VideoHelp Forum

Try DVDFab and download streaming video, copy, convert or make Blu-rays,DVDs! Download free trial !
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3
1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 61
Thread
  1. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    quebec
    Search Comp PM
    i've got this turntable that will need lots of love .. it was badly stored for far too long ...it will need cleaning , a new belt it's electronics will have to be reviewed and needs a new cartridge..

    i just found out that shure doesn't do cartridge anymore ..it needs a good tracker and the hability to read some warp vinyls (if possible) ..any suggestions ?

    at the time this turntable was kinda the entry model of that time ( i think)

    so i'm gessing i'm better off spending around 300$ on it to get her into shape than buying a 300$ new one

    My plan is not just listening but convert to digital also with acon's acoustica basic ..

    a good clean and a good setup will give me less filtering to do for those clcks and pops ..

    Any vinyl fans around here ?
    Quote Quote  
  2. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    I had that very same model back in the 80s/90s. Worked great!

    If you can't get a good quality shure v15 or a pickering cartridge off of ebay/craigslist/etc, I would look at who is currently making shibata mm cartridges. You might even try mc pickups, but you would definitely need the additional pre-amp then, and I'm not sure how you would work it in line with you system.

    It's not the best tracking in the ranks, but does decently, so long as you properly tweak the anti-skating.

    Good luck!

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  3. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    quebec
    Search Comp PM
    in Acoustica basic ..their is a "virtual phono preamp"
    that mimics the RIAA curve for phono from a line in input

    and thx for the suggestions i'll look into them

    other suggestions are also welcome
    Quote Quote  
  4. Originally Posted by smartel View Post
    so i'm gessing i'm better off spending around 300$ on it to get her into shape than buying a 300$ new one
    Not necessarily.

    The Technics belt drive tables were sold in the millions: they are very very common, decent budget spinners that sold for $99 back when they were new (and until fairly recently could be found by the dozens every week on eBay second-hand for $50). So unless you live in an area where absolutely no alternatives come up for sale on local eBay or estate/ garage sales, it really doesn't make economic sense to invest $300 in repairing an SL220 thats in bad shape. Right now on eBay USA, there are several in very nice condition that have already been restored (complete with a good or new cartridge/stylus) selling for under $200.

    IMO, even that is ridiculous: the Technics belt drives are decent reliable old turntables, but nothing spectacular to justify that price. Unfortunately, turntables have become the must-have "hipster" accessory of the decade (second only to Leica film cameras), so demand has inflated vintage TT prices to crazy levels. Turntables that were just slightly better than the SL220 are selling for double, and one can easily drop $800 on popular old spinners that were perhaps only 30% better performers back in the day.

    A popular cartridge for the SL220 was the Shure M91E, which was compatible with most turntables with S-shape tonearm. These sold for $25 new in 1980, you can still find nice clean used examples on eBay for $40 if you're patient. Similar cartridges from Audio Technica, like the AT95E, can be bought new for $50-$70. Used, good condition Pickering, Ortofon, Grado, etc are also floating around in excellent used condition for under $50. Or you could buy a new or "new old stock" cartridge/stylus for much more money. Just be sensible about the costs: while you can certainly use a top grade cartridge with a budget turntable, in the heyday of vinyl it was not usual or common for buyers of tables like the Technics SL220 to install something as expensive as a Shure V15 Type IV.

    Very high performance, expensive cartridges are most useful for listening to vinyl directly thru a good analog stereo system. If your primary interest is making digital files from your analog vinyl, a top-of-the-line cartridge/stylus can be overkill: the digitization tools available to the casual user often have difficulty capturing the more subtle differences (space, air, staging) between a good mid-price cartridge and a very expensive model. A Shibata stylus may or may not dramatically reduce surface noise like clicks and pops: there are as many variables that affect this as there are turntable models.
    Last edited by orsetto; 25th Dec 2019 at 23:59.
    Quote Quote  
  5. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Shibata has other benefits but I was thinking more along the lines of extended HF response, which helps much during the digitization. I think, even using generic consumer equipment.
    As is often the case in A/V, the analog transducers have the wildest quality variation and so are the weakest links in the overall chain (and thus if you improve those, you are getting the biggest bang for your buck).

