LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  June 2005

ARSCLIST June 2005

Subject:

Re: turntable recommendations

From:

Eric Jacobs <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Mon, 13 Jun 2005 14:24:35 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (162 lines)

It's true that you need to give it an extra manual push to get
it to 78 RPM.  There is method behind this madness - the idea
being to minimize the torque applied by the motor to reduce the
affects of motor cogging on the platter speed.

You'll find that many of the high-end tables need to be manually
brought up to speed.  Some, like the Nottingham, leave the motor
in a stalled condition when "on", and when you want to play, you
manually spin the platter to "start".

The lack of speed control is a valid shortcoming of the P78 for
playing "78s" whose record speed differs greatly from 78 (or
78.23) RPM.  This can be remedied with a speed controller, but
that adds considerable cost.  However, the speed controller
gives you more than pitch control, it gives you constant voltage
and frequency independent of what is happening on your power
line.  You can have a very heavy platter, but that still won't
counteract inconsistent power at the motor.  The speed controller
will improve the sound.

There are some third-party semi-automatic lifts (at end of play)
that can be added to a turntable, but I don't have any experience
with these.  But this may be one way to make a manual turntable
semi-automatic.

The Rega P78 may be a better sounding 'table than the Technics
(in my opinion), but it may not have the features you're looking
for if you want pitch control.  The Rega P78 is only $100 more
than the Technics.

Other recommendations:

  - Elberg MD-12 phono preamp (for non-RIAA EQ of 78s)
  - Shure M44-7 cartridge

The Elberg MD-12 only lacks a lateral/vertical switch (if you
don't have any vertically cut records, you don't need the
switch anyway), but is otherwise very easy to use, and the
design and electronics are very high caliber and sound good.
Although the Elberg doesn't give you every last EQ combination,
it does a great job for "getting close" for listening purposes.

The Shure M44-7 is a great bang-for-buck cartridge.  You can
get custom styli for it from Expert Stylus in England so that
you can play just about any record.  Also, the manufacturing
consistency on the Shures is much better than the Stantons.
The Shure is a dynamic cartridge and is harmonically correct
for the most part.  For listening to 78s, it's a hard cartridge
to beat without stepping up to a moving coil.

Eric Jacobs
The Audio Archive


-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Daniel Leech-Wilkinson
Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 12:07 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] turntable recommendations


I have a Rega planar 78 at home and a Technics 1200MkII at work, and I wish
I'd never bought the Rega. You have to swing the turntable to get it to 78,
and then there's no (other!) speed control. But the Technics is great.

Dan


At 11:30 13/06/2005 -0700, eugene audio wrote:
>13 June 2005
>     That's funny - the statement about the Thorens
>crashing into the dumpster being the best sound it
>ever
>made.
>
>    I've had a few of the Thorens 124's and 160's.
>I never liked them much. I've also had a thousand
>  other turntables over the years.
>    If you want to buy new, I lke the Technics
>1200Mk2. We just received a new one here at work.
>They have improved the feet and chassis to
>help isolate external vibrations. And they
>have a simple adjustment to set tonearm height.
>IT IS NOT SEMI-AUTOMATIC, only manual. But it
>is a nice heavy turntable that should give many
>years of reliable use. At $450. it leaves money for a
>good cartridge compared to much more expensive tables.
>
>
>   If you want to buy used, I have a Technics 1700
>at home which is an auto-return model.(not for sale)
>It's ok, but
>not as nice as the 1200. They also made a model
>(1900?) which was an automatic version of the 1200.
>But buying used may put you into another situation
>where you might have problems. Some older turntables
>developed problems with the cueing mechanisms which
>caused the stylus to scratch across the record during
>auto-return. Some were easy to service, some not.
>
>   What I like about the 1200 is that you can listen
>to your records as the debates flow back
>and forth comaring/contrasting belt drives, platform
>isolated tonearms, S-shape or straight tonearms,
>linear tracking arms, la de da, la de da .......
>
>   My opinion is, buy a turnatble with plenty of
>weight/mass and a sturdy toearm, then put your money
>into the cartridge which is where most of the sound
>characteristic comes from.
>
>   I'm NOT a big Technics/Panasonic fan. But they
>did consistently make some nice turntables. And
>some cheap ones too.
>
>Chris
>@eugene-audio
>
>
>
>
>
>--- James Lindner <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> > I would like to get a turntable for personal use -
> > not for restoration, just
> > to play back some of my personal collection of LP's
> > for personal listening.
> > No transcription disks or anything fancy - just for
> > home use, no "DJ
> > Scratching" - just playing some old disks in
> > reasonably good condition.
> >
> > I want something that has good isolation, that may
> > be the most important
> > issue where my turntable is located. People will
> > walk on the floor nearby -
> > it is unavoidable. Nothing huge - it has to fit on a
> > normal "entertainment
> > center" shelf.
> >
> > I hate hum - I had to throw away a thorens 145c -
> > worst hum in history and I
> > could not get it out of the system no matter what I
> > did and no matter what I
> > tried, it did however make a very nice sound as it
> > smashed into the dumpster
> > when dropped 20 feet - that was probably the best
> > sound it ever made. I am
> > not interested in another  "project" - I just want
> > something out of the box
> > that works.  I would prefer automatic or
> > semi-automatic.
> >
> > Suggestions??
> >
> > Jim Lindner
> >
> > *
> >

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager