What makes a record player good or bad?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jeremy Clarkson
  • Start date Start date
J

Jeremy Clarkson

New member
Aren't all record player basically the same and the impact comes from the speakers you play the music threw and the actual record?

My grandma has a record player and I'm thinking or asking her for it or do I need a special on?

don't really know much about analog sound

can I hook up better speakers?
 
What do you need a record player for?

What kind does your grandmother have?
 
Usually people need record players for playin' records ;)

Turntable design makes a HUGE difference in sound and they are most definitely not all the same, in fact I'd venture to say there's greater--and more critical--variance in turntable design than tape recorders by nature. They're mechanical devices that are particularly susceptible to vibration and setup problems that can cause distortion and in some cases damage the records.

They're one of those things that run the gamut from "someone gave this old one to me" to costing more than a luxury car, and everywhere in between. Sound quality can be anywhere from un-listenable to staggeringly jaw-droppingly good and everywhere in between, depending on how high- or low-end they are and how well set up they are--so it's kind of a loaded question you have ;)

If you want to fiddle around with it, the main thing with your grandma's turntable at the very least is to make sure to set it up dead level on something sturdy (not a speaker or wobbly table etc--personally I use an anchored wall stand but I'm quite fastidious...) You need to make sure the stylus (aka "needle") isn't overtly damaged (like, bent or obviously broken at least) and that the platter spins at the correct, steady speed (you would hear the music at an unsteady pitch if there was a speed problem). Long as it works ok, go for it and see if it tickles your fancy.

Beyond that it depends on what sort of player it is and how tired it is. What you can hook it up to depends on what sort of player you're talking about. Some of them have more doodads and settings than others, but most don't have any kind of speaker amplification aside from the ancient portables or ones built into older "bookshelf" stereos.


BTW had to do a double take as I'm watching Top Gear while I type hehe :D
 
Last edited:
vinyl guy here (6000) lps and counting .....

First off, your grandmas' 'table will probably be a fine starting point unless it's something like a kids' 'table.
As briank mentioned ... you want to be sure the needle is in decent shape or it can ruin every record you play with it.

Let me know what kind it is and I can definitely give you some help.
Briefly, for right now, you have to run it into a stereo that has a phono input because the signal has to be boosted and the RIAA curve has to be implemented by a phono-preamp. If your stereo doesn't have a phono input you'll have to get a phono-pre which start at the cheapest, around 30 bucks.
If grandmas' player is all in one (speakers and everything) then there's a phono pre in there.
A wall mount is useful if you have suspended floors because it will stop it from skipping every time you walk across the room.
If the house is on a slab then it's not really neccessary.

Later on you start to get into things like belt-drive is better than direct drive ...... a high mass plinth helps get a more neutral sound etc.
Right now these things don't really matter for you yet.

So let us know what grandma has and we'll help you figure it out.





And, if you don't already .... start watching Top Gear! :D
 
Last edited:
I've had two turntables, firstly a Wharfdale of some kind that my father got me for Christmas a few years ago. It was atrocious. Everything distorted, even after I bypassed the internal pre-amp. Finally it weirded out such that switching to 33RPM made it play around 22RPM, 45 made it play at 33, and 78 remained at 78RPM.

I replaced it with a Kenwood P-110 which had favourable reviews on Amazon (aside from some guy who didn't seem to realise it needed speakers). The difference really is like night and day. I am still astonished at how much better the Kenwood was over the Wharfdale.

The only drawbacks I've had with the Kenwood are that it's very small and the record overhangs, and that it doesn't support 78 RPM. Also it came from Germany and needed an adaptor.

It's something to consider if you're in the market for one.
 
There are so many variables that go into this. OP, since you are referring to it as "record player" and not "turntable", chances are you aren't going to be blown away by the sound. There's an important difference between a "record player" and a "turntable", even though they both will play records. A record player is usually some sort of integrated device, maybe with speakers, maybe with a tuner or cassette player. Sometimes you get portable ones that fold up like a suitcase. I would call all of those "record players" and I've owned them all.

