Does a record player make that much of a difference??

@joshindc if Dynavector 20x2 impressed you so much, I would guess Audio Technica AT-ML170/180 (even AT24) will change your mind about MC carts magic! AT MM carts sounds better at 1g track force, vs 2g tf MC carts.. On top of that, MM carts are not that phono cable resistance sensitive as MCs.

I wish Nandric was around to give everyone struggling with the question a lesson in semantics.  There is no common vocabulary or an agreement on concepts that ties the disparate claims together.  Thus this thread can go on forever or ad nauseam, whichever comes first.

Let me add, that last year, my rich audiophile cousin upgraded his TT from a Clear Audio Ovation, to a Kronos Pro, using the same arm, cartridge, phono stage. 

And there was most certainly a substantial improvement.

The phono cartridge, and the phono stage may make the most sonic difference, but the TT is more important.

If the TT is not doing its job correctly (spinning at the correct speed, suppressing airborne and vibrational noise, ’sinking’ record and motor noise through the platter and plinth, etc. It won’t matter how good your cartridge and phono stage are.

And of course, the better the rest of the system is (amps, preamp, speakers, etc) the more noticeable improvements in the TT will become.

I should never have thought of using one as an SUT!

But then again......no, not a Variac built as a power supply, but if an autoformer would work as an SUT, one could see it being interesting. Variable turns ratio/gain, but coupled with varying load. Presumably one sweet spot for each cartridge.

Tweak1, I’ll bite. What are you going to do with the Variac?

In my earlier post in this thread, it states the function of the Styli, which as a description is strongly suggesting the Styli and Armature are the components dedicated to dealing with produced vibration.

The Turntable will/can create energy that adulterates the information to become a electrical signal the Styli is capable of retrieving.

The Armature typically is not designed to be a filter, that stated, different Armature Materials will have their own unique impact on the sonic that is to be produced.

The Armature is a Link and part in use as a tool to transfer styli produced energy efficiently with a minimum of added adulteration, prior to the energy transferred becoming a electrical signal.  

Adulterated energies from Ambient or Mechanical sources, that are of the capacity that are influencing the Styli, will most likely result in certain frequencies being transferred and converted to a electrical signal, being amplified within the Phonostage, hence becoming a produced sonic at the Speaker end.

Not exactly the Highest of Fidelity those sent energies that are adulterated at the time of being processed into electrical signals, but in multiple cases the presence is accepted and enjoyed as part of the musical encounter being had.     

Could be wrong, but my point is, I think the reason record-loving audiophiles put so much more attention and money on record players vs carts and phonostages is because there is more to look at.

@joshindc 

This seems a bit insulting. Your opening question is which has better “sonics”, then later assume we’re purchasing for “visual bling” instead of sonics.

The turntable is a vibration detection device.  As audio chains become more transparent like lowering the noise floor through better electronics, sonic differences in turntables become very noticeable including tonearm performance with specific, platter materials, platter speed, plinth material, motor noise, etc.  

Your Marantz TT16 is a fine turntable at it’s price point, but I’d expect noticeable positive sonic differences if you upgraded to a $3-5k turntable - at least better tonearms and better platter material like Delrin on MoFi turntables 

I can't help but wonder how beneficial a voltage VARIAC would be

Cartridge is the most important.  Second is the phono pre. As long as the TT is not complete garbage it’s the least important. I don’t understand how one could argue otherwise. Unless one sells expensive TTs.

Stability as in level, speed, reduced wow/flutter are all very important imo. So the table, tonearm and cartridge as a system matters a lot. But possibly the cartridge less so than the table and arm.

@joshindc 

With a turntable I am more of a function over form kind of guy.  By that I mean once you break a turntable down into its basic functions and your table has those bases covered, the rest is diminishing returns on the dollar. And yes, performing these basic functions do matter to the sound quality-

1) Speed stability (freedom from note wavering) and speed accuracy.  I have owned and heard expensive turntables that had speed stability issues where you could clearly hear a wavering in the pitch of sustained notes and sound slow, stogy and lack energy compared to others.  A turntable with great speed stability and accuracy sounds more energetic and life like.  

2) Immunity from vibration.  There are expensive turntables available that are not very good at dealing with air born or foot traffic vibrations.  These cause you to purchase work arounds like wall mount shelves or vibration reducing platforms in order to sound their best.  Many turntables do not need these work arounds and come with very good vibration damping feet, stable, structurally sound plinths and platters.  