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  6. Originally Posted by Cornucopia View Post
    Shibata has other benefits but I was thinking more along the lines of extended HF response, which helps much during the digitization. I think, even using generic consumer equipment.

    As is often the case in A/V, the analog transducers have the wildest quality variation and so are the weakest links in the overall chain (and thus if you improve those, you are getting the biggest bang for your buck).
    I agree in principle, but there are traps and "gotchas" with some combinations that can be a huge waste of money for vinyl neophytes who don't yet fully understand the complex, arcane interplay of cartridges/styli vs tonearms vs drive mechanics vs preamps.

    The Shure V15 (Type IV and later) series is a perfect example. When they were new, they weren't really all that expensive relative to "exotic" cartridges, even accounting for inflation. Their resale value ramped up to insane heights over the past decade, primarily because "Shure V15 Type Whatever" is the best-remembered, best-marketed upscale cartridge brand of the '70's/'80s. But nine out of ten people chasing them today have no idea why they want them, other than good mentions on enthusiast sites. In truth, few turntables (and ears) can extract a stupendously notable difference between the M91E, M95ED, or a V15. Thirty-five years ago, perhaps, because all the gear was new. Today, with ancient turntables that are rarely in perfect condition or set up flawlessly, playing thru who knows what preamps, into PC audio capture card? Not so much.

    Things get even more sketchy if a Shure V15 doesn't include an original, genuine-Shure V15 stylus and damping brush. Aftermarket alternative replacement styli from suppliers like Jico can be very expensive, very well designed, yet still fall distinctly short of what the cartridge was prized for with the genuine stylus. Nobody has yet been able to precisely duplicate Shure's own damping brush/stylus interplay: depending on your exact turntable and music preferences, third-party replacements can sound anywhere from superb to no better than a good midrange cartridge/stylus at half the price. I run a Thorens TD-145 (1975) belt drive and Pioneer PL600 (1979) direct drive, both high performance (for mass market) tables, and I wouldn't put a V15 with knockoff stylus on either of them.

    For the cost today, there are better-integrated brand new cartridges (and far cheaper vintage models). When the original stylus on my V15 Type IV gave out I tried the Jico SAS and didn't love it. Sold it to a friend, and put the proceeds toward four "lesser" carts. At the moment, the vintage M91ED on my Pioneer sounds amazing thru a Creek 4140sII preamp, as does the Ortofon X1MC on my Thorens. Some preamps like the Creek or Advent 300 (Holman) make nearly any cartridge sound wonderful, others are more picky: thats another quest that can last years.

    Many many variables.

    If it were me, smartel, I would skip restoring your (apparently) grungy dysfucntional Technics SL220 in favor of buying another complete SL220 (or similar) already in excellent condition. That is a much better value for money, and you could resell the parts from your "bad" SL220 on eBay to help defray the cost (headshell, platter, dustcover and feet are all needed by somebody else).
    Last edited by orsetto; 26th Dec 2019 at 02:20.
    Quote Quote  
  7. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    quebec
    Search Comp PM
    when i'm saying 300$ it's more like 15$ on a belt and 250$ on a cartridge and maybe some electronic components .. if the motor is dead and the wiring dried out ..i'll look elsewhere
    Last edited by smartel; 26th Dec 2019 at 04:06.
    Quote Quote  
  8. Originally Posted by smartel View Post
    when i'm saying 300$ it's more like 15$ on a belt and 250$ on a cartridge and maybe some electronic components .. if the motor is dead and the wiring dried out ..i'll look elsewhere
    Ah, thats a different story. If it just needs a new belt to run well, then of course go for it.

    But I still feel $250 is a bit too much to spend on a cartridge for this particular table. Up t to a point, better more expensive cartridge will benefit almost any turntable, but realistically once you go beyond +- $100 there are diminishing returns on vintage entry-level TTs. The Technics belt drives were nice enough in their day: they were successors of previous old-fashioned looking budget belt drives like the legendary Pioneer PL-10. But they were definitely built to a price: the chassis and tonearm scream "discount special". That is not a slam: the overall design compromise was (and is) very good for the price. It just isn't an ideal platform for the pricier cartridges: they may work well, but you probably won't get all they're capable of when used on a TT with better tonearm (esp thru a software RIAA).

