Turntable Setup...What do I need to suit my tastes?

What are you expecting from 2 channel vinyl that would be superior to 5.1 DTS MA or 5.1 Dolby True HD?

You need a preamp specially designed to apply the RIAA curve or vinyl will sound bad. Very aggressive EQ is needed to get vinyl to track and hold a significant length of music. A few AV receivers at least used to have dedicated turntable inputs but decent outboard preamps aren't too expensive.

Aside from just being different one advantage of vinyl for recent music as I understand it is that normal cartridges could not track hypercompressed volume wars cd mixes so they are forced to leave some actual dynamic contrast in the vinyl master. Rather ironic since cd has something like 40 dB more intrinsic dynamic range than vinyl, but there you are.

First, you must have a phono preamp connected between the cartridge and amplifier/receiver; a cartridge CAN NOT be connected directly to a normal line input of an amplifier. A good phono preamp is CRITICAL to decent vinyl sound quality.

The phono preamp not only supplies needed gain, but applies RIAA equalization to restore the bass, which is reduced as much as 100 times before it is cut into the record master. It would be good if you would look up RIAA Equalization on Wikipedia; everyone should understand the concept. The bottom line is that the information recorded on the vinyl is not in a condition to directly be played back; it must be restored by an RIAA equalization circuit before it is listenable as music.

The Musical Fidelity V-LPS is very good and under $200. It is available from Needle Doctor and others.


I suggest that you look at some of the integrated amplifiers from NAD and Cambridge Audio. They will run anywhere from $300 to $800.

One very good set of speakers I can recommend is the KEF iQ30 speakers, which you can get for $399 at KEF Direct. Another good set is the Monitor Audio Bronze BX-2 speakers for $489.

The Ortophon 2m Blue is $225 at Needle Doctor and might be a worthwhile upgrade, but the Red is not too bad.

Not hijack this thread, but I have a question for the TT aficionado's here.

My integrated has an MC preamp, but not an MM. Are there any budget TT's you know of which can use an MC cartridge? All the budget TT's I have scoped out come With MM cartridges. Or are MC cartridges not really a good idea with budget turntables?

The Boston AVR7120 HAS a phono preamp that works very well, has both 5.1 and 7.1 capability, along with plenty of honest RMS power. While it does not have HDMI swithing and some of the latest codecs (Dolby HD MA) it has served me well for the past 5 years and I hope many more. I used to use a Phase Linear 700B (350 watts/ch.) just for front main/subs channels and stereo music and was surprised how close the Boston provides similar sound enjoyment. I was and still am amazed at the copious power the Boston AVR7120 puts out. It is a beast weighing in at almost 60lbs. I use it with B&W front mains along with a pair of BIC 10" sub woofers. Bass? Tight, clean, and solid. No muddy fake bass and works well woth both audio from my vintage turntables and Audio Technica AT120E, AT 125LC, Stanton 681EEE, ADC ST XLM II, and several other cartidges mounted on everything from a Dual 1229Q and 1229, Dual 1219, and one of the two Technics SL-1700 MK2 turntables I have.

The Boston AVR 7120 come up on Ebay now and then and in audio boutique shops. That said, if you want good sound for both music and home theater, I would recommend at least 110 to 150 RMS watts per channel along with some name brand speakers. I like B&W but there are many mid and high end speakers out there. I will say this. As a rule of thumb, in my opinion, after years of owning different speakers from Infinity, Advent, Cerwin Vega, JBL, and more; for home use I have found a tower system using multiple 6" to 8" drivers along with a pair of 10" to 12" sub woofers to work best. Regardless of the brand, speakers of this size generally have less coloration, don't collapse or fold up under high volume levels, and give you both cleaner mid range as well as tight bass with little tendency to deliver the "muddy" bass you would abhor.

I'm sure there are many here who can advise what speakers and brands might fit into this category of parameters I've described, as well as other recommendations.

I'll bite. You don't say what kind of budget turntable, but generally I wouldn't use a MC cart on a budget turntable. If you do, then a separate high quality preamp mounted very close to or under the turntable would be best in my opinion.

