Because you have made some bad buying decisions, if your sole goal is tracking the 1812 Overture, and because of inflation and the evolution of the "high end" as we now know it, and because to some degree "we" drank the moving coil Kool-Aid 30 years ago.
progress?
I know this subject has been visited and revisited. I'd like to approach it from a slightly different perspective. This is regarding the infamous Telarc 1812 overture with the digital cannons. In 1979, I purchased the recording and played it entirely satisfactorily with my Technics SLD2 or Sony PSX7 and Shure cartridges: M95e, V15III, etc. My AudioTechnica 12XE and 12 SA played it as well ,also MicroAcoustics, Acutex, and ADC cartridges without problems. Skip to 1984 or so; with the CD age, you could buy at thrift shops many by then older turntables: Onkyo, Pioneer, Sansui, Kenwood, Technics, Yamaha, etc. Well, those sometimes $10 or less turntables could also play the cannons without problems with the aforemention cart's without bouncing out of the groove. Ortofons or Stantons, even the 681EEE, could not do so unless you brought in a turntable with a servotracer arm [JVC, Denon, Sony, etc.] Keep in mind the total cost at thrift stores would be less than $50, whereas brand new equipment might have run as much as $200. OK; Look at today; I have had turntables from VPI, Project, Music Hall, Rega (3) priced from $1000 to $3000 which look silly when trying to play the 1812 Telarc cannons! This is progress?, I would like some input, and I'm fully aware of phono cartrige compliance assues,and tonearm weight, ec..
- ...
- 25 posts total
This photo of some of the grooves on that recording may be of interest to those who haven't physically seen it. Among other things, note the point near the center of the photo where there is an abrupt change of direction of around 45 degrees. IIRC, there were some other points that were even more severe, which don't appear in the photo. I didn't purchase this recording, in part because the receiver I was using ca. 1980 would have clipped on the cannon shots if I listened at anything approaching reasonable volume. I did, however, borrow it from a friend and play it back at a very low volume setting, using a Sony direct drive turntable with its integrated arm, and a Shure cartridge. Had no tracking problems at all. I believe that a few years later Telarc released a version of the recording that was somewhat easier to track. Regards, -- Al |
I bought this record in 1980/81. I think it was close to $20 back then. I bought it because I thought digital records were the best. I don't think that today, although the Telarc records were exceptionally quiet back then, more so than most labels. I also bought it simply for the challenge because of all of the warning labels on the jacket. Telarc was daring me to buy it and play it. I was young and bold back then. I actually enjoyed the piece and played it often back then for people. I also remember smirking a few times in the 80s when someone's high end tt would jump the tracks during the canon fire- usually it was a salesman at a stereo shop. I have never had an issue playing it with my gear. I used MM or High Output MC cartridges up through 2002 when I traded my old faithful ARC SP-6b for my current preamp that can play low output MC cartridges. Never a problem with MC cartridges. I think it is all about set-up, cartridge/tonearm matching and proper isolation. This is a low frequency tracking problem. If your analog rig can't track canon fire, then how do you know the bass is all it can be otherwise? |
In one sentence: why in 1980 could I buy a turntable such as a Technics SLD2 for $130 and a cartridge such as an Audio Tecnica 12XE for a total of $160, while today I might spend $3000 and still not be able to track the Telarc 1812 cannons[when I could do so with the $160 1980 expenditure]?In 1980, vinyl records were the medium of choice for home music reproduction. Millions upon millions of turntables, tonearms and cartridges were manufactured and sold every year. Today, that number would be in the mere thousands, not millions. Economies of scale dictate pricing. The fewer units a company's fixed costs can be amortized over, the higher their prices must be to stay in business. Additionally... what they ^^^ all said about the goal of our equipment. I don't own a copy of the Telarc 1812 and never will. Since the track looks like the photo Almarg posted, I've no intention of subjecting my $5K LOMC to it. My $15K vinyl rig plays music so much better than my old $500 rig that I can't stand to listen to the old one. If a rig isn't worth listening to, I couldn't care less what sort of torture tests it can track. |
" I think it is all about set-up, cartridge/tonearm matching and proper isolation." Having not tested out or compared the modern tables to the older in a test like this, I also suspect the overall setup is the key to success in many cases. This and similar records were the ultimate test for table tracking back then. I was in retail audio sales back then and had the opportunity to set up and use many tables and carts back then and the setup made all the difference as I recall. Only a small % of setups/combos seemed up to the task even back then as I recall. Also I seem to recall high mass carts in lower mass tonearms popular with many Japanese and European tables at the time having the least success due largely to extreme inertial effects. Those records served too purposes: 1 ) demonstrate the dynamics possible with digital recording technology of the day and 2) demonstrate the shortcomings of most record players/turntables of the day with such recordings as they failed to track the records adequately in most cases. Digital had its own technical issues and challenges to conquer over the years, but the laws of physics relating to mass and inertia was not one of them luckily. |
- 25 posts total