Respectfully disagree? That's fine but give a reason why you disagree. You must have a reason......:scratch2:
-
Feeling lucky? Check out the AK 24th Anniversary Giveaway thread and join in the fun!
Why do you like manual over auto turntable?
- Thread starter RAJOD
- Start date
- Status
Respectfully disagree? That's fine but give a reason why you disagree. You must have a reason......:scratch2:
You would do well to remember that blanket statements are never right.
Please offer proof of these assertions ... and when I say "proof," I don't mean uninformed babble from some magazine writer who has no engineering background and who counts several manufacturers of manual turntables among his best buddies.
No one has to offer proof of this. It is common knowledge gleened from years of experience. 50 to be exact. Why don't you offer proof why automatic turntables sound just as good as manual Mr. Tinear
I don't think people here can't understand the different levels of the hobby.
This topic has nothing to do with what's better but why you like manual or auto. After all your pissing and ranting what did you accomplish? Arrogance, belittling, Better than attitude, a boost to your socioeconomic status.
Just my opinion but I don't think it's that behavior helps in making friends on the world wide web.
What you can't seem to understand is nobody is fighting with you on the hobby but rather your attitude in this hobby and post you leave. There's an old saying "you can't see your ears". Meaning you can't recognize your own negative behavior but others see it clearly.
As long as the hammer blows were in the vertical plane, an AR XA would play right through that assault without skipping or exhibiting any degradation in sound quality. Edgar Villchur, the designer of the AR XA, offered that claim as proof that the XA's spring suspension was very effective at isolating the platter and arm from external shock and vibration. You can find it in AR's ad copy from the 1960s if you care to do a bit of searching.
I can offer an anecdotal report that my Technics SL-230, a single-play automatic belt-drive turntable, sounds just as good as the fully manual AR XA that it replaced in my main system. The turntable in that system is on a sturdy rack that sits on a poured concrete basement floor. If it were in a location that subjected the turntable to more structure-borne shock and vibration, the AR's suspension might very well enable it to sound better than the Technics.
I should also point out that the Technics outperforms the AR in one area that's important to me -- freedom from hum. The AC motor in the AR induced a small amount of hum in my Grado cartridge. The DC servo motor in the Technics is dead silent with the Grado. That's why I bought the Technics.
Beobloke
Super Member
Simple - Because they sound so good!
I choose the hammer and your one TT short.
Maybe because its a linear tracking turntable and other others were not?
I like that Sony you own. I just ordered another B&O 8002 hope it makes in one piece this time.
Yes its automatic! I buckled over its high tech gadgetry and looks. I know repairs and the stylus can get expensive. I guess the cartridge MMC2 is so good people retro fit in on regular turntables.
Multiplex
Appease my earhole.
Let's face it... Most semi-automatics and full automatics were mass-manufactured in Japan as affordable mid-fi products to appeal to the average consumer. Many were available in the sub $400 price range, and you have to figure that a big portion of that cost went into engineering and manufacturing those little intricacies of the automation. So a full-auto TT priced at $400 would probably have been built with similar "bones" to that of a $200 manual TT of comparable design. Consumers didn't want to pay the big bucks, so there was constant a push to drive costs down. Costs were cut both for the automation components, and for the TT itself. Thats why by the mid-1980s, you saw all of those cheesy black plastic full-auto turntables that weighed like two or three pounds. Manufacturers made what the consumers demanded. Quality, as usual, was sacrificed. Now, could an automatic TT of exquisite quality and perfection be produced? In all likelihood, yes. Would it be cost prohibitive? Probably. So, we get what we get.
And yeah, comparing the average 30 year old Japanese mid-fi auto TT to the $2,500-$5,000 hi-fi audiophiles TT of today isn't quite fair. The audiophile TT was produced in small quantities to appeal to a small group of enthusaists and purists. They are very well made, and usually put much more of a focus on sound quality and asthetics. They need not bother with automation, since part of the novelty and charm of vinyl in the modern day is the ritual of handling, cleaning and cueing...
There are always compromises... Convenience or quality? Are we limited to the affordable, or can we splurge on the exquisite?
At some point, you have to make a choice. It is your preference. That's all the OP asked. If you prefer the high end, and can afford it, that's not a bad thing. How you spend your money is your choice. Now, if someone prefers to save their money, or would prefer the automation, that is their choice. This does not make them ignorant.
"Better" depends completely on application. ...And personal preference. There is an appropriate place for both automation, and clinical perfection alike.
And yeah, comparing the average 30 year old Japanese mid-fi auto TT to the $2,500-$5,000 hi-fi audiophiles TT of today isn't quite fair. The audiophile TT was produced in small quantities to appeal to a small group of enthusaists and purists. They are very well made, and usually put much more of a focus on sound quality and asthetics. They need not bother with automation, since part of the novelty and charm of vinyl in the modern day is the ritual of handling, cleaning and cueing...
There are always compromises... Convenience or quality? Are we limited to the affordable, or can we splurge on the exquisite?
