A Copernican View of the Turntable System

Hi Nick_sr,

I face a similar dilemma and tried both for some time. I went for the extra length on preamp to amp interconnects (power amp between speakers - feeling that the speaker cable length is more telling). Analysis Plus [Silver Oval, as originally recommended to me by Raul] pride themselves on control/accuracy over long lengths. Their conducted square wave tests appear to support that view and - as I said - my hearing seems to agree. Although not ideal, this might therefore be worth giving a listen.

As always...

Hi Nick sr, This is the difference between the 'actual world' and the 'possible world'. I used to have on my wall not a TT rack but many Playboy beauties while I married the
girl next door.

Regards,

Hi Nick:

20 feet (from preamp to poweramp?) should be OK for preamps that have good output drive capability and low output impedance. With preamps of higher output impedance, you may encounter some high-frequency roll-off. This effect can be minimized by making sure that you use as low-capacitance interconnects as you can find. I think that Blue Jean Cables offers some interconnects which prioritize low capacitance.

IME, the acoustic problem from having big, acoustically reflective objects between the speakers is a bigger problem than needing to use long interconnects. Having big objects between the speakers really does mess up the soundstage and imaging big-time, with lesser (but still significant) damage inflicted on instrumental timbres and dynamics. If you absolutely must have your equipment rack between the speakers, I would try to get the rack and equipment as far behind the speaker baffles as possible, and get the equipment or rack's highest edge lower than the speakers' tweeters, preferably the midrange also.

If you can't disassemble your rack and reassemble it to get it lower, perhaps you could keep a thick blanket handy to throw over the rack and gear when the speakers are playing. This won't be as effective as opening up the space between the speakers, but it will give better results than doing nothing.

One more simple setup technique that I habitually use is to experiment with the rake angle of the speakers front baffle. Changing the rake angle of the front baffle will modify the time-alignment between midrange and treble (unless you use full-ranges), and can be used to alter the perceived height of the soundstage center, and the tonal balance. I find that most people seem to find the sound most comfortable if I adjust the speaker rake angle to bring the vertical center of the soundstage to approximately ear level.

Note that if the angle of the left and right speakers is different, you will introduce a height skew to the left and right sides of the soundstage. Making sure that the left and right speakers have identical vertical rake will give better imaging focus and soundstage depth.

hth, jonathan carr

You can quantify the difference by making a high-bit recording of your turntable without the speakers playing, and with speakers playing at your customary listening levels, and compare the two files. If you put the two files through a program such as DiffMaker by LIberty Instruments, it is possible to extract the difference component and listen to it as a distinct "distortion" track.

Not sure why you would want to do this?
Listening through a fine set of headphones with a great amp will remove all the room effects, the equipment positioning effects, the 'supposed' air-borne feedback effects as well as all conjectural problems regarding speakers.
When I listen through the Audeze LCD2 headphones through the Schiit Lyr headphone amp I hear no reduction in distortions compared to my speaker/room/equipment interface.Rather, through my speakers/room/equipment interface I hear exactly the same spectrum of sound quality as through the headphones with an added air, transparency, depth, bass impact, instrument positioning and emotional content.
There are no theoretical arguments which can turn 'black' into 'white'.
I don't doubt the experiences of others.......I expect the same respect for mine. :^)

Dgob, re: your comment from 9/14. Excellent point. This a never-ending problem in human communication. I have a BA in English, attained after the large scale introduction of postmodern theory in the late 60s and into the 70s. While meaning is ultimately fluid (Roland Barthes, Jacques Derrida) beyond the realm of the natural sciences (which themselves are subject to the need for definition of terms), it is still incumbent upon humanity to try and find common ground--acceptance of shared meaning--because our survival depends on it. The process of critical thinking, linked as it is to language and argumentation, is the only possible method we can use. Everything else falls into the category of faith, religion, ideology, etc. and we see the destructive ramifications of that on a daily basis. A far greater degree of universal consciousness (involving language, meaning, critical thinking) is needed, and I suspect it won't evolve into the human species in time. Not a pleasant thought but...