Turntable versus tonearm versus cartridge: which is MOST important?
Lohanimal, If your question is not hypothetical, you got a great deal. I paid $600 for my QL10, but it was in "broken" condition. Or were you merely trying to point out that cost is not necessarily related to quality, especially with used or vintage equipment. So the question posed by the OP falls apart in that case. |
@chakster as a joke question I bought a JVC QL 10 with UA arm in mint condition for £400 - is a £10,000 cartridge wasted on it? The question is why did you buy it ? @lohanimal If the counterweight is not broken (like on most samples) then do not under rate this tonearm. Victor top of the line cartridges (MC and MM) are quite nice and even after 30-40 years cost over $1k for MM (like X1II) and over $2k for Direct Couple MC that inspired Audio-Technica for ART-1000 ($5k). My ex TT-101 was restored by Fidelis Analog for another audiogon member. |
@chakster , you like cocobolo? Check out the record clamp I just made on my system page. The finger lift is also cocobolo. @mijostyn you got your own workshop? Nice! Maybe you could make two cocobolo sideboards for my LUX :) |
If the assertions (premise) are not true then deduced statements from those assertion also can't be true. Assertion formulated in the simple ''S is P'' form ( ''subject is predicate'') can hardly be sufficient base for correct reasoning. Relational statement can't be put in terms of ''properties of individual objects''. Those are implicated by analogy with statements about individual objects. |
Atomic60, I could have used ebony. If you look at the top of the record clamp you will see an ebony plug in the very center. There is a cavity in the clamp filled with lead shot. The ebony closes the entry. The problem with using ebony in the finger lift application is that it is very brittle. Turning it down to that diameter would be very stressful. It would probably that me 10 trials before I could get one off in one piece. I know this for a fact as I turned a set of pick-up sticks for my children out of 20 different varieties of wood. I put a picture of it for you on my system page. This is how you teach yourself to have a light touch on the lathe. Cocobolo and ebony have almost the same density. Both are almost as heavy as water. Cocobolo is a lot oilier and more flexible. |
@chakster , no problem. Just send me dimensions, a picture or two and the type of wood you want. Shop time is $50/hour. Then there are materials and shipping. I doubt it would take more than an hour. The cost of wood can vary drastically. Shipping to Russia? No idea. I doubt customs will bother with a wood sample:-) |
Dear @lohanimal : " after a certain stage in a turntable it’s the improvements in the arm that are the most significant. Cartridges IMHO are often very subjective..." Take two good designed and manufactured tonearms ( everything the same including tonearm EL. ) as the one that comes in the Rega RP10 and in the other side the SAT and take the same cartridge, say Etna SL, and certainly will sounds different and maybe the sound will like more to some gentlemans in the Rega tonearm and to other audiophiles in the SAT tonearm Both cases: subjective. What is what is happening down there? first " minute/microscopic " differences in the tonearm/cartridge alignments, both tonearms resonates/vibrates with different tone " color/frequency " due to its different builded materials, the cartridge could be well matched in both tonearms but not exactly/mimic and all those and other " things " could make those differences. So for the ones that like it the Rega/Etna the tonearm is more important and to others that like with the SAT this tonearm BUT it’s the cartridge and its tracking abilities that pick-up the information recorded in those groove modulations and it’s the cartridge whom must convert/transduce those modulations in the electrical signal that will be processed through the Phono Stage, this is the cartridge roleand it is not subjective but facts that maybe for some of us are more important and for other gentlemans not to important. What is the role of the tonearms down there? to hold the cartridge and to follow accurately the cartridge movements: up/down and side to side and these movements must needs to do it with out any " additional " movements by tonearm it self ( obviously needs low friction ( say no more than 25mg. ) and tight bearings that today tonearms and even vintage have. Unipivots can’t acomplish with the tonearm role. ). Then one thing is a subjective audiophiles opinions and other different are the facts explained here. I’m with the cartridge and I’m with out diminishing in any way its tonearm mate ( not the TT role neither. ) and maybe in that example the Etna sounds could like me the more through the Rega and this is subjective and dependent of MUSIC/sound priorities on each one of us. Regards and enjoy the MUSIC NOT DISTORTIONS, R. |
@lewm i think you got my point because clever/lucky buying can distort the equation. @chakster not sure if you got the 'tongue in cheek' nature of my joke/question. I bought JVC as a doorstop - sorry just kidding - i got it to listen to and as per most people on this forum - I also like my toys - in this case direct drive turntables - I also have a TTS8000 and an EMT 950. @mijostyn I was wondering when someone would call out the 'elephant in the room' that is the unipivot - a truly lazy engineering solution |
