Again, you are missing the point. If you weren’t so predisposed to interpreting others’ comments the way that you want to see them it would be clear. I’ll try it one last time (with you).
For starters, suggesting that the reason that someone does not see things from your point of view is that he beat you to the bong is an argument by any standard. But, that’s your style and I know it well. Unfortunate. Straight ahead.
Now, if you had cared to really read my comments you would see that the only gear that I have “recommended” as worthwhile is “well chosen and well set up” budget gear; specifically the vintage Thorens that I linked. This, as a way to encourage those wanting to try vinyl for the first time while staying within their stated budget, or very close to it, to try it. IMO, it IS possible to get a taste of what many find so “involving” about analog while staying within their stated budgets. Funny, how quick some are to spend other people’s money. Also funny is how that budget figure gets smaller and smaller each time you quote it. Have you ever heard a well set up vintage Thorens? I doubt it. You would be shocked at how close it would come to your beloved Rega as far as playing MUSIC goes; and, for some, in some specific ways, it does it even better. Please reread my comments if you want more specific details as to why I feel the way I do. If that is not enough then read, if you haven’t already, big_greg’s comments as to why he enjoys listening to his lp’s more than his digital, finding the experience more “involving”. Those comments sum things up very nicely.
What is “better” music playback? That which scores points in all the “audiophile” criteria, but doesn’t keep you glued to your listening chair digging the music? Or, that which does? For me it’s a no-brainer.
