What's your latest purchase?

[shaizada]

I was going to wait another year or so before I moved into my idler wheel turntable journey. Well, I just went ahead and moved that planning forward!
I bought a Steve Dobbins Garrard 301 (cream colored, oil bearing version) with the upgraded copper platter. I haven't decided what tonearm and cartridge I want for it, but it should all happen relatively soon. The turntable ships tomorrow!

Here she is:

[allenh]

2 hours ago, shaizada said:

I was going to wait another year or so before I moved into my idler wheel turntable journey. Well, I just went ahead and moved that planning forward!
I bought a Steve Dobbins Garrard 301 (cream colored, oil bearing version) with the upgraded copper platter. I haven't decided what tonearm and cartridge I want for it, but it should all happen relatively soon. The turntable ships tomorrow!

Here she is:

Very nice, I love a Garrard 301 or 401. Had lots of them but pretty rare where you are and a few pennies I reckon, they cost a few quid here so I hate to think what it cost you there. The hammer finish grease bearing one I sold to a nice man in Japan about 10 years ago is the one I always regret letting go.

 

The standard fitment for them arm wise is a SME 3009 or preferably a 3012 and ideally a series 2 improved but either way a 12" arm is the order of the day with them generally for the best results.

 

I've got a 401 and a 3009 here that I need to get a plinth for at some point but too many projects and too little time.

[mertzrock]

10 hours ago, allenh said:

Very nice, I love a Garrard 301 or 401. Had lots of them but pretty rare where you are and a few pennies I reckon, they cost a few quid here so I hate to think what it cost you there. The hammer finish grease bearing one I sold to a nice man in Japan about 10 years ago is the one I always regret letting go.

 

The standard fitment for them arm wise is a SME 3009 or preferably a 3012 and ideally a series 2 improved but either way a 12" arm is the order of the day with them generally for the best results.

 

I've got a 401 and a 3009 here that I need to get a plinth for at some point but too many projects and too little time.

Allen's a Astronaut Cowboy Millionaire...

Edited September 15, 2016 by mertzrock

[allenh]

8 minutes ago, mertzrock said:

Allen's an Astronaut Cowboy Millionaire...

No I'm just poor old people addicted to shiny stuff, when the shiny stuff addiction takes hold it's goodbye wallet.

 

Anyway the Astronaut Cowboy Millionaire gigs already taken shaizada took that ages ago

[Crabwalker]

Not really a purchase but I traded for a headphone amp.

Got the Woo Audio WA6 SE.

 

Pretty stoked to give it a run through.  

[Crabwalker]

Not really a purchase but I traded for a headphone amp.

Got the Woo Audio WA6 SE.

 

Pretty stoked to give it a run through.  

[Crabwalker]

Not really a purchase but I traded for a headphone amp.

Got the Woo Audio WA6 SE.

 

Pretty stoked to give it a run through.  

[allenh]

I picked up some Naim Intro II speakers yesterday. I'm not a fan of the Naim sound and these are not Naim's best attempt at speakers but for £30 I couldn't leave them there. Tried them on some charity shop Marantz I picked up and they're ok just cold like everything Naim I've heard or owned. I'm going to replace the tweeters with some ribbons, remove the crossovers, run them active and drive them with some valves, if that doesn't cheer them up nothing will.

[mcpherson123]

On 9/6/2016 at 2:09 PM, ajxd said:

This.

 

Also.

Why so? Audio has come leaps and bounds. You have an older model Marantz now, if you're going to upgrade... upgrade!

 

Also also

Don't mess with EQ. And tweaking from record to record just sounds exhausting. Set it all to noon and forget it.

I'm not sure why you protest the mid knob. Some insight?

 

I've read that the 2270 has more warmth than most of the other models plus 70wpc is cooler than 30 wpc. As far as Audio coming leaps and bounds, I don't care for the modern equipment in my price range and I find that I really like the way the Marantz passes the audio. For me, vintage (70's) design (electronically and aesthetically) are my upgrade from late 80's/early 90's receivers. I can hear a very pleasant different in the Marantz versus any other system I've had or listened to for any length of time. For my money, its a change worth making and definitively an upgrade. I don't believe I'll ever be able to afford to be a McIntosh tube pre-amp per side and Steve Dobbin's custom plinth (never mind a fully constructed turntable) kind of guy.

