably good system, like this, compromize themselves.
It´s a total misthinking that the 'soundstream' from one TT is handled differently than from the other, of course it isn´t, whatever other components there are, they cannot differentiate between good and bad, they just process what comes to them, equally.
gusten
But do you accept that there are differences in phono preamps, and that some can reveal differences better than others? That's what is being argued here, nothing at all about differentiating good or bad.
If you don't accept that there are differences in pgono preamps, then you are saying they all sound the same, which means a lot of us have wasted much money!
If you don't accept that there are differences in pgono preamps, then you are saying they all sound the same, which means a lot of us have wasted much money!
gusten
Addicted Member
Of course there are differences in phono amps, but that was not the issue here. The issue was that some think that it is not a fair test, because the TTs will be 'compromized' differently.
I have no idea if You have waisted Your money, it´t for You to decide.
gusten
Yes, it was the issue if you look. It is easier to spot differences, i.e; flaws in equipment through high end revealing, and often expensive, gear than through other, often budget components, and the feeling was that the phono preamp in use - and it's one I've never heard so can't comment - was masking some aspects of both turntables.
That seems fair enough to me.
That seems fair enough to me.
gusten
Addicted Member
Well I agree that if the phono amp had a lot of distortion, noise and hum, it would be more difficult to detect differences, but still possible.
But in this case we have a phono amp with much lower noise floor than the recording/TT/arm/cartridge, much lower distortion and hum. How can it mask anything important for this test, IMO it can´t.
gusten
ODS123
Super Member
I completely agree. ..IMHO, pricey phono pre-amps are yet another unnecessary audiophile extravagance. ..As with power amplifiers, the challenges of reducing distortion and noise were solved long ago. ..Today, even inexpensive AV Receivers, when so equipped, have phono sections that are transparent and up to the task of properly amplifying/equalizing a phono signal. This is not the so-called bottleneck.
beatcomber
AK Member
What would you say the price cut-off point should be? There's definitely a difference in performance between a $50 ART and a $150 Rega Fono Mini. I own both and have compared them.
Pio1980
AK Member
IMHO, if there is a "bottleneck" it would likely be with the digital end which is unavoidable for the purpose of this demo. It'd be to the OP to say whether he hears a significant dif between on-site and on-line repro.
Aside from being on a restricted bit budget I haven't used my computer appliance for critical auditioning so cannot say myself. Also I am not a digiphobe having finally heard decent CD sound in my own system thru a player I like.
Aside from being on a restricted bit budget I haven't used my computer appliance for critical auditioning so cannot say myself. Also I am not a digiphobe having finally heard decent CD sound in my own system thru a player I like.
ODS123
Super Member
consider me skeptical. ..I would bet that each has different output gain which would mean that one would sound louder than the other at identical volume setting. Even a small difference in volume would sully the comparison. For a proper comparison you'd need to measure voltages at the speaker terminals or, though less accurate, use a db meter at your sitting position, before attempting to compare.
Last edited:
ODS123
Super Member
Transparent Analog-to-digital conversion is well within capability of just about any laptop these days.
Before posting sample clips (in a different thread) I compared the clips I made to original LP - I could not detect one iota of degradation. ..I even created clips from a CD, played through my pre-amp and recorded at the line-out jacks, and could not distinguish b/w these clips and the CD.
Unfortunately, there will be no end to the doubt in many audiophiles minds about all of this. ..For those who believe in huge differences b/w turntables are also apt to believe in huge differences b/w pre-amps, DACS, amplifiers, speaker cables, and so on. ..Which actual science has proven do NOT exist. IMHO, course.
It sure is interesting how you are able to decide that what you hear is correct, and then totally dismiss what anyone else hears. Just adding a "IMHO" doesn't change that, and is totally opposite to the "All Audio. No Attitude" mantra of AK.
ODS123
Super Member
You seem intent on running me down. ..Though you're a moderator, you've called me ignorant earlier in this thread, something I have NEVER done here on AK or any other forum. ..not very "moderator" like. Though you obviously don't agree with my view that, apart from speakers and room acoustics, most hifi sound more similar than different, it's an opinion I should be entitled to express without harassment from a moderator.
A newbie who comes to this website may find my contributions to be worthwhile. ..Fine if you don't.
Last edited:
gusten
Addicted Member
arcorob
Addicted Member
Again just for the record
The ART DJ far exceeds the specs needed for this test..it is not a tube based pre so no coloration, strictly SS. And while another phono pre for $150 may sound better to the poster, it is not indicative of all phono pre's in the same range. As I said, I have tested several costing that and more...hated them. Doesn't mean they won't work well on another system but for my use, the ART is clean and pure without masking.
As to the other components. Another link in the chain is the way it gets in to the computer (the computer is very high end btw).
I use an Echo Gina box (external) which feeds an Echo Gina soundcard. It is designed to take analog inputs for music and convert to digital.
Very similar to this
http://www.amazon.com/Echo-24-Bit-Multi-Track-Digital-Recorder/dp/B0002GXQ4O
The capture software actually comes from DAK and it is EXTREMELY good. If I wanted to, I could even remove hiss and pops (among other things) but I choose to keep it native raw to ensure no frequency loss at any level.
I have an older model but it all works the same. Even has its own sound driver instead of WDM.
really guys, even without the sound clips, I think I have proven that the ATLP120 is a solid machine. I'll contend maybe not quite as solid as the Technics but remember what the technics was designed for. It was designed to deliver great sound and be moveable, shakable, tough environments for DJ's. It is not a VPI Scout or a SOTA. But then again, those tables would probably collapse with the use that a DJ would do...every tool has its place.