3) Tonearm adjustability for cartridge optimization.  A great turntable should have a tonearm that can easily be adjusted for use with the better available phono cartridges.  Many cartridges have stylus shapes that need precise VTA (vertical tracking angle) to sound their best and the tonearm should be easily adjustable for VTA as well as anti-skating and VTF (vertical tracking force).  If you cannot get the VTA so that the top of the cartridge is level with the record surface the sound could be compromised and cause uneven / early stylus wear.  

4)Tonearm mass / match with cartridge compliance and resonance.  The turntable should have a tonearm with the appropriate mass to match with the cartridge you like and are using.  In general a lower - mid mass tonearm works with higher compliance cartridges as a starting point.  You would usually pick a cartridge to match your tonearm but many people have their favorite sounding cartridges and need a turntable with a tonearm to match.  A poor tonearm to cartridge match will cause it to be resonant at higher or lower frequencies that will have an impact on the sound.  Improper matches can cause rumble effects, coloration or blurring of the sound and be more susceptible to warped records.  

5) Turntable mat.  A poor turntable mat will be a source of electrical static and may not provide the best damping of tonearm cartridge energy.  A good turntable mat (even stock) will provide just the right amount of energy damping to avoid sound coloration but not too much as to reduce sound dynamics and energy. 

So yes, turntables do affect sound quality.   

@joshindc

From your original question it sounds like you don’t think your current table isn’t any ball of fire. My buddy is using a Technics SL-1210GR with the same Dynavector. It sounds great!  The Technics has a decent arm and all the adjustments that you would ever need.

it's hard to imagine a thread more confusing, unintelligible, contentious, and yet substantive and full of hard earned insight in the same time. If this was someone driving from point A to B, he'd be going in the more asinine route and at times at 120mph an hour, taking crazy but beautiful turns while crashing and hitting pedestrians 10 times in 20 minutes

Soooooo many would like to perform as well as this Vintage Combo which I had/loved for years.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/134814145255?mkevt=1&mkcid=1&mkrid=711-53200-19255-0&campid=5338381866&toolid=10001&customid=a3423a32-8628-11ee-8c50-393864376633

live within range of seller? friend within range to check it out?

Vertical vibration MUST be eliminated due to the magnificent bearing's sensitivity to vertical vibration.

The Styli in the Groove passing modulations solely generates the the energy to be transferred via the armature to induce a current.

The current produced being a result of the link between Styli and Coils (MC) is ideally a result of the impact of the modulation on the Styli only. Ambient energies withing the listening environment being able to transfer and influence the Styli to generate alien energy through the armature will be producing a current and sent on signal that is not pure modulation retrieval.

Additionally, the mechanics of the Turntable and Tonearm are both able to influence the Styli, and produce energies that will be transferred through the armature to produce a current. Such a current will be very different than that produced by the Groove Modulation only.

The learning and methods used to control mechanical produced energies comes with a need to have a skill set that is usually way beyond the typical user of a Vinyl LP as a Source. Usually such control measures are found through making substantial investments in equipment, in the hope these mechanical interfaces are much improved by the quality of the engineering adopted as a design and application.

Hence, it is much easier for the typical user of the Vinyl LP as a Source, to create a structure to support the Trilogy of ancillaries to enable a Vinyl LP to be replayed, which will be as a whole, aiding in creating a reduction of ambient energies within the room being transferred to the Styli, where ultimately the most detrimental of the energy that can be encountered is dissipated by the structure. 

With either of the above addressed, but preferably both, will be the condition that allows for the Phonostage to receive Electrical Signal that is mostly created through the Vinyl LP's Modulation/Styli interface only.             

Dear @noromance  : " the turntable and its supporting structure has the most significant contribution to retrieval of the maximum amount of data from the grooves.  "

Key in your statement: " retrieval of the maximum amount of data from the grooves.  " "

look and think for a moment: even if the TT is not exactly precise on spining at 33.33 rpm or any other " condition " the RETRIAVAL amount information fromthe LP grooves ( rigth or wrong ) is the main target/responsability of the cartridge it's why cartridges exist along two other " items " tonearm and our care of that cartridge/tonearm set up.

Yes, with out the spining on TT nothing can happens but that's not the issue in your statement words. After the LP the " source " is the cartridge/transducer.

