"Did The Music Business Just Kill the Vinyl Revival?"

[4_everyman]

DD has that “grainy-sizzly” sound to it that would have driven all of the snakes out of Ireland had it been around in St Patrick’s day.

Thank you for describing that better than I ever could have.

 

[barfle]

Vertical Tracking Angle (VTA) is not as critical unless you are playing CD-4. Then the angle can cause enough mistrackiing to mess up demodulation..

Strange thing happened to me regarding VTA. Going back, back, back to the 1970s. I was using my then fairly new Miracord 50H playing 45s in a stack. When Steppenwolf's Magic Carpet Ride as the second record from the bottom, it sounded a LOT clearer than in any other postition. I never had an instrument to measure VTA, but I really can't think of any other explanation.

 

[MidiMagic]

Strange thing happened to me regarding VTA. Going back, back, back to the 1970s. I was using my then fairly new Miracord 50H playing 45s in a stack. When Steppenwolf's Magic Carpet Ride as the second record from the bottom, it sounded a LOT clearer than in any other postition. I never had an instrument to measure VTA, but I really can't think of any other explanation.

Interesting. I have that record. When I get my surround system back together, I will try that.

There might be another reason

- I used to repair record changers, and I seem to recall cases where the horizontal arm pivot om the 50H wanted to stick. When it stuck, the pickup was tracking too light. The lubricant in the bearing had dried out and needed renewing.

- What pickup were you using?. I remember a few that were VTA-sensitive because the stylus mount was motion-restricted.

 

[atrocity]

I had some of those. I didn't ream out the centers (Though I do ream out the 180 g vinyl so I can play it). I have a turntable with a removable spindle, so I just removed the spindle and centered the record.

One big advantage of those bisexual decks that worked as both one-disc and changer models! I had one decades ago and used to do just that. I've looked into it on my current one, but I don't see an easy/obvious way to go about it and since it's an irreplaceable Sony PS-X75 I haven't dug too deeply.

 

[atrocity]

I have never come across a record hole that was too small for the spindle!

Years ago I got a British Noel Coward 78 that had that problem. Since it was shellac, I worried that trying to ream it would shatter it, so I had to stack a bunch of other 78s under it!

I always debate the reaming thing...am I destroying the collector's value or is that value already gone because it's a defective pressing?

 

[marcb]

You would like the base I have for my favorite changer. I made it myself out of some hardwood cabinet doors. It has rubber feet on the Masonite bottom with spacing between the feet and the side walls. The side walls are 5/8-inch thick oak panels supporting the Masonite top with the cutout for the changer base. And the supporting springs for the changer are damped with foam rubber. My brother's bass guitar and amp didn't cause any problems when the changer was playing..



Vertical Tracking Angle (VTA) is not as critical unless you are playing CD-4. Then the angle can cause enough mistrackiing to mess up demodulation..

I can't hear any audible difference in the change of VTA from the first record in the stack to the eighth when the records are stereo or matrix.



I had some of those. I didn't ream out the centers (Though I do ream out the 180 g vinyl so I can play it). I have a turntable with a removable spindle, so I just removed the spindle and centered the record.



Me too. I was a college student during that period. I often bought used records.

Different carts are impacted differently by changes in VTA and SRA. To broadly say it’s not critical is arguable at best (and frankly, incorrect IMO).

 

[par4ken]

Back in the day everyone had a record "changer", the practice of putting on a stack of records was common. Today I cringe at the thought of that practice! Records falling on top of each other, the whole stack carelessly being removed, dumped in a pile before being filed away, Augh!

As a hifi nut from a young age I recognised the consequences of such poor practice and only played one record at a time on my changer. Latter when I started to purchase my own equipement I never even considered the purchase of a "changer" only fully manual or semi-automatic!

 

[4-earredwonder]

LPCM 5.1 does sound better than DTS, but DTS is way better than DD. DD has that “grainy-sizzly” sound to it that would have driven all of the snakes out of Ireland had it been around in St Patrick’s day.

Agreed, DTS does sound better than DD but take those SW TULL remixes, for example: On a high quality rig, whereas the DTS 5.1 remixes sound somewhat stunning, just switch to the LOSSLESS 96/24 STEREO and IMO, it blows away the DTS codec!

My wish one day is that all SW Tull 5.1 remixes are re~released in LOSSLESS DTS~HD MA 5.1 192/24 or better yet ATMOS on BD~A!

Those two RHINO QUADIO boxsets [Chicago/Doobies] sound absolutely RAVISHING in 192/24 on BD~A!

 

[barfle]

- What pickup were you using?. I remember a few that were VTA-sensitive because the stylus mount was motion-restricted.

That's a good question. I don't remember what I bought in 1969, although I eventually got a Shure V15 Type 5 MR, I don't believe I was using it at that point.

I'm inclined to think it wasn't a sticking pivot, because I could repeat it. But it was quite a while back, so some of those memories may have rotted away.

 

[gene_stl]

https://www.techradar.com/opinion/t...o-a-crashing-halt-but-dont-blame-taylor-swift

 

[MidiMagic]

Back in the day everyone had a record "changer", the practice of putting on a stack of records was common. Today I cringe at the thought of that practice! Records falling on top of each other, the whole stack carelessly being removed, dumped in a pile before being filed away, Augh!

