Audio cassettes never bit the dust for me. I have used them for a long long time. I have learnt German and French from them and a little Japanese, Russian, Serbo-Croat , Spanish and Italian.I have still got Tony Hancock and Goon show tapes. One of my Australian friends sent me Kevin "Bloody" Wilson comedy tapes - very risque and they would probably be banned nowadays.
I was never one for recording my LPs onto tape but I did a lot of help recording party tapes in the 1970s. I can remember lots of discussion about what should be recorded on a tape and in what order.
In the last thirty years or so I have travelled widely with my job. The cassette tape kept me sane on long plane journeys and long stays in hotel rooms. I could take the, classical, folk, jazz and rock music of my choice with me. This was mainly during the 1980s and 1990s.
I had a really snazzy Sony Walkman DC2 it sounded great as good as an LP record deck without the clicks and pops and static hiss and it still works. In 2000 my wife bought me an Archos MP3 player and all of a sudden I had much more room in my brief case.
But, I have put equal use to playing cassettes in the car and taping CDs was the best thing since sliced bread for me. The tape of a CD always sounded better than the tape of an LP record and often it sounded so much better than the same music on a manufactured cassette.
This is the advantage of digital music when the tape got bust or stretched you could easily make another one.
I still make tapes for my rather aging car which has got a tape player but no CD. I cannot bring myself to use my adapter and source the music from a Tablet computer or MP3 player; somehow it does not seem right.
All of my LPs and tapes have been digitised to WAV and MP3 files for convenience and for archiving. When the car is pensioned off I will probably never use an audio cassette player again. But wait a minute I have still got a record player and even though the digitised versions sound exactly like the original LP I still like to spin some vinyl. So maybe some life will remain for the audio cassette player yet.
The audio cassette was one of the most practical inventions regarding music reproduction; it paved the way for MP3 players and private music on the go. It gave me hours and hours of musical enjoyment, education and entertainment. It was a superb invention from Philips who also were prominent in the development of the CD. I can remember when the first recorder and player came onto the market in 1963 but they were only used widely by music fans from the 1970s when they slowly started to replace the LP.
Tuesday, 1 October 2013
Saturday, 14 September 2013
Beatles - Re-mastered Mono LP set
The new Beatles Mono LP set is due for release in November this year.
No doubt some people will be agonising whether to buy them or not. All I can say is if you have got the money and vinyl is your preferred choice of playing recordings then go ahead with a clear conscience. I shall not be buying this new set, even though I have got the money, because my preferred choice of listening to music is digital from a laptop, streamer or CD player. I still enjoy vinyl and still play some of my old Beatles records on a turntable for fun.
There is a lot of rubbish written about mono versus stereo and which is the best way to get back to the original sound. You cannot get back to the 1960's sound with any of the re-mastered releases but more of that later.
There is so much rubbish written about LP versus CD and now the various digital formats and this is beyond my comprehension. Soon the internet airwaves will be full of the old arguments about which is the better format and which take of the Beatles sounds better the mono one or the stereo one.
When I was a youngster back in the sixties I listened to the Beatles so much that I can remember most of their songs exactly word for word and chord for chord. So can most of my contemporaries unless they hated the Beatles and preferred the Rolling Stones; people were just as partisan in those days.
To all intents and purposes we only ever heard the Beatles and all our other favourite groups in Mono.
These were the combinations:
Mono LPs played on a mono record player with a ceramic cartridge and with valve or tube amplifier all in one box. These were played so loud that the distortion was really noticeable but no-one cared.
Mono LPs played on a mono record player with a ceramic cartridge and with transistor amplifier and all in one box. Once again the music was played so loud that there was noticeable distortion but no-one cared.
Stereo LPs were sometimes played on Mono record players but too loud again and of course you heard them in Mono.
Listening to a mono LP on a mono valve radio in AM; the transmissions were often distorted by interference.
Listening to a stereo LP on a mono transistor radio in AM; and once again the transmissions were often distorted by interference.
Listening to a mono or stereo track played on a VHF black and white telly. The sound reproduction was slightly better unless you had the volume turned up to full. The telly only had one speaker so you always heard mono. There was less interference and a better frequency response than AM radio.
Listening in mono on a jukebox played in a coffee bar or pub.
Playing a mono LP on your parents stereo if they could afford one. The end result was mono.
Playing a stereo record on your parents stereo if you were lucky and of course it sounded better and different. I bought Sgt Pepper in 1967 in stereo in anticipation of my parents getting a HIFI.
Listening to FM radio in the latter part of the 1960s but mostly on a radio with a single speaker - so in mono. Stereo FM did not become widely popular until the early 1970s when people could afford the latest equipment. FM stereo was a big improvement to listening to a mono record player.
The technical choice was as wide as we have today, excepting that digital did not exist and tape recorders were very expensive and audio cassette recording was trash until the 1970s came along.
The sound reproduction was awful compared to what we have today. There was no real discussion about the differences in mastering techniques and the small differences in how the mono and stereo versions of the Beatles albums were put together. No-one could care less, as all we were concerned about was listening to the best pop music even though it was usually distorted.
My sister and I had musical ears so we could tell that She's Leaving Home was playing in a different key on the stereo and mono versions of Sgt Pepper.
Of course, I never got annoyed by the vocals on the stereo version of Eleanor Rigby which now seem to be disembodied and jumping from one speaker to another because I was always listening in mono.
If you think for one minute that buying the boxed version of the Mono Beatles LP will get you back to the magic days of the 1960s then you are mistaken. You will be buying these versions for the excellent sound that they will give you even if they are played on a humble turntable. If you are paying £30 or so for each LP then insist upon getting undamaged vinyl and sleeve covers. Why should your music appreciation be marred by a warped record or one that has in built crackles because of bad manufacturing and quality control?
I can suggest two ways to get back to the so called golden days of the 1960s even though we did not have much cash to buy the LP when it first came out or listen to it through decent equipment.
1) Buy a second hand Beatles record mono or stereo from the 1960s. A cheap one will have plenty of scratches and it will also be damaged by excessive playing on what would now be termed as primitive equipment - a worn out sapphire stylus with a very heavy ceramic cartridge.
Buy a refurbished 1960s record player complete with sapphire stylus and ceramic cartridge.
Place the record player on a rickety sideboard or on the floor. Clean the record if it has a lot of gunge on it or otherwise leave it. Play the record with the volume turned up full and jive. You are almost back to how we listened and danced to the Beatles in 1964.
2) Tune in a single speaker transistor radio which has the AM medium wave band, you will probably have one in the house, to a distant radio station hundreds of miles away and during the day time; this will mean that the station will probably fade. If you have got the patience, hope that the station plays a record from the 1960s; the Beatles even.
No-one ever used headphones in those days but sometimes we used a ghastly single white ear bud type earphone if we did not want our parents to know we were listening to Radio Luxembourg rather than sleeping.
3) Instead of buying the record player with a credit card, pay with cash that you have saved in a jar or piggy bank from the spare change that you have got in your purse or pocket until you have got the right money. This will give you some of the air of anticipation that we had back then when we bought our first record players - or records for that matter as we had to save hard for them too.
Do not be tempted to play your brand new Beatles albums on the sort of equipment I have just described as you will ruin them on the first play.
Sit back and enjoy your re-mastered LPs first with the music coming from between the two speakers. And then secondly from only one speaker using the balance control.