@rauliruegas use a trough for your tonearm (like my Rock Elite) It takes the tone out of tonearm and it massively equalises tonearms. To that end it either puts the tonearm as the most/least important part of the equation. Most - insofar as using the trough highlights how much 'tone' (unwanted resonances) are caused by the arm. Least - once installed you find it a bit of a tonearm equaliser. I am pondering on a fairly cheap RB250 but with Ikeda wiring. |
@lohanimal , "use a trough for your tonearm." Could please elaborate. Are you talking about a damping trough with a paddle and oil? Could you show us a picture. I like that, " lazy engineering solution." I've always called it the "cheap" solution. That certainly makes three of us. "Oh, but you need to listen before you roast!" Not me. Shoot first and ask questions later. |
@bobbydd Has your question in your OP been satisfactory answered, or are there further concerns? In essence, all three (turntable, tonearm, cartridge) contributes to one systems sonics. To emphasize one while ignoring the others is a mistake - the entire audio chain matters. Usually, addressing/upgrading the weakest links (components) in one’s audio chain yields the best price/performance uptick. |
Dear @lohanimal : You participated in the next thread where along it several opinions were discussed. Here my asumption/premise was and is: " everything the same ". Your point is not what is under discussion but as always welcomed. Here the link: https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/tonearm-damping-damped-or-not-useless-welcomed R. |
@rauliruegas I did raise the trough and the vintage bargain as curveballs - just for a bit of fun - and it may well have digressed. IMHO if it is based upon how one splits the budget (and i am going to do it on the basis of new equipment) turntable, then arm, then cartridge. My logic is based upon the law of diminishing returns happen further up the turntable ladder - then the tonearm - then the cartridge. Cartridges are a funny thing as everyone will know because important though it is - it really does change the signature sound profoundly. Not just that but even new there are some really great bargains (relative) out there which have certain skills that exist regardless of price. |
Agreed, everything is important. Sound fidelity (like a chain) is only as good as it weakest component. The best table and tone arm has no chance against a marginal cartridge. As such, a magnificent cartridge has no chance against a marginal recording... There is an app called turntabulator that will check your table speed. Some fine tuning on tracking and weight can make a huge difference so my choice is use the best cartridge you can afford. Much more to say on this subject but for another time. |
Agreed, everything is important. Sound fidelity (like a chain) is only as good as it weakest component. Nice try. Freebie rubber power cords are absolute crap. If I swap out my Moneoone Supernova for freebie rubber crap it is obvious. But it doesn't bring my whole system down to that level. It is worse, obviously worse, but still much better overall than "its weakest link." A system is the sum of its parts. The weakest link may be the smartest place to look for improvement. But it is not what determines system performance. The best table and tone arm has no chance against a marginal cartridge.The opposite of what many of us have said. Based on experience. The best table and tone arm will make a marginal cartridge sound incredibly good. The best cartridge on a marginal table and arm will only let you hear very clearly all the faults that made them marginal in the first place. |
Spend $150 on each the TT, tonearm and cartridge. Then put the remaining $9,500 into a cable! Shell out another $1k on fancy interconnect nail polish coating. Case closed. Problem solved. Or rather than an unrealistic approach this of all or nothing mentality, why not use a more balanced approach and allocate your budget so that each component gets consideration? Lastly, why is no one mentioning the phono preamp? This is as much a factor as the rest. Especially if you are using a cheap $50 phono pre built into an integrated. |
Dynamic_driven, because that is a different subject. Cartridges and phono stages to have to match within boundaries. Among a group of excellent phono stages it will most likely be the cartridges that make the largest difference. The job of the cartridge is much more difficult to perform well and the way it interacts with the tonearm is perhaps the most critical match in audio. You can jamb any phono stage into any system if you are so inclined. |
Here's an interesting article/take on this very topic - it's a review on the Rockport Sirius III turntable. Page Title (iar-80.com) |
| Post removed |
Let's see, we have a great car (Turntable). Now lets pick the tires that should go on it (cartridge). Finally, what road/track will you choose to drive it on (record album). It matters doesn't it? God forbid, you buy a 4 wheel drive Jeep and expect it's best performance on the Indy race track. Better yet, what about an Indy car in the dirt?
