Buying a new TT today

No one is talking about cheap belt drives. That is Chak's argument. He thinks the Technics new DD table is a better value than the more expensive belt drive tables. Cheap belt drives without external power supply units have a harder time keeping the speed constant.

BTW- I just saw VPI coming out with a 40th anniversary direct drive table, so once again we see that the technology doesn't matter, it's the design and build of the specific product. I do disagree with Chak that the exception to that rule is that MC carts are GENERALLY better than MMs. That technology seems to be better from all that I've read and heard, especially if you have a good phono stage.

The right way to compare MC and MM is to buy a turntable with two tonearms and an MM/MC phono stage. If both cartridges carefully selected and matched to the arms then it will be impossible to say which one is better (MM or MC). But most likely MC will cost twice as much that MM. And being cheaper MM has user replaceable stylus (even with exotic cantilever and stylus tip). The situation with MC depends on who will fix the stylus/cantilever when your diamond is worn, after first refurbishing (if it’s not done by manufacturer or original cartridge designer) it can be serious degradation of sound especially for an exotic cartridges when someone will put something else instead of original designers choice. So first retip/refurbishing can ruin the sound of very nice LOMC. It will never happen with MM if the user can change the stylus with the next backup (original) sample.

@sokogear did you read this ?

@sokogear          

The post said $2000 on a belt drive. I use a garrard 301, a couple direct drives and a belt drive. A Kuzma Reference. It’s a decent belt drive. I’m not against belt drives.  I just think that for $2k there are better choices than a new belt drive in this price catagory. 


The mm vs mc debate. I’m quite new to vintage mm. I have four arms mounted at once and have spent time comparing. I’m not going to say that one is better than the other, but I’m blown away by dollar for dollar vintage mm is the clear winner. Yesterday I listened to my $2k dynavector xx2 and an NOS  Stanton 881s. I paid $300 for the Stanton. This isn’t the totl Stanton either. It sounded awesome!

Yes, and it is I guess a matter of taste. When I went from a good MM cartridge that is no longer made (you might like it because of that) the Acutex 412 STR, to the VDH One Special, I remember thinking the VDH was much more alive, vivid, and detailed. But the Acutex back then was inexpensive - I think $2-300. I still have it, plus an extra brand new stylus the guy gave me since he stopped selling them.

When people are in the studio, they produce records trying to make a certain sound - not what is played in the studio, but mixed to achieve a certain sound. I guess those guys are the ones you should ask if the sound on a stereo from a particular cartridge is closer to the mark. Not the techies, but the artists themselves, especially if they produce their own albums.

You'd probably get lots off opinions there too.

When people are in the studio, they produce records trying to make a certain sound - not what is played in the studio, but mixed to achieve a certain sound.

Right, but Doug Sax is famous for DIRECT CUT (Direct-To-Disk) recording techniques. This is when a signal from the mics going to the mixing console and to the cutter stylus (no reel to reel in between). Audiophiles raving about his Sheffield LAB direct cut albums. His monitoring cartridge was Stanton 881s (not even the best Stanton model, but close to the best models). In that TAS article many engineers claimed than MC has a lot of coloration and not true to the sound. This is an opinion, but an opinion from a very well educated sound engineers and mastering engineers with very good ears. @sokogear

It must be a very good MC to be neutral. 
You should really try some killer MM cartridges, your Acutex can't speak for all MM or MI.