    The problem today is turntable and cartridge prices no longer bear logical relationships to actual performance. The vinyl market is thriving, but is still a tiny fraction of what it once was. Many of the tables/carts are vintage, and subject to web-driven cult followings. The best known "good-better-best" cartridge lineups from key mfrs are all screwed up now: some are still available new, some have been reformulated, some you can only buy used. Many tables/cartridges that were legends in 1979 or 1985 or 1992 at their original discounted prices are not good values at their current inflated prices. Pairing the right combo of TT and cart is harder because of all the cult blather and price fluctuations

    The highest grade cartridge anyone ever bought for something like the SL220 when it was new was the Shure V15 Type III, the last version of "classic" V15. At the time, it was not incredibly expensive, and its design mated very nicely to the typical tonearms of the era. Starting with the V15 Type IV, things got more complicated: the later V15 models result in "WTF did I just spend this money for?" reactions unless paired with a tonearm/table that suits them perfectly. The V15 Type III was way less fussy about the table/tonearm it was attached to than any other V15, which was wonderful, but that easy-going nature did not carry over to its successors (despite the same name). So if you want a "proper V15 experience" from something like an SL-220, spend some time trolling eBay for a good used Type III (they can often be found bundled with an old turntable cheaper than by themselves: look closely at listing photos). Otherwise, go with a more modest vintage Shure or a new non-Shure cartridge known for good performance with older high-mass tonearms. $150 should be enough for an excellent SL220-compatible cartridge, $250 is likely to overshoot the target.
    Last edited by orsetto; 26th Dec 2019 at 09:48.
    Quote Quote  
  9. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    quebec
    Search Comp PM
    keeping the original cartridge with a brand new stylus may be an option too

    i also have a Panasonic SL-N15 ( it's supposed to be some kind of Technics SL-3 clone)

    but the needle sometimes goes home on longer records
    Quote Quote  
  10. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    It's been a long time since I had my stereo setup, but recall that the V15 series had a reputation for handling warped records better than more expensive carts because of the damping brush and the ability to use it a higher down force. Back in the day, I had two turntables, a Technics with a mid-range Grado cart and an ADC straight arm with a mid-high end ($400+) Dynavector Sapphire and later Diamond MC cart. The Grado could track and play slightly warped and worn records better than the Dynavector, which would jump out of the groove.
    Quote Quote  
  11. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    quebec
    Search Comp PM
    cartridge with shibata needle are expensive , audio-technica are the most afordable ones

    the cartridge on the technics now is only marked " EC81" ..

    google tells me it's a generic cartridge possibly made by shure (oem) for TT like those found at radio-shack at that time ... i may be wrong here
    Quote Quote  
  12. EC81 is definitely a generic unbranded Shure, the question is which "classic" Shure model its a knockoff of. The original 4x7 stylus seems designed for heavier tonearms at heavier tracking force, which fits right in with the SL220 specs. If it doesn't seem to be working right, probably best to discard it and get another entire cartridge than pay the $30 cost of a replacement stylus. Before throwing $30 at an EC81, I would buy a clean M91E, which was the midrange-starter cartridge sold with nearly every turntable from 1973-1978. The M91 was the "Type O -" universally-compatible, good-sounding, good-tracking cartridge of the SL220 era. Or, put the $30 toward any other used or new cartridge that interests you. There seems to be a consensus among Technics enthusiasts that the tonearms work particularly well with Audio Technica cartridges, so you might start hunting there.

    The only real drawback of entry-level Technics tables is their low resistance to external disturbances. If you're having trouble with warped records, try moving the SL220 away from your speakers and/or putting it on a makeshift heavy damping base to absorb room vibrations. The speed servo electronics are dependable, but the two thumb dials that control fine speed adjustment tend to oxidize every few years. If you experience speed drift issues, squirt a small bit of DeOxit into the wheels and work them thru their entire range several times to clear out the oxidation.
    Last edited by orsetto; 27th Dec 2019 at 20:56.
    Quote Quote  
  13. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    A few devices that you may already be aware of that may help dampen the warps on your records.