If you are lucky enough to afford the stereo re-masters as well, then you can afford to buy a mono active speaker and rig it up. You will then be able to hear the stereo versions condensed into mono so that you can compare both formats. I am willing to guess that the music will sound just as good which ever way you listen. Enjoy.
PS
Some of you are probably thinking about buying a turntable for the first time to go with your new records so please be aware of the next paragraphs.
Here are facts that you cannot escape from. If you scratch your pristine new 180 vinyl you will hear a popping noise. The mere act of pulling the record from a sleeve will generate some static electricity noise and you will quite probably hear this on replay. If you allow dust to build up on the stylus or the record itself you will hear a noise. Too much dust and fluff could cause the record to jump track or sound muffled or both.
All of this type of noise can affect the playing of LPs whether you have paid £300 or £3000 for your turntable. One fool on a forum suggested that a £3000 turntable and cartridge can filter out scratches, static noise or the effects of dust and fluff. It cannot and it will sound just as ghastly as on a cheap deck. Make sure you protect your records.
An expensive deck will help to eliminate wow and flutter and rumble noise and should reduce harmonic distortion to a minimum. But, you must set up the deck correctly and level it and protect it from vibrations and acoustic feedback.
Sit back and enjoy the music.
No doubt some people will be agonising whether to buy them or not. All I can say is if you have got the money and vinyl is your preferred choice of playing recordings then go ahead with a clear conscience. I shall not be buying this new set, even though I have got the money, because my preferred choice of listening to music is digital from a laptop, streamer or CD player. I still enjoy vinyl and still play some of my old Beatles records on a turntable for fun.
There is a lot of rubbish written about mono versus stereo and which is the best way to get back to the original sound. You cannot get back to the 1960's sound with any of the re-mastered releases but more of that later.
There is so much rubbish written about LP versus CD and now the various digital formats and this is beyond my comprehension. Soon the internet airwaves will be full of the old arguments about which is the better format and which take of the Beatles sounds better the mono one or the stereo one.
When I was a youngster back in the sixties I listened to the Beatles so much that I can remember most of their songs exactly word for word and chord for chord. So can most of my contemporaries unless they hated the Beatles and preferred the Rolling Stones; people were just as partisan in those days.
To all intents and purposes we only ever heard the Beatles and all our other favourite groups in Mono.
These were the combinations:
Mono LPs played on a mono record player with a ceramic cartridge and with valve or tube amplifier all in one box. These were played so loud that the distortion was really noticeable but no-one cared.
Mono LPs played on a mono record player with a ceramic cartridge and with transistor amplifier and all in one box. Once again the music was played so loud that there was noticeable distortion but no-one cared.
Stereo LPs were sometimes played on Mono record players but too loud again and of course you heard them in Mono.
Listening to a mono LP on a mono valve radio in AM; the transmissions were often distorted by interference.
Listening to a stereo LP on a mono transistor radio in AM; and once again the transmissions were often distorted by interference.
Listening to a mono or stereo track played on a VHF black and white telly. The sound reproduction was slightly better unless you had the volume turned up to full. The telly only had one speaker so you always heard mono. There was less interference and a better frequency response than AM radio.
Listening in mono on a jukebox played in a coffee bar or pub.
Playing a mono LP on your parents stereo if they could afford one. The end result was mono.
Playing a stereo record on your parents stereo if you were lucky and of course it sounded better and different. I bought Sgt Pepper in 1967 in stereo in anticipation of my parents getting a HIFI.
Listening to FM radio in the latter part of the 1960s but mostly on a radio with a single speaker - so in mono. Stereo FM did not become widely popular until the early 1970s when people could afford the latest equipment. FM stereo was a big improvement to listening to a mono record player.
The technical choice was as wide as we have today, excepting that digital did not exist and tape recorders were very expensive and audio cassette recording was trash until the 1970s came along.
The sound reproduction was awful compared to what we have today. There was no real discussion about the differences in mastering techniques and the small differences in how the mono and stereo versions of the Beatles albums were put together. No-one could care less, as all we were concerned about was listening to the best pop music even though it was usually distorted.
My sister and I had musical ears so we could tell that She's Leaving Home was playing in a different key on the stereo and mono versions of Sgt Pepper.
Of course, I never got annoyed by the vocals on the stereo version of Eleanor Rigby which now seem to be disembodied and jumping from one speaker to another because I was always listening in mono.
If you think for one minute that buying the boxed version of the Mono Beatles LP will get you back to the magic days of the 1960s then you are mistaken. You will be buying these versions for the excellent sound that they will give you even if they are played on a humble turntable. If you are paying £30 or so for each LP then insist upon getting undamaged vinyl and sleeve covers. Why should your music appreciation be marred by a warped record or one that has in built crackles because of bad manufacturing and quality control?
I can suggest two ways to get back to the so called golden days of the 1960s even though we did not have much cash to buy the LP when it first came out or listen to it through decent equipment.
1) Buy a second hand Beatles record mono or stereo from the 1960s. A cheap one will have plenty of scratches and it will also be damaged by excessive playing on what would now be termed as primitive equipment - a worn out sapphire stylus with a very heavy ceramic cartridge.
Buy a refurbished 1960s record player complete with sapphire stylus and ceramic cartridge.
Place the record player on a rickety sideboard or on the floor. Clean the record if it has a lot of gunge on it or otherwise leave it. Play the record with the volume turned up full and jive. You are almost back to how we listened and danced to the Beatles in 1964.
2) Tune in a single speaker transistor radio which has the AM medium wave band, you will probably have one in the house, to a distant radio station hundreds of miles away and during the day time; this will mean that the station will probably fade. If you have got the patience, hope that the station plays a record from the 1960s; the Beatles even.
No-one ever used headphones in those days but sometimes we used a ghastly single white ear bud type earphone if we did not want our parents to know we were listening to Radio Luxembourg rather than sleeping.
3) Instead of buying the record player with a credit card, pay with cash that you have saved in a jar or piggy bank from the spare change that you have got in your purse or pocket until you have got the right money. This will give you some of the air of anticipation that we had back then when we bought our first record players - or records for that matter as we had to save hard for them too.
Do not be tempted to play your brand new Beatles albums on the sort of equipment I have just described as you will ruin them on the first play.
Sit back and enjoy your re-mastered LPs first with the music coming from between the two speakers. And then secondly from only one speaker using the balance control.
If you are lucky enough to afford the stereo re-masters as well, then you can afford to buy a mono active speaker and rig it up. You will then be able to hear the stereo versions condensed into mono so that you can compare both formats. I am willing to guess that the music will sound just as good which ever way you listen. Enjoy.
PS
Some of you are probably thinking about buying a turntable for the first time to go with your new records so please be aware of the next paragraphs.
Here are facts that you cannot escape from. If you scratch your pristine new 180 vinyl you will hear a popping noise. The mere act of pulling the record from a sleeve will generate some static electricity noise and you will quite probably hear this on replay. If you allow dust to build up on the stylus or the record itself you will hear a noise. Too much dust and fluff could cause the record to jump track or sound muffled or both.
All of this type of noise can affect the playing of LPs whether you have paid £300 or £3000 for your turntable. One fool on a forum suggested that a £3000 turntable and cartridge can filter out scratches, static noise or the effects of dust and fluff. It cannot and it will sound just as ghastly as on a cheap deck. Make sure you protect your records.
