Has vinyl playback technology gone about as far as it can go?

[Another Johnson]

Really, the cartridge does “extract the information,” but the extraction is corrupted by the arm and platter. The difference between one turntable and another really comes down to how much data corruption each inflicts.

 

[Another Johnson]

Ivor Tiefenbrun understood this well when he presented his critical path for a TT. Platter suspension drive first. Then arm and its mounting. Then cartridge. He reasoned that it made no sense to put a super cartridge on a mediocre arm, mounted to a mediocre TT. The information extracted would not reflect the capabilities of the cartridge.

Clearaudio had the same critical path hierarchy, but solved every problem differently from Tiefenbrun.

There are a lot of ways to skin the cat.

 

[Mike Lavigne]

The way I look at it, Mike, is that the cartridge is extracting the information and your turntable without the active platform was corrupting that information because it allowed vibrations to affect the reading of the grooves.

objectively so might yours. without extensive investigations you would never know for sure.

Once you sorted that out, the information that the cartridge transcribes is closer to what is embedded in the grooves.

agree.

To Tim’s point, the frequency portion of the waveform is encoded in the grooves by the cutterhead (excluding a couple steps during the making of the record). My understanding is that that information is already in the record. Yes the platter must rotate at the correct speed for the information to sound right but the turntable is not creating the information or extracting it. The turntable simply provides the correct environment for the information to be extracted by the cartridge. At least that’s the way I look at it. I’m happy to be corrected.

agree. you are right. but with mechanical things there is always a little bit better available. the diminishing returns are still diminishing. the struggle is not over. but maybe thinking about it is over. which is the best we can do.

 

[PeterA]

objectively so might yours. without extensive investigations you would never know for sure.

agree.

agree. you are right. but with mechanical things there is always a little bit better available. the diminishing returns are still diminishing. the struggle is not over. but maybe thinking about it is over. which is the best we can do.

Yes, of course. I have investigated, and I know that my turntable can be improved upon because I have heard it from another turntable. All you need to do is listen and find a better example where the information from the same records is presented with less corruption.

The information is already in the grooves. Designers are still looking for ways to extract more of it, and then present it with less degradation.

 

[tima]

To Tim’s point, the frequency portion of the waveform is encoded in the grooves by the cutterhead (excluding a couple steps during the making of the record). My understanding is that that information is already in the record. Yes the platter must rotate at the correct speed for the information to sound right but the turntable is not creating the information or extracting it. The turntable simply provides the correct environment for the information to be extracted by the cartridge. At least that’s the way I look at it. I’m happy to be corrected.

I agree the turntable is not creating what the recording process and record production already did. The cutter head spins out a single thread that is the groove. The groove is the tangible result of the production process and represents potential.

I do not offer correction but my perspective. Where we may differ is over how to consider time in the analog process. As I wrote in my Monaco 2.0 review: "Before any other component comes into play, he who controls time controls the source, and he who controls the source rules the vinyl universe."

Music only occurs over the passing of time. Rhythm and beat are two of the many ways time expresses itself in music. When you play a record (extract information as you say) your analog front end is recreating the signal laid down in vinyl during the production process. That signal creation is continuous, it occurs not all at once but is a sequential thread. Time is essential to continuity and sequence.

Where does time come from during the signal creation? It comes from the rotating turntable -- the analog system's clock. From my perspective signal creation in time (thanks to the rotating turntable) is more than the environment, it is one of the necessary conditions for continuing the analog chain as it actualizes the potential of the record. Another necesary condition is the cartridge. The nexus of the rotating record and the cartridge creates the 'spark of life' that is the electrical signal.

 

[astrotoy]

The two greatest Decca engineers, Kenneth Wilkinson and Arthur Lilley, both decided to retire when Decca switched to recording in digital. That also coincided with the death of Decca's founder Edward Lewis and the sale of Decca to Polygram. This also led to the closing of the great New Malden pressing plant and moving Decca's record pressing to Holland (which according to Decca engineer John Dunkerley was a major step backwards in pressing quality). Larry

 

[Another Johnson]

Music only occurs over the passing of time. Rhythm and beat are two of the many ways time expresses itself in music. When you play a record (extract information as you say) your analog front end is recreating the signal laid down in vinyl during the production process. That signal creation is continuous, it occurs not all at once but is a sequential thread. Time is essential to continuity and sequence.

Every equipment reviewer in the UK would have agreed 45 years ago. The question for a turntable comparison was “Which one gets your toes tapping?”

Toe tapping is the listener’s synching with the music. If one TT gets your toes tapping and another does not, it obvious which one should win the “bake off.”

Relevant today or not, this whole idea built the House of Linn.

 

[bonzo75]

Yes, of course. I have investigated, and I know that my turntable can be improved upon because I have heard it from another turntable. All you need to do is listen and find a better example where the information from the same records is presented with less corruption.

The information is already in the grooves. Designers are still looking for ways to extract more of it, and then present it with less degradation.