 

I like to mess with EQ. I enjoy it. I've found a setting that I find works really well for most records by now. Here and there I may change the bass and mid knobs a notch up or down but I was looking forward to making that decision. I've tried the all noon method. It does not suit my ear.

[slinch]

I understand the desire to use EQ on really shitty recordings, but if nothing sounds good to you without it, then there's a big problem with how your setup is set up.

[slinch]

Also, there's tons of incredible gear between the Marantz and the "McIntosh tube pre-amp per si..." you know what? I can't.

Edited September 20, 2016 by slinch

[allenh]

It's your ears and your equipment and I'm with you on liking 70's electronics but like modern equipment it starts at shit works all the way up to absolutely jaw dropping and stops at all the places in between, so all that tells me is that you haven't heard enough of any of it yet. I've heard an absolute shit load and still know I've only scratched the surface and am still constantly impressed and underwhelmed in equal measure by the things I hear.

I like the proper 70's Marantz sound but not as much as I like other 70's equipment which is just a matter of personal preference but EQ's like sub's are the devils work!, if you need them you need them but all they are doing is masking a system deficiency somewhere or it means the recording engineer hasn't done his or her job properly.

I saw a review of a couple of cars once (can't remember which) but one was British and the other Japanese and the reviewer used a couple of AV receivers to make a point in that he said on the Japanese one If I go though all these menu's and sub menu's and different modes I can make it sound almost as good as the British one but what's the point, the British one I just turn on and it sounds gorgeous, In other words no need for all that extra complexity just make the thing right in the first place.

[Tardcore]

Fixing audio with EQ is sort of like trimming your beard with a chainsaw.

 

If a particular song isn't mixed to your liking, adjusting high/low/mid is going to change a relatively huge range of frequencies across the board.

 

if a particular piece of gear is falling a bit short on a particular range, adjusting high/mid/low isn't likely to compensate for exactly the frequencies the gear is over/under representing.

 

That said, all this falls under "if it sounds good to you" doctrine.

[mcpherson123]

3 hours ago, slinch said:

I understand the desire to use EQ on really shitty recordings, but if nothing sounds good to you without it, then there's a big problem with how your setup is set up.

So you are telling me there are no EQ's on your system at all? I'm puzzled by the anti-EQ sentiment. The EQ is present in the signal chain on my equipment. Why wouldn't I tweak it to my liking? And when you say "without it" do you simply mean having the three knobs at flat center? I ask because there is no EQ bypass switch and that's the only thing I can think of that would mean "without it" as it is integral to the circuit of the receiver by design.

 

1 hour ago, allenh said:

It's your ears and your equipment and I'm with you on liking 70's electronics but like modern equipment it starts at shit works all the way up to absolutely jaw dropping and stops at all the places in between, so all that tells me is that you haven't heard enough of any of it yet. I've heard an absolute shit load and still know I've only scratched the surface and am still constantly impressed and underwhelmed in equal measure by the things I hear.

I like the proper 70's Marantz sound but not as much as I like other 70's equipment which is just a matter of personal preference but EQ's like sub's are the devils work!, if you need them you need them but all they are doing is masking a system deficiency somewhere or it means the recording engineer hasn't done his or her job properly.

I saw a review of a couple of cars once (can't remember which) but one was British and the other Japanese and the reviewer used a couple of AV receivers to make a point in that he said on the Japanese one If I go though all these menu's and sub menu's and different modes I can make it sound almost as good as the British one but what's the point, the British one I just turn on and it sounds gorgeous, In other words no need for all that extra complexity just make the thing right in the first place.

And yes, I know I haven't heard a huge array of different pieces of audio gear. As I said, I use what I can afford and I think the Marantz 70's lines are pretty nice from what I've listened to myself in person and what I've read about them. I haven't had the opportunity to try that many different types of setups but I know I trust vintage home audio more than modern based on the little experience I've had with different setups. Using the Marantz receivers that I have, I've noticed a drastic increase in fidelity in the highs and mids with plenty of nice bass response that I enjoy. Why is that wrong?

