"Bob Latham" wrote

Perhaps they decided that all R&D improvements would only be on next years
model and people who purchased this year's, would go without.


Have there been any improvements in turntable design over the last 30 years?
It seems to me that current models are all firmly based on designs available
in the 1970s. All three of the currently available drive arrangements:
idler-wheel drive, belt drive and direct drive date from the 1970s or
before, electronic speed control was introduced in the 1970s. Modern
turntables work no better than those of the 1970s, nor has the LP changed in
that time.

So if the turntable manufacturers *are* doing R&D it can only be in terms of
manufacturing methods aimed at reducing production costs.

David.

In article , Bob Latham
wrote:
Jim you go on about others making mountains out of mole hills.

That can be made to seem so when you cherry-pick some of my comments out
of their contexts, then present them with your own 'spin'. :-)

I think your criticisms above are either nit picking or exaggerated out
of all proportion just because you didn't like it, the marketing and
publication issues surrounding the LP12.

Alas, you still seem to keep missing all the statements I have made that
don't suit your belief that I am being excessively critical or 'hate' Linn.

I've tried explaining a few times. So I guess I should now assume that
trying again to get you to understand this would be a waste of time. Happy
to leave any other readers to draw their own conclusions.

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html

"Keith G" wrote

My words were directed at no particular individuals although the recent
exchanges do seem to have demonstrated what I was saying. There has always
been a bit of a 'lynch mob' in this ng when it comes to certain
manufacturers and products.

Has there?, can't say I've noticed it. Certainly people often do have strong
views for and against particular products, systems and techniques. But
everyone writes as an individual, I see no evidence of a "mob". What is this
ng for if not to discuss these matters? and discussion will inevitably bring
out differences of opinion. I see no merit in crying "unfair" when something
you happen to like gets criticised.

My own view is that, provided no-one goes hungry, let them spend what they
will on whatever takes their fancy. It is worth noting that a pair of
'thousand dollar' interconnects on eBay that were pointed to recently
still made over two hundred and fifty quid!

Absolutely. If someone wants to waste a lot of money on snake-oil products
that's their perogative. But it's also my perogative to say that I think
them foolish for so doing.


These days I use a Luxman DD turntable. It claims
to be an "ultimate HiFi component", so it must be better than any other
turntable, mustn't it? :-)


Of course! :-)

I like Luxman stuff and had an amp and a tuner a while back when I was
going through various kit. Interesting that our local 'high end' designer
and manufacturer, Tim De Paravicini, started out in audio designing for
Luxman....


I only have it because I was able to buy it second hand for a pittance. But
I like it, there's plenty of torque in the motor so it runs up to speed
quite fast despite the heavy platter, the plinth and cover are big enough
that there's no need for a cut-out in the cover to allow the stylus to reach
the centre of the record with hitting it, the cover has proper hinges, not a
slot in the back and the speed change is electronic, not by a fork moving
the belt from one pulley to another as was the case with the Thorens
(accompanied by several seconds of 'orrible noises as the belt rubbed
against the fork). I can't say I've noticed any particular change in sound
quality between it and the Thorens, but then I don't play vinyl much these
days, it's too much hassle.

David.

"David Looser" wrote in
message
"Bob Latham" wrote

Perhaps they decided that all R&D improvements would
only be on next years model and people who purchased
this year's, would go without.

Have there been any improvements in turntable design over
the last 30 years? It seems to me that current models are
all firmly based on designs available in the 1970s. All
three of the currently available drive arrangements:
idler-wheel drive, belt drive and direct drive date from
the 1970s or before, electronic speed control was
introduced in the 1970s. Modern turntables work no better
than those of the 1970s, nor has the LP changed in that
time.

The Thorens TD125 had electronic speed control and was introduced in 1968. I
bought one in 1969 and it had been out for a while.

If memory serves there was even a turntable in the 1950s with a tubed
electronic speed control unit. The name Rek-o-Kut comes to mind, but I'm
fuzzy about the details. I know that Rek-O-Kut had turntables with
mechanical speed control.

"Bob Latham" wrote in message

In article ,
David Looser wrote:
"Bob Latham" wrote

Perhaps they decided that all R&D improvements would
only be on next years model and people who purchased
this year's, would go without.


Have there been any improvements in turntable design
over the last 30 years?

In your opinion obviously.

If there had been a signficiant improvement in turntable design or even the
whole area of vinyl cutting and playback, then you could cite me the
corresponding scholarly paper. I track such things, and if memory serves,
the last one was dated in the late 60s or early 70s.

not but I'd expect you to say
the same about CD players and amplifiers.

They've both made dramatic improvements in things like size, weight, cost,
maximum power (amplfiiers) and reliability.