Is this all equal to audio? |
@atmasphere Ralph, that was very incisive. 4krowme, wrong analogy. The car is the turntable and the cartridge is the motor. Regardless of what kind of race you are in, more power is ALWAYS better but you can put too much power in a vehicle that can not handle it safely. Looked at it this way there is a philosophical similarity. Ralph, look at it this way, your bike is the turntable and your legs are the cartridge. You know darn well what happens when they fail:-) |
Let's just forget about argument by analogy. This question has three components: physics, psychology (perception and taste), and economics (bang for the buck). Only the last is easy, because cartridges wear out. Psychology is obviously personal. That leaves physics, which is plenty complicated enough to defy analysis in a thread.
|
I think we can all agree the most important component is to keeps spending gobs of money until all the problems and deficiencies go away...and then spend more to improve it incrementally until you go bankrupt or die! |
Dear @terry9 : " That leaves physics, which is plenty complicated enough to defy analysis in a thread. ""
For me problem is not only physics but that due to all those imperfections that exist including the LP it self there are " hundred " of parameters that are and have a relationsship in between, this fact makes the whole subject extremely complex even to develop a mathematical model with. It's just impossible to do it.
Our opinions in all the posts in this thread are only our first hand expériences that are way different in all of us.
R. |
That anaogy might be even worse than the one suggested earlier 😂 There is a vehicle analogy that I use. I've manufacturered my own 'table for about 22 years: The requirement of the arm tracking the cartridge is nearly the same engineering problem as is steering in a car or motorbike. In the case of the arm, it must keep the cartridge in contact with the groove. In the case of a motor vehicle, the wheel must be kept in contact with the road- if not, if there is any slop in the steering and suspension system, if there is resonance, the vehicle will have handling problems and may be dangerous to drive. Similarly the tonearm cannot have any slop in its bearings, no resonance in its armtube and there cannot be any slop in the platter bearing. Further, the coupling between the platter bearing and the base of the arm must be profound and lacking any resonance or susceptability to vibration. Beyond that the similarities weaken- for example the suspension in a steering system is damped in an immediate fashion (as in a Mcpherson strut) whereas if you are to damp the cantilever of a cartridge, it is done at the other end of the arm tube. Further, a tonearm is expected to have a mechanical resonance between 7 and 12 Hz where there should be no resonance whatsoever in a steering system- so at this point the analogy has fallen apart. If the arm is unable to keep the cartridge in consistent contact with the groove wall distortion will result. I've seen this happen with $10,000 cartridges. I've also seen a $35.00 cartridge track perfectly. The cost of the cartridge has almost nothing to do with it. This all comes from the arm and how well the cartridge compliance and weight works to allow for the mechanical resonance to fall into the right frequency. If the arm has loose bearings (any bearing slop), if a required adjustment parameter cannot be met, if there is resonance in the arm tube, the result will be a coloration and/or mistracking regardless of the cost. While cartridges themselves are a bit miraculous in that they are so small and require a lot of precision at the same time; no matter how precise it is, it characteristics will not be realized if the arm simply isn't up to the task. If you seek the best cartridge, make sure your arm is up to the task first! |
@terry9 , you really don't want to ask raul that question. The answer will get pornographic fast. @atmasphere , how come I always have to take the heat for dissing unipivot tonearms? Have you checked out my thread on dust cover blues? I would appreciate if you would contribute. Forget about the dust cover thing. What do you think is going on? |