    A spindle weight/clamp will help with cup warped discs and a heavy turntable mat will help to dampen vibrations and keep the record from slipping. Both are available from Amazon. What I don't see and can't search for because I don't know what it's called, but there used to be a weighted rubber ring that you could use with upward cupped and warped records. [Edit: Since these devices, except the spindle clamp add weight to the platter, it's probably not a good idea to use with a low end table that may not be able to handle the extra weight.)

    IMO, like video capture, audio capture should be done with as high quality equipment as possible. A good cartridge is a key component and as stated it's possible to take out the pops and clicks, but rumble is harder and wow and flutter is probably extremely difficult. As with video equipment, buy good quality and the resale value will likely recoup most of your costs.
    Quote Quote  
  14. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    quebec
    Search Comp PM
    a carbon fiber brush is mostly suggested and a wet cleaning solution made with 1/10 vinegar* ( or isopropilic alcool ?) and 9/10 distiled water with a few drops neutral detergent and some say a little dishwasher rince for static

    either pluging it in in the line in or with the vc500

    and for unwarping puting the disk between 2 glasses .. the disk in it's sleeve with a pasteboard and one heated glass on top to 60 degres celcius for around an hour i'm french speaking so may have used wrong words here

    *vinegar may harm the PVC of the "vinyl" ... still reading threads everywhere so..

    https://audiokarma.org/forums/index.php?threads/record-cleaning-a-comprehensive-resource.884598/
    Last edited by smartel; 12th Jan 2020 at 21:56.
    Quote Quote  
  15. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    quebec
    Search Comp PM
    Do i really need a preamp ??
    Quote Quote  
  16. Member Cornucopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Search PM
    Most capture devices expect "line level" (either pro or consumer, usually consumer).

    Unless it's already supplied onboard somehow, you need a pre-amp to bring a MM cartridge up to LL.
    And for MC cartridges, you need a pre-pre-amp (yes, it's that low a level).

    Scott
    Quote Quote  
  17. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    There is software that claims to be able to digitally correct the RIAA curve in software: https://www.google.com/search?q=correct+riaa+curve+software&rlz=1C1MSIM_enUS785US785&o...hrome&ie=UTF-8

    As I recall, the uncorrected analog signal is prone to exaggerating any wow and flutter present which will be higher in a cheaper turntable. The software is intended for high end turntables and capture device.

    Back in the day, as a test, I ran the output of my turntables (both MM and MC) directly into the line-in inputs on my receiver. The sound was there, but really low and bad.

    Edit: The phono amp in preamps, separate, integrated or in a receiver aren't all the same. Ironically, some cheap Radio Shack phono preamps got a lot of praise, being preferred over much more expensive devices. Here's a discussion of one: https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/realistic-42-2101-42-2101-a-phono-preamps.455017/

    Remember that the ideal for analog audio is "straight wire with gain" which means theoretically the least done to the signal, the better. Ironically, the exact opposite in the digital age.

    "Anything worth doing is, worth doing right." Like video capture, a quality capture starts with quality equipment all along the line. I'm not saying you have to ditch your turntable for a $$$ high end one, but decide whether you really want 'good enough' or 'best I can do for X $'. Not everything can be fixed by digital in post.
    Last edited by lingyi; 31st Dec 2019 at 11:56.
    Quote Quote  
  18. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    quebec
    Search Comp PM
    i've got an old technics receiver (SA-G67) that i don't use ... i could use it's "phono in" and it's "rec out"

    i don't even have to connect it's speakers ..just it's preamp capabilities.. i guess all it's tone control and volume would be bypassed

    i guest i've answered my own question
    Quote Quote  
  19. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Yes, you're correct. Good Luck!
    Quote Quote  
  20. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    quebec
    Search Comp PM
    Audacity ? for capturing maybe .. but for noise reduction ?