@terry9  posted that phono stage is first in importance order and makes sense in several ways because it's this electronics unit who has to proccess the cartrisge information but even that the SOURCE still is the cartridge and what surrounded LP/cartridge couple are its slaves, yes important " slaves " as a whole.

R.

Consider the base of the turntable and its ability to isolate the table from footfalls, vibrations from the speakers and form earthquakes (measurable in very minor increments which affect the sound that you would never know about)_ disctintly from the ability to spin the record precisely and generate no noise from it's motor.

The most expensive TTs do both in an excellent fashion, but if you are trying to optimize the investment, go with a light table like a Rega and spend a few bucks on a base (and wall shelf if needed like when you have a suspended floor). In my experience, I agree with @mijostyn that the turntable should sound like nothing so sound improvements in that would be less discernible than the arm/cartridge phono stage one you have a very good TT. Arm and cartridge need to be well matched as do the cartridge and phono stage which can make the choices complicated.

Features can play a big role in the decision. The way the power supply is plugged into Rega's P8 was the opposite versus the P5 I replaced, and the wiring directly from the arm to the end of the interconnect wiring that plugs into the phono stage was much improved. However, I upgraded the arm first from the P5 arm (RB700) to the RB880 that comes with the P8 first, and found the tonearm upgrade dramatically improved the sound. The table, not so much. Still, since I liked the new features of the P8, I don't regret getting it. 

Someday, maybe, a VPI or a Dr Feickert... But I recently added an Orbit Theory to my third system to upgrade from a Pro-Ject Debut Carbon DC, and have fallen in love. At the price I paid, open box discount, it was a true steal...for a USA product. Quiet, tracks very well, cast magnesium arm, a clever anti-skate, solid wood plinth, 3 great adjustable feet, built in phono stage (which is conveniently by-passed) and an upgrade to Ortofon 2m Bronze (keeping the Blue for need). You can buy direct from Orbit. My only quibbles; the supplied phono leads and the plastic dust cover hinges which are obvious cost saving moves, very minor complaints.

You have to ask?! He** yeah, the biggest difference!

@noromance yes I saw although Mr Lavigne doesn't post often in these forums but when he does I pay attention. He's much more active on WBF.

@rsf507 Ironically, Mr. Lavigne was the first gentleman to reply to this thread. 

Sorry R but I'd put more value into WBF with gentlemen like Mike Lavigne and others than just about anyone in these forums. Just my own perspective YMMV

@joshindc I should have pointed out that as each listening environment is unique in the way energy is transferred through it, there is not really a ubiquitous method to prevent the most harmful of these energies being transferred to the TT>TA>Cart', hence the suggestion to trial different devices, materials and configurations for these.

A very expensive Sub-Support can be purchased, but the devices in use are not a surety that the usage is going to create anything that is noticeably a betterment over a design using an assembly of materials that have shown as a support structure the sonic has been tidied up and is a more attractive presentation for the end user.

When it comes to the subject of working to create a structure that enables the Cartridge, especially the Styli's interface within the Vinyl Groove, to only send as a signal, the embedded data detected as a modulation is passed, there is not too much tinkering that can be done if the purest of signal is the desired goal to be sent on through the Signal Path of the System.

If this aspect of using Vinyl as a source material is overlooked, the use of the trilogy of supporting ancillaries is most likely being substantially compromised, making their Value as a purchase seemingly a wasteful expense.

As said, if something along these lines is undertaken, and benefits discovered will transfer through to any equipment changes made to the Supporting Trilogy for using Vinyl as a source.    

@OP - is your turntable a TT16 or 15 as I cannot find any references to a Marantz TT16 - perhaps you could post a picture which would allow a more precise response to be given.

Answering generically - yes, a better turntable and arm can make a big difference. The Linn philosophy was taken to extremes, with people running LP12s with Ittok arms and cheap K9 cartridges and getting pretty poor sound from a large investment. However, with due regard to upgrading a system in a balanced way, better turntables do make a difference - more resolution, better pitch stability, more bass extension, blacker backgrounds, better control of surface noise etc.

@noromance ,

using the Studiotracker that came with it, I also have a AT540ML that I had on the ATLP120 (took that off and put back on the AT95E that i'm giving my neice)  haven't put the 540ML on to see how that sounds on it yet because i'm so happy with the sound of Studiotracker. I got everything dialed in. 

