How TurnTables differ ..

[Sergey Green]

Hi all,

They say some turn-tables will sound better than the other. Provided the two different makes/models would have the same cartridge and play the same LP, what other factors do contribute to the overall sound quality/perception?

I just read the comment somewhere that many older Thorens do sound muddier when compared to the more modern models, but I would think the only difference there is is in the mechanics and the looks - or is it not so? Intuitively, I know it is not so, but I don't know what it is that makes that difference. Would it be fair to ask some of you to post few points on where those differences are?

I thank you in advance.

-sg

 

[Solist]

That is the catch. You can't always use the same cartridge on different tonearms.

The main thing is how well it can hold the speed, which impacts the sound greatly.

Then you need to have a motor with low magnetic field, so it does not affect the cartridge.
It should also produce a minimal amount of vibrations.
I am in favour of high torque motors, but some people will disagree, I understand.

Then what type of drive does it have?
Idlers are great at holding speed and they mostly have a high torque motor, which for me is desirable.
The negative thing is that they allow more vibrations to transfer to the platter. But you usually get a heavyweight platter to absorb a great deal of those.

Belt drives are better when dealing with vibrations. But a belt will stretch, which may affect speed stability with some models. Mainly you get a lightweight platter with belt turntables, which is a no no from me. More expensive belt will have a massive platter to create a fly-wheel effect which takes care of speed stability.

Direct drives. You have a motor directly attached to the platter. Quartz lock takes care of speed but I prefer to see a turntable which doesn't need electronics to maintain a proper rotating speed.
Some DD suffer from magnetic field effecting the cartridge.

And then there is the main bearing and platter. The bearing should produce minimal amount of vibrations while rotating. The platter should have some mass to it so it absorbs the vibration produced by the bearing. Mass will also help maintaining a steady rotating speed.

Also the platter and rotor should be balanced, and a thousand more things.

 

[Grenadeslio]

Belt vs direct, suspended vs not, straight arm vs J vs S, length of arm, pivoted arm vs linear, unipivot vs ........ The options are endless on why one table sounds "different" than another.

As for older Thorens sounding muddy, complete BS, whoever or wherever you heard or read that is mistaken.

As many here I have a multitude of tables, all have different presentations and some I prefer over the others but that doesn't mean someone else might not prefer one of the others. Plus added to the equation one might perform better in a certain venue than another, way too many variables to say type A is better than type B or C.

 

[Solist]

Yes, in the end it comes down to how everything is put together. I might oversimplified a bit too much.

There are great ID, BD and DD to be found if enough research is applied.

I also don't buy the muddy sound. My 1019 is over 50 years old and still runs dead silent. Even when I crank the volume the quiet passages are dead silent.

 

[Guest126]

The difference in sound starts with tonearm, including the cartridge (perhaps the largest difference). Next, the turntable construction, which includes the platter, platter speed accuracy, and noise isolation.

 

[stereofisher]

Different turntables do sound different. I have two turntables on my bench. One is a refurbed Garrard Zero 100. The other is a Dual 1219 I just finished. The Garrard had a Shure V15 type III and the Dual has a Shure M44. I would expect these two to sound different. They did. My Dual had deeper base than my Garrard. Expected it. Fast forward, I got a Garrard Zero 92 off Eprey. The guy must have wanted to get rid of it. Has a Shure M55 on it. $42.42 with shipping. The cart and sled are worth that alone. Put 55 on my 100. My Dual has more bass than my Garrard though it sounds good. The Dual has an edge. There is a difference. Without much cash outlay and being able to fix them, I have good sound! Have a spare stylus like the 1219s. May try that to compare.

Eric

 

[Guest126]

Different turntables do sound different. I have two turntables on my bench. One is a refurbed Garrard Zero 100. The other is a Dual 1219 I just finished. The Garrard had a Shure V15 type III and the Dual has a Shure M44. I would expect these two to sound different. They did. My Dual had deeper base than my Garrard. Expected it. Fast forward, I got a Garrard Zero 92 off Eprey. The guy must have wanted to get rid of it. Has a Shure M55 on it. $42.42 with shipping. The cart and sled are worth that alone. Put 55 on my 100. My Dual has more bass than my Garrard though it sounds good. The Dual has an edge. There is a difference. Without much cash outlay and being able to fix them, I have good sound! Have a spare stylus like the 1219s. May try that to compare.

Eric

My CS 1246 has an M44C on it, and it was different than the Garrard that I had previously. It started out slow, however. The Dual's sound was somewhat dull and muted (in the beginning when I acquired the tt), but then as I continued to listen to it I noticed that the cartridge was very good at translating voice signals and instruments. Bass is very good as well. The M44C improved when I added a new stylus to it.