Budget as in under $1k. I wouldn't be opposed to upping the spending limit. It is just that for experimenting, I was looking to keep things on the cheap. And since my integrated's phono preamp is already MC, I believed that a phono preamp would one thing less to worry about. But after doing a little research on the complexities, it appears that isn't so.

If you want punchy, I would recommend at least 2 10" subs. Here is a Yamaha unit that is a bit dated (I have one ), but has outputs for TWO passive subs .. . . meaning you can get by cheaper because the subs don;t have to have their own amp. It is a pretty good Yamaha unit and better than some newer models I think.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from...&_nkw=RX-V1065

And here is it's "little brother":

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Yamaha-RX-V7...item256f92e000


OR:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...amaha+receiver


Also, look at Denon for a little better although costlier units. But these Yamaha are pretty decent and the 1065 and 765 were a bit better in some regards as to power in my opinion than some of the newer units unless you go to higher priced models >$700.

As for speakers, by 'brand name" yes, KEF, B&W many more. Don;t actually care for Klipsh that much tho. There are also some "B" brand speakers like Polks, Aperion Audio, and Pinnacle Speakers. But for these later you have to pick and choose. . .. some are better than others.

Lastly, as I stated, if you want punchy in-your-chest bass, I would go with two 10" subs placed behind your main front speakers and facing outward right and left. The Disney WOW video calibration disc actually has a very good part on speakers placement.

I have two sets of B&W vintage speakers. . . DM603 S2 with the Nautilus tweeters, and a pair of DM 640i.

I only see the normal 2x preamp outs on these for the sub channel.

Bill

The 765 is less power, has one or maybe two less HDMI inputs but otherwise pretty close. If you go to the Yamaha web site you will find the specs and also can look up the 1065.

http://usa.yamaha.com/products/audio..._u/?mode=model

The 795 is a nice unit also. But the 765 has updated HDMI switching, yet still has the higher end separate discrete amplifiers.

Yes, you would still need a phono pre-amp, but not a biggie and you can get very good ones. Check Audio Karma for more on those.

Oops... you are correct and good catch, sorry . . I was thinking of my Boston AVR7120. I have two BIC 10" passive subs running on that one.

Is your decision firm enough? There were several serious complains about this table on other forums. Some found it inferior to earlier Pro-Ject's.

The Denon is newer and supports HDMI 1.4 for 3D home theater use if that is important to you. However, I am a bit concerned that some sources list the Denon 1611 at 75w/ch and at least one stated 110. I'm guessing it's 75W. I also see nothing detailed about discrete amplifier channels which gives better power capability as in the Yamaha. . . which is why I chose it. The RX-V765 was the last year Yamaha put such high end quality in an mid priced unit. All I can say here is that the Yamaha is a solid unit

It isn't just the wattage/power, but also the over all power bandwidth and depth of sound. More power almost always sounds cleaner and more open. . . . more dynamic range. If it were the difference between 95 and 105 watts. . .. not so much. But 75 watts to 95 or 100. . . is significant, plus. .. . separate discrete 8 amplifiers in the Yamaha vs probably some sort of multiplexed hybrid circuits in the Denon. Also.... if the speakers you chose only have 88 to 90db sensitivity, rather than 92 or 93 .. more power will be needed to drive them.

And if the Denon is available that cheap. . . might be telling you something.

As to Marantz. . . or any other brands/comparison. Google is our friend.

http://www.google.com/search?q=avr-1611&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a&source=hp&channel=np#hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&channel=np&sclient=psy-ab&q=Denon+avr-1611+vs+Marantz&oq=Denon+avr-1611+vs+Marantz&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_l=serp.3...4134.10663.1.10881.21.10.0.0.0.3.2186.6777.0j2 j4-2j2j1j1j0j1.9.0...0.0.Tx7-iezijCI&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=edee43f1655d1fb9&biw=1366&bih=633

You don't have to use a separate phono pre-amp....depending on what quality of phono pre-amp might be in any given AVR or stereo or MC pre-amp.
Parasound, for instants, makes a separate phono pre, the JC3;
But they also have the P7 7 channel analogue pre-amp, which has a very good phono input.