I just want to clarify, my comments above were related to a novice, and upgrading cartridge 1st.

After reaching a level of very good sounding cartridge, AND acquiring alignment tools/skills: it's time to upgrade the TT, and deal with the complications of a new arm, (especially acquiring my preference for a removable headshell, so many TT's come with fixed arms).

After than, no longer a novice, and acquiring a successful phono stage, it's back to cartridge refinement.

@eryoung2k What cartridge? 

Well i love my setup, Mofi Studiodeck that is dialed in, Outlaw Audio RR2160MKll integrated amp, Pair of Pioneer CS99-A, Pair of Dahli Zensor, Outlaw Audio Powered Subwoofer for 4.1 Sound. Ordered AudioQuest Golden Gate cables from Amazon that was absolute junk! major hum to the phono stage. Returned those and used the Mofi cables that came with the MoFi. Dead Quiet!  My system sounds Amazing to me and my wife and friends. That is all that matters to me.   I think people tinker to much.  But hey to each there own! I mainly listen for classic rock LP's from the 60's and 70's mostly, some 80's (Queensryche, warning and Rage for Order 1st pressings). Coming from a ATLP 120usb. Best upgrade for me was the MoFi deck. Giving the Audio Technica 120 to my niece who is using a Crosly LOL

Assuming all the components are working well in combination, the turntable and its supporting structure has the most significant contribution to the retrieval of the maximum amount of data from the grooves. Changing tonearms and cartridges obviously change the resulting sound. As they should. That can lead opinion because those parts are likely changed more often. But the turntable dictates the global quality of the sound realized.

@joshindc There are very cheap activities that can be carried out, to give you the insight into how a set up for a TT>TA>Cart' can be influential for the better on a produced sonic.

Using Footers under the TT of differing materials and introducing a Sub-plinth with additional Footers will produce change to a sonic, some configurations will create a change only and others will be discernable for being a betterment for the sonic produced.

Taking things a stage further and producing a support Structure solely dedicated to the TT, will also be able to add to the Benefits that can be discovered.

If your listening environment allows for an additional space to be taken up by a dedicated structure for supporting a TT, there is many methods to be found that will not cost the earth and be without doubt a improvement. It takes trialing materials and different configurations for the materials being selected to get the most from them.

If attractive aesthetics is a must have then a little extra cost might be incurred, to conceal the honesty of the structure that is selected.

When the under TT configuration is discovered that has the most impressive impact on the Sonic being produced, these discovered benefits should transfer onto any changes made to the Type of TT>TA>Cart' being used.

Note: Extracting the best from a Vinyl Sources supporting Trilogy of ancillaries, can become a lifelong side pursuit to the enjoyment had through the replaying of Vinyl recordings.      

Best advice is if you want to go into analog bring big money and don’t look back!

In my experience as an expert in all things audio Turntables are the hardest to deal with and the biggest headache. 

I believe(for the most part) in Ivor Tiefebrun's maxim; Basically, if you don't get the information off the source, Lp Cd, etc., you cannot make up for it downstream.  In a turntable, it's the turntable first, then the arm, and finally the cartridge/preamplifier.  Her, I think that this is a good analogy: like a sports car if the chassis is not really stiff(the turntable), the suspension(tonearm) will not work to its utmost, and the motor(the cartridge) will not be able to apply its power as best that it could.  Something like that.  So if the table isn't absolutely stable and precise in its ability to spin that record with the least amount of error, the tonearm won't be able to control the fine undulations in the record that the cartridge has to traverse.  Again, something like that.

@fsonicsmith yours is always the question when $ is involved…. the hard and fast rules seem to come and go IMO… for example Jelco supplied a vey competent tonearm that was capable of much…sadly they are no more. Yet we have Hana with scale / volume / quality control building excellent for $ MC, ditto Ortofon for MM ( RIP Signet, Grace , etc )…

good ?

@inna I didn’t want to rewrite volumes as your question contains the life work of many a deceased and living master… they are many… For me anyway it starts with mass and compliance matching. i am an advocate of using the  Korf calculator, which includes acceleration. So for example, my Lyra Delos is not ideally suited to the Triplaner without added mass, experiments with added mass help the ear / brain understand the impacts. This is just one relationship, 

I suggest looking at it from a slightly different perspective-which some of you are already doing; where do the diminishing returns kick in more abruptly. I also am disregarding base-level set ups intentionally (base level skews the analsis). 