    Audacity is often suggesrted and reaper's REAfir also for constant noise .. but for pops and scratches ?

    i tried acon's acoustica that has it's noise reduction version 1. .. tried with another file since my TT isn't ready ...i'm not that impressed ...takes out some musical character

    Izotope RX is also suggested but $$$ but for less money a could get something like Magix's soundforge audio studio 13 .. or even audio cleaning lab..but magix feels like it's always releasing old products with new colors..

    when searching the web..it always comes down to record cleaning ..
    Quote Quote  
  21. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Garbage In, Garbage Out. As I stated above, not everything can be effectively corrected by software. No matter how good the software (which must often be tweaked by ear), it's replacing what's not there, with the best approximation of what should be there. The bigger the pop or click, the greater the approximation must be.

    A clean, clean, clean record is the start of reducing pops and clicks. I'm pulling back memories from over 30 years ago, but the reviews on Amazon confirm that the original DiscWasher is one of the best affordable products for cleaning records: https://www.amazon.com/Record-Cleaning-Kit-System-1-Pack/dp/B07YLDK41Y/ref=sr_1_5?keyw...7982384&sr=8-5. Follow the directions exactly as there's a technique to using it correctly.

    Another 'trick' is to use a second cartridge, can be a lower priced one with a wider spherical stylus (versus a Shibata or ellipical one) with lighter tracking force (just remembered to the correct term), possibly even below that recommended, that will ride higher in the record groove. You'll loose some sonic quality, but it may smoothen the pops and clicks that may be caused by imperfections lower in the groove. For scratched records, you may have to increase the tracking force to better 'ride in groove'.

    I sometimes had to experiment with different combinations of cartridge/turntable to get the cleanest signal.

    I just remembered that I had a cheap third and possibly fourth cartridge that I used for playing troublesome records. Again, Garbage In, Garbage Out. The goal is to get the best quality signal going in so you have to do less in software. Even more critical back in the day, when little could be done without very expensive external processors to fix a recorded signal.

    If this sounds like too much effort, it's simply the correct way to do things. The equivalent in the video world would be asking how to get the best playback of an EP tape and being told to get a VCR that plays it back better.

    Edit:Read this Audacity tutorial for some good tips and software recommendations: https://manual.audacityteam.org/man/tutorial_click_and_pop_removal_techniques.html. Note that manual tweaking may be required for the best results as I stated above. The reality is that no software can beat the human ears and brain for optimally (for you) correcting audio or video imperfections.

    Back in the 70's, my audiophile days began because I realized that my ears were better than my eyes and decided to focus on that. Sadly, now my eyes, even with glasses are better than my ears and I've switched back to video as my primary source of entertainment.
    Last edited by lingyi; 2nd Jan 2020 at 12:10.
    Quote Quote  
  22. ½ way to Rigel 7 cornemuse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Cyber Dystopia
    Search Comp PM
    Many years ago I bought a Creative Labs "Awe 64 Gold" sound card. It came with s/w included with drivers/install stuff. Dont remember the particular name but I could 'zoom' in on one pop/scratch, just one spike & reduce it. Thing was it was incredibly tedious to remove them.
    The included s/w would not install on comps without Creative Labs cards installed. Still have those (2) cards, (& the cd's) but they are ide(?) really long plugin to comp, Typically at the bottom of the mobo. Have not seen a mobo with that slot in many years. Cards even had RCA jack outputs.
    Cranky Old Man
    Quote Quote  
  23. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Another blast from the past. Even/especially a brand new record must be cleaned before playing because [there] may [be] debris from the pressing process and dust from the packing room.

