Which turntable do you prefer and why?

[PeterA]

I came upon this video in the video thread and find it quite interesting. Michael Fremer directly compares two turntables, one belt drive, the other direct drive. All other variables are fixed. The point of the video is to clearly demonstrate that the two turntables sound different. MF accomplishes this, clearly. I wish he had explained where the mic is located and shown the images from the listening seat.

I think there is something else pretty interesting going on. First, the implication is that we are listening to the two turntables. In reality, we are hearing the two turntables within the context of Fremer's system and room. We are hearing two different presentations of his system in his room. This jazz recording will sound different on these turntables if they are in different systems. Perhaps that is obvious. Regardless, what can we really learn from such a video about the two turntables?

I am interested in learning if readers here have a preference for one table over the other, and if so, what are the reasons. I am also curious if readers think these types of videos can tell us much and if they think reviewers (and dealers) will increasingly use them to increase exposure to products. It seems to me that such system videos are becoming more popular with both hobbyists on forums and also with members of the industry in their digital publications. Is that a good thing?

 

[bonzo75]

I came upon this video in the video thread and find it quite interesting. Michael Fremer directly compares two turntables, one belt drive, the other direct drive. All other variables are fixed. The point of the video is to clearly demonstrate that the two turntables sound different. MF accomplishes this, clearly. I wish he had explained where the mic is located and shown the images from the listening seat.

I think there is something else pretty interesting going on. First, the implication is that we are listening to the two turntables. In reality, we are hearing the two turntables within the context of Fremer's system and room. We are hearing two different presentations of his system in his room. This jazz recording will sound different on these turntables if they are in different systems. Perhaps that is obvious. Regardless, what can we really learn from such a video about the two turntables?

I am interested in learning if readers here have a preference for one table over the other, and if so, what are the reasons. I am also curious if readers think these types of videos can tell us much and if they think reviewers (and dealers) will increasingly use them to increase exposure to products. It seems to me that such system videos are becoming more popular with both hobbyists on forums and also with members of the industry in their digital publications. Is that a good thing?

the K3 sounds awfully dry and unemotional, no flow or swing of music or tone compared to the AF3p in that video. I like such videos, would just like it with more music data points of course, just any such thing is welcome.

off to sleep now, will listen again tomorrow morning.

listening today morning, the one negative of Techdas is it adds a bit of homogenising warmth. I still prefer it to the K3 for the reasons mentioned above. On the drums the K3 has more range but sounds stop start like a poor CD player

 

[TooCool4]

I had a quick listen when I saw the vid last night, did not really pay that much attention. All I can say is they definitely sound different, but which one I prefer can’t really say. Life’s too short for me to go back and listen again.

 

[RCanelas]

@PeterA if I'm not mistaken, the recording is an ADC from the phono stage output. That's why it sounds so clean.

I'm leaning towards the oma presentation. I feel it less in rails than the TechDAS. Less constrained. During the drum solo I feel the drum kick is more lively, less polite.

Close shades of gray in any case, these are both top of world turntables. I don't believe any would hold you back in any way and with a different cart/arm/cable/phono all bets are off.

Very nice video by Fremer. As usual.

 

[Lee]

The K3 has noticeably better sound on the drums. I prefer that presentation.

 

[PeterA]

@PeterA if I'm not mistaken, the recording is an ADC from the phono stage output. That's why it sounds so clean.

I'm leaning towards the oma presentation. I feel it less in rails than the TechDAS. Less constrained. During the drum solo I feel the drum kick is more lively, less polite.

Close shades of gray in any case, these are both top of world turntables. I don't believe any would hold you back in any way and with a different cart/arm/cable/phono all bets are off.

Very nice video by Fremer. As usual.

Thanks for the comment about the ADC phono stage output. That makes sense.

What I find interesting is just how much the K3 record weight is moving around. It is not flattening the LP.

