Cost Incurred to Achieve a Vinyl LP Replay

As a Long Term user of the Vinyl LP as a Source, as well as being one who has ventured into discovering and experiencing how fellow enthusiasts have developed their own interest in Vinyl replays. I have got to a place where limited to my experiences only, most I have encountered have over many years have been constrained in their budgets for the Ancillaries required to replay a Vinyl LP.

A few have exceeded the approx' £30K mark for a TT > Tonearm > Cartridge, and fewer from this selection are using dedicated Electronics with a Value of more than £10K to support the Source. 

My most typical experiences are of Ancillaries and Electronics used to support a Vinyl Replay with a combined cost of between approx' £6K - 16K.

I have been demo'd through being at commercial events, Ancillaries and Electronics that far exceed the above Values, but as these demo's are not from a familiar system and have been quite some time in the past these experiences have not been considered as being of importance or contributing to shaping how my present methods are I place to replay a Vinyl LP. 

What I have also become quite aware of, as a result of sharing and receiving accounts of Past Experiences, is that 'dye in the wool' Vinyl Replay Enthusiasts have been active at different levels in their trying out or introducing new ancillaries to get to a place where they are believing that most contentment can be found for their own unique preferences for a produced sonic.

My own endeavours has been to remain with a Particular ancillary and look to have it overhauled, where a modern approach is used to produce a end product that has materials and electronics selected and utilised to transform the ancillary into something that is noticeably different for the better over the original. As such methods are Bespoke, it is difficult to have the methods understood by a onlooker.

My experiences shared have introduced myself to like minded individuals in the flesh and through Global Forum communications. 

I do belive adopted methods to produce Bespoke ancillaries are capable of producing performance that will be more aligned to ancillaries costing much more if using a Branded Item is the guideline, as a selection of materials and adopted methods for these materials can be found in the more recent marketed products. . 

For myself Vinyl Replay is a method to supply a form of entertainment The use of ancillaries to create this entertainment is a must. The learning that is to be attained as a result of using the Ancillaries creates what is more aligned with being a hobby.

The question that is a vaguery, is how much monies, from a range of approx', £3K ($3.2K) - (£350K ($400K) does one feel justified in spending/believes needs to be spent, to satisfy their hobby (lessons learned) needs and need to be entertained (enjoyment of listening to music) .

It is without doubt, there will be 

 fewer reading this, that will be experienced with and able to comment on the 50K and upward ancillaries, it would be good to see what is to be shared. 



Ah, yes, but the wooden surface is the top of a 400lb oak chest from the early 1700s. I cannot get rid of it, nor move it elsewhere, so I must make the best of it.

And maybe, just maybe, oak that is nearly 400 years old is just about as dense or sonically equivalent to panzerholz? Bet no one has tested that!

Either way, Lee has agreed to make me tonearm panels that will attach to a 10lb pod at both ends.

A friend, who a few Years ago was to become very impressed with my own rebuilt SP10 MkII and redesigned/modified Tonearm. The MkII and Modified TA, was demo’d to my local HiFi Group on a day set aside for comparisons of the MkII >TA, to a few of the Group Members owned TT’s. One being an expensively upgraded Linn LP12 and another members SME 20/12.

The outcome of that session being (No BS either),

The Linn owner shortly after become a owner of the SP10R > Glanz MH-1200S (mounted on a own design professionally produced Pod) > Miyajima.

The SME 20/12 owner was convinced their Source had been bettered and shortly after hearing their Source compared to the SP10 R, had this notion of being bettered reinforced, resulting in their selling the SME 20/12 and with the funds, has been happily experiencing a range of different TT’s across the past few years, which I have had the pleasure of being demo’d them in use.

An attendee at the first experience of my SP10 MkII compared to the Linn and SME, as a result the impression made, bought a SP10 MkII took it to my Technician and had SP10 MkII and Identical Tonearm to my own produced. Shortly after their comparing the New SP10 MkII > New TA to their owned Mitchell Orbe ( fully modified ) > Audio Note TA > Audio Note IO, the Orbe and AN TA were both sold on.

