Vinyl...
Dec 26, 2004 at 9:05 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 21

Mr.Radar

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 6, 2004
Posts
2,697
Likes
11
WARNING: Long, rambly post ahead.

Yesterday I went to my aunt and uncle's house, which I do only once per year (we usually celebrate Thanksgiving and X-Mas at either their's or my grandparent's house). When I got there I discovered he had a turn-table and two boxes full of mint-condition records (he said he used to have more, but threw most away, and said my aunt would like him to get rid of the rest sometime soon (I told him I'd gladly take his records and player if he didn't want them anymore)). I have yet to hear a proper vinyl rig and this is the closest I've come yet.

The turntable was a Technics full-auto Direct Drive model with some Audio Technica MM cardtridge. A mid-1980's Marantz integrated amp served as both the amp and phonostage. The first half of my listening was done with some Marantz floorstanding speakers which I didn't like a lot (they sounded very muddy, unlike the Marantz bookshelves he had hooked up to his DVD player in the living room which are the best speakers I've heard yet). The second half of my listening was done through some Sony MDR-7505 headphones (V600 drivers in V500 headband/cups, they sounded better than the speakers though despite trying to crush my skull) I found in my uncle's office.

The first record I listened to was The Little River Band - The Net. I have three of the songs on this records on CD, however I did not have the CD with me to compare the album to so I was going off memory. The sound of this record wasn't very impressive, with the vocals being especially rough/grainy and the highs lacking compared to the CD.

The next record I listened to was Toto - Toto IV. The only song I've heard off this record is an MP3 copy of Africa off the CD version (which, again, I didn't have with to compare). Actually, this record revealed both one of the biggest problem, or feature if you want to look at it that way (I can see it both ways), is that you can't just press a button and have the record skip to the next song, so you have to listen to a whole side at a time. Again, on the Africa track (the last on Side 2) my impressions were similar to The Net, though the roughness of the vocals was less aparant.

Following Toto I listened to Welcome to the Real World by Mr. Mister. I have never heard any of the tracks on this album on CD. This record seemed better mastered than The Net and Toto IV, and there was very little grainyness in the vocals. The sound was warm, dynamic, and musical. The music was great, but I was still not extremely impressed with vinyl as a medium (though I could see how some people could enjoy its sound).

Moving on to Meldown by Steve Taylor...
eek.gif
biggrin.gif
WOW! I don't know if it was the mastering, the headphones (I started listening with the headphones about 1 song in), or the fact that I corrected the speed about half way through (the TT included a built-in speed adjuster that took me a while to find) but this record blew me away. There was no vocal graininess in addition to the music being absolutely fabulous. Then it suddenly hit me: this is what music is suppost to sound like. I like this album so much that I'm going to buy the CD the first chance I get, but I'm afraid I won't enjoy it as much!

The last record I listened to was Boston - Boston which only reinforced my impressions of Meltdown. I can now not imagine listening to rock from the late 70's/early 80's on a digital system, it just doesn't seem quite right.

A very educational experience, and a year from now I predict that I'll be well on the road to becoming a vinyl junkie. The only thing preventing me from buying a turntable now is the fact that I'd have nowhere to put it, or to store the records, and the fact that my younger brother would probably destroy half of them if he ever had the chance to get at them.

NOTE: I'm only 15 so I grew up with CDs as my primary music storage format, though when I was 3 my parents bought me a toy record player on clearence and a whole bunch or children's records from the 60's and 70's at garage sales so I'm not entirely unexposed to vinyl.
 
Dec 26, 2004 at 10:03 PM Post #3 of 21
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Radar
A very educational experience, and a year from now I predict that I'll be well on the road to becoming a vinyl junkie. The only thing preventing me from buying a turntable now is the fact that I'd have nowhere to put it, or to store the records, and the fact that my younger brother would probably destroy half of them if he ever had the chance to get at them.


LP's do take up quite a bit of space, but the vinyl "experience" is well worth the investment both in money and in space. I would also imagine that, although your uncle's albums were in "mint" condition, they could have probably used a good cleaning. You would be amazed at the difference clean vinyl makes.

If/when you do ever get into vinyl, have fun.

Hell, have fun anyway.
biggrin.gif
 
Dec 26, 2004 at 11:07 PM Post #4 of 21
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Radar
I can now not imagine listening to rock from the late 70's/early 80's on a digital system, it just doesn't seem quite right.


Exactly. Try listening to Jethro Tull - Aqualung or Thick as a Brick and you'll be able to understand this even better.

Boston is a particularly well-recorded album, too. It's great you were able to hear that. I was about 15 when I heard my first vinyl too. However, four years it took me to get a TT of my own. I have almost 1000 records, that are now being played.

Check out my review of the Goldring GR1, if you ever intend on getting started with Vinyl.
 
Dec 27, 2004 at 7:10 AM Post #5 of 21
I got a kick out of that post. Not to be condescending, but you do realize, you don't have to listen to the whole side.
There are gaps between tracks, and you can lift and place the arm wherever you want, just do so gently.
 
Dec 31, 2004 at 12:50 AM Post #6 of 21
It's a long story but instead up upgrading my headphone amp and headphones, I've decided to try vinyl (and overhaul my system layout) instead. Check out thread on AudioAsylum and the attached graphic for my [future] system details.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMT
LP's do take up quite a bit of space, but the vinyl "experience" is well worth the investment both in money and in space.


And time. I'm just reading over how to get a turntable setup and it seems like a pretty length process process, though I'm sure that it'll be well worth it when it's finally done.

