2. analog
  3. 125957-5604

When will we ever hear turntables demoed fairly?

To my amazement after 45years we still have no way of ascertaining the sound of turntable designs.Every stereo store has tables set up with different arms and different cartridges.How then is anyone to determine what is contributing to the sound when an apple is being compared to an orange and then to a pear.It's absurd and to make matters worse you are listening to different phono stages and amps and and speakers.If you can't isolate what is contributing to what what's the point.End of rant.

brucegel
yogiboy's avatar
yogiboy
5,907 posts
 
brucegel,
Touché ! !
bdp24's avatar
bdp24
10,285 posts
 
It used to drive me crazy when some (usually British) reviewers would, in a review of a new table, use a different arm and/or cartridge on that table and a reference table, then purport to describe the differences in sound between the two. Duh! A really good dealer of turntables (Brooks Berdan was, and his son Brian still is, at Audio Elements in Pasadena, CA) will set up the same arm and cartridge on two tables. Yeah, it’s a pain, but that’s how they earn their 40 point margin!
terry9
2,354 posts
 
Set-up is probably more important than any other variable, because it's critical and invisible. Hence easily manipulated to maximize retail profit.

I can make a good MM sound far better than my big Koetsu, no problem. Just run the Koetsu 30 minutes of arc out of correct azimuth, 1 degree tail up, and half a gram too light. Now you can hear with your own ears that the highly merchandised table and inexpensive cartridge sound better than the exotics. Who but a sucker would pay big bucks?

inna
7,923 posts
 
Do you think that table/arm match is important too in addition to arm/cartridge match?  If it is, putting same arm/cartridge on different tables won't answer the question regarding table differences fully.

terry9
2,354 posts
 
Hello Inna. I have no opinion on that - I have neither the experience nor the theoretical framework.
More to discover