Modified Vintage, or High End Modern Technology
- Thread starter ehoove
- Start date
jblnut
Don't Overthink It
I too was walking this path about a year ago. With both a PF-800 and PX-2 in the house, a GT-2000 was at the top of my list. I exchanged some emails with a forum member who was getting rid of a few 2000's (he had 6 iirc!) but somehow we miscommunicated the time frame of the sale and I ended up without one. So now I was left to decide if I wanted to chance buying one from hifido, or move on to something else. I ultimately decided on a VPI Classic and it helped a lot that I was able to get a "demo" unit from musicdirect for a substantial discount. Although I have no way to hear a Classic and a GT2K along side one another, I think I made the right $2k decision. Running old Yamahas is one thing - running old Yamahas that were never sold in this country could spell real trouble if things go wrong.
I will also echo what others have said here - I was expecting a lot more of a change than I actually got. I have moved a little father along the continuum from "the table makes the biggest difference" to "the cartridge and preamp make the biggest difference" end of things now. You might actually consider stepping up your cartridge game on the Thorens and calling it a day. Food for thought....
jblnut
I will also echo what others have said here - I was expecting a lot more of a change than I actually got. I have moved a little father along the continuum from "the table makes the biggest difference" to "the cartridge and preamp make the biggest difference" end of things now. You might actually consider stepping up your cartridge game on the Thorens and calling it a day. Food for thought....
jblnut
I'm of the camp that says the table is what gives the phono preamp and cart the ability to make the most difference. Especially when talking about tables that can run $10,000 carts and we're mostly comparing them with carts of much lower potential. We compare things that aren't being taxed (a VPI Classic with my lower end Zyx, for example) with things that are maybe, but not quite, keeping up but reaching the limit of their potential.
I've been coming around to this idea too. I had a definite lack of success in the past mounting high end cartridges to mid fi tables. It seems to me that a comparatively poor table will hold back the performance of a good cartridge, while a great table will squeeze every bit of performance out of a more pedestrian cartridge. Then you really need a good phono stage to get the best out of the whole thing.
I think I'd spend my money on TT first, phono stage second and cartridge third.
jblnut
Don't Overthink It
All I can say is that moving 3 carts (OC9/II, AT33EV and Denon DL-S1) between two tables (Yamaha PX-2 and VPI Classic), I was clearly able to tell which cartridge was which while the table it was on was a much more subtle thing. I'm not saying that you should put $10k carts on that yard sale Pioneer from the 70''s here guys. I'm saying the thing with the diamond and the magnets actually making the sound is responsible for a great deal more of "sonic character" than the table once you get to a place where you're using very good tables.
Camp "Cartridge" over and out...
jblnut
Camp "Cartridge" over and out...
jblnut
jn229
Super Member
I agree and disagree............. IMHO added within the above order, should be cartridge/arm synergy. My thinking as of late is that the way the cartridge and arm function as a unit is critical.
To the OP: five tables; five arms; five cartridges….LOL….. you may want a table that you can mount multiple arms on.
Sorry. Should have been more clear. Of course, you are right. I guess I just don't even consider that to be a discussion point anymore. Nothing works if you get that combo wrong.
Mister Pig
Pigamus Maximus
I would agree with you wholeheartedly. Phono stages get overlooked and underspent on. It is easy to see the "value" in the table, and possibly even the arm. Cartridges are exotic, and always have an interesting story attached with them. Phono stages are usually just boxes that sit there, and it is easy to skimp on them when dealing with a budget.
In my system hte phono stage is one of the cheaper items in terms of cash outlay. But it is a factory direct component, and its circuit is a stripped down version of the one the company uses in their $20K phono stage. while it may be the most expensive one I ever bought, I found that it was critical to getting the performance i wanted from my analog rig.
Cartridge was the most expensive piece, followed by the table, then the arm and phono stage. but the arm is also factory direct, and another one of those pieces that fly under the radar in terms of value and performance. So price alone does not define every component choice, but understanding the relationship of value and what supports the other pieces of the analog puzzle leads to getting a balanced and well thought out analog system.
Regards
Mister Pig
dnewma04
The Healer
It's interesting that audiophiles are picking back up on the TD-124 as a real alternative. 6-7 years ago, audiophiles largely thought it was a joke that anyone would suggest that it was even worth listening to, much less a competitive option. I know this because I found one that was inexpensive, joined a bunch of forums to find out what I had and was mocked and ridiculed for thinking it could be decent. I think a lot of that has been the aftermarket upgrades that have bridged some of that gap. I've had 4 TD-124s, two partially functioning, one original in very good working condition and one restored.
