"Having owned many good turntables in my audiophile life I am still wondering why not one of the modern designs of the last 20 years is able to beat the sound qualities of an EMT 927."
There is not much difference in "sound quality" of one well constructed table versus another IMHO.
What will result in sound quality differences is all that goes into getting a good table arm and cart set up well, and all that goes into selecting flavor of cart to sound best with all the rest. Which actually might or does is largely subjective.
Spinning a record quietly with good sound is not rocket science. It just has to be done right. DO it right and there are many possibilities regarding which will be determined by who to beat the others. |
Its always a fair question to ask how one knows how a particular component in an audio system is contributing to the end results.
Listening to a system only indicates what each of the components used is CAPABLE of doing in that particular configuration, not how the individual parts sound in general.
Its useful information but one should be careful about jumping to general conclusions about specific components. Turntable A may be the winner in system A. That probably is a good indicator that it is a strong competitor but does not mean that it will perform equally well in system B.
An analogy is that a baseball player may lead the league in batting in stadium A, but fall well behind the leaders in stadium B. IF they are among the leaders in multiple stadiums (the more the merrier), however, that is probably a good indicator that the player is pretty good. |
"either the speed is good or it's not."
That's easily measured and determined. $150 Japanese turntables from the seventies used strobe lights as indicators. Most decent tables in good working order had good speed control. The most common problem was belt drives with dirty or defective belts, usually an easy fix. I heard many tables and was able to recognize speed issues to some degree by listening but not always with enough precision to detect minor speed problems.
"either the music has flow and energy or it does not"
This is one I do not understand. Is this a speed thing again? Is it dynamics? If the latter, the table itself has little to do with it. The overall phono setup and system as a whole is what matters. The cartridge matters a lot more than the table itself. IT has to have good performance in general and especially with the specific tonearm on that table to be truly great.
"and familiar pressings reveal plenty about noise levels and such."
For a reference point, my 30 year old Linn Axis that cost me about $600 new at the time is still as dead quiet as my digital with good quality records in good condition. Again, setup of the rig and quality of the vinyl are the main factors, not so much just the table itself.
Things like these are why it never surprises me when a seemingly meager or ancient device on the grand scale of things perform like champs. Ability of the owner/user to make good equipment choices and get things set up right is probably the biggest factor of all with phono. |
I just think its funny even comparing an old table like the EMT 927 to a modern table costing.....wait....$36,000.
IT better be good for that price. Ain't many fish out there likely to take that bait. :^)
I'd bet they both are quite good when operating properly, like most every other good table out there. |
I agree with dev to stick a Timeline on any table that claims to be top notch and show the resulting measurements to prove it. |
$36000 for a turntable might be justified even if just for aesthetic reasons. But in terms of performance, there should be something concrete other than words to justify the price. Measuring the precision of the speed control using a suitably sensitive device should be par for the course if tt cost is based on relative performance. |
For me tt has two jobs to do well:
1) spin record at proper speed
2) isolate from noise
I feel most good tables set up properly and in good working order are proficient at both.
tt alone cannot isolate effectively from external physical vibrations and EM fields, both of which are sources of noise. This is where the user's setup alone can work and solutions need not be at all expensive.
THese things addressed effectively are what produce top notch results.
Expensive tables with very high build quality can help address external vibrations but cannot solve that in all cases alone, so money may not be able to buy the complete solution from a tt maker. |
"You say that most "good" tables do a good job of spin speed and isolation. I totally disagree."
Useless argument. If they don't, then they are not good. Bottom line is what you can hear. I've never heard much difference that I could attribute to the table alone with any decent table and I've sold and heard many. Maybe others can/do more than me. But I would estimate that I am significantly more sensitive to these things than most, if not all. |
If it were possible the best tonearm length would probably be no tonearm, or 0 length. Tonearms are necessary evils given the inherently flawed design of vinyl and teh systems needed to play it. Bigger/longer might be OK if done well but is definitely not better. |
The thing is almost every aspect of vinyl record playback is a compromise. I suppose that's what makes it so interesting say compared to digital, there are lots of ways to do it yet no approach is perfect, much less any record being played.
So it is what it is. Long tonearm, shorter tonearm, whatever....it is what it is. WHatever you do there will always be a compromise somewhere. Its part of the vinyl mystique I suppose. |
Tbg,
Of course digital is subject to errors are well and nothing is perfect , but there can be no comparison IMHO either in design or practice between the precision, significance, magnitude or commonality in practice of the errors common or possible with the half century old 33 1/3 vinyl system compared to modern digital.