 

[joeling]

For me, the turntable is a mechanical device. It definitely has a huge impact to the sound of the TT system. End of the day, it's about matching (quite the cliche I know). In the context of my system, I have 2 tables with similar arms & cartridge. FR64S + Koetsu Blue Azule on the Avid Acutus SP while the Techdas AGF3P spots a FR66S + Koetsu Blue Lace. Compared to the Techdas, the Avid sound mellow & warm while the Techdas sounds neutral but still sweet. I play brighter records on the Avid which works out well. This is not a subtle difference that one strains to hear.

 

[djsina2]

K3 sounds digital.

 

[tima]

I can't recall anyone saying all turntables sound the same. That said ...

Jazz through the Air Force table is better articulated with more natural transients. Granted a piano is a percussion instrument, the piano sound from the Oswald Miles is a bit too percussive.

 

[mtemur]

the K3 sounds awfully dry and unemotional, no flow or swing of music or tone compared to the AF3p in that video. I like such videos, would just like it with more music data points of course, just any such thing is welcome.

off to sleep now, will listen again tomorrow morning.

listening today morning, the one negative of Techdas is it adds a bit of homogenising warmth. I still prefer it to the K3 for the reasons mentioned above. On the drums the K3 has more range but sounds stop start like a poor CD player

I watched the video yesterday and I agree with you. When I first watched it I wonder what is MF trying to proove when K3 sounds less resolving, less articulate than AF3P. IMHO the only place K3 wins is the tone of piano but it can be because of many things like cables, recording, pressing, isolation platform etc.

When evaluating turntables it’s better to look for silence, lack of noise, detail, impact and try to understand if the sound is putting it’s feet solidly on the ground and reaching top easily or playing in the middle. IMHO concentrating to the tone is not a good way to evaluate turntables cause tone can easily be changed by tonearm, cartridge, mat, cables, tubes etc. AF3P can have solid metal feet and new silicone damping feet. I heard comparisons of two feet in two different setups. Silicone feet gives a warm sound while metal feet gives more agile sound. I wonder which feet did that AF3P has.

IMHO K3 is not a better turntable than AF3P.

 

[joeling]

The silicone feet upgrade costs a pretty penny but helped me reduce much of the motor noise transmitted through the rack platform. For some reason, the Phasemation PP2000 is very sensitive to this. Again, the mechinical nature of this playback device is very interesting.

 

[PeterA]

My solution is to isolate the motor unit from the base unit. They sit on separate platforms with different types of supports. It is easy to overdamp a turntable with the wrong kind of footers. Listening is crucial. Of course people have different approaches and different preferences.

 

[audiobomber]

I couldn't listen all the way through with the first table (DD). It was all about bass and treble and detail, but lost the music. The second (BD) made the music much more involving. Musicality is FAR more important than technical prowess. I have no use for a device that makes music sound boring.

 

[bonzo75]

TTs sound different to each other, as do records, CD players, dacs, cables, carts, arms and phono.

So, all aspects of the source do sound different. Which makes more of an impact, though

1. Keep out the negatives. The wrong record, cartridge, table, can completely rob you of enjoyment
2. Once you get to the good ones, and you get to a stable good level, the cart plays a more important role than the TT. In Joeling’s example, he is using the same cart with a matching arm on two TTs – but the FR 64s is an excellent match for Koetsu. A poor matching arm/headshell will cause a bigger impact (negative) than between his two tables.
3. Here is Mike’s recent reply on the pressing making a bigger difference in his three analog set ups https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/my-morning-with-starker.37575/post-912832
4. I think if you compare two good TTs next to each other with the same cart and arm, you might make choice for one. But this will be insignificant compared to putting the right cart with the matching arm on it.

Some more comments on that from Mike and Shakti – I realize there will be counter comments as well

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/thre...table-is-kind-of-impossible.35146/post-808827

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/thre...table-is-kind-of-impossible.35146/post-808828

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/thre...table-is-kind-of-impossible.35146/post-808731

https://www.whatsbestforum.com/thre...table-is-kind-of-impossible.35146/post-808750


5. There are always exceptions.

 

[bonzo75]

Fremer's video reminds me of another video that was sent to me, comparing Sp10r with OMA plinth, Glanz and Dava vs Artisan Fidelity 301 with Durand Tosca and Dava. While that had different volume outputs, my comments on that were the Sp10r was dry, lacking flow, digital sounding.

