Thinking of collecting vinyl

[gEd]

The quality of the mastering is important. There are CD rez and HD rez versions of an album on Qobuz (I don't recall the specific album atm) which sound completely different. Different as in there is a bass line that is completely missing from the HD mastering on one of the tracks. We're not talking subtle differences here.

 

[lucid]

Not sure why people are arguing over the merits of vinyl, all points are pretty moot.

I'm no audiophile whatsoever, never had a vinyl player, always been a day zero adopter of digital and streaming etc, but there is something tangible about vinyl, as agreed by with all those fuelling the resurgence of it. Only a couple of months ago did a vinyl shop and bar open up on my road.

I've been to a few places, Airbnb mostly, where they've had a vinyl player and I think put simply, it's just fun. Selecting the albums, actually putting them on, limited choice, etc. It's not for everyone but it's pointless arguing against anyone for or against because it's pretty much an opinion.

I came across this thread because I'm looking to get one for the new house where we have a 2nd reception room and just grabbing the odd £2/3 vinyl here and there as well as a few 'key' albums that I used to own or listen to digitally a lot. We only listen to music when we have guests anyway so it'll make it more of a thing rather than the same old Spotify playlist (plus my amp, speakers etc will be with the TV in the other room so I need a new system regardless).

The first few posts are already really useful so thanks to all those that have contributed to the OP.

Edit OT:

I *really* like the look of the Pro-Ject Primary E! I know this is a pretty budget setup, but anyone have any comments on this setup?

The amp will only be used for the turntable so don't want to go crazy as it's not like it'll have extra uses (TV etc). Same for the speakers.

I know it doesn't really matter but it looks as though the Primary E is pretty much the exact same size (330x420mm) as the AM5 (340x430mm) as well so should sit neatly on top?

Just picking up on this; I know mid-gen replied already, but there's a couple of points and some recommendations to add.

He's correct when he says there's no phono pre-amp built in to the Topaz amp. The Pro-Ject Primary E doesn't have one built in either. Somewhere then between the turntable and the amp you'll need a box to convert the cartridge signal in to something powerful and correctly balanced to drive a line level input on the Topaz (Aux, CD, Tuner, BD/DVD are all line level inputs).

The lowest-cost-but-still-decent phono preamp box is the Pro-Ject Phono Box E at £49, but I wouldn't buy that. Instead, I'd take the budget and put it in to a better amplifier; one that (a) have a phono pre-amp built in, and that - as an amp - has more power, sounds better and gives you infrared remote control as well. Have a look at the Onkyo 9010 @ £180. That's a much smarter purchase.

The Topaz amps are okay for the money. They're about the lowest cost you can buy for something full sized that's designed carefully to be hi-fi rather than just a collection of circuits to make sounds louder. But there's a limit to what can be achieved. The Achilles heel of the Topaz amps is the power. That's where they saved a load of cash. What they've been crafty with is how they quote the power. The headline figure is 25W, but what they left out is all the tricks required to magic up this number. Long story short, the true power is about 10W per channel when measured as Hi-Fi amps should be. That's not a problem in the short term. We don't need that many watts to start making some sound; but ultimately it does limit the dynamics and scale that the amp can reproduce because the reservoir of power is so small.

Measured on a level playing field then, the Topaz AM5 is 10W versus the Onkyo 9010 at roughly 25W per channel. The Onkyo has bigger balls.

Next, your plan to put the TT on top of the amp.....hmmm.... not such a smart move. There are two problems, and they'll both show up as hum through the speakers.

First, turntables rely on converting microscopically-small ridges in the groove in to electrical signals. To do that, the record platter and the tonearm have to be as still as possible to allow the stylus (needle) to track the variations in the groove as accurately as possible. Sitting the turntable on top of something that vibrates will not be helpful to the cause. At this point you're probably thinking that amplifiers don't vibrate, but in actual fact they do. Anything with a transformer will vibrate. UK mains frequency is 50Hz, so that's the frequency that the transformer in any amp will vibrate at. Sitting the turntable on top of something vibrating, even very subtly, is going to transmit some of that to the stylus.

Next, stray magnetic fields.

The sort of cartridge in most of the Pro-Ject turntables works by moving a magnet past a couple of coils of wire. The magnet induces and electrical current to flow in the coils, and that's what is picked up as the music signal. You're probably familiar with the idea of cordless charging of mobile phone batteries. It uses induction too. The charger base generates a fluctuating magnetic field, and this is picked up by coils of wire in the battery which makes and electrical current flow and that's how the power is transferred. The same sort of principle applies when you put a turntable cartridge close to a transformer such as the one in an amplifier.

Summary: Turntable sitting on top of amp = bad news.


The Primary E is a good starter turntable. If you're interested in sound quality first, then you can't buy better for less. The Onkyo 9010 makes for a better amp than the combo of the Topaz AM5 + a phono pre-amp. The Diamond 9.0 speakers are okay for the money, but you can do massively better with the Diamond 220 @ £99.

