2. analog
  3. 152392-104877

Turntable cost:benefit

I read the new Garrard 301 review in the current "Stereophile" with great interest, especially as my father owned one which he jettisoned decades ago...most unfortunately. Anyway, appealing as the re-issue is, the cost is punitive, as noted by the author.

With that preamble, I'm interested in forum members' thoughts on the cost:benefit ratio of a high priced turntable for a modest vinyl collection. In my case, that's around 800 LPs. Another reason I'm curious is that I have a friend who simply "decided to get into vinyl" and bought a ~$15k turntable plus a comparably priced tonearm + cartridge. He owned zero vinyl at the time of the purchase. Now I think he has about 20 "audiophile" pressings to enjoy on that TT.

To answer my own question, I can't justify a turntable at that price level for my own vinyl collection. Actually, I can't really summon up a compelling argument for such a purchase. Plus, I'm quite content with my  VPI HW-19 Mk 2 (though a better cartridge would be attractive).

Assuming disposable funds are not the absolute deciding factor and other components in your system are good enough to support a high end TT, what size record collection do readers think justifies a turntable costing over some arbitrary (say around $3000 for the purposes of argument) threshold? Is that even a consideration?
kacomess
edgewear
543 posts
 
I guess it’s easy to make fun of people with - say - a $25k turntable (actually modest by today’s standards) and a few dozen ’audiophile’ reissues to play. It’s even more pathetic when you realize that many of those so called audiophile pressings don’t really sound very good at all. It’s money wasted.

At the other extreme there’s the so called ’serious’ record collectors crowd, who spend their days hunting down very expensive original pressings from the golden analog age and play them on some mediocre record player. This is money wasted as well. Those pressings deliver the best possible sound quality, but you will need the highest quality level turntable (and rest of the system, obviously) to bring that out.

So the only sensible cost/benefit ratio should be found in a well considered balance of the quality of the source material and the playback equipment. Makes sense?

three_easy_payments's avatar
three_easy_payments
2,097 posts
 
Money is only wasted if the resulting musical experience is perceived poorly.  If the experience is joyful who cares about recording and equipment perfection?
mijostyn's avatar
mijostyn
8,501 posts
 
Kac, one step at a time. You either like vinyl or you do not. I’ll assume you do. First, toss the Sumiko and get something like a Lyra Kleos. Next get a SOTA Sapphire and a Kuzma 4 point 9.
you have just hit the point of diminishing returns. To do significantly better you will have to spend thousands more and this turntable will last you the rest of your life. Just enjoy a new cartridge once in a while. Then buy a lot more records:)
kacomess OP
199 posts
 
Yikes! I just posted this "poll" merely as a "food for thought" item! It's certainly elicited a variety of interesting replies, all of which are appreciated.

I've been acquiring vinyl records since ~1965 and I'm relatively (more-or-less) happy with my current setup. On the other hand, high-end equipment and/or financial donations will be sincerely welcomed; gratefully and individually acknowledged; and (even better still!) applied in-full by me to acquire your recommended and preferred system upgrade(s) :)
terry9
2,326 posts
 
If you actually listen to 800 lp's, I say that you can justify any amount of money. The issues are what you can afford and what you want to spend (I think that these two are different).

I have a few thousand lp's and I concentrate on bang for buck. Consider the best bargain in high end: the Trans-Fi Terminator air bearing tonearm. I use one on my conventional belt drive TT, and another one on my more exotic air bearing TT. My opinion is that until you have heard an air bearing TT, you haven't really heard vinyl.
More to discover