2. analog
  3. 126824-33947

Where is the significant point of diminishing returns on hi-end turntable?

For those that don’t know me I am newish to this game. Yes, I believe this chase for perfection in sound reproduction is a game. There are endless variables affecting the sound of every system and 100x that in opinions on each of these variables. I love cool $hit as much as the next guy but I am looking for an analog rig and I keep getting drawn into the seemingly endless "what about this option that costs tons more?". I started with a $6 to $10K budget and now I am considering a $25K setup (Table, cart and phono stage) after talking to a local retailer. I will be blunt, I want to be that guy in the Memorex ad from the 80’s that is getting blown away by his system (my impression is he is overwhelmed by the amazing sound coming from that speaker not the volume). Now that I have acquired some pretty descent stuff I am spending 15 plus hours each week listening and really enjoying this hobby. I don’t want to have any regrets and just be marginally satisfied with my setup but where do I draw the line? Back to my initial question; what is a reasonable amount to spend on an analog setup to achieve the best bang for the buck? I may be somewhat unique in that I don’t want to constantly be upgrading my equipment, I just want to buy great products the first time that are very satisfying and spend hours listening to great music. I don’t want to be the guy always chasing the next great thing.
128x128mmporsche
orpheus10
8,668 posts
 

Rushton, you stated that 25K would not be your point of diminishing returns, and neither would it be for the OP.

Now I'm just sitting here with my buttered popcorn waiting for some examples of the kind of rig someone would chose, when 25K did not approach that point the OP spoke of.

Maybe if 25K did not approach that point of diminishing returns, then possibly one of these turntables would be suitable;


        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SfIUh0S7yTQ


      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2QfjcgDjsY


Although I'm in the little league, I've always wanted to see how those in the big league play the game.


Enjoy the music.
tomcy6's avatar
tomcy6
2,597 posts
 

Hometheaterreview and shydog,

Out of necessity, it is considered common courtesy not to get on a vinyl thread and tell everyone that vinyl sucks and digital rules and the same applies to vinyl people posting on digital threads. This is necessary because telling people that their format of choice sucks doesn’t change anyone’s mind and leads to a lot of arguing and hostility, you know, flame wars.

Most people are really tired of flame wars, name calling and hostility, so please be courteous and if you want to write about the superiority of digital, start a "Digital Rules" thread in the Digital Forum. It really does work better that way.

jperry
2,450 posts
 
My apologies to all for the troll feeding. This is an interesting thread and I did not mean to cause any trouble.
whart's avatar
whart
3,043 posts
 
So, do you think, with the wide range of views about where the point of diminishing returns kicks in, it is fair to say that the answer varies-- depending on a number of factors (system, record collection and budget, among them)?

I’ll throw out one provocative thought regarding the "money issue" which seems to be an undercurrent here-- that obscenely expensive tonearm that a few reviewers, starting with Fremer, have raved about--the SAT? (i think that’s the brand name). Crazy money, right?
But, what if, by using it, you can use far more modest cartridges? Top tier phono cartridges are nutty money today, and are "consumables"- so the cost of several cartridges would offset the extravagant price of the arm.
One last thought--for now. I have a fairly big league table and arm. It isn’t the latest and greatest and that is, in some ways, the point--I haven’t found a need to upgrade, modify or replace it since I bought it circa 2006-7. (Replaced a few belts and the manufacturer supplied one replacement part at no cost since I’ve owned it). In the long run, cheaper than trading up or sideways periodically.
lewm
13,101 posts
 
I think the reason that the question posed by Dr. Porsche has elicited so many disparate responses (and arguments with nattering nabobs of negativism) is that the question calls for subjective opinions; we all have one.  I have always had the "feeling" that there is a point of diminishing returns when it comes to all or any type of audio gear, but I have no idea where that point lies.  I don't think any of us have an answer that is generalizable to everyone else.  This dilemma has made a cheapskate out of me, most of the time, and induced me to become a DIY tinkerer and builder.  I do know what capacitors and resistors I prefer, but I could not and would not dare tell anyone else where he or she should stop spending money on a turntable.  For me, the "answer" is either my SP10 Mk3 turntable, heavily tweaked in a custom 100-lb slate and cherrywood plinth, in which my net investment is around $8K or my Kenwood L07D, restored to OEM operating condition, at an investment of about $3800.  But others who prefer belt-drive turntables would scoff at those choices and those valuations, preferring instead some modern $50K piece.  I don't take issue with that.  This is a fun hobby. I've heard the Walker turntable in its earlier iterations, and it is indeed superb, best sounding belt-drive I ever heard, but I am happy with what I've got.
So, Porsche baby, perhaps you should re-phrase your question or else take the responses that appeal to you the most and go for it. (In my lifetime, I owned just about every model of 356 Porsche ever made, up to and including a Carrera GT Speedster, and then a 550RS Spyder.)

More to discover