An expensive deck will help to eliminate wow and flutter and rumble noise and should reduce harmonic distortion to a minimum. But, you must set up the deck correctly and level it and protect it from vibrations and acoustic feedback.
Sit back and enjoy the music.
Thursday, 5 September 2013
HIFI Cable Humbug and Snake oil etc.
There is too much emphasis placed on spending huge sums of money on HIFI cables. Most of what is written about this subject is complete tripe. HIFI magazines promote myths about the benefits of all sorts of equipment.
Before magazines pay any credence to the performance claims of manufactures they should test the cables using the scientific method and use double blind ABX listening tests and then subject the result for peer review by independent sound engineers and statisticians.
When I have swapped interconnect cables around on my system I have not noticed any difference in performance. In fact I have found that reasonable quality and priced interconnect cables from Maplins do not sound any different to much more expensive ones. The same applies to speaker cable; you can buy excellent quality speaker cable for £1.50 per metre and I am not certain that this performs much better than bell wire.
Good quality copper cable does the job nicely.
http://gizmodo.com/315250/pear-cable-chickens-out-of-1000000-challenge-we-search-for-answers
With the increasing use of USB DACs also beware of an claims regarding USB connectors as no scientific tests seem to have been conducted on these. The performance claims could be equally as bogus.
Like most houses we have umpteen sets of music and computer equipment plugged into the mains with WIFI connexions producing all sorts of radio frequency transmissions. You could be led into believing that you need power conditioners and all sorts of other equipment to "clean things up". Some power conditioners cost hundreds of pounds.
I have performed this simple test. I switched on every piece of equipment that we have in the house including set top boxes to receive terrestrial and satellite television. I switched on the BluRay player, the CD player and the DAC and Laptop which are connected to my amplifier. I then turned up the amplifier to half volume and three quarters volume. I could hear absolutely nothing even with my ears pressed up to the speakers. I then turned up the volume to full and then heard a slight hiss with my ears pressed up to the speakers. None of the electrical equipment in my house or the power supply was interfering with the performance of my HIFI equipment. The slight white noise was coming from the amplifier which is only to be expected at full volume. The equipment is obviously well shielded and filtered.
I suggest that you do this test before investing in fancy cables or expensive power conditioners. In some houses there may be a case for shielding the gear from interference from the power supply. But test this first before buying; the interference could be caused by faulty equipment or poor connexions.
I am amazed that so called audiophiles and HIFI journalists can be fooled into thinking that very expensive speaker cables etc. improve performance. These are the very same people who find the snap, crackle and pop noise and the surface noise acceptable when they are playing LP records on exceptionally expensive turntables.
Don't get me wrong I love listening to LPs but I have to accept their limitations and no amount of money spent will cure the LP of the in built flaws of static build up, surface noise and dust. I also accept that a Maplin's interconnect cable performs just as well as a cable costing hundreds or even thousands of pounds more.
I spend the money saved on the music which is all that really matters.
Before magazines pay any credence to the performance claims of manufactures they should test the cables using the scientific method and use double blind ABX listening tests and then subject the result for peer review by independent sound engineers and statisticians.
When I have swapped interconnect cables around on my system I have not noticed any difference in performance. In fact I have found that reasonable quality and priced interconnect cables from Maplins do not sound any different to much more expensive ones. The same applies to speaker cable; you can buy excellent quality speaker cable for £1.50 per metre and I am not certain that this performs much better than bell wire.
Good quality copper cable does the job nicely.
http://gizmodo.com/315250/pear-cable-chickens-out-of-1000000-challenge-we-search-for-answers
With the increasing use of USB DACs also beware of an claims regarding USB connectors as no scientific tests seem to have been conducted on these. The performance claims could be equally as bogus.
Like most houses we have umpteen sets of music and computer equipment plugged into the mains with WIFI connexions producing all sorts of radio frequency transmissions. You could be led into believing that you need power conditioners and all sorts of other equipment to "clean things up". Some power conditioners cost hundreds of pounds.
I have performed this simple test. I switched on every piece of equipment that we have in the house including set top boxes to receive terrestrial and satellite television. I switched on the BluRay player, the CD player and the DAC and Laptop which are connected to my amplifier. I then turned up the amplifier to half volume and three quarters volume. I could hear absolutely nothing even with my ears pressed up to the speakers. I then turned up the volume to full and then heard a slight hiss with my ears pressed up to the speakers. None of the electrical equipment in my house or the power supply was interfering with the performance of my HIFI equipment. The slight white noise was coming from the amplifier which is only to be expected at full volume. The equipment is obviously well shielded and filtered.
I suggest that you do this test before investing in fancy cables or expensive power conditioners. In some houses there may be a case for shielding the gear from interference from the power supply. But test this first before buying; the interference could be caused by faulty equipment or poor connexions.
I am amazed that so called audiophiles and HIFI journalists can be fooled into thinking that very expensive speaker cables etc. improve performance. These are the very same people who find the snap, crackle and pop noise and the surface noise acceptable when they are playing LP records on exceptionally expensive turntables.
Don't get me wrong I love listening to LPs but I have to accept their limitations and no amount of money spent will cure the LP of the in built flaws of static build up, surface noise and dust. I also accept that a Maplin's interconnect cable performs just as well as a cable costing hundreds or even thousands of pounds more.
I spend the money saved on the music which is all that really matters.
Tuesday, 16 July 2013
The Beatles At the Hollywood Bowl ( Live)
I picked up a second hand version of The Beatles At The Hollywood Bowl LP for £3 pounds at a steam fair over the weekend. The record was in tip top condition. My brother-in-law played it on his turntable and there was hardly a scratch or noise even though he didn't clean it or dust it off before spinning it.
The record was released in 1977 by EMI and years after the Beatles had broken up. The actual recordings were made at the venue on 3 track tape recorders. They were re-mastered by George Martin and Geoff Emerick to multi-track masters for the LP issue.
The LP contains a medley of Beatles songs from early in their career such as Long Tall Sally, A Hard Day's Night and Twist and Shout. The live recordings were made in 1964 and 1965 at the Hollywood Bowl venue.
There was a lot of controversy about whether the album should have been released at all but eventually all parties concerned agreed. I can understand why. The live performance is marred by intensive and continuous screaming generated by hysterical teenagers. The screaming was so loud that the Beatles themselves could not hear what they were playing and it is a tribute to the band that they were able to perform in tune.
When I went to see the Beatles in London in the early sixties I could hardly hear them for the screaming. I could not believe that the audience were simply not interested in the music and were content to show their feelings by hysterical wailing. No wonder the Beatles stopped performing live.
You were better off listening to them on 45 singles played on a Dansette. The persistent screaming led to another form of noise war. Groups had to amplify their music to make the noise of a caterwauling audience irrelevant. It is no wonder so many young people,including the artists themselves, got ear damage from listening to concerts from the late sixties onward.
When I got the record home I cleaned it and dusted it off. There was hardly a scratch or any damage or static for that matter. I could see why. It had hardly been played. I got as far as the third track and stopped playing it; the screaming had got the better of me. The music had been spoilt despite the best efforts of the Beatles and the original sound engineers - Hugh Davies and Pete Abbott. Geoff Emerick's valiant efforts to bring out the best on the re-master tapes had almost failed.
It looks like this is the only recording of a live Beatles performance which has been released as an official LP. It is not available on an official CD and it sounds like a bootleg album. If you want to hear what going to a live Beatles concert was like, then I recommend that you obtain a copy of this album. But going to the real thing meant that you heard almost nothing of the live performance.