Here goes, tying things together.

The owner of the SP10 R resides in a Historical Property lots of exposed beams and natural movement within the structure due to the structures method of build.

Furniture for the property has been selected that has a Period aesthetic, of which many are antiques. One furniture item is seen as a large Antique Oak Table produced using substantial pieces of Timber.

The Oak Table serves the role as the HiFi Rack, it supports the TT > Phonostage > Pre Amp and Power Amp.

I had heard the Linn TT set up on this table on a few occasions, and then was becoming quite familiar with hearing the SP10 R in use on the Oak Table.

I become compelled to make the suggestion the TT was seated upon a Sub-Plinth, and using suspension footers for the separator between table and Sub-Plinth.

First to be dealt with was the R’s need for a Plinth, the same machine shop that produced the Glanz Mount Pod, produced the Plinth. There was a very strong suggestion across all who heard the TT on a Plinth, that the experience of hearing the sonic produced had changed to the point it seemed to be with a sonic that is more honest/ believable. At the time I was in agreement with this as a description.

The impact of the Plinth certainly got the thoughts going on a Sub-Plinth.

A 25mm Granite Plinth was acquired, at a minimum dimension, it is the same as the Plinth. I am a user of Granite for numerous years and have compared the material as a Plinth Material and Sub-Plinth to other material types and it does have a influence on the sonic in the environments I have experienced it used in. My own personal preference at present is to have Granite in use, even though Densified Wood is winning me over where it has been experienced in use, especially in the usage of Plinth and Sub-Plinth.

The footers chosen for the Granite are a not too expensive Spring Type. I am familiar with footers of all types and can say that out of them all used in the environments I have tried them, suspension types inclusive of pneumatic versions have proved to have the most attractive end result and are very capable of ’tidying up’ the sonic.

My experiences had of the newly mounted R and assessment made of the very positive impact the Granite Sub-Plinth and Spring Footers had on the SP10 R has been that the perception has been the R is now performing in a way that is a mimic and recognisable of the SP10 MkII that I own and have mounted on a purpose produced dedicated support. In my mind that suggests the improvement as a betterment was seemingly measurable and at the least notable.

The added Links show Two Footer Types that could be considered prior to considering adding a unobtrusive Sub-Plinth.

My go to footer today for lighter weight devices is earlier production model from the Brand Solid Tech ’Feet of Silence’. This has a similarity in design to SME Suspension, utilising Vertical Orientated ’O’ Rings.

The Link has a ’O’ Ring Suspension that is Horizontally oriented and has been seen offered as design for many years by different Companies.

It has now become a further point of interest to myself as it is this orientation of ’O’ Ring that has been adopted by both Solid Tech in their latest footer designs and even more interesting SME have adopted the method in their Latest £60K range of TT’s.





If the OP has a particular neurodivergence that compels them to capitalize words that shouldn't be capitalized, I don't wish to be rude or insensitive.  

I will say trying to read the OP made my head hurt.  

Hard to understand what is being expressed there. The inexplicable and seemingly arbitrary use of capitalization contributed to that.

This thread has been an eye opener for me on the value of AI for editing a poster who apparently has compulsive logorrhea.  It hasn’t taught me anything about audio, as it is revisiting familiar ground.

  AI always seems so useless in business applications.  Again, I was surprised by how useful it was to make sense out of someone who’s incapable of concision.



My use of Upper Case letters has caused a few to express their thoughts maybe even a little rile has been poked. I won't be accepting any blame for ones loss of their composure.

The Topic presented, along with comments offered, has produced a selection of interesting responses that have proved  beneficial to my own inquisitiveness. I have been served well by a few of the threads contributors.

I'm still more than happy to receive further views on the Threads Subject.