Cost Incurred to Achieve a Vinyl LP Replay

@cleeds The first iteration of the OWC Mercury Pro, which was where the exact same make and model of disk limitation arose. OWC could not sell me a replacement disk of the same model. Newer versions allow the disks to be mounted as a JBOD, and I prefer that, with one disk copying to the other three every day. They now use SoftRAID rather than built-in hardware.

@pindac If I weren't such a slut for cartridges and had only the one I thought "best" no doubt I would also want the best tonearm and table, which is how those who can afford it get into the super-tables; always chasing "the best.". A variety of cartridges is like insurance against going along that path.

@pindac 

@dogberry I have shared with you in the past on occasions about your methods used for mounting Tonearms.

Indeed you have. I thought you might be amused to see the latest twist among my pods: using two per tonearm. The latest pair have built in micrometer adjustment of VTA, but seemed to tip rather easily. So I placed a pod under the distal end, so that it rested upon it. More mass, more stability, and sounds very good!

Next step, as there always is a next step, is to ask Lee at Acoustand to make me custom tonearm panels with a mounting hole at both ends. That way the tonearm panel can be firmly attached (ie mechanically coupled) at both ends to a 10lb weight sitting on spikes - 20lb on spikes will damp every vibration arriving at the tonearm mount, I think.

 

I have been allocated my own personal listening space within the home, which indirectly meant 'in my mind',  there was no holds barred on the aesthetic front. I have thoroughly abused this new liberty, not much amuses me when it comes to being creative with an assembly. 

My mounted on Granite Sub Plinths under the HiFi Racks are sheets of Steel with a dimension of 900mm (36") x 1100mm (44") x 12mm (1/2"). 

The raised above the floor by approx' 500mm (20") Sub Plinth for the Monoblocks is a Granite Slab weighing in at approx' 250Kg. Positioning that proved to be fun, but it is doable with the right plan in place. 

As with all changes made to a mechanical interface on a TT, TA or Cart' a change will be detected for the perceived sonic, it is almost certain to occur.

Living with the new set up and perceived sonic, will over time produce indicators where the change made is being perceived as valuable or whether something seems to be amiss.

If the amiss indicator shows regularly, reverting back to a earlier set up, should be enough to allow for showing where the change is for the better or worse.

It is not uncommon for a sonic that is unfamiliar and causing questions to stir, actually proves at the time of a revert, that the latest produced sonic is the most attractive option to be maintained.

Looking at your Image, I can see opportunity for a substantial tidying up of the sonic, if the table is isolated from the TT and Pods by mounting these onto a Sub Plinth / Sub Sub Plinth, using different configurations of materials for the separators.

 

 

Ah, yes, but the wooden surface is the top of a 400lb oak chest from the early 1700s. I cannot get rid of it, nor move it elsewhere, so I must make the best of it.

And maybe, just maybe, oak that is nearly 400 years old is just about as dense or sonically equivalent to panzerholz? Bet no one has tested that!

Either way, Lee has agreed to make me tonearm panels that will attach to a 10lb pod at both ends.

A friend, who a few Years ago was to become very impressed with my own rebuilt SP10 MkII and redesigned/modified Tonearm. The MkII and Modified TA, was demo’d to my local HiFi Group on a day set aside for comparisons of the MkII >TA, to a few of the Group Members owned TT’s. One being an expensively upgraded Linn LP12 and another members SME 20/12.

The outcome of that session being (No BS either),

The Linn owner shortly after become a owner of the SP10R > Glanz MH-1200S (mounted on a own design professionally produced Pod) > Miyajima.

The SME 20/12 owner was convinced their Source had been bettered and shortly after hearing their Source compared to the SP10 R, had this notion of being bettered reinforced, resulting in their selling the SME 20/12 and with the funds, has been happily experiencing a range of different TT’s across the past few years, which I have had the pleasure of being demo’d them in use.