My brother-in-law used to go and see the Beatles and the Swinging Blue Jeans and other Mersey beat artists live at the Cavern club. There was no screaming there and then as the audience just wanted to hear the best rock and roll. I wish I could have gone there. I was too young and too far away.
The record was released in 1977 by EMI and years after the Beatles had broken up. The actual recordings were made at the venue on 3 track tape recorders. They were re-mastered by George Martin and Geoff Emerick to multi-track masters for the LP issue.
The LP contains a medley of Beatles songs from early in their career such as Long Tall Sally, A Hard Day's Night and Twist and Shout. The live recordings were made in 1964 and 1965 at the Hollywood Bowl venue.
There was a lot of controversy about whether the album should have been released at all but eventually all parties concerned agreed. I can understand why. The live performance is marred by intensive and continuous screaming generated by hysterical teenagers. The screaming was so loud that the Beatles themselves could not hear what they were playing and it is a tribute to the band that they were able to perform in tune.
When I went to see the Beatles in London in the early sixties I could hardly hear them for the screaming. I could not believe that the audience were simply not interested in the music and were content to show their feelings by hysterical wailing. No wonder the Beatles stopped performing live.
You were better off listening to them on 45 singles played on a Dansette. The persistent screaming led to another form of noise war. Groups had to amplify their music to make the noise of a caterwauling audience irrelevant. It is no wonder so many young people,including the artists themselves, got ear damage from listening to concerts from the late sixties onward.
When I got the record home I cleaned it and dusted it off. There was hardly a scratch or any damage or static for that matter. I could see why. It had hardly been played. I got as far as the third track and stopped playing it; the screaming had got the better of me. The music had been spoilt despite the best efforts of the Beatles and the original sound engineers - Hugh Davies and Pete Abbott. Geoff Emerick's valiant efforts to bring out the best on the re-master tapes had almost failed.
It looks like this is the only recording of a live Beatles performance which has been released as an official LP. It is not available on an official CD and it sounds like a bootleg album. If you want to hear what going to a live Beatles concert was like, then I recommend that you obtain a copy of this album. But going to the real thing meant that you heard almost nothing of the live performance.
My brother-in-law used to go and see the Beatles and the Swinging Blue Jeans and other Mersey beat artists live at the Cavern club. There was no screaming there and then as the audience just wanted to hear the best rock and roll. I wish I could have gone there. I was too young and too far away.
Tuesday, 11 June 2013
Hi-Res Music humbug
There is already too much "horse manure" written about vinyl LP versus CD and which sounds better so why do we have to suffer an equal dose of "ordure" about the quality of so called High Resolution (Hi-Res) digital downloads.
Some people claim that Hi-Res music files are of higher quality than the poor old CD. 24 bit 96 khz or 24 bit 192 khz recordings sound so much better than CD - well they don't. No one has been proven to hear the difference between HiRes and CD quality sound reproduction when all other listening parameters remain the same. Before you buy Hi-Res music, or the equipment that plays it, please read the following as it could save you a lot of money.
http://mixonline.com/recording/mixing/audio_emperors_new_sampling/
It is possible that some Hi-Res music has been mastered more diligently and that a higher quality master has been produced than for the CD equivalent. But if you convert this Hi-Res master to 16 bit 44.1khz or CD quality files you will hear no or very little difference at normal playing volumes.
If you do not have digital equipment that will play Hi-Res files you can easily convert the music to 16 bit 44.1 khz using dBpoweramp or Audacity (Audacity is free). I have done this with some Hi-Res music bought from the web. When I have played back the "Hi-Res" and CD quality versions to my friends they could hear no difference but of course this was not a scientific test.
You can download samples of open source Hi-Res music from www.archive.org for free. Just put 24/96 in the search box.
You should also consider this, a lot of pop music has been poorly mastered on CD since the around 2000. Sound engineers have compressed the music to make the softer parts of the music as loud as the loud parts. This has been part of the loudness wars to make the music stand out more on a "juke box" or on the radio and TV. 45 Single records in the sixties were mastered in a similar way. The music loses its dynamism and sounds tiresome.
A lot of jazz, classical and folk music CDs have been produced without being compressed and in fact they have been mastered very well. You may not be able to hear much difference between a HiRes master and an ordinary CD. Save yourself some money and ignore all the hype and humbug. A well mastered CD should sound as good as a well mastered Hi-Res music file and of course as good as our old friend the vinyl LP.
Sit back relax and enjoy the music no matter what the source is.
There is so much humbug and hype written about Hi-Res music that all I can say is buyer beware - so caveat emptor.
Some people claim that Hi-Res music files are of higher quality than the poor old CD. 24 bit 96 khz or 24 bit 192 khz recordings sound so much better than CD - well they don't. No one has been proven to hear the difference between HiRes and CD quality sound reproduction when all other listening parameters remain the same. Before you buy Hi-Res music, or the equipment that plays it, please read the following as it could save you a lot of money.
http://mixonline.com/recording/mixing/audio_emperors_new_sampling/
It is possible that some Hi-Res music has been mastered more diligently and that a higher quality master has been produced than for the CD equivalent. But if you convert this Hi-Res master to 16 bit 44.1khz or CD quality files you will hear no or very little difference at normal playing volumes.
If you do not have digital equipment that will play Hi-Res files you can easily convert the music to 16 bit 44.1 khz using dBpoweramp or Audacity (Audacity is free). I have done this with some Hi-Res music bought from the web. When I have played back the "Hi-Res" and CD quality versions to my friends they could hear no difference but of course this was not a scientific test.
You can download samples of open source Hi-Res music from www.archive.org for free. Just put 24/96 in the search box.
You should also consider this, a lot of pop music has been poorly mastered on CD since the around 2000. Sound engineers have compressed the music to make the softer parts of the music as loud as the loud parts. This has been part of the loudness wars to make the music stand out more on a "juke box" or on the radio and TV. 45 Single records in the sixties were mastered in a similar way. The music loses its dynamism and sounds tiresome.
A lot of jazz, classical and folk music CDs have been produced without being compressed and in fact they have been mastered very well. You may not be able to hear much difference between a HiRes master and an ordinary CD. Save yourself some money and ignore all the hype and humbug. A well mastered CD should sound as good as a well mastered Hi-Res music file and of course as good as our old friend the vinyl LP.
Sit back relax and enjoy the music no matter what the source is.
There is so much humbug and hype written about Hi-Res music that all I can say is buyer beware - so caveat emptor.
Friday, 31 May 2013
Is there room for Venus in hi-fi heaven?
Is
there room for Venus in hi-fi heaven?
Why are most women not
interested in hi-fi? Or, more
pertinently, why are they not interested in the technicalities involved in
buying and setting up the equipment? I do not see much involvement from women
in the hi-fi world. Is the male dominated hi-fi industry missing a trick here?
Half the population seems to be ignored.
The other day I was at
my local street market and spent a lot of time thumbing through the second-hand
records on a stand. The friendly and talkative proprietor was playing his
records through a smart-looking bright red record player; the music did not
sound too bad considering that the device only cost £99.
An older lady was thumbing through the records
too and then asked the salesman if the player could go louder - maybe it was
for her grandson. “Yes” he said. “You can connect it up to your main hi-fi with
a line connexion and then it will sound like a CD” - a slight exaggeration, I thought.