I won't waste bandwidth by quoting Ralph's post of today at 3:35 pm but it echoes what I have been trying to say in this thread. Take a well designed no frills drive like a Gem Dandy or PureFidelity (among any number of other candidates), fit it with a great arm and a $100-$250 cartridge, get it dialed in and watch the awe and amazement ensue. You CAN NOT replicate the same result with either of the other two possible combinations. And yes, there are theoretically nine total combinations so you can look at this way too-any combination that does not include an excellent tonearm is doomed. |
"The cost of the cartridge has almost nothing to do with it. This all comes from the arm and how well the cartridge compliance and weight works to allow for the mechanical resonance to fall into the right frequency."
Well said. Our human mind, as we know, is often easily overloaded and it then usually tries to simplify matters by resorting to general principles. These can be called prejudices and more often than not they are useful when making decisions. One such prejudice is that higher cost always equals greater performance. However, when it comes to sonic performance I don’t see any great correlation with cost. The best I can suggest is that it seems to resemble a bell curve where beyond a certain point, performance can often start to go down. Some might say that beyond a certain point, it has nowhere else to go!
Therefore throwing increasingly large sums of money at audio products might be the surest way to ultimate disappointment. A bit like trading your Lexus in for ’something better’.
Turntable/tonearm/cartridge compatibility (and siting) might be one of the least understood areas in all of domestic audio. What we do know is that resonance control matters. What we don’t always know is how best to achieve it. |
When it comes to numbers it’s nothing, because your $10k tonearm is 30-50-70% cheaper on the secondhand market, but it’s the same tonearm. BUT your $500 cartridge can be more expensive in time if it’s a great cartridge like some of those vintage MM or MC, they are getting more expensive if the condition is still NOS after 30 years (and, of course if many users are still fascinated about the sound). Your calculations are wrong, because a $500 cartridge from the 80s today will cost $1500 (for example). You can use a great cartridge on any great tonearm if you like the sound. I’ve heard $450 cartridges on $5000 tonearms and it was a stunning combination in direct comparison to more expensive cartridges. The system balance you measure in % is nonsense if you will take a whole picture. The balance is only about the sound and you can’t measure it in $ or in %. Some people are living in the world of High-End Audio press where everything is high priced, they might think they need a system like M.Fremer has. In reality the brain can be totally satisfied with a well balanced and much cheaper system and it's not necessary to follow the reviews for cartridges that cost $15k each. |
Value judgments are not ''truth-functional''. That is to say there is no question about truth or falsity involved. To put this otherwise ''values are cultural determined''. So not universal. A typical example of difference between ''nature'' and '' nurture''. Trying to get consensus about whatever component is trying to avoid the issue. Compare Chines opera with Mozart or Bach to get ''the picture''. |
The majority of the highly technical responses above lack practicality if one wants to avoid making a turntable system a many years long project. There is definitely a sweet spot that "might" be achieved if just three vinyl system components, turntable, tonearm and cartridge, were were generally ranked by price/performance, and then, considered on a diminishing performance returns basis. For example regarding the turntable piece, it makes sense to give Fieckert, Sota, Rega, Linn, etc their due when considering all the mechanical aspects of building a turntable. There is no need for non-engineer audiophiles to be bothered with consideration for bearings, motors, and other build components....that is better left to the specialty manufacturers with proven track records. Furthermore, as a practical matter, it would be necessary to make the assumption that longstanding venerable brands which have achieved a consistent and positive reputation in the audiophile community, have earned that reputation as a result of ongoing technical innovation provided at a given price point. Because of the combined electronic/mechanical nature of a turntable versus all other hifi system components, eliminating pricy esoteric fly-by-night manufacturers from consideration will weed out all but proven brands, while state-of-the-art technical leaps will be well represented by the established companies. Yes, I wish an honest retailer was capable of taking a client's budget number to assemble a vinyl playback system, matching the turntable, tonearm and cartridge on the basis of price/performance and the diminishing performance returns analysis of each component. |