I now checked with another owner and he can comment, but he said when he moves from his Artisan Fidelity sp10 mk3 to the micro seiki, he gets more liquidity.

Which is similar to what many are hearing in this video compare

I have the AF 301/Durand Tosca/Dava video up here

WhatsApp Audio 2023-02-05 at 16.43.34.mp4

drive.google.com

 

[PeterA]

TTs sound different to each other, as do records, CD players, dacs, cables, carts, arms and phono.

So, all aspects of the source do sound different. Which makes more of an impact, though

4. I think if you compare two good TTs next to each other with the same cart and arm, you might make choice for one. But this will be insignificant compared to putting the right cart with the matching arm on it.

This is what I thought until I directly compared the Micro Seiki SX 8000 II to the original American Sound turntable and then to the new AS 2000.

The better the turntable, the higher the quality of the end result. I agree that the recordings and the tonearm and the cartridge all matter a lot for the end result. I understand that some people will make choices and stop at a certain level of turntable and enjoy playing with different cartridges and better recordings. That is fine too. I am just not convinced that at a certain level cartridges are more important than turntables.

 

[bonzo75]

This is what I thought until I directly compared the Micro Seiki SX 8000 II to the original American Sound turntable and then to the new AS 2000.

The better the turntable, the higher the quality of the end result. I agree that the recordings and the tonearm and the cartridge all matter a lot for the end result. I understand that some people will make choices and stop at a certain level of turntable and enjoy playing with different cartridges and better recordings. That is fine too. I am just not convinced that at a certain level cartridges are more important than turntables.

having compared AS 2000 in tang’s and 1000 in David’s system, and then other great tables including in Mike’s system and others, I formed the above impression (post those compares).

 

[RCanelas]

what I find interesting, in a recurring way, is the variability of the opinions, even with relatively well controlled (better than anything I have ever seen, read or experienced before) a binary choice.

Here we have two presentations where the only differences are the turnables and minute set-up variability. I say minute because we all know Fremer is a set-up expert and he can get it to a point at least as good as the best of us can.

That said we have, besides the a/b differences in preference expressed here and in the comments of the video, (apparently) contradictory reasons being given as the drivers of the preference. Either a is more musical or b is more musical. Either a is more detailed or b is more detailed. Either a is more like tape or it's more like digital.

Even in the narrowest possible direction, we can still find immense misalignment between us listeners. It explains a lot about our community, and should also give some pause to people with the habit of making categorical statements about what's best. It's immensely exciting for me as a maker.

 

[PeterA]

having compared AS 2000 in tang’s and 1000 in David’s system, and then other great tables including in Mike’s system and others, I formed the above impression (post those compares).

Yes, and my choices are based on my direct experience. You compared the AS 1000 and AS 2000 in two different systems and rooms separated by time. I compared them in the exact same system. Only three people I know of have made that direct comparison and to the big Micro. In my opinion, the differences are pretty significant and the turntable platform will elevate performance of the rest of the system. At a cost for sure.

I understand that at a certain level you may prioritize other choices.

 

[bonzo75]

Yes, and my choices are based on my direct experience. You compared the AS 1000 and AS 2000 in two different systems and rooms separated by time. I compared them in the exact same system. Only three people I know of have made that direct comparison and to the big Micro. In my opinion, the differences are pretty significant and the turntable platform will elevate performance of the rest of the system. At a cost for sure.

I understand that at a certain level you may prioritize other choices.

sorry I am not talking about comparing AS 2000 and 1000 to each other. I am talking about comparing them with the respective tables in that room where the respective AS models did sound better.

i have no doubt your AS sounds better than the MS 8000. That does not in any way invalidate the point I made. In fact for me it is consistent because I do not like the MS 5000 or 8000.

now, if you had 5 TTs you yourself think are good, but you yourself think are less than the AS, and did the compares with 5 different but stellar carts and matching arms, then yes, if you made that call, it would be different from mine.

the SME is a good value neutral arm to compare carts but does not get the best out of most carts. If you are a reviewer wanting to write about the general differences between carts, the 3012r is fine