Your videos show an extremely high positive impact from the DST compared to any of your previous cartridge or turntable changes

 

[PeterA]

Your videos show an extremely high positive impact from the DST compared to any of your previous cartridge or turntable changes

The DST is better at extracting the information. It is a copy of what was a pinnacle sixty years ago. This winter I will directly compare it to a friend's original Neumann in the same system.

As I wrote elsewhere, this cartridge seems to combine the resolution of the Colibri with the weight/heft of the vintage Ortofon. It is more complete than either. I have stated a few times now that I believe the original Neumann DST is the best cartridge ever made, certainly the best I have heard. When I heard what I now consider to be the best turntable I have heard, the American Sound The Absolute Nothing, it was with an original Neumann DST. The presentation was extremely convincing.

I suspect that had I had my DST Replica when I did my various turntable comparisons at home, the differences I heard would have been even more clear. The cartridge and arm also make a difference, but you need a good stable platform to show the potential of the arm and cartridge. Read the various reports of visits to Utah and how everyone who compared DDK's various turntables all preferred the same one. And now he has his two designs that are even better in direct comparisons.

You should get a system and compare a DST Replica to your favorite DAVA cartridge, make some videos, and report back to us. In my opinion, unless one has exceptional knowledge and experience, he needs to live with a system in one setting, the same context, fine tune it, and listen over long periods of time to a variety of music, to fully understand what the system does and how various changes affect the sound. This is where real learning occurs.

You answer the question posed in the title of this thread. This cartridge, a replica of what was made sixty years ago, tells us now how far we have come in that time with some aspects of vinyl playback technology.

 

[bonzo75]

The DST is better at extracting the information. It is a copy of what was a pinnacle sixty years ago. This winter I will directly compare it to a friend's original Neumann in the same system.

As I wrote elsewhere, this cartridge seems to combine the resolution of the Colibri with the weight/heft of the vintage Ortofon. It is more complete than either. I have stated a few times now that I believe the original Neumann DST is the best cartridge ever made, certainly the best I have heard. When I heard what I now consider to be the best turntable I have heard, the American Sound The Absolute Nothing, it was with an original Neumann DST. The presentation was extremely convincing.

I suspect that had I had my DST Replica when I did my various turntable comparisons at home, the differences I heard would have been even more clear. The cartridge and arm also make a difference, but you need a good stable platform to show the potential of the arm and cartridge. Read the various reports of visits to Utah and how everyone who compared DDK's various turntables all preferred the same one. And now he has his two designs that are even better in direct comparisons.

You should get a system and compare a DST Replica to your favorite DAVA cartridge, make some videos, and report back to us. In my opinion, unless one has exceptional knowledge and experience, he needs to live with a system in one setting, the same context, fine tune it, and listen over long periods of time to a variety of music, to fully understand what the system does and how various changes affect the sound. This is where real learning occurs.

You answer the question posed in the title of this thread. This cartridge, a replica of what was made sixty years ago, tells us now how far we have come in that time with some aspects of vinyl playback technology.

There are other good carts as well. As Mike, Shakti and I have told you before, and you contended, the cart has a bigger impact.

It would be interesting if you get a TD 124 or some other regular TT if a friend can lend you, put the DST on it, the vdh on your AS, and do some videos.

 

[PeterA]

There are other good carts as well. As Mike, Shakti and I have told you before, and you contended, the cart has a bigger impact.

It would be interesting if you get a TD 124 or some other regular TT if a friend can lend you, put the DST on it, the vdh on your AS, and do some videos.

I am not arguing that the turntable has a bigger impact than the cartridge. I was sharing my impressions of various turntables and how they differ in direct comparisons using the same cartridge and arm. You are now shifting the topic, which is fine.

Given a particular budget, I can see how you and others would buy a table you consider to be a good enough platform for your arm and cartridge and then optimize the performance of the system by carefully selecting your favorite arm and cartridge for that platform, and be happy. I was discussing turntable advances that I have personally experienced. Cartridges are a different subject.

I agree that the DST Replica sounds best in my system of the various cartridges I have. I also will not quibble with you if you think the cartridge change makes a bigger impact over videos that do the actual turntables. It all depends on budget, priorities, and tastes. My goal was to buy the turntable I wanted and close that chapter. That platform would then allow me to experiment with various cartridges. I now just began a serious of SUT comparisons. Not as game changing as the cartridges perhaps, but they are showing some promise. My favorite now is a vintage Ortofon with the new DST Replica. No videos yet.

 

[bonzo75]

I am not arguing that the turntable has a bigger impact than the cartridge. I was sharing my impressions of various turntables and how they differ in direct comparisons using the same cartridge and arm. You are now shifting the topic, which is fine.

Given a particular budget, I can see how you and others would buy a table you consider to be a good enough platform for your arm and cartridge and then optimize the performance of the system by carefully selecting your favorite arm and cartridge for that platform, and be happy. I was discussing turntable advances that I have personally experienced. Cartridges are a different subject.