Quote:

I would also imagine that, although your uncle's albums were in "mint" condition, they could have probably used a good cleaning. You would be amazed at the difference clean vinyl makes.


He did have a dust brush with some kind of fluid (antistatic?) I used on each of the records before playing them, and it did make a visible reduction in the amount of dust on each record.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DCnphones
I got a kick out of that post. Not to be condescending, but you do realize, you don't have to listen to the whole side.
There are gaps between tracks, and you can lift and place the arm wherever you want, just do so gently.



Yes, I realize this but it's still not as convenient as pressing the "next track" button on a CD player. It also takes a minute to get the arm aligned so that when you put it down the stylus will fall in the gap between the songs and not at the beginning or end of either of the tracks (though I'm sure this becomes easier with practice).
 
Jan 1, 2005 at 12:09 AM Post #7 of 21
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Radar
Yes, I realize this but it's still not as convenient as pressing the "next track" button on a CD player.


That alone can be the deciding factor for some people
biggrin.gif
 
Jan 1, 2005 at 3:27 AM Post #8 of 21
I would much rather listen to older rock and metal on vinyl than on CD. They can digitally remaster certain albums as much as they want, but they'll still never be as good as the vinyl, in my opinion. I was lucky that my dad kept his old turntable. It was on old Micro Seiki. I don't know about the tonearm and the catridge, though. I used to listen to all of his old records. And it was convinient, too, that he had pretty much every Queen and Bruce Springsteen album on vinyl, as Queen and Bruce are two of my favorite artists. I just wish he had more Black Sabbath. The only albums he had were Heaven and Hell and Mob Rules, which are fine albums, but I would have loved to hear Paranoid and Master of Reality. I also wish he had the 1970's releases from Judas Priest. In any case, I enjoyed the vinly much more than the CD's I have now. It kind of makes me wish that vinyl was still the format of choice for consumer audio.
 
Jan 1, 2005 at 5:05 AM Post #9 of 21
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Radar
Check out thread on AudioAsylum and the attached graphic for my [future] system details.


If you haven't acquired that Dual yet, I'd suggest to get basic Thorens decks TD160-6/146 etc. I've had like 4 Duals from 1215 to 701 and the first TD165 manual table I heard brought 'unimaginable' improvement to my ears. There's also many japanese nice turntables but what surprised me is how good a cheap sony x55 can be. Got it practically for free from ebay - as a bonus attached to a $30 shure cartridge that was of my interest.

However if you've won the 1237, it could serve as a trusty backup table if you decide to upgrade later on. A good stylus with it will beat a great table with crappy stylus.
 
Jan 1, 2005 at 5:06 AM Post #10 of 21
Quote:

Originally Posted by JMT
I would also imagine that, although your uncle's albums were in "mint" condition, they could have probably used a good cleaning. You would be amazed at the difference clean vinyl makes.


JMT, what would be the least costly automatic record cleaner that you can suggest ? Thanks.
 
Jan 1, 2005 at 8:37 AM Post #11 of 21
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nak Man
JMT, what would be the least costly automatic record cleaner that you can suggest ? Thanks.


There are really no inexpensive "automatic" record cleaners. The Nitty Gritty Record Doctor II is the least expensive record vacuum that I am aware of. You apply the solution and turn the record by hand, but it does have a vacuum motor to remove the spent solution from the surface. The Orbitrac 2 system from Allsop is one of the better non-vacuum cleaning systems that I have used.
 
Jan 1, 2005 at 8:56 AM Post #12 of 21
Quote:

Originally Posted by JMT
There are really no inexpensive "automatic" record cleaners.


Thanks, JMT. Yes, the Nitty Gritty looks interesting and I didn't realise constant high-torque motor cost a huge chunk in order to get the manual one at half price. If only there's a custom brush-adaptor to fit our vacuum cleaners it would be great ! I saw a diy adaptor once and that looked like a good idea.
 
Jan 1, 2005 at 11:53 PM Post #13 of 21
Yeah, unless you have a LOT of records, the manual Nitty-Gritty is good.
 
Jan 2, 2005 at 3:19 AM Post #14 of 21
Recently I just called ToddTheVinylJunkie and he told me that I could just get a large amount of Bugtussel cleaning solution and a dry brush from him for fifty bucks. He seemed to think it would be best for me, and that it by far gives the best value.

He also told me that it isn't that difficult to manuver, and that it was basically a sinch to do.

I am personally using my turntable as my primary source, but I still don't see the ultimate need to go and buy one of those large, expensive, >1k dollar automatic machines.

What advantages do they give over, say, the Buggtussel cleaning solution?

Thanks guys!
 
Jan 2, 2005 at 6:00 AM Post #15 of 21
Quote:

Originally Posted by Aman
What advantages do they give over, say, the Buggtussel cleaning solution?


The most important difference is that they suck those cling-to-the-groove dirt away. Brush is good, but somehow limited to large 'particles', while some dirt just stick deep down and only managed to get pushed around with brush. Secondly the automatic ones remove these particles in a slow but very constant motion (about 3-5 rpm ? never seen one in action ..) which is required to get a uniform result. With brush and manual hand rotate machine I can imagine some area of groove may be cleaner when we applied the brush harder and or rotate slower. Finally brush simply won't be effective for very very dirty old record, they just need to be immersed with cleaning solution. However, for not-so-treasured-LPs this can be overcome by washing said LP with soft brush in kitchen sink using various magical formula. =)

Considering the price, automatic cleaners may likely be worth if we have thousands of LPs, to bring cleaning cost below $1/LP ... There are some diy projects and this particular one doesn't suck at all (and uses very high speed instead).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top