 

3 hours ago, slinch said:

Also, there's tons of incredible gear between the Marantz and the "McIntosh tube pre-amp per si..." you know what? I can't.

Maybe you can throw out some makes and models of some components that you think I should look into if you don't mind?

 

 

1 hour ago, Tardcore said:

Fixing audio with EQ is sort of like trimming your beard with a chainsaw.

 

If a particular song isn't mixed to your liking, adjusting high/low/mid is going to change a relatively huge range of frequencies across the board.

 

if a particular piece of gear is falling a bit short on a particular range, adjusting high/mid/low isn't likely to compensate for exactly the frequencies the gear is over/under representing.

 

That said, all this falls under "if it sounds good to you" doctrine.

What you are proposing is that if I as a person with ears hears a recording through my system and feels the need to adjust ANYTHING, then there's either something wrong with the recording (which I cannot go back in time and alter at any stage of the process) or its a problem with my gear which includes tone trimming options such as EQ to "correct" or alter the over all general frequency bands somewhere to my liking but that should apparently never be done because there is other gear out there that somehow plays back recordings representing the absolutely correct frequency response that all recordings, despite their differences in mixing and mastering should always be played. This seems like circular logic. I'm clearly missing something in what you are trying to tell me.

 

The basic fact of the matter is that I've managed to get a sound I'm very pleased with which includes the use of 3-band EQ. I can't imagine why that is being frowned upon. As you said "if it sounds good to you" and it does. And I can afford it. And I like it.

 

I'm not upset nor am I trying to pick a fight but it seems like some of the responses that I replied to were delivered with an air of smug elitism. And I'm not trying to pick anyone out in particular, just mentioning that I got that impression from one or two of the responses I got. Again, I'm not picking a fight but something seems to be missing in the communication of being questioned on my choices of home audio.

 

 

 

[allenh]

No one is trying to be elitist just trying to impart a bit of experience from listening to a whole load of audio equipment over a long period of time.

 

All Hifi is trying to reproduce the music without colouration, and by colouration I mean altering the replayed sound by being more responsive to an area of audio within the replayed spectrum so that you hear more of one thing than another, e.g people like Bose push up the high end to make you think the reproduction is picking out the details, it's not it's over emphasizing them at the cost of the middle and bass lower down. Marantz were also a little guilty of this in their time but nowhere near Bose levels. Also no amplifier is capable of being neutral across the whole audio spectrum so it will colour the music somewhere and the same is true of all speakers and to a lesser degree every bit of audio in the chain.

Tone controls of any sort put a stage in the amplifier that is unwanted because of the above plus it's a limiting factor and signal attenuator too a degree but is put there for 3 main reasons.

1) the manufacturer thinks the customer expects it

2) in an attempt to tidy the colouration but it fails because it makes it worse somewhere else.

3) to make the customer think they are getting more for their money.

 

You can just run everything flat i.e all 3 controls in the middle but I suspect the colouration of other things within your system mean you need to use the tone controls but it will always be a compromise.

 

There are a couple of hifi clichés here, usually the best hifi you've heard is the last and once you've heard really really good you will be forever chasing it and emptying your wallet.

 

My advise stick with what you like but understand why it's wrong and don't ever listen to anything really good whatever you do.

Edited September 21, 2016 by allenh

[slinch]

17 minutes ago, allenh said:

My advise stick with what you like but understand why it's wrong and don't ever listen to anything really good whatever you do.

Without a doubt the best advice possible, on all points.

[Tardcore]

9 hours ago, slinch said:

Without a doubt the best advice possible, on all points.

I could do without your elistist attitude about which advice is "best".

[mcpherson123]

20 hours ago, allenh said:

No one is trying to be elitist just trying to impart a bit of experience from listening to a whole load of audio equipment over a long period of time.

