No doubt there's a law of diminishing returns with hifi (as there is with bikes). I've moved up from an AT95E through a variety of cartridges to a Lyra Helikon which, at the time, was their cheapest option. The more expensive I've gone, the less obvious the imperfections on the record and the more intricate the detail retrieved.
I posted this thread yesterday as I'm keen to hear other systems:
https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/hifi-listening-to-other-systems/
Years ago I listened to a super expensive set up with a Nakamichi Dragon amongst other exotica. The owner loved the sound but I felt I was listening through a blanket - each to their own!
Well I blame Mr.S. I was more than happy with my CD player until she bought me a S/H Marantz auto TT for xmas 2020. Within two months I'd upgraded to an AT LP5x and an elliptical stylus. Then I splashed out on a RigB upgrade so my cartridge is secure in a machined aluminium housing.
Mugged? Not too sure. We do like buying stuff - it's in our DNA.
But I know, hand on brain, that the CD format is superior by a long way for multiple reasons:
Cost
Resilience
Footprint
Noise floor
Dynamic range
Freq. response
Compliance with Nyquist sampling theory with more than adequate bit depth for accurate quantization...
And the science behind the CD is mindblowing, especially given the time it was prototyping.
Think of computer or car technology in 1978!
Wanna buy a turntable?
EDIT: double post
CDs were a fine example of superb engineering. Absolutely.
but
Hifi isn't exactly sold on science, is it?
But I know, hand on brain, that the CD format is superior by a long way for multiple reasons:
Cost
Resilience
I have at least two CD's in the cupboard that will no longer play due to the discs degrading with an oxide bloom under the polycarbonate. The vinyl from even longer ago is still playing well. Neither music format are super versions of pressing (SACD or 200g vinyl).
Early CD players were really poor at reproduction too as corners were cut to maximise profits from the new format. A Linn Sondek of the period will still comfortably keep up with moderate CD players though it may be necessary to update bearings and stuff to get the best out of them today.
CD's at 16 bit/44.1k are not that great 24 bit 192k is a world apart.
analog recordings can sound superb, and a good pressing to vinyl often sounds nicer than a digitized versin, even though it goes through a whole mountain of of phase shifting eq etc.
digitized analog signals are robust, but there is some dark art in music and recording I feel..
at the end of the day its the music that moves you not the medium.
regarding CD's being able to store and replay the nuance of sound that humans are capable of discerning, no they are not.
a good pressing to vinyl often sounds nicer than a digitized versin
Define "nicer".
nicer as in pleasing to listen to, its very subjective.
Indeed. Your nice probably isn't mine. Which is why arguing about hi-fi is a waste of time.
About a year ago I spent around £900 on refurbing and servicing my 35 year old Linn Sondek LP12 turntable, which I've had from new, treating it to a new power supply, motor, bearing, belt and cartrige (about £200 for the cartridge) so yes I have spent well over £125 on a stylus. Money well spent I reckon because it sounds at least as good as a decent CD or streamer- of course with the occasional added surface noise. Good investment as well because the dealer reckoned that even in its knackered state the deck was worth around £1500 so now its probably one of the most valuable things in our house.
Your nice probably isn’t mine. Which is why arguing about hi-fi is a waste of time.
Oooh, now you've done it....🙂
'Nice' is subjective.
'High Fidelity' isn't.
If your HiFi doesn't look like this it ain't worth shit - bring back the stack! 🙂
[img] 
[/img]
slowoldman
Full MemberIndeed. Your nice probably isn’t mine. Which is why arguing about hi-fi is a waste of time.
Maybe..in fact you are almost certainly correct, it's more than quite probable...and who is having an argument here?
if you love music and have and interest in how a performance or idea can be captured crafted and distributed, discussing the playback may or may not be a waste of time depending on your personal perspective.
some people obsess others just like to subscribe to spotify, whatever dude.
Money well spent I reckon because it sounds at least as good as a decent CD or streamer- of course with the occasional added surface noise.
You spent £900 on repairing something that now sounds "at least as good" as a CD player only with extra noise?
I must've missed something here.
"I must’ve missed something here."
The fact that he has loads of vinyl records and likes to listen to them?
That’s a very cheap moving coil cartridge. I’d increase the budget.
