What is best turntable for listening to Rock from the sixties like Led Zeppelin?


The sound quality isn’t great, so rather than something super revealing, something that is very musical, and can also convey the magic. Sort of the Decca cartridge equivalent of turntables. I am guessing less Caliburn and Techdas, more Linn, Roksan, Denon, EMT 927, Rega, even.
tokyojohn

Showing 6 responses by bdp24

John---Since you mentioned the Decca cartridge, and as a follow-up to Geoff’s great pun, I recommend the Townshend Rock table. The Decca was actually a factor in the table’s design, and the two are known to be a synergistic match (the table’s damping trough tames the microphony and resonance found in Deccas). The Rock provides very tight bass, a good thing for all music, of course, but none more so than the 60’s Rock you mentioned. It also minimizes LP surface noise, helpful with old records.
Agree 100 per cent John. Transducers differ in character more than other components imo, and the Decca/London most especially. So alive, so dynamic! Makes other cartridges sound so reserved, so polite. Ironic, the Decca being so iconically British and all.

Wolf, I saw the Jeff Beck Group on their first U.S. tour, and they were great. Ron Wood playing bass (a Telecaster!), Mickey Waller drumming, Rod Stewart singing. Jeff was really fantastic.

Not just in turntables, but in all components, the nature of the music being played is affected by the failings of the components comprising a system. Different examples of any given component have different levels of failings in different aspects of music reproduction. Music containing a great amount of low-level detail (J.S. Bach’s Concerto for Four Harpsichords and Orchestra, for example) is harmed more by a component somewhat deficient in retrieving low-level detail than is music containing less of that detail. If that piece of music is typical of what one listens to, a turntable excelling in that regard is a priority.

So, what are the characteristics of "Rock from the 60’s like Led Zeppelin" that are therefore a priority in the capabilities of a turntable to reproduce? Decide that, then look for a turntable excelling at reproducing those characteristics. ALL turntables have strengths and weaknesses, better in some ways than others. And different music’s require strength in some areas more than others, and are harmed less by weaknesses in other areas. IMO.

Ralph's (Atmasphere) contention that components being music-sensitive is a myth is not one I can agree with. One example of that argument being mistaken is in the obvious case of the original Quad loudspeaker. I have and love the speaker, and listen to Bach through them, but would not dare play AC/DC at 110dB on them! Turntables are not so obvious, of course, but still.....

"Should" not depend on style of music is right, theoretically. But in practice, since all turntables have failings in different ways, ways that are related to certain aspects of music and/or sound, it may be advisable to find a table that least harms music in ways most important to oneself or to the music one most listens to.

For instance, just as an intellectual exercise: organ music is better served by a table great at reproducing low frequencies than one weak in that regard, whereas music without a lot of deep bass but with long-held piano noted needs a table with the lowest wow & flutter, a failing less harmful to the organ music with no long-held notes. The table that provides great bass could be weak in regards to wow & flutter, making it fine for the organ lover, not so good for the piano lover. Of course we all want a table with no musical or sonic failings; how many of us has one?

But, really, how many of us has the luxury of any such choice? The cartridge is normally the first part the LP player chosen, for the same reason the loudspeaker is at the other end: it's a transducer, far more variable in sound characteristics than the other parts (uh, right?). Who picks his arm first, then his cartridge? Or his amp first, then for a speaker it works well with? A knucklehead. Cartridge chosen, an arm appropriate for the cartridge is next. Then, lastly, the table. Owners of Oracle Delphi's learned why that table was not the best choice for the ET air-bearing arm: the mass of the arm tube was too great for the table's suspension, changing the level of the table as it moved across the LP. The VPI HW-19, on the other hand, was a good match for the arm.

Yeah cleeds, my argument was more of an intellectual (though by that I don’t mean smart!) or theoretical one for justifying the case of choosing a table based on the differing musical abilities of various models. I had a friend (R.I.P.) who had perfect pitch, and was very bothered by music played back too fast or slow. Other listeners without pp wouldn’t be bothered by a table not playing back at the exact correct speed, or records mastered incorrectly.

As long as a listener stays with cartridges having about the same compliance and mass, no problem with the original arm. But that does not change the fact that if you have an arm of high moving mass, you better not want or use a high compliance cartridge, or visa versa. In that sense, the arm limits the choice of cartridge; change cartridge types, and you may need a different arm. I would much rather have my cartridge choice dictate my arm than visa versa.