I agree that the DST Replica sounds best in my system of the various cartridges I have. I also will not quibble with you if you think the cartridge change makes a bigger impact over videos that do the actual turntables. It all depends on budget, priorities, and tastes. My goal was to buy the turntable I wanted and close that chapter. That platform would then allow me to experiment with various cartridges. I now just began a serious of SUT comparisons. Not as game changing as the cartridges perhaps, but they are showing some promise. My favorite now is a vintage Ortofon with the new DST Replica. No videos yet.

I too am interested in SUT comparisons. Old ortofon definitely sounds great for SPUs, consolidated silver in copper can have only compared to modern carts, and have not compared consolidated, Slagle, and Phasemation yet. Those who did preferred Phasemation.

I am not arguing that the turntable has a bigger impact than the cartridge.

You did. Probably the DST in your system changed your view

 

[Kingrex]

I don’t mean to imply that the turntable and tone arm don’t have an influence. They have a big influence. The way I see it, all the information is already in the record. The cartridge extracts it. The turntable and tone arm provide the platform for the cartridge. A necessary condition for the cartridge to do its work is the turntable spinning at the proper speed. Beyond that the tone arm and the turntable can only degrade or corrupt the information that’s being extracted. The less degradation or corruption, the closer the end result presentation is to the original information that already exists in its best form in the grooves.

The best turntable and arm are those that do the least harm to the original signal. That’s why accurate speed and resonance management are so important.

I don't agree. If the tone arm holding the cartridge vibrates, that vibration may cause the diamond in the cartridge to skip over information (peaks, valleys, dips etc) in the groove. That skipping, hops over information transcribed in the groove. It is lost information. Its not there in the signal going to the preamp. its not blurry. Its just not there. The better record player is holding the cartridge in such a way, all the way down to the diamond, that the diamond can perfectly track the groove and capture all the dips and peaks and valley all all that is in there.

 

[bonzo75]

I don't agree. If the tone arm holding the cartridge vibrates, that vibration may cause the diamond in the cartridge to skip over information (peaks, valleys, dips etc) in the groove. That skipping, hops over information transcribed in the groove. It is lost information. Its not there in the signal going to the preamp. its not blurry. Its just not there. The better record player is holding the cartridge in such a way, all the way down to the diamond, that the diamond can perfectly track the groove and capture all the dips and peaks and valley all all that is in there.

You are comparing a bad (or unsuitable) tonearm or TT with a good one, rather than comparing two good ones.

 

[jeff1225]

I too am interested in SUT comparisons. Old ortofon definitely sounds great for SPUs, consolidated silver in copper can have only compared to modern carts, and have not compared consolidated, Slagle, and Phasemation yet. Those who did preferred Phasemation.

You did. Probably the DST in your system changed your view

I did a big SUT comparison and preferred Phasemation by a wide margin. Paired with the MM input of my Lamm LP2, it was far superior to the internal SUT.

I did not try EMIA which I've heard might be the best SUT's.

 

[Balle Clorin]

An arm the vibrates or is disturbed will rarely make the stylus skip the groove.But any vibration , resonance or movements of the arm will cause added signal and intermodulation distortion. it is quite amazing the vinyl works as well as it does..

 

[bonzo75]

I did a big SUT comparison and preferred Phasemation by a wide margin. Paired with the MM input of my Lamm LP2, it was far superior to the internal SUT.

I did not try EMIA which I've heard might be the best SUT's.

Did you compare consolidated silver?

 

[PeterA]

You did. Probably the DST in your system changed your view

OK. I don’t remember that. Or maybe it was when I was comparing my sonic labs signature gold to airtight PC one supreme. Regardless, I think it depends a lot on what turntables you’re talking about and on what cartridges you’re talking about. If all the turntables are good and have the same basic nature like the four high mass thread drive tables I’m discussing in this thread, maybe the cartridges can make a bigger difference depending on the differences between the cartridges.

But I’ve also heard direct drive turntables and idler Drive turntables that sound very different. And if the system is not very resolving, you might not hear big differences between turntables and cartridges. For instance, when I directly compared a friend technics SP 10 Mark three to my SME 30/12, using the same arm and cartridge, the differences were profound. Much greater than what I’m hearing between the DST and the Ortofon cartridges or what I heard from the airtight and my sonic lab cartridges on my SME turntable

Too many unknowns to generalize in my opinion. My point is that I was not making that argument in this thread. I may or may not have discussed years ago somewhere on some thread on some forum. And yes, over time, my opinion has certainly changed on a lot of this stuff. There’s an awful lot to discover in this hobby and I know very little, admittedly.

 

[bonzo75]

But I’ve also heard direct drive turntables and idler Drive turntables that sound very different. And if the system is not very resolving, you might not hear big differences between turntables and cartridges.

Of course, I am talking where you can hear differences here cart (and records) make the difference. I don’t generally like DDs myself and idlers are good value for a lower price but I usually prefer good belts at a bit higher used price - though I would like to demo common wealth with Dava properly

 

[iaxel]

Did you compare consolidated silver?

Kondo SFZ was far superior to the Consolidate Silver when I compared in my system.
Actually, I have yet to audition a better SUT than the Kondo.