I still like and often might even prefer a good vinyl recording, but I am not going to delude myself about the inherent flaws and compromises that are involded with playing records, both in theory/on paper and even more so in practice. It often sounds much better than it probably has any right to still, but good sound and accuracy/precision are two separate things. |
YEs, no purpose in yet another vinyl versus digital debate. Its pretty well documented already.
Good pure analog recordings are the ones that shine most uniquely on vinyl for me.
Once the recording and mastering process starts to become digital, then the unique strengths of vinyl become lessened.
Nowadays, both good digital and good analog recordings have a lot to offer. The differences between the two seem to become less and less significant the more of a role digital plays in the process overall. |
"Analog, like digital, has made strides in the last 3 decades."
No doubt.
But how much again to get the equipment capable of it?
Then how many recordings capable of actually demonstrating it?
Then how many people capable of setting it up properly to achieve the results?
Granted, the results can be extraordinary when done right, especially these days on a good modern rig. That's all that matters in the end. |
Just to summarize my perspective, it wold not surprise me if no other table beats the EMT 927 because the criteria in which such a comparison would be made is totally subjective. There is little quantitative to bank on regarding the ability of one table alone to beat another. There are too many factors that go into top notch vinyl performance....turntable alone is a small part. There are many ways to very good results, though all are technically flawed even if results are most sonically pleasing. SO its a total pot shot in the end regarding what beats what. Good digital will beat bad vinyl and vice versa as well. |
"We customers decide almost nothing on which audio item should I buy."
"Audiophiles have been lied to for nearly their entire life ('perfect sound for ever/we make the best'); audition is really the only solution until a particular voice they know gains credibility in their eyes."
YEp, as the wise sage Billy Joel sang "It's all about Trust".
Everyone decides for themselves what they buy and who they trust, right or wrong. |
"NO it's not, even you learned ( for the good or bad ) through the AHEE and your ears accustomed to what the AHEE taught to you."
You mean I shouldn't put all my trust in those guys who want to sell me something?
How about just a little here and there?
Seriously, I think there is truth to what Raul says in that the AHEE as referred to certainly have had a lot of influence on audiophiles over the years, but the fact is no two AHEE preach the exact same gospel usually.
SO people still decide who they will trust or not and how much.
There IS learning to be achieved through this process if done with common sense.
Its easy to trust ones ears and one must in the end, but its been well proven and becoming increasingly more widely accepted in teh business world that collaborative environments deliver better informed and more productive participants than those that are closed and that exclude certain viewpoints that might even seem to be frequently way off base. |
Raul,
You sound like you are well informed regarding AHEE untruths.
What are you non-AHEE sources of truth then? I would really like to know! |
"Dear mapman: Sources of truth?, it does not exist in formal way. They came from personal research deep research I can say.
"
Raul, the problem with that is that no man is perfect. WHat if you are wrong or missed something? How would you know? Good science does not happen in a vacuum usually. |
"When confronting the Borg, resistance is futile. When confronting Raul, argument is fruitless. I am OK with that......, Really."
That's too bad. Raul does share some good information (albeit in fractured English), as do many others. I have yet to find anyone who seems to have cornered the market on audio truths.
Picard resisted the Borg, maybe Raul can too! As well as the AHEE! :^) |
Raul,
I think you are relying a bit too much on superlatives and absolutes in your language and accordingly overestimate the tendency of other educated people to act like sheep and follow the "AHEE". If a study were done, I think you would find many other educated and independent thinking "AHEE" similar to you, with some of the same and some different beliefs and interests. That's a good thing! Glass half full, not totally empty...
There are many "Rauls" out there. Maybe just not using the word "AHEE". |
"Dear Mapman: Agree that are many other persons that are thinking and experienced audio subjects " out of the box ", I never said I'm the " only ": not."
No, but when you talk about AHEE in such broad general terms, it gives the impression that it is an all inclusive club and categorically evil and misinformed.
I would loose the word AHEE all together if I were you and be more specific in who/what is being addressed case by case instead. That avoids grouping those who are educated with good intentions in with those who might be otherwise. Its a good practice and also better from a PR perspective.
Now if in fact you have 100% revolutionary ideas that toally flies in the face of everything anyone already knows about this stuff, then by all means have at and take on the world, but do you really, Raul? Really?
Impressions matter with people, sometimes even more than facts. |