 

[Russinating]

Really useful @lucid, thanks.

 

[nlyh]

The compression thing is certainly the most important factor in the argument of CD/Digital vs Vinyl.

For modern releases, it appears to be the "in thing" to release CD/Digital with terrible compression, giving no decent dynamic range. In that sense Vinyl does sound better than CDs. Vinyl releases maintain the better dynamic range, which can be checked out on a database.

Random example : http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=vektor&album= (Clear differences between digital/vinyl)

Random example : http://dr.loudness-war.info/album/list?artist=rush&album=moving+pictures (Older releases, CD and Vinyl pretty much the same range)

There are some CDs I own which I simply cannot listen to on my kit as it reveals all the harsh compression and it sounds absolutely awful. I think that is the main reason as to why you hear the "Vinyl sounds better" argument from the majority of people these days.

On the other hand, I own CD/Digital music which is not compressed and when done right it sounds much better than Vinyl to me, but that is personal preference. I like listening to Vinyl too for it's own appeal.

I still collect Vinyl simply because many modern releases sound better in that format, in most cases.

 

[9designs2]

Blimey this debate still going, I remember when it started, about 30 years ago !!! It was then and is now still based on myth and misunderstandings. Would I recommend someone to start up collecting vinyl? No. Not for some of the ignorant hearsay comments made, but because most won't have the budget to do it justice. It's an expensive format, always has been always will be to get it good. So to the comment made about speakers being the most important part, complete BS in a vinyl system.
To give an example, I recently bought a pair of small bookshelf speakers off ebay for my garage. About £30. They are JPW Gold Mini Monitors, decades old. I knew they would sound good as I use to help out in a shop 25 years ago when JPW were flavour of the bookshelf market. Hooked them up to some modern quality kit and they sound great, more than good enough to reveal improvements on Turntable upgrades. So for a budget system, them plus an old Arcam/Naim/Linn/Creek/Exposure amp would be far better than a horrid sounding class D amp. Then a decent Projekt, Rega deck. THEN, site and position all with great care, all piled on a shelf or cabinet is a disaster. As Lucid said, a deck as all about micro vibrations and recovering them, so think about it next to the speakers!

Cheap turntables are a waste of effort, better to limit your amount of sources and get a better dedicated streamer/DAC with the money. Now I still buy and use vinyl, always have done, didn't sell out during the CD revolution, which I have now ditched unless it's just to rip to my NAS. I use Tidal which make a great partner to vinyl. Gives you a digital version of your vinyl collection when convenience wins over sound.

Oh yes the sound. It's got nothing to do with resolution, frequency range etc, you listen to vinyl because it often has the ability to sound more "ENJOYABLE" (on a good system) How it achieved to sound more enjoyable fills endless pages of forums, but largely is irrelevant keyboard jockeying, if it sounds nicer just enjoy it and leave the technical debate in the forums for others to stress over.
Sadly most of which haven't bothered to hear either a good digital or analogue set-up, rather stating their cheap DAC use the same chip as the expensive stuff so must sound the same, wrong again.
Vinyl masters are different, they have to be else you would blow the cutting head and produce a groove that couldn't be tracked.

It is true quality components have become very cheap and find there way into all price points, but just because you buy in a quality part doesn't mean it will sound good. Many I believe at teh budget end just hook up digital circuits as per the data sheet from the supplier, they then all end up sounding the same. A smart designer start there then develops ways to better use the components to make higher performing piece of kit.

Have to laugh at putting so much kit in a Z4, I own one as well, with the better OEM system in, which is okay, but any system in a car, short of very expensive highly insulated limo's is fighting a loosing battle of noise and vibration. The Zed is full of noise, drones and rattles. Just buy a performance exhaust and turn the stereo off. For sure some cars come with cheap crap stereos/speakers and few upgrades can be worth while but spending thousands is just willy waving. You own a classic like a Z4 for it's driving challenge and enjoyment, not too listen to music!!!!

In the end a top flight digital source, ie streamer or vinyl can sound superb and actually not a far apart. There is a naturalness to vinyl and an involvement in the process of listening, it takes an equally expensive digital front end to equal a top flight TT. I'm lucky not to have to choose as I use both as the mood suits me, but after around a 35 year journey in Hi-Fi, the old saying you get what you pay for still holds a lot of truth. In that time I've gone from budget to "high end" what ever that means in both digital and analogue. Get the best source you can and don't over look used classic kit.

 

[mid_gen]

Have to laugh at putting so much kit in a Z4, I own one as well, with the better OEM system in, which is okay, but any system in a car, short of very expensive highly insulated limo's is fighting a loosing battle of noise and vibration. The Zed is full of noise, drones and rattles. Just buy a performance exhaust and turn the stereo off. For sure some cars come with cheap crap stereos/speakers and few upgrades can be worth while but spending thousands is just willy waving. You own a classic like a Z4 for it's driving challenge and enjoyment, not too listen to music!!!!