I disagree. As much as I used to want to believe it, my own eperiments, and some bit of investigation, demonstrate to me that power unused makes zero difference. If (as I believe is about accurate) I use 20 watts or so per channel to play back peaks (at 95 db per channel - - 10 dB below movie reference) in my current setup at my typical listening levels, a 200 watt amp will, by virtue of its 200 watts-ness, make zero difference in the sound I hear. My speakers cannot see feel or taste the extra watts that would be there if a higher input voltage were applied to the power stage. If I purchase an amp in the future that has astounding engineering pedigree and way more power (I admit to being a Bryston fan), it will be to satisfy my ego or sense of asthetics.

I assume you look for something like this kind of bass?
It sounds a lot better with a sub woofer or two than with small computer loudspeakers, but it gives you an idea. It's 5.1 or 7.1 and I still believe you have a better chance of finding good bass in today's recordings than in vinyls with a lot less hassle (rumble, skips, hiss, knack, keeping them clean and/or play with a liquid, mount the player on a wall to prevent skips etc.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VC02wGj5gPw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWg6iB0Evj0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqGuFfeAdgw

Well, I won't argue, but I will say that I have had a number of amps over the years. As I said headroom, or dynamic range is greater on a more powerful amplifier. Generally, peaks are less likely to be clipped or limited resulting in, usually, a more open sound.

As a couple of examples, I've owned a SWTP Universal Tiger MKII pair tested and rated by a MacIntosh clinic at 105 watts RMS unclipped power. I later purchased my first Phase Linear 400B which had over twice ( approx. 225 W/ch) the RMS power. At the same volume level with the same speakers (large Advents at the time), the sound was more open and "airy". Now, also, there could be effects of damping factor differences between amps. But. . .. I later bought a Phase Linear 700B which now had a rated 350 W/ch. and it also has, again, a noticeable improvement in dynamic range and clarity, even at a 5 or 6 watt average power level. I repeated the comparison with other speakers since , such as my B&W DM 603 S2 and others.

I hear what you are saying, and a lot also has to do with how ample the power supply rails are able to stand up in an amp also. I have a very humble NEC made receiver made in 1986 that only is rated at 60 w/ch and it puts out very respectable sound for it's size, but there IS a difference compared to even my original Phase Linear 400B. . . at the same measured sound levels.

Depends on the weight of your tonearm. If you have a low mass tonearm 10gm's or less you'll need to look for a high output MC cart. If you have a medium to high mass arm a low output MC would be the best option.

Let me ask it this way... What Entry Level TT would some here recommend using an MC cartridge? I just don't find anything, until you start getting into the range of say, the VPI Classic, or Scout. (which to me, is putting things in the upper end of 'Entry Level'.)

I miss the old days when everything was either a Garrard, or Technics turntable.

That is exactly what you need to get most from entry level MC carts - "upper end of entry level" table.

Ahh. . . an old guy like me. You should have seen my first turntable. . . an Elac Miracord XA-100 in deep burgundy with a matching all metal stamped plinth. Seemed to track a Shure M3D ok at 3 grams.

I generally agree and have not been a fan of MC cartridges, but I also have vintage turntables and cartridges that have worked well and sounded superb to my ears with them:

. . ."audio from my vintage turntables and Audio Technica AT120E, AT 125LC, Stanton 681EEE, ADC ST XLM II, and several other cartidges mounted on everything from a Dual 1229Q and 1229, Dual 1219, and one of the two Technics SL-1700 MK2 turntables I have."

3 grams?? I had a Yamaha DD TT with a Shure V15 Type II, III, IV, V over the years and never had the tracking force more than 1 gram.
I think even now with my Marantz S151 and a Shure M97 I'm only @ 1.5 grams.

I guess that does reveal my age!

Yeah, it appears that many people aren't fans of MC cartridges. If it wasn't for the fact that my integrated only has an MC phono preamp, I would simply stick to an MM. In the end, I may end up going with an MM anyway, but it seems like a waste to not use the built-in phono preamp, I already have.