I have at least two CD’s in the cupboard that will no longer play due to the discs degrading with an oxide bloom under the polycarbonate.
The problem is with the thin coat of lacquer that’s spayed onto the aluminium coating applied to the polycarbonate disc after its pressed; some manufacturers were using the wrong type of lacquer that degrades and allows the mirror coating to oxidise. Nimbus Records,,a classical label, we’re especially guilty of this, I’ve got a number of their recordings, and the lacquer on the non-label side is actually sticky! I also have discs I bought in the early 80’s which still play perfectly, including the very first CD I bought in 1982, Peter Gabriel 4, after I returned five vinyl copies because of the appalling quality of the pressings, which were unlistenable due to surface noise. And that was on the turntable I mentioned earlier.
Anyway, only two? What percentage of your total CD collection does that comprise? I’ve still got hundreds of CD’s, I think even the Nimbus ones will still play, and they’re all over twenty years old.
Bought a 7″ single , barrie by frankie, from Juno the other day and it’s appalling.
*sigh* It’s a 7” single, I can promise you that format never was, and never will be, the definition of high fidelity! It’s intended for jukeboxes and teenagers with a little portable record player on the floor with loads of 7”-ers scattered all over the place. You’ll get better results from a cassette.
Now, a 12” single, well mastered, will blow your socks off! It’s the format of choice for dub, funk, anything that requires a decent amount of dynamic range, you’ll never get bass on a vinyl album that comes close to a good 12” single.
A 7” single will have at most have a meagre 40/45 dB range no matter what expense is thrown at the turntable/system, a well mastered and cut 12” can have approx 65dB of dynamic range, a cd’s dynamic range is approx 96 dB.
re: "the stack" above.
The graphic equaliser. *Sigh* How much shit can you possibly introduce to the signal path?
Anyway - enjoy your music however you listen to it.
I'm having a vinyl morning. Queen through Du Lipa to China Crisis and it's ace.
I may spend that £149 when my elliptical becomes conical!
How old are you and how good are your ears? You likely lost any perceivable benefits from a £150 needle
Wrong and misses the point.
Even if you've lost some top, decent kit will make everything that you still can hear sound better, and feel better (which is the real point).
No kit exists to scientifically measure 'how you feel' so it's a concept many of the literal-minded denizens of Singletrack fail to grok when it comes to the philosophy of hi-fi.
I need a new needle as it goes; I won't be spending £149 on a replacement, no ...
How long do they last for?
No kit exists to scientifically measure ‘how you feel’ so it’s a concept many of the literal-minded denizens of Singletrack fail to grok when it comes to the philosophy of hi-fi.
er, yeah, no
hifi is sold in exactly the same way as fad diets or politicians or self improvement schemes, with voodoo and hand waving mysticism
you want to give
a travelling wizard
a celebrity dieter
a hifi shop
some money for
some totally magic beads
their zero effort yet more tasty than fast food weight loss diet
overpriced bits of electronics
then crack on
but, the totally magic beads are not actually totally magic at all, in much the same way the emperor's new clothes were not even there.
If you're talking it up as a 'philosophy' then, I think, you are too far down the hifi rabbit hole and will certainly not GAS about anything I, or any other literal-minded denizen of singletrack hath writ, unless it is to attack it.
Also, I have some totally magic beads to sell. They're totally magic. Would you like to buy them?
Lets wax lyrical about the 12" single.
My first encounter with one was Motorhead's 'Ace of Spades'. I had an old hmv portable record player and when I dropped the needle the sound that emmitted from it was like the sound of hell opening up.
Of course it was the sound of the tiny speaker distorting and the feeble amp being overdriven but it sounded 'Ace'. It was the first time music had sent a shiver up my spine. CD's might have more dynamic range and clarity but they don't do that.
What we listen to is an interface between lots of different elements, with our ears (and brain) being the last pieces in that chain. Music is about vibration, be that a string on a guitar, a vocal chord or a drum skin but also our eardrum's as we listen to it and bodies as we feel it.
It's can also be about how the needle vibrates in the groove. Whist we can see this is an imperfect scenario it is nevertheless in smpathy with the physical way in which the sound is played, recorded and listened to. Digital formats tend to iron that out by claiming to eliminate some of the physical elements in the chain thus geting closer to a perfect sound.
