Who will survive? One last table til I die.


I want to buy a final turntable (call it 25 years worth of use until I can't hear or don't care). I want to be able to get parts and have it repaired for the next quarter century. I would also like the sound quality to be near the top or upgradable to near the top for that time period. I don't necessarily require that the manufacturer be solvent that long (the preferable situation), but otherwise the parts would have to be readily available and the design such that competent independent repair shops be able to fix it. I won't spend more than $10,000 and prefer (but don't require) an easy set up that doesn't need constant tweaking. I'm willing to pay for the proper stand and isolation needed over and above the initial cost.

I've got 9,000 LPs, and it doesn't make sense to start over replacing them with CD/SACDs (although I have decent digital equipment) even if I could find and afford replacements. Presently I have a CAT SL-1 III preamp and JL-2 amp, Wilson speakers, Sota Cosmos table, SME IV arm, and Koetsu/Lyra Clavis/AQ7000nsx cartridges.

Thanks in advance for your input. Steve
128x128suttlaw
Wow! Just tuned into this thread. No offence here honestly. so please excuse me here. Ahhh..... Geez Raul.... are you infecting another forum thread here? Preaching your narrow minded,lame and pathetic argument about distortion artifacts and that silly equilizer theory? Hey Pal,enough of your condenscending,self righteous BS already... give it a rest will ya! This is about the music here man... and not your distorted math... that distortion thing is right...right between the ears on your square head. Hey gang... I seriously doubt he has even heard half the stuff you guys are talking about, he doesn't own a schroeder tonearm, will never post his system,or even answer a simple question if it's directed at him. Get a life man! Sorry gang....but someone here had to do it. PS: Hey Raul....you any relation to Didactically?
Audio999- Fact is that Raul needs to take considerable time to review all of his posts to create a theoretical system that would be consistent with what he has already written. This could take awhile...
Dear TWL and Teres:

With respect to the answer given by Mr. Crabbe, he's right when he says that the voice-coil impedance can be considered to be in series with the amplifier's output impedance. However, that's not the point. The ideal amplifier's mission is to work as a perfect voltage source, regardless of the load impedance presented at its output terminals. This ideal can be reasonably approximated using many technologies -vacuum tubes, bipolar transistors, mosfet transistors, etc.- However, using vacuum tubes this task is almost unsurmountable, simply because tube 99.9% of current designs depend heavily on the use of an output transformer that further introduces anomalies, distortions, colorations, saturations, phase shiftings, etc. etc. By the way, perhaps at this moment the word OTL will come to your mind, but I could mention many aggravations they have too, but that is another matter that would be subject of a different thread. Anyway, assuming that all these problems could be solved, tubes generate big amounts of harmonic content not present in the original signals, and I see this as the biggest obstacle in our road to true fidelity. Tubes will always add sweetness to the music, at the expense of accuracy, that to many music lovers as myself means fidelity. Today's solid state devices, on the other hand, have current linearity far more linear and and noise characteristics far more desirable, all in favor of a better musical experience. This is the ultimate goal of listening to music.

And regarding Teres arguments, I have several points I would like him to consider: Tubes are voltage devices, whereas transistors are current devices. Therefore they operate in completely different fashions, not similar. Any electronics designer can confirm that. Although tubes and transistors both present big amounts of distortion if not corrected, transistors have the advantage of having complementary devices, that when properly matched, can virtually eliminate alinearities, harmonic distortion and IM distortion without needing any global feedback. Unfortunately, there are not and will never exist such thing as a complementary tube; they simply can't have this fundamental advantage. So when you say that transistors depend on big amounts of feedback, I can see that you have been simply ignoring the state-of the-art in modern solid-state design, where non-feedback is almost a gospel.

Ultimately, there will never be such thing as a zero-feedback amplifying device, and this includes single-ended triodes (where the electron flow and the space charge are the feedback parameters working in conjunction with the grid-cathode voltage) and transistor emitter-follower configuration (where the flow of minority carriers is the feedback parameter). I agree that a zero-feedback amplifier would be great, but it's not achievable yet.

Regards and enjoy the music,

Raul
"The ideal amplifier's mission is to work as a perfect voltage source, regardless of the load impedance presented at its output terminals"...

"Tubes are voltage devices, whereas transistors are current devices."

Is this an inadvertent mistake or a blatant inconsistency?

"Tubes will always add sweetness to the music, at the expense of accuracy, that to many music lovers as myself means fidelity."

The truth is that distortions of tubes is much less objectional to the human ear becasue it is a "natural device" God is a much better designer than man will ever be. Raul you confuse confuse the absence of euphonic colorations(some disingenuous solid state designers have added that distortion in order to compete with tubes.)with accuracy. The fact is that transistors have added a cold sterile quality to the sound either by adding or taking away something from the music. It reminds of the argument that a vpi motor was noisy and that could be proved by listenig to a tunrtble with a magnetic bearing. Shouldn't we be comparing motors.

..."using vacuum tubes this task is almost unsurmountable" You previously said "impossible". So we are making some progress.

Those of us who have been around for awhile remember that using amplifer specs as a means of evaluation is more of a madison avenue ploy than science. It was an attempt to convince us that transistors must be better than tubes because they measure better.
Raul as indeed your own post which refers us to $350,000.00 amp proves. It is the ss electronics that require major trickery to cure it's inherent problems. Everytime I read about or hear a ss amp that I can live with it is priced way beyond my reach.

As a huge fan of conrad johnson I look forward to auditioning thier Premier 350. It is suppose to achieve low distortion without any feddback. Somtimes that means only no global feedback. Examination of its spec's indicate it does not "double down" like Krell. I have nothing against ss per se.
Enjoy the music and playing with your equipment!(stereo) Thanks to all you guys for whetting my appettite for stereo again. Pardon me while I earn some money to buy some equipment!