An attendee at the first experience of my SP10 MkII compared to the Linn and SME, as a result the impression made, bought a SP10 MkII took it to my Technician and had SP10 MkII and Identical Tonearm to my own produced. Shortly after their comparing the New SP10 MkII > New TA to their owned Mitchell Orbe ( fully modified ) > Audio Note TA > Audio Note IO, the Orbe and AN TA were both sold on.

Here goes, tying things together.

The owner of the SP10 R resides in a Historical Property lots of exposed beams and natural movement within the structure due to the structures method of build.

Furniture for the property has been selected that has a Period aesthetic, of which many are antiques. One furniture item is seen as a large Antique Oak Table produced using substantial pieces of Timber.

The Oak Table serves the role as the HiFi Rack, it supports the TT > Phonostage > Pre Amp and Power Amp.

I had heard the Linn TT set up on this table on a few occasions, and then was becoming quite familiar with hearing the SP10 R in use on the Oak Table.

I become compelled to make the suggestion the TT was seated upon a Sub-Plinth, and using suspension footers for the separator between table and Sub-Plinth.

First to be dealt with was the R’s need for a Plinth, the same machine shop that produced the Glanz Mount Pod, produced the Plinth. There was a very strong suggestion across all who heard the TT on a Plinth, that the experience of hearing the sonic produced had changed to the point it seemed to be with a sonic that is more honest/ believable. At the time I was in agreement with this as a description.

The impact of the Plinth certainly got the thoughts going on a Sub-Plinth.

A 25mm Granite Plinth was acquired, at a minimum dimension, it is the same as the Plinth. I am a user of Granite for numerous years and have compared the material as a Plinth Material and Sub-Plinth to other material types and it does have a influence on the sonic in the environments I have experienced it used in. My own personal preference at present is to have Granite in use, even though Densified Wood is winning me over where it has been experienced in use, especially in the usage of Plinth and Sub-Plinth.

The footers chosen for the Granite are a not too expensive Spring Type. I am familiar with footers of all types and can say that out of them all used in the environments I have tried them, suspension types inclusive of pneumatic versions have proved to have the most attractive end result and are very capable of ’tidying up’ the sonic.

My experiences had of the newly mounted R and assessment made of the very positive impact the Granite Sub-Plinth and Spring Footers had on the SP10 R has been that the perception has been the R is now performing in a way that is a mimic and recognisable of the SP10 MkII that I own and have mounted on a purpose produced dedicated support. In my mind that suggests the improvement as a betterment was seemingly measurable and at the least notable.

The added Links show Two Footer Types that could be considered prior to considering adding a unobtrusive Sub-Plinth.

My go to footer today for lighter weight devices is earlier production model from the Brand Solid Tech ’Feet of Silence’. This has a similarity in design to SME Suspension, utilising Vertical Orientated ’O’ Rings.

The Link has a ’O’ Ring Suspension that is Horizontally oriented and has been seen offered as design for many years by different Companies.

It has now become a further point of interest to myself as it is this orientation of ’O’ Ring that has been adopted by both Solid Tech in their latest footer designs and even more interesting SME have adopted the method in their Latest £60K range of TT’s.

 

 

 

 

If the OP has a particular neurodivergence that compels them to capitalize words that shouldn't be capitalized, I don't wish to be rude or insensitive.  

I will say trying to read the OP made my head hurt.  

Hard to understand what is being expressed there. The inexplicable and seemingly arbitrary use of capitalization contributed to that.

This thread has been an eye opener for me on the value of AI for editing a poster who apparently has compulsive logorrhea.  It hasn’t taught me anything about audio, as it is revisiting familiar ground.

  AI always seems so useless in business applications.  Again, I was surprised by how useful it was to make sense out of someone who’s incapable of concision.

  

  

My use of Upper Case letters has caused a few to express their thoughts maybe even a little rile has been poked. I won't be accepting any blame for ones loss of their composure.

The Topic presented, along with comments offered, has produced a selection of interesting responses that have proved  beneficial to my own inquisitiveness. I have been served well by a few of the threads contributors.

I'm still more than happy to receive further views on the Threads Subject. 