It seems to me that current models are all firmly based
on designs available in the 1970s. All three of the
currently available drive arrangements: idler-wheel
drive, belt drive and direct drive date from the 1970s
or before, electronic speed control was introduced in
the 1970s.

No problem with any of that.

Modern turntables work no better than those of the 1970s,

You know this how?

Absence of evidence.

Measured them all?

Done my share. `

Listened to them all?

Done my share.

Or is it just bigotry?

Bigotry is the only explanation for the ongoing claims of any generalized
sonic superiority of vinyl over good digital.


You've made your mind up that
everything sounds the same from a certain point in time
unless there is something wrong with it.

The only reason why everything didn't always sound the same was that back in
those days, there were so many things wrong with it.

So why do you have any interest left in Audio then?

For me, its all about how good things sound when you do everything right.

Its done and dusted, end of.


I don't need the promise of pie in the sky on the other side of the rainbow
to get me started in the morning.

I cannot say if one item is better than another. I can
say I prefer the sound of one item over another and in
that context I preferred my Linn to other TTs at the time
and if I'm honest it is still in many ways nicer sounding
than CD.

I heard people's deified Linns many times and it wasn't the second coming.

nor has the LP changed in that time.

So if the turntable manufacturers *are* doing R&D it can
only be in terms of manufacturing methods aimed at
reducing production costs.

According to your "everything is the same unless faulty"
logic indeed yes.


Prove that there is anything actually something logically wrong with the
idea that "everything is the same unless faulty"

Like Jim you are choosing to take a very extreme view

Actually, their/our viewpoint is not extreme. Many people have gotten off
the "everthing sounds different" bandwagon.

and the only value that I can see in that is to provoke
people so I'm now out of this conversation.

Yup, take your ball and bat and go home. How cordial and mature of you! ;-)

"Bob Latham" wrote in message
...
In article ,
David Looser wrote:
"Bob Latham" wrote

Perhaps they decided that all R&D improvements would only be on next
years
model and people who purchased this year's, would go without.


Have there been any improvements in turntable design over the last 30
years?

In your opinion obviously not but I'd expect you to say the same about CD
players and amplifiers.

As far as ordinary audio power amplifiers go, no I don't think there has
been significant improvement in performance over the last 30 years. I still
use a 30 year-old Quad 405 and can think of no good reason to replace it. CD
players are a different matter as 30 years ago they hadn't appeared on the
market. However if we make that 20 years then again I'd be surprised if
there was much improvement in performance. Cost is another matter, both CD
players and amplifiers are available at much lower real prices than they
were then (the audiophile status-symbol products excepted).

It seems to me that current models are all firmly based on designs
available in the 1970s. All three of the currently available drive
arrangements: idler-wheel drive, belt drive and direct drive date from
the 1970s or before, electronic speed control was introduced in the
1970s.

No problem with any of that.

Modern turntables work no better than those of the 1970s,

You know this how? Measured them all? Listened to them all?

Based on the fact that there has been next to no changes to the design or
operating principles of these products. Based on the fact that all three are
operating at a limit of performance set by the basic fundamentals of these
operating principles. Based on the fact that, to the best of my knowledge,
nobody has conducted a properly designed subjective listening test that
demonstrates that improvments have been made.

Or is it just
bigotry?

My opinion is "bigotry" and yours is - what exactly? Sorry Bob but my
opinions and yours are both *opinions*. If you want to call mine "bigotry"
then you will have to accept the term yourself.

You've made your mind up that everything sounds the same from a
certain point in time unless there is something wrong with it. So why do
you have any interest left in Audio then? Its done and dusted, end of.

Why do you assume that audio is limited to vinyl, CDs and amplifiers? Or
that good old-fashioned two-channel stereo is the be-all and end-all of
HiFi? There's a whole word of possible (and potentially dramatic)
improvements to be had from multi-channel audio and new ways of coding audio
to create an immersive sound. ISTM that the world of HiFi has got stuck in a
rut just fiddling with tiny changes to well-established designs of hardware
but without addressing the big issues of how to create convincing sound
fields in listening rooms. There are multi-channel systems, SACD and
DVD-audio, but these have largely failed to make it commercially. The only
sort of surround sound to have any real commercial success is the 5.1 or 7.1
movie sound track, and those are more about putting sound effects behind the
audience's heads than creating a convincing immersive sound field.

I cannot say if one item is better than another. I can say I prefer the
sound of one item over another and in that context I preferred my Linn to
other TTs at the time and if I'm honest it is still in many ways nicer
sounding than CD.

Fair enough, you are entitled to your preference.

nor has the LP changed in that time.