The working ones always sounded pretty good to me. I owned them prior to really getting into records, heavily, so I'd be curious to recompare them to something like an Oracle or SP-10 to see how they'd work out. I had the opportunity to listen to a Garrard 301 compared to an Avid and the Avid seemed to be better all around, but then again it was a 15k turntable vs 50+ year old idler, albeit restored.
I would get into the inertia discussion as there is some misunderstanding about it expressed in this thread, but that's better left to another thread. I think the complexity of the SL-1200 gets overstated a little bit, too. There really isn't anything particularly complex about it.
I believe if I were in the same position as Jim, I'd be seriously considering something like a VPI Scout, Classic, or something in that range of products. While I'm not afraid of obsolete ICs in old gear (most of the old ICs were used in the motor controllers and re-engineering those controllers could be done), I do find the same sort of issues in older high end belt drives and even in newer tables with non-mechanical speed control.
The working ones always sounded pretty good to me. I owned them prior to really getting into records, heavily, so I'd be curious to recompare them to something like an Oracle or SP-10 to see how they'd work out. I had the opportunity to listen to a Garrard 301 compared to an Avid and the Avid seemed to be better all around, but then again it was a 15k turntable vs 50+ year old idler, albeit restored.
I would get into the inertia discussion as there is some misunderstanding about it expressed in this thread, but that's better left to another thread. I think the complexity of the SL-1200 gets overstated a little bit, too. There really isn't anything particularly complex about it.
I believe if I were in the same position as Jim, I'd be seriously considering something like a VPI Scout, Classic, or something in that range of products. While I'm not afraid of obsolete ICs in old gear (most of the old ICs were used in the motor controllers and re-engineering those controllers could be done), I do find the same sort of issues in older high end belt drives and even in newer tables with non-mechanical speed control.
I'm actually considering ponying up and doing the upgrade. The new motor and controller are supposed to be killer.
Jim,
You are aware that in my thread where I was expressing my jubilation with the the consolidated sound quality of three key components of my system, I provided a link to the AK Yamaha GT 2000 Social Group. In the collected postings on that social group are some interesting observations from one particular poster who happens to be both a new (ie recently acquired) Yamaha GT 2000 owner and a VPI dealer.
I'm not going to rehash here his observations. They are there for the open-minded to investigate. His testimony also covers his considerations of the GT 2000's arm quality vis a vis the use of cartridges on the GT 2000 and on another highly regarded current production arm.
I don't know whether you have read them. Nor ultimately would it bother me if you hadn't. I will say they are interesting and that he is enthusiastic about the GT 2000 to say the least.
My current experiences and my years of listening to the (past) contenders for the title of top-rank turntables tell me that the GT 2000 deserved to be included in the uppermost of that past top rank. It is possessed of a great deal of 'electronic trickery' which thankfully is also partnered with heroic engineering and the option to upgrade the excellence performance of the stock base unit with some select add-ons that were purposely designed by the company(as opposed to aftermarket modifications never considered by the designers).
My testimony to the superb sound quality of the GT 2000 on AK is generally muted, hence my recent thread where I highlighted how well it works with the other two dark horse gems that have joined my system in the past 6 months. All three utterly deserve to be more widely considered and auditioned. I'm not going to say much more about any of them on this site, because I have said my bit now. It is up to others whether they investigate or not. I stand by my testimony of all of them.
I thoroughly disagree with any outright dismissal of new turntables even without the benefit of having listened to any of the top contenders of the past 20 years, That is simply closed mindedness( which contains its own reward). I will say to those who automatically assume that everything new automatically outstrips that which may be decades old, that to assume such is similarly closed minded and that they might well be overlooking some products which can still hold their own even amongst currently exalted company.
Jim, by all means go and listen to what is currently available. There are many which are nothing but rehashes of old ideas in new clothing. They are some which are genuine new thinking. Neither of those stances guarantee excellence. The truth of the matter, is not what is implemented but rather how it is implemented.
Good Luck my friend.
You are aware that in my thread where I was expressing my jubilation with the the consolidated sound quality of three key components of my system, I provided a link to the AK Yamaha GT 2000 Social Group. In the collected postings on that social group are some interesting observations from one particular poster who happens to be both a new (ie recently acquired) Yamaha GT 2000 owner and a VPI dealer.