I had a Z4 years back as well, also lol at spending money on audio gear for one. Apart from the obvious (it's a bloody convertible), part of the intake system is deliberately piped into the cockpit to make more noise (I know this because I removed part of the baffle to make it noisier ;P). I guess if all you want to do is pose in it though....

 

[SexyGreyFox]

 

[Psycho Sonny]

I had a Z4 years back as well, also lol at spending money on audio gear for one. Apart from the obvious (it's a bloody convertible), part of the intake system is deliberately piped into the cockpit to make more noise (I know this because I removed part of the baffle to make it noisier ;P). I guess if all you want to do is pose in it though....

that's all good and well if you like induction noise. most people prefer the notes coming from the other end (exhaust).

 

[mid_gen]

that's all good and well if you like induction noise. most people prefer the notes coming from the other end (exhaust).

You know better than BMW's audio engineers, I'm sure...

 

[Psycho Sonny]

You know better than BMW's audio engineers, I'm sure...

well that is why they put that foam in their in the first place. to stop too much induction noise from coming through. but i take it you know better by removing it?

 

[signs]

whats this ^ got to do with collecting vinyl ?

 

[mid_gen]

You mean you aren't interested in knowing that PsychoSonny has a Z4 and the details of the audio equipment installed in it?

 

[gEd]

Not in the slightest

 

[signs]

nope

 

[jpaul]

your'e only 6 degrees of separation from a man and his BMW ?

I recently tried a back to back comparison using Muse's Origin of Symmetry. I recorded my vinyl copy as a WAV, and compared it with the same album ripped from the CD. The vinyl has noticeably greater dynamic range.

Unfortunately the current trend in the music industry is to make albums that sound as loud as possible, which usually means compressing the living **** out of them at the mastering stage. This is the main reason I still buy vinyl - it's often the only way to avoid the heavy-handed compression. The irony is that CDs and other digital formats have a far greater theoretical maximum dynamic range than vinyl since the noise floor is so much lower, but in practice they sound the most compressed.

yes I subsequenly read a number of stevehoffman threads with folks seeking out better/earlier cd pressings, often using the dynamic range 'database'
to, at least, weed out the bad cd's

Audiophile help: CD Dynamic Range Compression or Remastering

Anyone else seeking out older CDs

 

[SexyGreyFox]

Anyone else seeking out older CDs

In 1987 I had a Saturday job in an Heavy Metal record shop called Lotus Records in Hanley Stoke on Trent and we had just acquired our first revolving rack of CD's but we couldn't play them because we didn't have a CD player.
A couple of weeks later a bloke came in saying he had over 300 vinyl albums that he wanted to trade for CD's, my boss said he could have 30 CDs, he agreed and we then spent a lot of the day filling the shelves with a load still on the floor because there was nowhere to put them.
The following Saturday when I arrived I noticed lots of spaces on the shelves and all the vinyl missing from the floor.
Apparently the bloke had come back on the Monday saying the quality of the CDs were crap and he'd found out they were direct recordings from vinyl and not gone through any special re-mastering process.
He traded in the 30 CDs and then had to pay at least £2 an album to get his vinyl collection back or what was left of it.
So as far as I was concerned because of that bloke, CDs were crap quality in the 80s.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

Naughty boy

 

[flea.rider]

best place to sell vinyl albums ? original sgt peppers and abby road ?

 

[lucid]

Apparently the bloke had come back on the Monday saying the quality of the CDs were crap and he'd found out they were direct recordings from vinyl and not gone through any special re-mastering process.
He traded in the 30 CDs and then had to pay at least £2 an album to get his vinyl collection back or what was left of it.
So as far as I was concerned because of that bloke, CDs were crap quality in the 80s.

I remember the advent of CD. That bloke was right, more or less. Many of the early CD releases were awful. Even those albums mastered and released after CD production started to get in to full swing still sounded awful. They were overly-bright. I got Private Dancer on CD after hearing it on vinyl. The CD could make a person's ears bleed.

Around the same time there was still some good Hi-Fi press. There were a couple of mags I bought monthly. One was Hi-Fi News & Record Review, IIRC. They did some articles on CD mastering. They identified the problem that the studios were equipped with gear that had evolved over decades for the analogue recording and mastering process. Also, the recording engineers too were used to mastering for vinyl. The whole process chain didn't suit the transition to a digital format.

I got my first CD player sometime around '84 I think. It was a Sony D50; a 'portable' that wasn't really that portable. At the time there wasn't that much of a selection of CDs in HMV. I think the sum total occupied two vinyl racks. With two people browsing at the same time there would be body contact. It didn't really matter though. CD was still niche. Players were expensive separates items. But then, maybe in time for Christmas, Amstrad launched their first music system with a CD player. Within a couple of months the CD section at HMV expanded massively. There was a huge amount of stuff released on CD from the original analogue masters, and it sounded rubbish. It took a few years for the engineers to get the hang of doing CD and vinyl masters separately.

 

[koolpc]

A friend of mine started collecting vinyl.

He has been to 50% of all the flooring shops in the UK so far!