As a $200 table, the AT gives you a lot of value for the money. It sounds well above its price point and it is a fairly solid table.
No one is taking anything away from the Technics. Would love to do the underplatter sound shield on the AT and maybe get some sound deadening in the body. Perhaps even some shrink tube on the arm to add mass and stop any resonance that may or may not be present. But for the average buyer looking for a cost conscious table, this one gets an A+.
Hoping the albums arrive today.
The ART DJ far exceeds the specs needed for this test..it is not a tube based pre so no coloration, strictly SS. And while another phono pre for $150 may sound better to the poster, it is not indicative of all phono pre's in the same range. As I said, I have tested several costing that and more...hated them. Doesn't mean they won't work well on another system but for my use, the ART is clean and pure without masking.
As to the other components. Another link in the chain is the way it gets in to the computer (the computer is very high end btw).
I use an Echo Gina box (external) which feeds an Echo Gina soundcard. It is designed to take analog inputs for music and convert to digital.
Very similar to this
http://www.amazon.com/Echo-24-Bit-Multi-Track-Digital-Recorder/dp/B0002GXQ4O
The capture software actually comes from DAK and it is EXTREMELY good. If I wanted to, I could even remove hiss and pops (among other things) but I choose to keep it native raw to ensure no frequency loss at any level.
I have an older model but it all works the same. Even has its own sound driver instead of WDM.
really guys, even without the sound clips, I think I have proven that the ATLP120 is a solid machine. I'll contend maybe not quite as solid as the Technics but remember what the technics was designed for. It was designed to deliver great sound and be moveable, shakable, tough environments for DJ's. It is not a VPI Scout or a SOTA. But then again, those tables would probably collapse with the use that a DJ would do...every tool has its place.
As a $200 table, the AT gives you a lot of value for the money. It sounds well above its price point and it is a fairly solid table.
No one is taking anything away from the Technics. Would love to do the underplatter sound shield on the AT and maybe get some sound deadening in the body. Perhaps even some shrink tube on the arm to add mass and stop any resonance that may or may not be present. But for the average buyer looking for a cost conscious table, this one gets an A+.
Hoping the albums arrive today.
I find it interesting how active some imaginations on this site are. You know, its very easy to not completely dismiss things you have no experience with. Be it better DACS, ADCs, phono stages, amps, you name it. But no. We have an entire sub culture here that just KNOWS what everything is like, despite never once offering examples of actual comparisons they've made with gear-in-hand.
What is up with that? There's a whole lot of "I just know!" and not a lot of "I did this, and this is how it stacked up". Which is one of the nice things about this thread...its a real world comparison instead of "I already know this, even though I haven't done it".
And some people are going to take issue with that. If you talk the talk, don't get all whiny when somebody takes issue with you not walking the walk. Especially from people who've spent a lot of time and money doing so. When you have a lot of time and money invested in something, to have a group of folks come in and offer the advice to new folks that "none of it matters! I just know!" some people are going to offer up a counter argument. Because we care where the hobby goes. And if you HAVE the experience, by all means, share an opinion counter to that, counter to mine, counter to anybody, if your experience differs. But include EXAMPLES of how you arrived at these ideas. Without that, its just making stuff up.
All you have to do is record directly to a computer using its ADC and then use something like an Apogee DUET, a nice but not too expensive pro-sumer ADC, to readily hear how important ADCs are. It is NOT a subtle difference, despite what you think you can tell by reading a few specifications.
What is up with that? There's a whole lot of "I just know!" and not a lot of "I did this, and this is how it stacked up". Which is one of the nice things about this thread...its a real world comparison instead of "I already know this, even though I haven't done it".
And some people are going to take issue with that. If you talk the talk, don't get all whiny when somebody takes issue with you not walking the walk. Especially from people who've spent a lot of time and money doing so. When you have a lot of time and money invested in something, to have a group of folks come in and offer the advice to new folks that "none of it matters! I just know!" some people are going to offer up a counter argument. Because we care where the hobby goes. And if you HAVE the experience, by all means, share an opinion counter to that, counter to mine, counter to anybody, if your experience differs. But include EXAMPLES of how you arrived at these ideas. Without that, its just making stuff up.
All you have to do is record directly to a computer using its ADC and then use something like an Apogee DUET, a nice but not too expensive pro-sumer ADC, to readily hear how important ADCs are. It is NOT a subtle difference, despite what you think you can tell by reading a few specifications.
Last edited:
arcorob
Addicted Member
Eating my own cornflakes
Last night, I listened to some of my own recorded clips from SKYDRIVE through my Windows Surface into my main system. The Surface has a pretty cool Wolfsen DAC.
I was impressed with both...and the beautiful separation I hoped would come out, did...its why I chose the tracks.
I did find I could record at slightly higher level. It was okay but I was conservative as any clipping would invalidate the test. Clips for the future will have a slightly higher volume. I like the fact that the ART will let me know if I am clipping (red light should never show)
ANyway, my point was, going from LP to Computer and then playback on my main rig was very good. I felt it was a good representation, not flat or muddled, no masking.
Last night, I listened to some of my own recorded clips from SKYDRIVE through my Windows Surface into my main system. The Surface has a pretty cool Wolfsen DAC.
I was impressed with both...and the beautiful separation I hoped would come out, did...its why I chose the tracks.
I did find I could record at slightly higher level. It was okay but I was conservative as any clipping would invalidate the test. Clips for the future will have a slightly higher volume. I like the fact that the ART will let me know if I am clipping (red light should never show)
ANyway, my point was, going from LP to Computer and then playback on my main rig was very good. I felt it was a good representation, not flat or muddled, no masking.
beatcomber
AK Member
Be careful... that's a good way to get yourself booted.
- Status