She might as well have been talking to an audiophile Martian. She probably did
not believe him and walked away without buying anything.
A younger woman arrived
at the stand and asked the record man if the player had a line output. “Yes”,
he said enthusiastically. He then tried to engage her in conversation about hi-fi
amplifiers but she drifted away apparently embarrassed to have asked such a simple
question. Maybe, she was only attracted by the bright colours.
The record man talked
to me instead. He knew all about old record players and turntables with idler
drives and such like. I bought a Jefferson Starship LP and took it home. My
wife thought it sounded great and said, “Let’s play records more often”; but I
had to flip the disc over to the second side.
My wife loves jazz, the
Pink Floyd and the Beatles. When I was courting her, she had bought a really good
separates system with a Pioneer deck which she had set up for herself. She is
no technophobe and can fix up a WI-FI system and change a computer’s sound card
with ease. But, she only does any of this when I am on a business trip; when I return
I have to do all things technical concerning the hi-fi and the PC. I get the
feeling that she is bored by the button pressing and would just rather leave it
all to me. She, like most of her gender, is more interested in the human
aspects of playing music rather than just being attracted to the equipment for
its own sake.
We have an easy
relationship when it comes to hi-fi as my wife knows that I have got the good
sense not to spend an unaffordable fortune on kit. The wife of a former
colleague did not have such luck. Her “other half” invited us to their apartment one evening to listen to
thousands of pounds worth of “high-end” turntables, CD transports, amplifiers
and their ancillaries.
We were treated to an
evening of audio nirvana during which he was tweaking the equipment with
filters and stroboscopic adjustments. He asked us to decide which sounded
better - CD or LP? His wife could hardly tell the difference nor could mine and
neither could I; such was the quality of the sound from both sources. He was
convinced that LPs sounded so much better and would not accept our views. I could not resist jibing, devilishly, that
the turntable gave the best quality sound reproduction of a static discharge
that I had ever heard.
My colleague’s wife averred
that it would be better for their family budget if he plumped for just one
format, CD, rather than duplicate the cost of different sources. And, anyway,
the awful looking equipment was cluttering up their living room. I later found
out that he had got himself into hundreds of thousands of pounds of debt to
finance his enthusiasm. His wife’s ideas of how to listen to good music were
much more realistic and took home economics and sociability into account.
Possibly, this extreme
example points out the differences between most women and men and their approach
to hi-fi. I find that women take a much more practical attitude, as they are
much more interested in what the music sounds like rather than the
technicalities of high resolution filters or advanced anti-skate devices.
I can see why women seem
to have been excluded from the hi-fi market; it is because they are not
interested in listening to or reading about techno-babble or tweaking equipment. The sales of hi-fi separates are continuing to
fall because young people in general are not interested either - the market is
now in a crisis. The purchase of high fidelity equipment could soon be limited
to rich, or highly indebted, male enthusiasts.
When it comes to hi-fi
women are no fools; they want high quality music at a fair price. They want to
hear music that makes them feel good by playing attractive and user friendly equipment.
Perhaps, it is time for the manufacturers to appeal to both sexes before the
market place is completely flooded by cheap headphones, MP3 players and docking
stations.
Women could be the
driving force that pushes a healthier and more profitable industry into a new
era of practicality which appeals to the social nature of listening to good
music through good equipment. There is
still time to avert a crisis by giving hi-fi heaven the sex appeal to attract Venus.
Thursday, 23 May 2013
Getting into LPs and vinyl? Here are some tips
So you want to play LPs and 45s
Sales of turntables are starting to grow again and interest in playing LPs and 45s is growing. I was at a second record stall the other and there was a young man with his mother asking the salesman about vinyl records and how to play them, so below I have included some history and a few tips.
History
Like many people of my age I started listening to records in the 1960s. I have used a complete variety of turntables and some of the turntables from the 1960s had a really distinctive sound. You can hear this on Youtube.
I grew up with LPs and during my youth the records of the day and the equipment we played it on was not HiFi. It was not until the early 1970s that really good quality turntables and cartridges were produced that young people could afford. We were then able to appreciate high quality music reproduction.
The old turntables used sapphire needles and ceramic cartridges and the earlier ones were set up for mono reproduction only. Stereo turntables did not start to become popular or affordable until the later years of the 1960s. When I went to university in 1969 not many of the students had stereo record players.
In the early 60s most popular records were issued in mono and there was a gradual conversion to stereo which was completed in the latter part of the the decade. When you converted to stereo you had to change the needles in your ceramic cartridge or else you would damage the record immediately.
The sound coming from the records from a technical point of view was pretty awful. The portable record players that we used as teenagers had some bad faults. There was mains hum because the electronics were poorly filtered. There was wow and flutter from the speed variations of the motors. The platters were driven by idler wheels which transmitted a lot of rumble from the motor drive to the cartridge. All these faults were easily audible.
The cartridges were not very responsive and added to the harmonic distortion inherent in the vinyl records themselves. The cartridges were heavy and wore out the records quickly.
The vinyl itself was quite tough and better quality than the vinyl products of the 1970s and 1980s. Nevertheless LPs were still prone to scratching and attracted dust and static. If you lent an LP to a fellow teenager then there was a fair chance that it would come back scratched.
The amplifiers in the record players were poor by today's standards. Some of the early 60's ones were valve amplifiers which added to the harmonic distortion.
Try this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbU71k1LF2Y
All in all it was a HiFi disaster area; the record players sounded tinny and had to be played at full blast to give any sort of presence but of course turning up the volume to full added to the distortion. It was also useful to have some spare valves or tubes around and know how to change them. You also had to wait for your valves to warm up before you could start to play anything.
All the same and despite all the difficulties we enjoyed our music and shared the experience with our friends. There was lots of dancing and jiving to the Beatles and the Stones.
People who had stereo separates systems, usually adults, fared a little better but not much. You had to be really rich to buy top quality kit.
In the early 1970s matters improved. Young people at last had enough money to buy some have decent gear. Turntables were improved enormously and belt driven tables almost eliminated the sound of rumble and the stroboscope and improved motors helped to almost eliminate wow and flutter as well. Moving Magnet and Moving Coil cartridges with diamond needles also helped to improve frequency response and reduce harmonic distortion.
The problems of scratched records, static from dust and dirt and distortion from over playing remained and these problems remain today.
Usually someone scratched the record when they paid a visit. I was never a control freak and I never prevented anyone either playing a record or turning it over or changing track in the middle of a record. All of this was guaranteed to cause damage.
Records could also attract static at any time and the simply act of pulling them out of the sleeve created pops especially in dry weather.
To get round the problem of damaged records many of my friends made audio cassette copies of their favourite LPs and rarely played their vinyl on a turntable. They also "lent" records to friends by making a cassette copy. The audio cassette allowed party tapes to be produced so that the best rock tracks could be played continuously.
Everyone had a turntable or record player and we were all "tweakers". I was never ever able to tell much difference when I played around with tracking forces and anti-skate devices so I gave up messing around with these controls. Some people love "tweaking" and enjoy trying to perfect the sound. My hearing was almost perfect when I was young and I can still pick out the person singing out-of-tune in a choir.
What is HiFi?
But, what is HiFi? This is a difficult question to answer but it means that the record and its sound reproduction must sound life like and as close as possible to the original live performance or the master tape. A good LP record and a good HiFi system can achieve this and you do not need to spend a fortune to get this especially if you do not listen to classical music.