 

If you're happy, pindac, then we (most of us anyway) are happy. I'm someone who thinks dictionaries should be prescriptive, grammar and punctuation matter, and spelling isn't an art form. However, I'm also comfortable making no end of allowances for the neurodivergent and for ESL speakers. You should hear my French!

Going off-topic a little, I was quite serious, however, when I said that ChatGPT made good sense to me of your OP. Which is interesting to me as a member of a family of ASD-types. You'll be amused to hear that the NYT is suing OpenAI for training ChatGPT on its articles without permission. It seems I can buy a newspaper, read it, and pass it on to someone else to read, all perfectly legally. But I cannot pass it on to an AI to read....

The entertainment on offer is rivalling the fun had whilst at the Pantomime a few days past.    

I am diagnosed now, I hope by a time served and qualified professional. The Prognosis given solely based on the context of:

"I don't want to be rude of insensitive"

has suggested I am Abnormal. 🤣

Then we have the other individual who has never been face to face as part of a communication with myself. Not allowing for them to hear one word uttered from my lips, but this individual is quite happy to declare and is seemingly sure of their  I opinion of myself having "Compulsive Logorrhea" 😂. 

"Oh Yes You Did" 🤡   

Vinyl is a fairly pricey endeavor. Not so much because of the cost of the hardware (although one can splurge here as much as one wants), but more so because of the software cost. Some folks I know have record collections that exceed one hundred thousand pieces. Just the ability to store such a collection adds cost.

@daveyf Your comments about Quantity of Vinyl LP's / Value if a LP's Collection is relevant.

In most cases the investment made for collecting LP's and producing a supporting Audio Set Up, have been a long-term venture. In the past, myself inclusive, it is typical for not expressing too much constraint when collecting LP's, the individual buy the items as they please. Maybe the breaks go on a little once a collection is where on classes as useful enough for their needs.

With the Audio Equipment used to replay the LP's, my experiences has shown that the individual expresses a different control on the attitude to how a purchase is made.  

I did not put emphasis on the LP Collection Value in the OP, I was expectant of certain individuals to declare their LP Source Material was surpassing the monetary value of selected tools used to enable the LP's to be replayed.  

@pindac  While I agree that the individual cost of a record is likely to be much less than a piece of hardware to replay it, the accrued cost of a decent size collection is usually far more. So much so, that if collectors, like myself, added up the cost of the software, the combined total would typically be several times what the hardware cost is. Almost regardless of what the table/arm/cartridge is. 

@pindac 

 

I did qualify my conjecture about your condition by saying “apparent” as yes, I have not had the pleasure to converse with you in the real world.  It is possible that in an actual social setting, one may behave differently than when that individual Is just sitting at a keyboard and not getting feedback from others in real time.

    As to the questions of music collecting and equipment, for me the priorities are first, the music (recording); secondly, the playback medium.  It is possible, once past a certain price point, to achieve excellent sound in both digital and analog.  For me the price point is a bit higher in analog, and of course every person has different means.  My current analog set up (Technic 1200 Direct Drive, Ortofon 2M Blue mm cart, Cambridge Audio mm preamp) cost me around $2K.  Vinyl is my secondary choice, and while I could afford to spend a lot more, spending less seems to lead to compromise.

  Digital can be excellent and around $1K, although it gets better as one ascends the price ladder.  I currently use a Melco NAS, a Bryston DAC3, a CA streamer and Oppo 105 CDP, cost around $10K.

  On the software side it’s hard to beat the value of a good streaming service.  Personally I prefer my physical media but I can totally understand why someone could be happy streaming exclusively.  The lps at present are fetching what I consider to be insane prices, particularly for new issues that involve digital editing.  
    The playback media itself is a source of enjoyment.  Many analog devotees find the issues related to replay such as cartridge choice, tonearm, to be an en end in and of itself, and there are digital equivalents.  I also find these issues interesting, and therefore participate in these forums, but the music appreciation is the primary thing.

  OK, I seem to have run on here.  I also have compulsive logorrhea.  Mea culpa