At some point, you have to make a choice. It is your preference. That's all the OP asked. If you prefer the high end, and can afford it, that's not a bad thing. How you spend your money is your choice. Now, if someone prefers to save their money, or would prefer the automation, that is their choice. This does not make them ignorant.
"Better" depends completely on application. ...And personal preference. There is an appropriate place for both automation, and clinical perfection alike.
Last edited:
Roivas
Well-Known Member
Hmmmmm.
I highly doubt that fully half of the design costs go into the automation needed to add automatic features. Also, depending on the profit margin, a table selling for MSRP of $400 might cost anywhere from $200-$350 to build. Larger companies could (and can) afford to make slimmer margins in a competitive marketplace by spreading R&D and development costs over more product.
Add onto that the fact that many tables that are automatic had manual brethren that lacked the automation, and you can see how much or how little automation probably added to the company's bottom-line. In fact, companies like Apple will often offer these extras with a higher percentage mark-up as you move up the chain. A basic iPhone with 16 GB of storage costs $199, while the model with 64 GB of storage costs $399. However, Apple does not pay $200 more for the extra parts. Instead, the profit margin on the added storage space is higher. The justification is that people willing to fork over the higher price for the extra space can afford to pad the margins a bit more as well. This almost certainly happened with turntables as well.
The price difference between a 1600MK2 and an 1800MK2 in 1979 was $100, with the semi-auto 1700MK2 priced directly in the middle. Considering the 1600 uses a nearly identical motor to the venerable 1200, it benefits from the investment costs associated with that other turntable. More of the R&D probably went into the suspension system that is unique to that line of tables and the Quartz-lock, which virtually eliminated wow & flutter. However, even if we take your argument at face value and assume that ALL R&D costs were recouped in the sale of these tables alone, that still leaves a price difference of at most 25% for the feature. At most. Likely, as with iPhones today, the production price was much closer and the margins for the upper model much higher. And in any case, you still get a fully automatic table that sounds equally awesome to the 1800MK2, which is absolutely no slouch in the SQ department.
But as you said, the market adjusts. You're certainly right that a lot of cheap junk was produced because people bought more and more cheap junk. And today the market for high-end tables is dominated by folks who want totally manual decks. Whether that's because of engineering limitations or because a lot of people have a false belief that manuals sound better...well, I leave other people to make that determination for themselves. But the market makes what sells, and high-end folks buy manual tables (much to my chagrin).
HOWEVER, your final point about better being relative and closer to preference than technical superiority is spot-on. I wouldn't necessarily put the two at odds (one could argue that they actually work towards one another rather than against each other), but this is not a zero sum game. If other people love their manual tables, they are free to do so. That just leaves more auto decks for me to find!
Cheers!
Last edited:
Zonian
Endangered Species
WOW!
Such angst over auto, semi or manual; there is a place in this world for everything.
When I am recording I use my manual TT.
If I am casually playing an album, and might not be readily available to end play, I use my semi-auto TT.
I don't currently own an automatic TT, but if I did, (and when I did) I would use it when I wanted to expend the least amount of energy and mental expense as was possible.
In short, I personally find a time and a place for each and every version of play.
My only caveat: it must be vinyl!!!
Such angst over auto, semi or manual; there is a place in this world for everything.
When I am recording I use my manual TT.
If I am casually playing an album, and might not be readily available to end play, I use my semi-auto TT.
I don't currently own an automatic TT, but if I did, (and when I did) I would use it when I wanted to expend the least amount of energy and mental expense as was possible.
In short, I personally find a time and a place for each and every version of play.
My only caveat: it must be vinyl!!!
Multiplex
Appease my earhole.
Yeah, I exaggerated a smidge...
But still.... Looking at the lower end of the spectrum, the difference between the fully manual SLB-1 and SLB-3 was $100-$150. And SL-D1 and SL-D3 was $125-$205. So, in this range automatic models fell somewhere between a 50% and 100% increase... Certainly more than 25%. But, I'm sure as you get higher up in the line, and are also paying for other bells and whistles like quartz lock, the automation constitutes a lower percentage of the value.
Last edited:
Eddie Edirol
Active Member
Well you guys gotta remember, any manufacturer like say "Technics" (Im Uber Technics guy) used pretty much the same auto mechanisms and parts from the the sl-1600Mk1 on up the chain. I know this from taking them apart and fixing them. So they used up all the R&D money in prolly 1975 to revamp the 1300 into the 1600, and coasted from there. Any R&D after that was probably for fine tuning, but its not like $350 of the cost of all models of their turntables went into R&D. They saved alot of money that way.
They most likely used some R&D money to adapt the same auto mechanics to the new plastic bases. They revamped the 1600mk2 with a totally different electronic mechanism, which made that one cost much more, of course the other ultra high end technics used that electronic variation as well. I wont get into the linear tracking turntables though....
But I own a SL-1650, Ive taken it apart and restored it, and I know the auto mechanisms dont touch the tone arm when its playing a record, only when its commanded to. But of course you cant replace the tone arm on an automatic Technics. I wouldnt want to anyway, I personally dont think I can hear a difference between tone arms like others can, so that will never be my concern.
But all of the early manual Technics can have the tone arms replaced, with great results Im sure!
- Status