I'm not going to rehash here his observations. They are there for the open-minded to investigate. His testimony also covers his considerations of the GT 2000's arm quality vis a vis the use of cartridges on the GT 2000 and on another highly regarded current production arm.
I don't know whether you have read them. Nor ultimately would it bother me if you hadn't. I will say they are interesting and that he is enthusiastic about the GT 2000 to say the least.
My current experiences and my years of listening to the (past) contenders for the title of top-rank turntables tell me that the GT 2000 deserved to be included in the uppermost of that past top rank. It is possessed of a great deal of 'electronic trickery' which thankfully is also partnered with heroic engineering and the option to upgrade the excellence performance of the stock base unit with some select add-ons that were purposely designed by the company(as opposed to aftermarket modifications never considered by the designers).
My testimony to the superb sound quality of the GT 2000 on AK is generally muted, hence my recent thread where I highlighted how well it works with the other two dark horse gems that have joined my system in the past 6 months. All three utterly deserve to be more widely considered and auditioned. I'm not going to say much more about any of them on this site, because I have said my bit now. It is up to others whether they investigate or not. I stand by my testimony of all of them.
I thoroughly disagree with any outright dismissal of new turntables even without the benefit of having listened to any of the top contenders of the past 20 years, That is simply closed mindedness( which contains its own reward). I will say to those who automatically assume that everything new automatically outstrips that which may be decades old, that to assume such is similarly closed minded and that they might well be overlooking some products which can still hold their own even amongst currently exalted company.
Jim, by all means go and listen to what is currently available. There are many which are nothing but rehashes of old ideas in new clothing. They are some which are genuine new thinking. Neither of those stances guarantee excellence. The truth of the matter, is not what is implemented but rather how it is implemented.
Good Luck my friend.
It is amazing how many hi-fi devotees are fashion victims eager to gush over products which are garnering rave reviews (even if they have never laid eyes upon them, let alone listened to them). The negative corollary of this is the castigation of products which they have never heard of from past years (let alone seen, let alone listened to).
I recall Ken Kestler swimming against the tide in the early '80s in his first column in the (then) Hi-Fi New and Record Review magazine. At the time the Linn Sondek LP-12 was vehemently proposed in some quarters to be the unopposed and unapproachable Best Turntable In The World. Kestler had the temerity to state that the Thorens TD-124 sounded better than it.
His assertion didn't attract too much controversy because it was widely considered that he was talking out of his orifice.
Around the same time in Japan, a locally produced Direct Drive turntable was released. This turntable (guess which one I am talking about
: ) cost twice as much as the Linn Sondek . Despite being a Direct Drive, a technology which had been inexorably lambasted and utterly dismissed in some quarters and costing twice as much as The Best Turntable In The World, this turntable sold in the tens of thousands in Japan.Given the propensity of hi-fi aficionados to be fashion followers, it is remarkable that a new release of a dismissed technology costing twice that of the current darling of the cognoscenti, was not only accepted but was lauded as superb and was a runaway sales success.
Does this not speak of its sound quality? Surely the Japanese buyer had the opportunity at the time to hear the Top Dog Of The Turntable World? Why did they choose this twice as expensive product of a reviled technology?
Why indeed? :scratch2:
I'll let those reading this consider why that might have been.....
Good point. Likely because I have been thinking the same way.
Just as the LP-12 and its ilk replaced the idlers as the new, latest and greatest thing, now the idlers are replacing the LP-12's again. One type of sound becomes ubiquitous, and as always, the market reacts against it when something newer and more exciting comes available. Or older and more exciting!
To be honest, I think that any of the top tier of turntables is excellent, and one could comfortably live with any of them. At that point it becomes a matter of preference for a certain type of flavor, as it were. I can't imagine that I couldn't find happiness for the long term with, for instance, a GT-2000, LP-12, Delphi VI, SME-20, VPI Aries, TD-124, Avid Acutus, etc. All are great, with wonderfully but subtly different presentations. Likely they would all excite or bore on different days, depending on ones mood. But I do think that it is overstating the case that any one approach is the right one.
Just as the LP-12 and its ilk replaced the idlers as the new, latest and greatest thing, now the idlers are replacing the LP-12's again. One type of sound becomes ubiquitous, and as always, the market reacts against it when something newer and more exciting comes available. Or older and more exciting!