So assuming a $5,000 and up budget/expenditure I believe they kick in most quickly with the phono stage, then cartridge, then turntable, and last with the tonearm. 

I know many hear will disagree. The above is based on some degree of experience.

I'm wondering if your phono pre-amp and turntable and arm aren't playing catch up with the new cartridge? I went the other way, improving TT, then arm, then in a position to invest in cart and pre. My second and third system are more "generic", but the main system has been upgraded a piece at at time for a very long time. The "better" the TT, it seems, the more intricate proper set up becomes, and the more critical the set-up becomes. At a certain level, and 2K plus TT's are getting close, the improvements are incremental, and require more attention. And the chance things go sideways increases (how I discovered the importance of tracking angle and MC carts). BTW an interchangeable head shell systems can be an error factory.. When I change a headshell/cart I still do full align (I align the cantilever)....just to be sure.    never assume. Just one of the reasons I have dedicated Mono and Stereo TT's.

That's a great answer. About one million or so possibilities.

Part science, black art, and luck…. along with an exploratory spirit

Tonearm/cartridge unit.. 

So how exactly can one find the best possible tonearm/cartridge match to create that perfect unit ?

Well my Mofi Deck came today, got it all hooked up and I can 100% say that it sounds So much Better than my ATLP120usb!! Night and day, I have listened to The Doors Alive She Cried (1st pressing) and Led Zeppelin lll (1st pressing) and I swear I heard things i’ve never heard before. Just fuller sound. Just Amazing!  Incredible build quality as well!  Will break it in better Friday and Saturday night with some proper beverages (I will be careful!!!)

If the shoe fits...

Dear @dogberry  : " Well I'm pretty sure some of these replies will have dissuaded the OP..."

I know that as always you are " behind " me to post that statement, no problem about and fine with me but as always too I post to help any one. Look:

my first post in the thread was asking for the OP listing system units to give him an advise but due that before he posted the thread  ha already had his answer then he not only ignore my post but ignored all the other posts by audiophiles that as me were trying to give some advise/help.

Yes, latter on I posted to him that his answer was and is wrong and at the end he said that he post just for " fun ".

Please read the OP posts and mines and come back and tell us what your common sense says Again, he ignored all the gentlemans posts here, he was not looking for advise or a kind of help.

What do you think?

R.

acmaier, Unless you are listening to LPs from the early to mid 50s, most of which will be mono recordings, the importance of having all those equalization curves built into the phono stage has been regarded as overrated by most.  Testimony from recording engineers who were active in that early LP era suggests that most companies adopted the RIAA standard early on. Thus, you could say it is nice to have that flexibility, but it adds a costly feature to the phono stage that may be superfluous, unless, again, your collection is heavily biased to the early days of LPs. Also, you can put the phono stage first if you want; my only point was and is that the tonearm and cartridge form a unit that together determine the ultimate sound quality that we usually perceive as due to the cartridge alone.

@ossicle2brain @joshindc Ossicle nailed it though I put phono-pre- first. The TT is the least important piece by far - it is simply a rotating platter and if it is isolated decently that is all you need. TTs with built in great isolation do tend to have all the check boxes (SME, Sota) and great arms. I always recommend to focus on the phono pre-amp first - aside from speakers. When both the phono-pre and speakers of excellent quality that match your acoustic preferences give you a foundation to build upon. System pre-amp with a great volume control system is next. On the phono pre-amp the must have feature IMO is recording industry based equalization selection (RIAA, Columbia, Decca) - otherwise the record and the analog output stage aren’t using the same expected equalization and you can’t correct for it without an equalizer.

I found photos of the current headshell at Triplanar. The finger lift is set directly into the side of the cartridge mount, not on a separate piece that also receives the cartridge mount screws. I personally wouldn’t worry about that resonating except as part of the whole, but diff’rent strokes for diff’rent folks. Seems the OEM construction is already damped with some sort of black sleeve, heat shrink or other.

@lewm Tri is a gem. See California system photos, set screw attachment visible. 

https://www.audiogon.com/systems/7100

Cartridge and tonearm should be viewed as a single unit. Tonearm makes a major contribution (or subtraction) in relation to the SQ perceived to be due to the cartridge alone. I’ve proved this over and over again in my home systems. So I would not insert “phono amp” between cartridge and tonearm in order of importance.

cartridge>phono amp>tone arm>TT