 

All Hifi is trying to reproduce the music without colouration, and by colouration I mean altering the replayed sound by being more responsive to an area of audio within the replayed spectrum so that you hear more of one thing than another, e.g people like Bose push up the high end to make you think the reproduction is picking out the details, it's not it's over emphasizing them at the cost of the middle and bass lower down. Marantz were also a little guilty of this in their time but nowhere near Bose levels. Also no amplifier is capable of being neutral across the whole audio spectrum so it will colour the music somewhere and the same is true of all speakers and to a lesser degree every bit of audio in the chain.

Tone controls of any sort put a stage in the amplifier that is unwanted because of the above plus it's a limiting factor and signal attenuator too a degree but is put there for 3 main reasons.

1) the manufacturer thinks the customer expects it

2) in an attempt to tidy the colouration but it fails because it makes it worse somewhere else.

3) to make the customer think they are getting more for their money.

 

You can just run everything flat i.e all 3 controls in the middle but I suspect the colouration of other things within your system mean you need to use the tone controls but it will always be a compromise.

 

There are a couple of hifi clichés here, usually the best hifi you've heard is the last and once you've heard really really good you will be forever chasing it and emptying your wallet.

 

My advise stick with what you like but understand why it's wrong and don't ever listen to anything really good whatever you do.

I respect what you're saying and it makes sense. When you consider what you're saying in the quoted selection that I've bolded, it seems to me that the chase for that perfectly uncolored playback is a never ending but unreachable state. Its really the reason why I feel comfortable settling on a grade of components that fit my needs without being a bank breaking endeavor which is what truly excellent modern hifi system building can be. My upgrade choices are "attenuated" by my budget if you will. I actually did spend some time consciously listening to a record with my EQ flat yesterday and though in the past I've noticed that I adjust to it rather quick I found myself fine tuning it far from flat much of the time. Though yesterday I left it flat for a solid 20 minutes and realized that I can enjoy the music that way but I do prefer tweaking some bands at least a little bit.

 

I'm still interested in brand names and models of turntables, amps, pre-amps and speakers that any of you have in mind to share as staples of the level of system you are referring to.

[ajxd]

23 hours ago, allenh said:

My advise stick with what you like but understand why it's wrong and don't ever listen to anything really good whatever you do.

 

23 hours ago, slinch said:

Without a doubt the best advice possible, on all points.

Minus the fact he can't spell advice.

[allenh]

1 hour ago, ajxd said:

 

Minus the fact he can't spell advice.

I'm an engineer not an English teacher, think yourself lucky I can manage a whole sentence.

Well spotted though I usually re read my diatribes for the odd faux pas but I missed that one, have a house point.

[allenh]

3 hours ago, mcpherson123 said:

I respect what you're saying and it makes sense. When you consider what you're saying in the quoted selection that I've bolded, it seems to me that the chase for that perfectly uncolored playback is a never ending but unreachable state. Its really the reason why I feel comfortable settling on a grade of components that fit my needs without being a bank breaking endeavor which is what truly excellent modern hifi system building can be. My upgrade choices are "attenuated" by my budget if you will. I actually did spend some time consciously listening to a record with my EQ flat yesterday and though in the past I've noticed that I adjust to it rather quick I found myself fine tuning it far from flat much of the time. Though yesterday I left it flat for a solid 20 minutes and realized that I can enjoy the music that way but I do prefer tweaking some bands at least a little bit.

 

I'm still interested in brand names and models of turntables, amps, pre-amps and speakers that any of you have in mind to share as staples of the level of system you are referring to.

Very true, that is the sad truth in the quest for sonic nirvana, all electronics will colour the sound but it's still the quest for it not to, so as an engineer and a music lover I am constantly trying to get as close as I can but the truth is my idea of neutral will be different to someone else's.

The closest approach with a pre amplifier in theory is to use a passive one as there are no electronics to colour the sound, (a complete misnomer as it's an attenuator not an amplifier but who lets engineering fact get in the way of jargon in hifi) the down side of a passive pre is that you can get impedance matching issues with them but that aside having tried a few and still owning one I find I don't actually like the ones I've tried so I must actually like my music coloured in some way as most people do but not always in the same way as the next person, hence all the opinion in relation to Hifi and how it sounds.