So if the turntable manufacturers *are* doing R&D it can only be in
terms of manufacturing methods aimed at reducing production costs.

According to your "everything is the same unless faulty" logic indeed yes.

Like Jim you are choosing to take a very extreme view and the only value
that I can see in that is to provoke people so I'm now out of this
conversation.

"Extreme"? really? Sorry but I can't see how my view is "extreme" when it is
one shared by a good many people, many professionally involved in audio.

David.

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote

My words were directed at no particular individuals although the recent
exchanges do seem to have demonstrated what I was saying. There has
always been a bit of a 'lynch mob' in this ng when it comes to certain
manufacturers and products.

Has there?, can't say I've noticed it.


Have you not? The occasional 'snake oil chestnuts' that are dropped in here
from time to time usually bring a predictable response from the same gaggle
of familiar names.


Certainly people often do have strong
views for and against particular products, systems and techniques. But
everyone writes as an individual, I see no evidence of a "mob". What is
this ng for if not to discuss these matters? and discussion will
inevitably bring out differences of opinion. I see no merit in crying
"unfair" when something you happen to like gets criticised.


Neither do I, but critics are not immune from criticism themselves.



My own view is that, provided no-one goes hungry, let them spend what
they will on whatever takes their fancy. It is worth noting that a pair
of 'thousand dollar' interconnects on eBay that were pointed to recently
still made over two hundred and fifty quid!

Absolutely. If someone wants to waste a lot of money on snake-oil products
that's their perogative. But it's also my perogative to say that I think
them foolish for so doing.


If you think it's worth the bother - the one person who will always think a
ridiculously expensive 'upgrade' is worth the money is the person who's
bought it!

"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote

My words were directed at no particular individuals although the recent
exchanges do seem to have demonstrated what I was saying. There has
always been a bit of a 'lynch mob' in this ng when it comes to certain
manufacturers and products.

Has there?, can't say I've noticed it.


Have you not? The occasional 'snake oil chestnuts' that are dropped in
here from time to time usually bring a predictable response from the same
gaggle of familiar names.


Well, if you equate "a predictable response from the same gaggle of familiar
names" with being a lynch mob. To me the term "lynch mob" implies a group
conspiring to destroy their victim, and I haven't seen that, or anything
close, here.

David.

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote in message
...

"David Looser" wrote in message
...
"Keith G" wrote

My words were directed at no particular individuals although the recent
exchanges do seem to have demonstrated what I was saying. There has
always been a bit of a 'lynch mob' in this ng when it comes to certain
manufacturers and products.

Has there?, can't say I've noticed it.


Have you not? The occasional 'snake oil chestnuts' that are dropped in
here from time to time usually bring a predictable response from the same
gaggle of familiar names.


Well, if you equate "a predictable response from the same gaggle of
familiar names" with being a lynch mob. To me the term "lynch mob" implies
a group conspiring to destroy their victim, and I haven't seen that, or
anything close, here.


You are being a little *literal* here - in this context the 'lynch mob'
seeks only to destroy the victim's reputation and/or possibly their future
trading prospects.

I have made my own views clear, but I always think there's more than a
little hint of jealousy involved when the 'snake oil squealers' see how
easily their 'target' can shake silly big money out of minted idiots'
pockets!

Same thing with Bill Gates - even my sister in law's American husband hates
him and to my knowledge they've never met!

In article , Arny
Krueger
wrote:
"Bob Latham" wrote in message

In article , David Looser
wrote:
"Bob Latham" wrote

Perhaps they decided that all R&D improvements would only be on next
years model and people who purchased this year's, would go without.


Have there been any improvements in turntable design over the last 30
years?

In your opinion obviously.

If there had been a signficiant improvement in turntable design or even
the whole area of vinyl cutting and playback, then you could cite me
the corresponding scholarly paper. I track such things, and if memory
serves, the last one was dated in the late 60s or early 70s.

My (imperfect) recollection is that there was a flurry of research and
papers around the time the industry thought 'quadrophonic' LPs would
replace stereo and some makers used systems requiring an ultrasonic
subcarrier. But I haven't checked to see if much more has appeared later.


Like Jim you are choosing to take a very extreme view

Actually, their/our viewpoint is not extreme. Many people have gotten
off the "everthing sounds different" bandwagon.

I remain puzzled and amused by the belief that what I wrote was a "very
extreme view".

Slainte,

Jim

--
Please use the address on the audiomisc page if you wish to email me.
Electronics http://www.st-and.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scot...o/electron.htm
Armstrong Audio http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/Armstrong/armstrong.html
Audio Misc http://www.audiomisc.co.uk/index.html