As a hifi nut from a young age I recognised the consequences of such poor practice and only played one record at a time on my changer. Latter when I started to purchase my own equipement I never even considered the purchase of a "changer" only fully manual or semi-automatic!

Most of the audiophile blather about the danger of record changers comes from the 78 era, when such dangers were real. I don't cringe today because I know the truth (note that I do not stack shellac 78s because some are so brittle that they can break).

The RIAA standards for all but 78 rpm records calls for a record design such that the grooves of stacked records never touch each other. The records are thicker in the label area and at the rim (larger records) so there is air space between the grooved surfaces of one record and the next. Unless the records are badly warped, the grooves should never touch each other. If the record is kept leve when it is dropped, an air cushion brakes the fall of the record. And vinyl does not break like shellac.

Would you allow an automatic single-play turntable?

 

[4-earredwonder]

And bless those stalwarts who have a collection of 45 rpm LPs.......Every 12~15 minutes they have to get up and turn the record over doing that 4 times for a standard LP's playing time.

But at least it IS good exercise!

 

[par4ken]

Would you allow an automatic single-play turntable?

Probably but I prefer fully manual!

 

[par4ken]

And bless those stalwarts who have a collection of 45 rpm LPs.......Every 12~15 minutes they have to get up and turn the record over doing that 4 times for a standard LP's playing time.

But at least it IS good exercise!

I have my Mothers 78's; some are record "albums" with each record side containing one song. The logical (and intended) way to listen to them would be via a record changer. I would never ever consider doing that! Much better idea to make digital copies then put them in a folder labeled sequentially, and play the album from there.

 

[barfle]

I have my Mothers 78's; some are record "albums" with each record side containing one song. The logical (and intended) way to listen to them would be via a record changer. I would never ever consider doing that! Much better idea to make digital copies then put them in a folder labeled sequentially, and play the album from there.

I have a couple of those myself, and I certainly remember "albums" with one record with sides 1 and 6, another with 2 and 5, and another with 3 and 4, or a similar scheme. Clearly intended for stacking.

"I feel romantic and the record changer's automatic, baby."

 

[Nyad]

Regarding record changers, I was looking at my stacking spindles for my 50H & 770H yesterday before I saw these posts, played a couple of Lp's on the 770H which has an adjustable headshell for the number of records in the stack, (this site is quite interesting for Elac Miracord) :Private ELAC Seite - Tonabnehmer scroll to the bottom for the 770H arm/headshell

 

[humprof]

Regarding record changers, I was looking at my stacking spindles for my 50H & 770H yesterday before I saw these posts, played a couple of Lp's on the 770H which has an adjustable headshell for the number of records in the stack, (this site is quite interesting for Elac Miracord) :Private ELAC Seite - Tonabnehmer scroll to the bottom for the 770H arm/headshell

As the owner of an old ELAC turntable, I'll say: that's a cool site!

Never know about "ELAC Quadraphony":
https://elac--analog-de-tl.translat...l=en&_x_tr_hl=en-GB&_x_tr_pto=ajax,se,elem,sc

 

[DuncanS]

The stacking player brought a smile to my face, it didn't to my fathers! I remember being told off by my father for 'potentially' ruining his records. I must have been about 8 and playing at being a DJ, I'd stick a stack of Dad's 78s or 45s on his Mono Radiogram (in a nice wooden desk like cabinet) and start the TT playing, amazing how many you could stack. I remember the cream coloured Bakelite tone arm and flip needle/stylus for 16 & 3/8? (slow for spoken word), 45, 33 or flipped over for 78. I remember a favourite for the stack (until I was caught!) was The Pearl Fisher's 45rpm single, I have all of his records which I inherited, so now this has brought up the memory, I'm going to have dig through them and play it - and I don't like opera!

 

[barfle]

Regarding record changers, I was looking at my stacking spindles for my 50H & 770H yesterday before I saw these posts, played a couple of Lp's on the 770H which has an adjustable headshell for the number of records in the stack, (this site is quite interesting for Elac Miracord) :Private ELAC Seite - Tonabnehmer scroll to the bottom for the 770H arm/headshell

One thing that's special about my 50H is that it's four speeds! And I have something that plays at each speed (although I only have one 16-2/3 rpm 7" record of Scheherezade).

 

[MidiMagic]

I have my Mothers 78's; some are record "albums" with each record side containing one song. The logical (and intended) way to listen to them would be via a record changer. I would never ever consider doing that! Much better idea to make digital copies then put them in a folder labeled sequentially, and play the album from there.

I won't either. Shellac 78s (especially those made during World War II) get brittle with age.

I have a few rules on which records to not stack.
- Shellac records
- Vitrolac records
- Edison (Bakelite) records
- Home recordings
- Records missing the lead-in or finishing grooves
- Records with eccentric trip finishing grooves work on the Collaro, but not the PE
- Records with warps
- Odd size records work on the Collaro, not on the PE
- Records smaller than 6-inch
- Records with noncontinuous grooves (some language lab records I have)

I once bought a well-warped record at a garage sale to use as a test record for vertical arm compliance. But I made the mistake of storing it properly. The next time I went to use it, the warps were gone.

There is also one kind of stack I can make on my modified Collaro: large 33 rpm records followed by small 45 rpm records. I often put on everything by one artist this way.