There is also the cultural aspect to take into account where for example the general feeling is that the far eastern ear much prefers an emphasis in the high frequencies with very little bottom, a north American ear prefers an emphasis on the low end and a European ear an emphasis on the middle frequencies, as I say a generalization but after having heard a lot of equipment from these different markets there is definitely something in that, Sony for quite a while used to produce amplifiers specifically for the British Market with "British tuned" stickers on the front because they were acutely aware of this.

 

The only way to find what fits for you is to listen yourself to as much equipment as possible but listening without making huge changes so that you hear the equipment difference not the difference you've made and you can't do that if you are constantly tweaking the EQ. also any EQ is very crude as it is basically a wide range filter that allows some things through and not others within it's bandwidth so by making big changes to the EQ you are limiting what your amplifier can give you.

 

We can't suggest what's best for you as your ears will be the only things that can tell you that and also availability of particular brands and items will be different for you than they are for me but try and have a read through the beginners post, I know it's 17 million pages long and you've probably already read a lot of it but there is some very very good info in there that I'm sure will register with you and what you are most likely going to like.

 

That said going on your current preference I'm going to suggest Rotel and Yamaha in general but bear in mind most far eastern manufacturers make and have made at some time from utter crap all the way up to absolute gems and it's just the weighting of where in that scale the majority of their output lives and when it was made as some brands have brief periods of brightness and then fade into obscurity or just destroy their reputation by continuing to trade on it whilst producing shite.

 

Mostly leave the bloody EQ alone and just enjoy the music.

[the_yetimonster]

My last 3 vinyl-related purchases:

 

First I bought and restored this SL-1500:

(note the SL1200mk2 feet and dust cover.  Some SL1500 parts aren't that easy to find anymore.)

 

And then I bought this amp:

and these Focal Chorus 705v speakers because my regular speaks got damaged and these were on closeout:

 

At roughly the same time.

 

Everything sounds hella good. 

Edited September 23, 2016 by the_yetimonster

[xxmartinxx]

Aside from the somewhat nonsensical philosophical argument that you shouldn't have an EQ because it should just be pure source and what is on the record (or CD, or MP3, or whatever), there is a real reason to not design an amp with an EQ.  An EQ degrades the audio signal, even if EQ'ed flat.  I guess if you have a defeatable EQ (depending on how that's designed) that would work, too.  

 

Why I think the "source purity" thing is horseshit is because everything you do changes the equalization.  Changing amps, or speakers, or turntables, even cables, is essentially re-EQing your stereo.  Assholes like me with tube amps swap out tubes for the same reason.  I've owned a bunch of tube amps, and I finally settled on the one I have now because the preamp tubes were only ever made by one place in Russia and the power tubes are too expensive to buy a bunch to see which ones "I like".  I used to spend more time moving tubes than enjoying music.  

 

Ultimately, if it sounds good to you it's fine.

[Monastic_mike]

On 9/23/2016 at 11:50 AM, the_yetimonster said:

 

 

Everything sounds hella good. 

Love it! I have a pair of 807v's a d really like them. Love your setup!

[allenh]

I've picked up a couple of turntables recently.

This ones a Trio (Kenwood in the US) KD-1033, cost me £25 shipped from ebay and just needed a headshell and cart. Not a bad little table and these are generally a bargain over here although you do see the odd one up for silly money, this one was particularly cheap so it's going to get the full Cardas rewire treatment and a full service to see how good I can make it embarrass a few things a lot more expensive, the basics are there so I'm pretty sure there are quite a few new tables it will upset by the time I've finished with it.

 

The next is a JVC QL-Y3F, I got this one in a deal so it doesn't owe me a lot of money and I'm liking it, superbly speed stable and it tracks superbly well, the AT MC cart in it is quite nice although it's a little bass heavy and mid light, it's not unpleasant just different and I do quite like it but I'll try another cart I know well in it to see if it is the cart that makes it sound that way or if it is the table itself that makes it that way.