As this is a Old Thread and recently received a Post claiming that a non-audiophile does not need to concern themselves with Bearings. When it comes to a Platter Spindle Bearing, producing a TT, that has a Platter Spindle Bearing which will not show a Platter run off, is a feat of engineering to achieve. To achieve a Platter run off which will show a measurement that has a very low tolerance for a movement, will need certain type of skilled labour at the production work front to hone the tolerances required. This practice has the potential to add substantial cost to the end product. Hence the average TT producer is not going to show the accuracy of their products in relation to a run off measurement, the exposure of the inaccuracies in relation to a Zero run off, will not bear well and will hold them to ransom on QA issues, if they were to make claims of the fluctuations in measurements working within a particular dimension parameter. It can also be heeded, that as a result of allowed production tolerances for parts being produced, one TT to another from the same Brand/Model can show quite substantial variation in Platter run off. I don't see Parts being discarded when they fall within a certain tolerance, but are maybe at the dimension parameters of the tolerances allowed for. Take the above and add it to used TT's being purchased, the condition of the Platter Bearing is a unknown, and Platter run off measurements might be further increased to the New Supplied item. When using a used TT, this might be the least of ones concerns, and will only be of a concern when a condition such as a discovered eccentric rotation is corrected. It does not necessarily mean a TT has to have had a hard life and a long usage have developed Eccentric Rotation, some TT's as a result of the design and materials used at interfaces can quickly develop a eccentric rotation after a short usage life. There is not a speed control device in use, or to be produced, that can correct a speed fluctuation due to a eccentric rotation occurring. There is not a Isolation design, whether Built into a TT or a Off Board Ancillary, that will stop the transfer of energy to the Cart', that has been generated as a result of a Platter Bearing Interfaces not being optimised, even worse is when eccentric rotation is present. The True Rotation and Quietness of the Platter Bearing during rotations, is 'one' of the Critical Factors to be considered that enable a Cart' and the Tonearm to function in a optimised environment. It is known Vinyl LP users are quite content to use a $10-$15K Cart'>Tonearm in conjunction with expensive devices to accurately control the TT's Speed, under the guise, the expense associated with the ancillaries in use are creating a optimised environment. I myself have used £6000+ Tonearm>Cart in a non optimised environment and can assure one that when the Bearing is improved toward a optimised environment the performance presented is Uplifted to the perception it can seem tangible. The use of expensive supporting ancillaries in a non-optimised environment (Non-True rotations of Platter Bearing/ Noise/Energy Transferred), is seemingly quite acceptable. It does seem that the Non-Optimisation of the Platter Bearing during operation, for many, is a lesser consideration, and the Brand/ Reputation of the supporting ancillaries in use are the focus that has the TT users priority. The Platter Bearing, Cart', Tonearm are a Engineering Trilogy and are as dependent on each to produce the best mechanical interfaces for optimised performance. TT's in most conditions met, are able to function to enable a replay of recorded music. If this is all that is wanted that is fine, the idea of spending substantial sums on supporting ancillaries is best avoided. When substantial monies are being outlaid to add supporting ancillaries to the TT, from experience, it serves the whole of the mechanical interfaces for the best, if the function is optimised for all critical parts necessary to enable the replay to take place. |
