Show us your turntable

You´re right. We did that some years ago by measuring and by audition






12 Likes

…still don’t know how you measure how good something sounds, except by using your ears and your own personal and subjective criteria.

Measurement is done on technical quality (Wow and Flutter, Speed deviation and S/N ratio) only not on individual taste or other subjective criteria. But you can also record what is played back and then analyze the frequency spectrum; this gives further clues and even shows what has changed in terms of sound

Agreed
…but…
If these parameters result in deterioration or improvement in sound quality, it will be apparent through the primary measuring devices, these being your ears and your auditory cortex.

Agreed. That´s what I said several times before. Audition and individual rating does not necessarily have to coincide with the technical facts, conditions and dependencies.

However, when it comes to technical quality there´s hardly no difference between turntables in the > 2.5k class.

For the sake of the thread, here Is my humble contribution :grinning:

31 Likes

Nice any info on make, tonearm and cartridge please mojo

1 Like

That’s a really pretty turntable.

Feeling such love for this VPI turntable…

Nothing to add from me. If Don Camillo is happy with a piece of eqpt and doesn’t see the point of another one, than who am I to tell him otherwise? Cheaper for him too :slight_smile:

1 Like

WoW!

I’ve actually heard this system.

1 Like

Hi, yes… It’s a Prime 2018 with its 10" 3D printed unipivot tonearm. Pick-up is a Grado Reference Sonata 2.
Lovely deck indeed, very well built and sounding really good Indeed!

1 Like

At Mike Lavigne’s home?
It must be something to hear such turntables. How did you found Dartzeel electronics?

What you interpret into the course of the conversation did not take place and was never said by me. Maybe you re-frame your reading.

For my part, I stayed objective and didn’t offend anyone. So you shouldn’t do that either. Thanks

From what I can see I don’t think anybody is being offensive or should be taking any offence here.

Some kind of misunderstanding perhaps?

Very nice indeed

I understood that for you any turntable after 2,5 k is a bit the same, from a technical point of view and sound level quality. Just a matter of tastes that can differ.
At least it’s what I understood from you.
So if you have a turntable in the 3 k range, no need and reason to buy a more expensive one. Cemil post was in that direction, no offensive at all.

…and I think that is why many of us are very careful to use phrases such as:
I think that;
In my opinion;
I prefer…
…etc etc…
Rather than:
This is better, because it measures better or because it has been auditioned (by whatever method) and has been judged to be better.
In the end, our personal judgements are usually by audition and therefore valid within our own context…the only one that really matters.
These fora are useful, in seeking opinions (rather than universally acknowledges truths) and advice.
…and sometimes just for an exchange of ideas!

That´s the misunderstanding - so re-framed it should be

… any turntable after 2,5 k is hardly equal from a technical point of view and all relevant technical quality aspects (wow and flutter, Speed deviation and S/N ratio). Change in material and construction with their effects on quality sum always up to these three aspects only from a technical point of view.

Maybe the following helps to figure out what is the central point of view into this:

  • Signal-to-noise ratio is defined as the ratio of the level of a signal (aka wanted input) to the level of background noise (aka unwanted input). Hence it already includes all (measurable) effects related to design principles, tonearm and cartridges as well as to materials choosen and paired or mounted what way for platter, bearing, plinth, suspension, rack, platform, bases, floor etc…

  • Wow and flutter sums up all (measurable) pitch variations which could result from warping of the record due to issues in record production or due to issues related to how the record is “connected” to the platter as well as any issue where the groove isn´t spun precisely centered and in level. Hence this measurement includes already all relevant aspects due to platter design principles, details about reached tolerances and quality level in design and all production processes (bearing, platter, mat, record, motor, PSU), material behaviour (e.g. damping factor of the mat), the design quality and approach of the control loop used in the motor control unit (PSU) as well as trackability capabilities of cart and tonearm and others …

  • Speed deviation gives an insight in what is the relative deviation of the measured platter speed (with respect to the rated speed the platter should turn with. This value therefore provides direct information about the quality of the entire drive unit. Hence it includes already all aspects about motor, PSU, belt, friction wheel, suspension and isolation of the motor as well as all effects inherited in concentricity aspects of platter, bearing and pulley or caused by magnetic fields in direct drive applications and again any trackbility issues …

Conversely, this technical approach turns any auditioned ranking of the sound as long as the technical quality level is not vastly different into just a matter of individual taste. Of course, I also have an individual taste, which, depending on my form of the day, sometimes persuades me to count one component to be more pleasing me than another. But i never ever woulld declare that to be the only valid ranking or the sound from a different class or world :sunglasses:

Furthermore that explains quite well why so different perceptions and rankings for otherwise identical components are reported regularily.

1 Like