It was never about that, the quality we admire in so much of the music we listen to is a consequence of imperfect interfaces, the interplay between different technologies. It's the story of modern music. Deus ex machina.
Someone disagree with me so I can cite a few examples..
Yes @inkster you have a point about imperfections being "desirable". It's what makes a tube guitar amp turned up to 11 make your hair stand on end. My argument however would be that that stuff is for the live performance/recording session. If you actually want the hear what was recorded you don't want to add further distortion in your living room.
AT95 is one of those good ones, don't cost much, have to spend a lot more to noticeably better it. But depends on your tastes, some folk want bass, some folk want the high end. Anything is better than a worn out, distorted, smoke damaged manky thing thats decades old.
The more you spend generally the better they get, but with MM type there is a ceiling (about £3-500), then above that you need to go MC, but that requires a better pre-amp and better everything in between TBH.
No point putting a £1k carbon crankset on an apollo Y frame from 2001. Same in the audio world. It defo becomes snake oil at the high high end.
For a reasonable MM cart, spend £60-200, get a £4 protractor to make sure it sits in the right place, then never worry about it again until you mangle it when the cat smacks it.
I can't remember me dad using a protractor on his Ferguson music centre...
Someone disagree with me so I can cite a few examples..
Can you cite them for people who agree?
Well I just discovered that the current replacement for my cartridge would be around £260 so I suppose I have to say yes - though maybe not considering vinyl is no longer my main medium.
"Can you cite them for people who agree?"
Ok, when Bessie Smith was first recorded, her voice was so powerful that it overwhelmed the recording equipment, distorting wildly. The engineers realised that although they had failed to record her voice accurately, something new had been created that sounded great in a different way, deus ex machina. They became aware that the technology itself had a voice, or even a kind of soul.
I'm reminded of Keith Richards arguing with the recording engineers as they freaked out whenever the needle went into the red, for Keef, if it wasn't in the red it wasn't working.
I can't remember which album it was but Bruce Springsteen once demoed an album onto a 4 track cassette. Said tape fell out of his shirt pocket whilst fishing and ended up in a lake. Once retrieved the sound had been ruined...in a good way. So good in fact that after recording the material in the studio he ended up using the soggy cassette for the master recording.
Then there's boogie woogie. The term comes from 'bogey woogie', coined a hundred years ago, when jazz musicians playing on railway trains in Texas had to modify what they were playing to accommodate the noise coming from the bogeys (wheels) as they went over the joins in the tracks. Diddly dum, diddly dum....
A bit esoteric that last one but I think it shows how 20th century music was very much about the relationship between humans and technology, the desired aesthetics of the product being more than just the idea and intention of the musician and the search for perfection.
The room in which you are listening to music has a much, if not more influence on the sound than the equipment being used.
I inherited some Nad amps and lovely teak speakers. My 12" bass heavy records sounded dreadful in my living room so I continued using my Event 20/20's (clinical studio monitors). I sold them to a friend who put them in his warehouse studio space, where they sounded incredible, giving a warm sound in a 'cold' space. The colder sounding Events sounded better in my 'warm', carpeted living room.
I'm very much geared to the physical aspects of sound, having worked in a lot of nightclubs. I preferred overriding the top end of an average house system (a bit of nice distortion on snares and cymbals) and bringing in extra sub-bass to handle the bottom end. Never bothered too much with the mid-range in those environments as it occupies the same frequency as people talking and MC's chatting, so if you tried to bring out the mid range you ended up turning everything up to 11 and hurting people's eardrums, I prefered heavier rather than louder and was often disappointed by mega systems that others thought amazing.
Though those who listen to music on headphones can probably ignore everything I said. I'll also add that my ears are f*** from all the aforementioned activity.
Hi-Fi was always the domain of the young (and today’s young no longer care).
How come old men designed the best stuff?
Did they?
Along with the room, amp and speakers the stylus is without doubt the most important parts of a record player set up in terms of sound quality.
I have made many hifi related purchases over the years that have definitely improved sound quality, but along with amazing innovation and technological advancement there has always been a fair amount of marketing balderdash in the hifi sector . Generally speaking though to get the decent bits of kit you have needed to pay top dollar.