So what do you do if you are new to vinyl? Well first of all decide what sort of music you want to play as it will dictate what sort of equipment you will need to buy and its cost. You also need to decide whether you are going to become a complete enthusiast and only play vinyl. Are you only going to play older records like me? How often and for how long are you going to listen to LP music? Are you going to play 78 rpm records as well as 45s and 331/3 LPs? How much can you afford to pay? Are you interested in vintage equipment and records?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_fidelity
Consumer decks
Do not let the cheap cost put you off ; you can can get a good consumer turntable in the lower price range. Just be aware that you will not get high quality mechanics or a high quality cartridge. It will not have many adjustments and it will not be "upgradeable". It will have lots of plastic used in its construction and some even have plastic turntables!
Such a deck will not reproduce classical music very well or jazz with a wide dynamic range. Otherwise a cheap player will be fine for pop, rock and folk music. Just, make sure it has a moving magnet cartridge and a diamond needle. Most of them have a built in phono-stage so you can connect them to the auxiliary line inputs of your amplifier. You will be able to avoid the cost of a special phono-stage or buying a new amplifier with a built in one.
I use one of these turntables myself and it is connected to a "high end" amplifier and speakers. You may ask why? I only play older and well used records from the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. These records are well worn in and a high quality turntable will hardly improve their performance. I do not play classical music or opera via a turntable: I use CDs for this or listen to BBC Radio 3 on FM or HD internet radio. I love classical music but of course nothing can beat a live performance.
I can afford to pay for a top notch turntable but I only have about 40 playable albums and I do not not intend to build up a collection of new 180 gm LPs. The few albums that are not replaceable have been archived to CD and Audio Cassette tape. I do not play LPs and 45s often; about a couple of hours a week maximum but I love it when I do. The turntable suits me fine and it gives HiFi quality sound but for how long? If it fails within couple of years or so then I can buy a new one.
Such a player should not be sneered at and if it is the only way you afford to find out about vinyl it will give you a taste of what it is all about until you can afford to buy something more substantial. Some of my old LPs have survived OK, about 8 of them, from the 1960s. Do not worry so much about tracking weights a modern consumer player won't damage your records as much as a 1960s model with a ceramic cartridge.
A consumer turntable will have some or all of the faults listed above but to a much lesser extent than a 1960s player and despite what it says on many vinyl forums these faults cannot be completely eliminated from any LP or turntable no matter how cheap or expensive it is. Harmonic distortion is an example.
These players are simple to set up and use and this can be a bonus. Most of them are belt driven but some are direct drive.
Some consumer players can play 78s, so this is an advantage if you are interested. I bought mine over the internet and I was delighted with the "retro" sound and I figured that I could easily get my money back if I was disappointed or it arrived damaged or faulty. Do not do this if you are buying a better player but go to a dealer and audition the product.
An example of a consumer deck but it is not a recommendation:
http://www.richersounds.com/product/turntables/marantz/tt5005/mara-tt5005
So called Budget Audiophile Turntables
These players can set you on the road to being a vinyl enthusiast. They should be better made than a consumer table but they might still have lots of acrylic, mdf and plastic etc.
Their performance should be better than a consumer table especially for wow and flutter and pitch control.
You can upgrade the cartridge or fit your own. They will have controls for tracking weight and anti-skate. They will allow you to adjust the tone arm for height and vertical tracking etc. They should have an improved frequency response for bass, mid range and treble. They should be well damped and resist vibrations better than a consumer model.
They should be of sufficient HiFi quality to reproduce classical and all other forms of music very well.
The lower tracking weights will not damage your LPs as much as a consumer player. The players themselves should be built to last years.
Many of these players cannot play 78 rpm records.
All in all, they produce good performance for the money. Some of them can be difficult to set up with little dangling weights for anti-skate devices. On some you might have to move the belt to another capstan when you change from 45 to 331\3 replay. These decks are a "tweakers" delight.
These players will be the next stage on an upgrade path to where the sky is the limit. If you buy this type of player you should audition it at a dealer with a record that you know well and which has a wide dynamic and musical range such as Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture.
Once again an example but not a recommendation
http://www.royjowetthomecinema.co.uk/pro-ject-debut-mk3-turntable.html?gclid=CNPrxPe-rLcCFXMctAod6FQAcg
So called Audiophile Turntables
If I were ever to become an enthusiast for vinyl and classical music I would get of of these but I would severely limit my budget and resist the temptation to keep upgrading to find a sonic utopia which does not exist. They are the next stage up and should provide almost electronic and mechanical perfection for playing the best quality records with hardly anything added or taken away. They are very expensive and you could spend hundreds of thousands of pounds on improved tone arms and cartridges etc.
But, always remember the law of diminishing returns. A £20,000 pound set up will not sound 20 times better than a £1,000 budget player. Any technical improvement might be inaudible. It could even sound worse if you do not get the set up right. The quality jump from consumer, to budget and audiophile player is not as great as some commentators, advertisements and salesmen would have you believe.
Unless you are very rich, you might be better off saving exorbitant amounts money on equipment to go to live performances or buy more records. If you can afford it and like the look, sound and feel of really well engineered equipment then why not spoil yourself.
Remember that your ears cannot hear frequencies above about 20 khz and most adults cannot hear above 15 khz. The top note on a violin is around 4.5khz and this is hardly enough to move a tweeter. OK, the harmonics are higher but you cannot hear a harmonic above about 15 khz if you are an adult.
Remember that an orchestra can have a dynamic range of 80 decibels but an LP has a range of about 70. An LP has harmonic distortion built in and this cannot be eliminated by any turntable and cartridge combination no matter the price. A classical performance on LP may therefore disappoint you compared to a live one.
An audiophile turntable is also a "tweakers" delight and needs careful set up and maintenance. You need to adjust the tonearm, the tracking force, anti-skate force, cartridge and speed control etc. and use instruments to measure them. Doing all this could give you a real buzz but I find it frustrating.
An audiophile turntable should give you the best quality sound reproduction and should be made of the best quality materials including metal and wood. They should be exceptionally well damped to reduce vibrations to a minimum. All in all the engineering should be great.
But, remember that a sensitive deck of this quality will really reveal any noise generated by the LP from dust, static electricity, scratches and warps. You need to look after your records with great care.
What better way to listen to Miles Davies, Tchaikovsky and Beethoven or the Pink Floyd, Ella Fitzgerald and the Beatles?
Once again, you must go to a reputable dealer to buy this sort of equipment and audition it with your best records.
This is reputed to be top notch equipment but not necessarily a recommendation from me:
http://www.houseoflinn.com/mall/departmentpage.cfm/houseoflinn/_214345/1/Linn%2520Turntables
The Second Hand Market
There are some bargains to be had in the second hand market but do your research well and, of course, buyer beware. You could find a high end audiophile turntable for a reasonable price. This approach is useful if you are good at do-it-yourself maintenance. Some HiFi magazines have a second hand advertising section.
Buyer beware but you could find a really good bargain!
http://www.gumtree.com/for-sale/uk/turntable
What Else Do You Need
You will need a decent amplifier and speakers and if you go for a better quality turntable you will need a "high end" equipment but remember the law of diminishing returns. Many people settle for an amplifier with a built in pre-amplifier others swear by a separate pre-amplifier which increases the costs again.
You will need a really strong and steady equipment rack to place your turntable. The rack is needed to reduce vibrations and the effects of footfalls etc. This applies to all turntables.