A turntable almost always refers to a dedicated, hi-fi stereo component that plays vinyl records. They always need to be connected to some kind of amplifier, usually with a preamp inbetween, though some cheapie turntables have their own preamps built-in. Turntables are your only source of high-quality sound from a vinyl record. But there is so much variance among different models, it's impossible to predict how good your grandma's turntable will be, considering it's not a standalone record player instead.
 
Lt. Bob is correct in his general statement that direct-drive is better than belt-drive, but if the platter (the heavy thing the records sit on) is truly heavy, and the belt has not stretched, you can get as good quality from a belt-drive table as a direct drive. The thing you lose is fast spin-up, once they are both up to speed, it is virtually impossible to tell the difference from listening. So, if you can score a free or cheap belt-drive, check those things and grab it.
 
stevieb said:
Lt. Bob is correct in his general statement that direct-drive is better than belt-drive, but if the platter (the heavy thing the records sit on) is truly heavy, and the belt has not stretched, you can get as good quality from a belt-drive table as a direct drive. The thing you lose is fast spin-up, once they are both up to speed, it is virtually impossible to tell the difference from listening..
Click to expand...


I respectfully disagree. With direct drive there is virtually always the issue of motor-borne vibrations coupled to the spindle/platter and traveling to the stylus and down the tonearm tube. It's the stark reality of all but the most insane direct-drive rigs (such as the $70,000 Rockport Sirus, in which a good chunk of that coin is spent decoupling the platter and stylus).

For most people, a belt drive with its vibration-damping properties is the better bet, and a good reason why nearly all high end turntables use a belt rather than a direct drive system. Yes DD has more torque for faster cueing and that's mainly why DJs depend on them (Technics SL1200s in particular) but for straight-up music playback, torque isn't so important...though "for the record" a grippy belt coupling and torquey motor can mitigate this; my belt-driven Michell Gyro SE gets up to speed quickly enough despite the massive platter. The caveat with belt drive is, as mentioned, that the belt needs to be maintained and replaced periodically as it loses elasticity and grip. DD can also be prone to pitch irregularity as it ages too, though no questions it's lower maintenance. Long as the rest of the turntable design is up to snuff, a belt drive rig will transmit less distortion-causing vibration to the stylus compared to all but the craziest of DD designs.

At any rate, don't want to start a DD vs. Belt Drive debate (been there, done that lol) just throwin' in my $0.02.
 
Actually I did not say direct drive was better than belt drive. What I said was:
Lt. Bob said:
.... belt-drive is better than direct drive ......
Click to expand...
good lord Steve .... you've got to start reading posts a bit better man.

Direct drive is not considered a high end drive system for turntables. For one thing, direct drive motors have an electronic control system to keep the motor at the right speed. It'll check many times a second and make corrections which essentially puts in whatever freq. it's checking at into the system as a vibration as the control 'hunts and pecks' back and forth keeping it at speed. That becomes a coloration of the sound.
Plus, as briank said, there will always be some amount of vibration from the motor and that goes right into the platter and thus ... right into the needle.

Virtually ALL audiophile 'tables use belt drive although I understand VPI and a couple others are planning on coming out with idler wheel drives.
 
Last edited:
Five'll get you ten the rubber, or lube, is shot anyway. :D

Yeah, direct vs belt. I believe and understand the logic of DD vibrations, and belt having the edge in the better units. I went through resurrecting the old AR and another unit and finding both DOA. After some reading bought a min entry belt drive (>$200 IIRC) and couldn't get past the pitch variations. Traded for that standard Technics 1200.
None of this is high end granted, but it is interesting the differences in how we perceive things and where we land with regard to various imperfections. A little 'within spec' wow drove me nuts. But then when I play a disk I hear the other distortions, pops, tics, the s/n, the euphonic disk mastering effects. From that perch', a little motor vibration blends right in.
:D
 
Yeah, my attention drifts when I get sleepy... unless you edited your post.:) JK.

I had a belt-drive turntable that came with the Kenwood package I bought while in the Air Force in the late 70's. Loved the whole setup, but the turntable's center spindle bearing would wear out every 5 years or so, allowing the platter to drop a millimeter or so, producing a rumble that I could hear through the amp. If I ignored it, it dropped more and drag against the base!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top