Garrard 301 with custom 2 arm plinth
One turntable with two arms, or two turntables with one each - which would you prefer?
Which would you prefer, if budget allowed: one turntable with two tonearms or two turntables with one each? What would your decision criteria be?
And the corollary: one phono preamp with multiple inputs or two phono preamps?
Assume a fixed budget, but for the purposes of this question, the budget is up to the responder. Admittedly for this type of setup, there will be a sizeable investment once all components of the chain are factored in.
I'm curious to hear how people would decide for themselves the answer to this question. Or maybe you've already made this decision - what do you like about your decision or what would you differently next time?
Cheers.
116 responses Add your response
This 7 layer JVC Victor CL-P2 Plinth is what I have. https://yahoo.aleado.com/lot?auctionID=c1062117063#enlargeimg Two Removable Arm-boards, normally 2 arms. It fits JVC Spinners: TT61, 71, 81, 101 (don’t go there). I chose TT81.
Three Arms: 1. rear 9" Removable headshell, various cartridges, MM, MC, ellip, shibata, ML ...; Arm has VTA on the fly for easy cartridge height changes. 2. right side can be long (mine is 12.5"), best MC cartridge, fixed.. 3. Then I found a compact Mission arm with a short counterweight section and ’squeezed’ it in, for MONO ready to go. https://www.vinylengine.com/library/mission/774lc.shtml
the mission arm is made by Jelco, there is a Jelco matching model, and you do not need the mounting plate, just mount the round base ring, 3 screws. |
I went to 1 TT with 3 arms, I don’t have room for two TT’s, and 1 SUT with 3 inputs to 1 Phono Stage, and PASS for MM thru the SUT to that favorite MM Phono Stage. I’m gonna assume two arms means you will get into MC cartridge. And 1 arm could be fixed cartridge, but the second should be removable headshell so a variety of cartridges, i.e. MONO, MM, Elliptical. Advanced Stylus could be acquired over time. MC Low Output means a SUT to get up to MM signal strength. SUT with PASS for MM. SUT with two selectable inputs; out of SUT to single Phono Stage. ....................... My Fidelity Research FRT-4 SUT has 3 selectable inputs, PASS, and 4 optional x-factors/impedances this one is over-priced, but shows it’s features, they often show up for around $700.
Entre ET-100 has 3 inputs, PASS, and 3 optional x-factors/impedances, usually cost a bit less that the FRT-4.
Note: FRT-4 has internally connected output cable with old simple connectors Entre ET-100, rca jacks: you can use your own output cable, better connectors, I may modify my FRT-4 one day.
|
One turntable with two tonearms is what I currently use. I absolutely agree with @ghdprentice on his comments about the need to invest in a quality phonostage. |
I've one turntable with 2 arms (and another turntable with one arm.) Initially, I didn't really use the second arm much but thanks to a generous gift from @tomic601, I now have two phono stages and switch between arms all the time. Turntable 1 > 12" arm 1 > phono amp 1 Turntable 1 > 9" arm 2 > phono amp 2 Agree with @ghdprentice that one good table is best. |
Absolutely without question one turntable with two arms. As you said at the same investment level. Turn table performance improves phenomenally with cost (assuming yo are doing your research). Two tts at half the price at almost any cost level are not going to sound as good. And phonostages even more so! Until I reached the ~ $8K level every Phonostage hindered the output my turntable. It is really easy to get a TT that exceeds the capability of your phono stage.
I have been listening to turntables for well over fifty years. And began my pursuit (very inexpensively at first) of the high end over 40 years ago. I am sure I have owned nearly a dozen highly rated phono stages of all cost levels and until I bought my first Audio Research Phono stage 30 years ago, they were of different brands. |
I tried to cheap out - one table, one arm, and multiple head shells with different cartridges. Problem was there was too much adjustment in fine tuning each set up when you changed head shell/cartridge. Next came a turntable and two tone arms. A much more elegant and much more simple to operate and still get good results. Problem was that limited options for turntables which you could set up for two arms Ultimately the best and easiest to set up and manage was using two tables. One was quartz locked with a MM cartridge, the other was a belt driven with a MC cartridge. I used only one preamp which allowed two turntables and had impedance selection controls to match cartridge selection (A now old ARC). If I were to do this again today I would do the two tables first if for no other reason than for the reduction of angst involved in getting the best SQ out of a multipurpose set up involving only one table. So I guess I would look in a mirror and ask myself ’how much do I really want the best SQ or am I willing to sacrifice a bit of SQ for the convenience of use, or for sure, the expense. Big bunch of tradeoff’s. Your call. |
It would have been much cheaper if this device was still made: http://www.time-step.com/distribution/SME%20Dual%20Arm.html I ended up with a second Model 10, for the same sound. I'm very content with the Model 10, but I did need the ability to run two cartridges as I try to spin out the life of my Deccas. |