HiFi Magazines
HiFi magazines are not prone to critically examining either their own claims or the claims of advertisers. Sometimes this can be a hindrance to making the correct decision on what to buy. Be careful of the reviews of ancillary equipment and interconnect cables. Good quality cables should not cost a lot of money and most of the claims that cables costing thousands of pounds perform better are preposterous. Usually there is no science to back up the claims with peer reviewed double blind tests. The powers of suggestion are very strong.
HiFi forums and blogs
The opinions on blogs and forums are sometimes outrageous and sometimes I think common sense has gone out of the window. Remember that your ears and perception are limiting factors and the sound reproduction performance of lots of equipment in both the analog and digital domains exceeds that of your ears and perception. No-one has been proven to hear a tone above 22.5khz so there is not much sense in providing equipment which can exceed this limit. It is a waste of money.
Trust your own ears
Why not audition equipment at an honest dealer and visit your friends to hear their equipment? If the first set of equipment does not sound better, to your ears, than the second then why be convinced otherwise by a dealer, a forum or a blog. You could save yourself a a lot of money by using your ears and perception wisely and trusting your own judgement.
Frustration
Vinyl is fun but setting up all the kit can be tiresome. Scratches and dust spoil the vinyl experience for me when I play classical records. So decide what kind of music lover you are. Are you prepared to put up with all the set up and maintenance and the cost of buying top class vinyl. And, also note that I have never heard a record that has not produced a popping sound at some time when it is being played - not even a brand new one.
Have fun.
So where do you start?
Unless you are absolutely convinced that you are going to be exclusively a vinyl enthusiast then I suggest that you start with a budget turntable until you are certain that you can live with playing records. Some things to consider are the following:
Sales of turntables are starting to grow again and interest in playing LPs and 45s is growing. I was at a second record stall the other and there was a young man with his mother asking the salesman about vinyl records and how to play them, so below I have included some history and a few tips.
History
Like many people of my age I started listening to records in the 1960s. I have used a complete variety of turntables and some of the turntables from the 1960s had a really distinctive sound. You can hear this on Youtube.
I grew up with LPs and during my youth the records of the day and the equipment we played it on was not HiFi. It was not until the early 1970s that really good quality turntables and cartridges were produced that young people could afford. We were then able to appreciate high quality music reproduction.
The old turntables used sapphire needles and ceramic cartridges and the earlier ones were set up for mono reproduction only. Stereo turntables did not start to become popular or affordable until the later years of the 1960s. When I went to university in 1969 not many of the students had stereo record players.
In the early 60s most popular records were issued in mono and there was a gradual conversion to stereo which was completed in the latter part of the the decade. When you converted to stereo you had to change the needles in your ceramic cartridge or else you would damage the record immediately.
The sound coming from the records from a technical point of view was pretty awful. The portable record players that we used as teenagers had some bad faults. There was mains hum because the electronics were poorly filtered. There was wow and flutter from the speed variations of the motors. The platters were driven by idler wheels which transmitted a lot of rumble from the motor drive to the cartridge. All these faults were easily audible.
The cartridges were not very responsive and added to the harmonic distortion inherent in the vinyl records themselves. The cartridges were heavy and wore out the records quickly.
The vinyl itself was quite tough and better quality than the vinyl products of the 1970s and 1980s. Nevertheless LPs were still prone to scratching and attracted dust and static. If you lent an LP to a fellow teenager then there was a fair chance that it would come back scratched.
The amplifiers in the record players were poor by today's standards. Some of the early 60's ones were valve amplifiers which added to the harmonic distortion.
Try this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbU71k1LF2Y
All in all it was a HiFi disaster area; the record players sounded tinny and had to be played at full blast to give any sort of presence but of course turning up the volume to full added to the distortion. It was also useful to have some spare valves or tubes around and know how to change them. You also had to wait for your valves to warm up before you could start to play anything.
All the same and despite all the difficulties we enjoyed our music and shared the experience with our friends. There was lots of dancing and jiving to the Beatles and the Stones.
People who had stereo separates systems, usually adults, fared a little better but not much. You had to be really rich to buy top quality kit.
In the early 1970s matters improved. Young people at last had enough money to buy some have decent gear. Turntables were improved enormously and belt driven tables almost eliminated the sound of rumble and the stroboscope and improved motors helped to almost eliminate wow and flutter as well. Moving Magnet and Moving Coil cartridges with diamond needles also helped to improve frequency response and reduce harmonic distortion.
The problems of scratched records, static from dust and dirt and distortion from over playing remained and these problems remain today.
Usually someone scratched the record when they paid a visit. I was never a control freak and I never prevented anyone either playing a record or turning it over or changing track in the middle of a record. All of this was guaranteed to cause damage.
Records could also attract static at any time and the simply act of pulling them out of the sleeve created pops especially in dry weather.
To get round the problem of damaged records many of my friends made audio cassette copies of their favourite LPs and rarely played their vinyl on a turntable. They also "lent" records to friends by making a cassette copy. The audio cassette allowed party tapes to be produced so that the best rock tracks could be played continuously.
Everyone had a turntable or record player and we were all "tweakers". I was never ever able to tell much difference when I played around with tracking forces and anti-skate devices so I gave up messing around with these controls. Some people love "tweaking" and enjoy trying to perfect the sound. My hearing was almost perfect when I was young and I can still pick out the person singing out-of-tune in a choir.
What is HiFi?
But, what is HiFi? This is a difficult question to answer but it means that the record and its sound reproduction must sound life like and as close as possible to the original live performance or the master tape. A good LP record and a good HiFi system can achieve this and you do not need to spend a fortune to get this especially if you do not listen to classical music.
So what do you do if you are new to vinyl? Well first of all decide what sort of music you want to play as it will dictate what sort of equipment you will need to buy and its cost. You also need to decide whether you are going to become a complete enthusiast and only play vinyl. Are you only going to play older records like me? How often and for how long are you going to listen to LP music? Are you going to play 78 rpm records as well as 45s and 331/3 LPs? How much can you afford to pay? Are you interested in vintage equipment and records?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_fidelity
Consumer decks
Do not let the cheap cost put you off ; you can can get a good consumer turntable in the lower price range. Just be aware that you will not get high quality mechanics or a high quality cartridge. It will not have many adjustments and it will not be "upgradeable". It will have lots of plastic used in its construction and some even have plastic turntables!
Such a deck will not reproduce classical music very well or jazz with a wide dynamic range. Otherwise a cheap player will be fine for pop, rock and folk music. Just, make sure it has a moving magnet cartridge and a diamond needle. Most of them have a built in phono-stage so you can connect them to the auxiliary line inputs of your amplifier. You will be able to avoid the cost of a special phono-stage or buying a new amplifier with a built in one.
I use one of these turntables myself and it is connected to a "high end" amplifier and speakers. You may ask why? I only play older and well used records from the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. These records are well worn in and a high quality turntable will hardly improve their performance. I do not play classical music or opera via a turntable: I use CDs for this or listen to BBC Radio 3 on FM or HD internet radio. I love classical music but of course nothing can beat a live performance.
I can afford to pay for a top notch turntable but I only have about 40 playable albums and I do not not intend to build up a collection of new 180 gm LPs. The few albums that are not replaceable have been archived to CD and Audio Cassette tape. I do not play LPs and 45s often; about a couple of hours a week maximum but I love it when I do. The turntable suits me fine and it gives HiFi quality sound but for how long? If it fails within couple of years or so then I can buy a new one.
