What do you mean you “heard” the turntable


I don’t get it. Maybe I just don’t have the biological tool set, but I read all the time how someone heard this turntable or that turntable and they comment on how much better or worse it sounded than some other TT, presumably their own or one they are very familiar with. 

Thing is, they are most likely hearing this set up on a completely different system in a completely different environment. So how can they claim it was the TT that made the difference?  The way “synergy“ is espoused around here how can anybody be confident at all considering how interdependent system interactions are. 

Can someone illuminate me?
last_lemming
 Though I have not done the test I would be willing to bet that a $2000 cartridge on a $500 turntable with sound just as good  if not better  Than $10,000 turntable with an $200 cartridge.  But you would never really be able to tell unless they were in the same system   
The law of diminishing returns will be where the line blurs. 
@larry5729

  I have a difficult time believing you can hear a significant difference between a $500 turntable and turntables costing $10,000 to #20,000. All turn tables do is turn a vinyl disk at a constant speed. As long as their is no feedback they should sound the same. I thought the difference was the quality of the cartridge. So, let's say you install an $1,800 cartridge on a $500 turntable, I will bet it will sound great.

I also don't know what the attraction is for vinyl. Vinyl can only reproduce a fraction of the sample rate compared to 16 bit and 24 bit CD's. Why would you want to starve yourself of the detail. I heard vinyl sounds warmer. However, I would rather hear the highs and mid's in a crisper sound.

With a simplistic belief such as the above, which, either through ignorance or on purpose, ignores all the variances of material and how different materials and costlier designs and uses of different materials combined remove self noise without harm, defend against external noise , built to tighter specs to do as little harm as possible to a signal significantly smaller than any other. Ergo , the more a signal needs amplified , so will its external and internal noise.
Better Tables , simply are better reproducers of only the stylus's vibrations reading the grooves. The better the arm , the less harm done to that quieter signal seen from better table design, the better the cartridge will magnify how all these efforts have been more successful and how much the phono pre has to work with. 
It may be too complicated, too difficult or too much work for the overly critical digital crowd, but....the results can't be argued for the music lover who isn't just vinyl because of choice of medium bias, but because the music long ago dictated it simply isn't available for every  recording since the 12 inch 33 lp came about and even when available digital as a reissue is absolutely no guarantee it will beat let alone come close to the originals capturing of a good original recording. Funny , I find most of the people I know critical of my quite large vinyl collection and  turntable/arm  costs ,...... seem to at the same time champion the "better" more expensive digital players , dac's and transports for many of the same reasons needed to eliminate noise as well. I'm glad to have both mediums and find owning both a blessing for less restriction to acquiring  the music
wanted. 
Don't waste your time arguing with someone who writes this sentence: "Vinyl can only reproduce a fraction of the sample rate compared to 16 bit and 24 bit CD's."
He doesn't even understand the fundamental difference between analog and digital reproduction.