To be honest, I think that any of the top tier of turntables is excellent, and one could comfortably live with any of them. At that point it becomes a matter of preference for a certain type of flavor, as it were. I can't imagine that I couldn't find happiness for the long term with, for instance, a GT-2000, LP-12, Delphi VI, SME-20, VPI Aries, TD-124, Avid Acutus, etc. All are great, with wonderfully but subtly different presentations. Likely they would all excite or bore on different days, depending on ones mood. But I do think that it is overstating the case that any one approach is the right one.
SteveA
Super Member
Agreed.
By all account and by my own experience, my old PL-71 was no slouch and when I upgraded from a DL103r to an XX2Mk2 I heard a nice improvement and I was happy.
However, I took up the offer to home demo a Well Tempered Versalex which was also fitted with an XX2, and had something of a rude awakening. It took all of three tracks to realise that my XX2 had a LOT more to give. A few months after purchasing my own Versalex I tried a high end phono stage (about 5x the cost of mine at the time) and the experience was repeated, albeit to a slightly lesser extent. So now, with the phono stage also updated, I think that my vinyl front end is complete, at least until the XX2 wears out.
Steve
It is not overstating the case. That stance is simply downright stupid.
I take note of the knuckleheads on this forum and other forums, and filter what they say for any truth and for the stupidity that they regularly propose. I do take the stance however that even a great fool can still be the author of a point which is worthy of praise. The greatest fool is one who dismisses everything which comes out of any individual's mouth.
A sad fact of life is that the most vehement dogmatic ignorant stance which mixes verifiable fact with utter rubbish can be accepted as authority by some merely because the author never backs away from their stance and is persuasive in convincing the small minded to their dogmatic mode of thought.
Ok. I was trying to be kind.
I can't disagree with anything else you say. In the space of a week, I heard top quality sound from DD, idler and belt drive tables. I'd have to be an idiot to have a bias against any one of them based on something as inconsequential as the drive system.
jgordon
Super Member
Agreed. It was sold/donated to a high end digital audio shop here in the city. I walked in while scouting locations for my vinyl-themed bar a few months ago, and we started talking. He felt that I'd give it a good home, and in exchange for pictures of its rehabilitation and use, he gave it to me for a song. Everything is perfect, including a plumb top plate. That said, I rebuilt the motor, replaced the mirror, and added a gasket to the lower motor bearing cover, so I could make an oil bath for the lower bearing. She's been singing for a while as my main rig. In fairness to the LP-12, the PSU is in England getting reworked, and I only have one arm, so I figured I'd experiment. But yes, even with original mushrooms, motor grommets, and a lightweight plinth, she sent the LP-12 to the bench. Such is life.
Here is the info on the ball bearings: Silicon nitride ceramic, in 6mm. Boca Bearings is the source quoted, and they're a few bucks each.
http://www.bocabearings.com/bearing-inventory/balls/1921/6-6mmcsi3n4gr5ballsea
http://www.theanalogdept.com/assemble_all.htm
I hear more about heavy brass thrust plates (or doing away with the plate and letting the bearing ride the naked end cap) than I do about sapphire, but I'd be curious to hear more if you find it.
John,
Here I was thinking an SME 3009 or 3012 would be the ultimate arm for the table. I'm using my Ittok LVII at the moment. What are your thoughts on the SME and why it's not ideal?
Here is the info on the ball bearings: Silicon nitride ceramic, in 6mm. Boca Bearings is the source quoted, and they're a few bucks each.
http://www.bocabearings.com/bearing-inventory/balls/1921/6-6mmcsi3n4gr5ballsea
http://www.theanalogdept.com/assemble_all.htm
I hear more about heavy brass thrust plates (or doing away with the plate and letting the bearing ride the naked end cap) than I do about sapphire, but I'd be curious to hear more if you find it.
John,
Here I was thinking an SME 3009 or 3012 would be the ultimate arm for the table. I'm using my Ittok LVII at the moment. What are your thoughts on the SME and why it's not ideal?
There are better 3009s, IMHO, than the S2 that I have. It is not a bad arm but it just seems to lack in refinement on the two tables I've had it on, the other in better condition than my 124...a Sony 2251 (yes, I like some Direct Drives, too...like Erik, I don't care about the drive method if the table sounds great).