Such a player should not be sneered at and if it is the only way you afford to find out about vinyl it will give you a taste of what it is all about until you can afford to buy something more substantial. Some of my old LPs have survived OK, about 8 of them, from the 1960s. Do not worry so much about tracking weights a modern consumer player won't damage your records as much as a 1960s model with a ceramic cartridge.
A consumer turntable will have some or all of the faults listed above but to a much lesser extent than a 1960s player and despite what it says on many vinyl forums these faults cannot be completely eliminated from any LP or turntable no matter how cheap or expensive it is. Harmonic distortion is an example.
These players are simple to set up and use and this can be a bonus. Most of them are belt driven but some are direct drive.
Some consumer players can play 78s, so this is an advantage if you are interested. I bought mine over the internet and I was delighted with the "retro" sound and I figured that I could easily get my money back if I was disappointed or it arrived damaged or faulty. Do not do this if you are buying a better player but go to a dealer and audition the product.
An example of a consumer deck but it is not a recommendation:
http://www.richersounds.com/product/turntables/marantz/tt5005/mara-tt5005
So called Budget Audiophile Turntables
These players can set you on the road to being a vinyl enthusiast. They should be better made than a consumer table but they might still have lots of acrylic, mdf and plastic etc.
Their performance should be better than a consumer table especially for wow and flutter and pitch control.
You can upgrade the cartridge or fit your own. They will have controls for tracking weight and anti-skate. They will allow you to adjust the tone arm for height and vertical tracking etc. They should have an improved frequency response for bass, mid range and treble. They should be well damped and resist vibrations better than a consumer model.
They should be of sufficient HiFi quality to reproduce classical and all other forms of music very well.
The lower tracking weights will not damage your LPs as much as a consumer player. The players themselves should be built to last years.
Many of these players cannot play 78 rpm records.
All in all, they produce good performance for the money. Some of them can be difficult to set up with little dangling weights for anti-skate devices. On some you might have to move the belt to another capstan when you change from 45 to 331\3 replay. These decks are a "tweakers" delight.
These players will be the next stage on an upgrade path to where the sky is the limit. If you buy this type of player you should audition it at a dealer with a record that you know well and which has a wide dynamic and musical range such as Tchaikovsky's 1812 Overture.
Once again an example but not a recommendation
http://www.royjowetthomecinema.co.uk/pro-ject-debut-mk3-turntable.html?gclid=CNPrxPe-rLcCFXMctAod6FQAcg
So called Audiophile Turntables
If I were ever to become an enthusiast for vinyl and classical music I would get of of these but I would severely limit my budget and resist the temptation to keep upgrading to find a sonic utopia which does not exist. They are the next stage up and should provide almost electronic and mechanical perfection for playing the best quality records with hardly anything added or taken away. They are very expensive and you could spend hundreds of thousands of pounds on improved tone arms and cartridges etc.
But, always remember the law of diminishing returns. A £20,000 pound set up will not sound 20 times better than a £1,000 budget player. Any technical improvement might be inaudible. It could even sound worse if you do not get the set up right. The quality jump from consumer, to budget and audiophile player is not as great as some commentators, advertisements and salesmen would have you believe.
Unless you are very rich, you might be better off saving exorbitant amounts money on equipment to go to live performances or buy more records. If you can afford it and like the look, sound and feel of really well engineered equipment then why not spoil yourself.
Remember that your ears cannot hear frequencies above about 20 khz and most adults cannot hear above 15 khz. The top note on a violin is around 4.5khz and this is hardly enough to move a tweeter. OK, the harmonics are higher but you cannot hear a harmonic above about 15 khz if you are an adult.
Remember that an orchestra can have a dynamic range of 80 decibels but an LP has a range of about 70. An LP has harmonic distortion built in and this cannot be eliminated by any turntable and cartridge combination no matter the price. A classical performance on LP may therefore disappoint you compared to a live one.
An audiophile turntable is also a "tweakers" delight and needs careful set up and maintenance. You need to adjust the tonearm, the tracking force, anti-skate force, cartridge and speed control etc. and use instruments to measure them. Doing all this could give you a real buzz but I find it frustrating.
An audiophile turntable should give you the best quality sound reproduction and should be made of the best quality materials including metal and wood. They should be exceptionally well damped to reduce vibrations to a minimum. All in all the engineering should be great.
But, remember that a sensitive deck of this quality will really reveal any noise generated by the LP from dust, static electricity, scratches and warps. You need to look after your records with great care.
What better way to listen to Miles Davies, Tchaikovsky and Beethoven or the Pink Floyd, Ella Fitzgerald and the Beatles?
Once again, you must go to a reputable dealer to buy this sort of equipment and audition it with your best records.
This is reputed to be top notch equipment but not necessarily a recommendation from me:
http://www.houseoflinn.com/mall/departmentpage.cfm/houseoflinn/_214345/1/Linn%2520Turntables
The Second Hand Market
There are some bargains to be had in the second hand market but do your research well and, of course, buyer beware. You could find a high end audiophile turntable for a reasonable price. This approach is useful if you are good at do-it-yourself maintenance. Some HiFi magazines have a second hand advertising section.
Buyer beware but you could find a really good bargain!
http://www.gumtree.com/for-sale/uk/turntable
What Else Do You Need
You will need a decent amplifier and speakers and if you go for a better quality turntable you will need a "high end" equipment but remember the law of diminishing returns. Many people settle for an amplifier with a built in pre-amplifier others swear by a separate pre-amplifier which increases the costs again.
You will need a really strong and steady equipment rack to place your turntable. The rack is needed to reduce vibrations and the effects of footfalls etc. This applies to all turntables.
HiFi Magazines
HiFi magazines are not prone to critically examining either their own claims or the claims of advertisers. Sometimes this can be a hindrance to making the correct decision on what to buy. Be careful of the reviews of ancillary equipment and interconnect cables. Good quality cables should not cost a lot of money and most of the claims that cables costing thousands of pounds perform better are preposterous. Usually there is no science to back up the claims with peer reviewed double blind tests. The powers of suggestion are very strong.
HiFi forums and blogs
The opinions on blogs and forums are sometimes outrageous and sometimes I think common sense has gone out of the window. Remember that your ears and perception are limiting factors and the sound reproduction performance of lots of equipment in both the analog and digital domains exceeds that of your ears and perception. No-one has been proven to hear a tone above 22.5khz so there is not much sense in providing equipment which can exceed this limit. It is a waste of money.
Trust your own ears
Why not audition equipment at an honest dealer and visit your friends to hear their equipment? If the first set of equipment does not sound better, to your ears, than the second then why be convinced otherwise by a dealer, a forum or a blog. You could save yourself a a lot of money by using your ears and perception wisely and trusting your own judgement.
Frustration
Vinyl is fun but setting up all the kit can be tiresome. Scratches and dust spoil the vinyl experience for me when I play classical records. So decide what kind of music lover you are. Are you prepared to put up with all the set up and maintenance and the cost of buying top class vinyl. And, also note that I have never heard a record that has not produced a popping sound at some time when it is being played - not even a brand new one.
Have fun.
So where do you start?
Unless you are absolutely convinced that you are going to be exclusively a vinyl enthusiast then I suggest that you start with a budget turntable until you are certain that you can live with playing records. Some things to consider are the following:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)