Not really related to the OP's original question but discussions on hifi equipment often bring to mind the (IMO) classic clip from the 80's film Ruthless people.
Along with the room, amp and speakers the stylus is without doubt the most important parts of a record player set up in terms of sound quality.
Well that about covers it.
And the once-critical importance of a decent analogue source and quality interconnects was genocidally destroyed by lossless digital about 20 years ago
I don’t think so. For those with large existing analogue connections who love music - still very important. Also DAC’s to your analogue amplifier. For casual listeners, purity has never really been that important.
There are lovers of music and there are lovers of hi-fi equipment.
There are lovers of music and there are lovers of hi-fi equipment.
I count myself in the former camp.
And all CD players do not sound the same.
That was absolutely the case when CD was first introduced - the early players from the likes of Technics were very ‘toppy’, because they were biased towards the sort of music common in Japan, which doesn’t have much bass. It was Denon, Philips and Marantz who first developed CD players for the Western market, my Denon was about £800 retail IIRC, and sounded amazing. However, many CD’s were actually very badly mastered, as the master tapes used were those originally used for vinyl mastering, which is deliberately eq’d with a reduced dynamic range.
er, yeah, no
hifi is sold in exactly the same way as fad diets or politicians or self improvement schemes, with voodoo and hand waving mysticism
@mrmonkfinger there’s always one post like this in a hifi post on STW so well done for being this thread’s doubting Thomas.
What I don’t understand is why people like you feel it so important to dismiss everyone else’s experience as delusion. It’s like any time religion gets brought up here and everyone races to explain it as mass hysteria (like COVID 😂); why not just accept your own intransigence and allow others who can hear huge differences in sound reproduction to enjoy their more informed experience; why the need to unilaterally dismiss us as the deranged ones; do we threaten you that much?
I’ve been blissfully happy since I was able to get a decent stereo back in my life. After my divorce, I set aside £30k from the house sale to buy the best damn system I could afford. Bit by bit it’s been built tweaked and improved and my new partner, a huge music fan but not someone who has ever been exposed to good quality sound before, has heard the subtle and often not so subtle, improvements that every iteration has yielded, even down to the use of graphite cones under the amps (which was a quite dramatic improvement but then the amps are valve based and so more prone to mechanical vibration effects).
Source continues to be a hugely interesting area for development. Because I was starting from scratch I went with a server based front end; I ripped about 600 albums to bit perfect 44/16 copies and bought a high end custom built music server. This was the last box to be delivered and having replaced my MacBook Pro on serving duties, the improvement was vast.
But what has impressed me the most are the high res files you can bow buy and download (downloaded still sounds considerably better than streamed) from places like Qobuz. 196/24 is a dramatic lift but DSD256 is a whole order of magnitude better again (when the music is recorded in DSD of course, which very little is currently apart from classical re-recordings).
I’m at the point now where other than user experience (which remains hugely important for analogue) there is little if no benefit from using vinyl over digital if your reason for doing so is quality of sound.
30k is a lot to spend on a hifi. Do you dance to the music it plays or sit in a specially placed armchair ?
there’s always one post like this in a hifi post on STW so well done for being this thread’s doubting Thomas.
followed by one that is so pretentious I cant decide if it’s parody or not #poeslaw
There's both nonsense AND common sense spouted about most subjects.
Crank length on bikes is a good example. I prefer a certain length, others can't tell the difference.
Fine, but my knees hurt when my cranks are too long.
The thing about HiFi is that many people who claim that others are being precious about it haven't used their own ears to decide.
CountZero
Full Member
And all CD players do not sound the same.That was absolutely the case when CD was first introduced – the early players from the likes of Technics were very ‘toppy’, because they were biased towards the sort of music common in Japan, which doesn’t have much bass.
I bought a Technics SL-PG520 in 1992, and still have it. It's a huge step forward from the first gen players.
I recently compared it to a Marantz KI signature, same model as Derek's.
I'd fancied one for years, they have a great reputation. It sounded amazing, but I still preferred the Technics in my system. More natural, less processed, less emphasis on the top end but a nicer bass and midrange.
The Marantz had better dynamics and more 'slam'. Horses for courses.
A huge difference in presentation, but both sound very good indeed and would please most people I think.