    There's also the controversial wet playing method. I tried it once with a bad record by purposely using extra solution on my Discwasher and leaving the residue on the record. Sounded like cr*p! Wet playing is discussed here: https://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/wet-lp-playback.127223/page-2
    Last edited by lingyi; 4th Jan 2020 at 14:58.
    Quote Quote  
  24. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by cornemuse View Post
    Many years ago I bought a Creative Labs "Awe 64 Gold" sound card. It came with s/w included with drivers/install stuff. Dont remember the particular name but I could 'zoom' in on one pop/scratch, just one spike & reduce it. Thing was it was incredibly tedious to remove them.
    The included s/w would not install on comps without Creative Labs cards installed. Still have those (2) cards, (& the cd's) but they are ide(?) really long plugin to comp, Typically at the bottom of the mobo. Have not seen a mobo with that slot in many years. Cards even had RCA jack outputs.
    Had to look up the IDE connection on the board because it didn't make sense to connect it to the MB. http://nerdlypleasures.blogspot.com/2012/07/sound-blaster-awe32-64-options.html. Sounds like you connected to the IDE port intended to used for an IDE CD drive. Creative Labs cards had an IDE port because connecting two drives to the same IDE cable would slow the transfer speed of both drives to that of the slowest device.
    Quote Quote  
  25. ½ way to Rigel 7 cornemuse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Cyber Dystopia
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by cornemuse View Post
    Many years ago I bought a Creative Labs "Awe 64 Gold" Still have those (2) cards, (& the cd's) but they are ide(?) really long plugin to comp, Typically at the bottom of the mobo.
    The (?)was why I was not certain of type of slot. I dragged out my ooold Shuttle - Spacewalker 'AV18E' mobo. Sound card is "ISA" plug. The ISA slot is at the bottom & about 5½" long. AV18E mobo has audio on board but the Awe 64 was much much better. Couldnt find in the manual but I think mobo was limited to W 98. It was a good board & I kinda miss W 98. <- (I'll be 73 in a few weeks!)

    -c-
    Cranky Old Man
    Quote Quote  
  26. ½ way to Rigel 7 cornemuse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Cyber Dystopia
    Search Comp PM
    Any vinyl fans around here ?
    I have a Kenwood KD21RB, A Pioneer PL115D, & the only one I use since I got it, (at a church rummage sale $5!), A Pioneer PL51A direct drive tt.

    I have 6 or 7 cartridges including a 'brand new' & a 'used' 30+ year old Realistic RXT6 (dont turn up your noses!) carts which are actually Shure M111E's. Also a Stanton 500E low usaged which is what the D J's all used when they used to spin platters. (before CD's) A few more, , , ,

    Even found my Robins stylus pressure gauge. I use it to calibrate the actual tone arm scale. Even found my old 40 + year old Parostatik Disk Preener.
    Have an old Kenwood KR5030 stereo reciever with phono input. Dont know how old it is but was before they sold stereo recievers with remotes.
    Have a Technics SA 424 stereo rec. I have not used since I got the Kenwood.
    Another thing I have is a Realistic 10 band equalizer (as above!, Radio Shack used to sell quality equipment), could really fine tune the music.
    A Magnavox CD player (Philips made in Belgium) The magizines used to compare new CD players to the chip in this one, even high end players like Nakamichis.
    Except for the PL51 & the Kenwood, they all have a thick layer of dust on 'em. I mostly prefer 'classical' music & 60's rock. Have some LP's I bought new more than 50 years ago. Locally, thrift stores sell lp's for $1 ea & most of them are in really decent shape.

    I'm rambling, ,

    -c-
    Last edited by cornemuse; 4th Jan 2020 at 13:44. Reason: feng shui
    Cranky Old Man
    Quote Quote  
  27. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Originally Posted by cornemuse View Post
    Originally Posted by cornemuse View Post
    Many years ago I bought a Creative Labs "Awe 64 Gold" Still have those (2) cards, (& the cd's) but they are ide(?) really long plugin to comp, Typically at the bottom of the mobo.
    The (?)was why I was not certain of type of slot. I dragged out my ooold Shuttle - Spacewalker 'AV18E' mobo. Sound card is "ISA" plug. The ISA slot is at the bottom & about 5½" long. AV18E mobo has audio on board but the Awe 64 was much much better. Couldnt find in the manual but I think mobo was limited to W 98. It was a good board & I kinda miss W 98. <- (I'll be 73 in a few weeks!)

    -c-
    Win98SE was worthy of praise. Win98 was not.

    Same with XP pre SP1/SP2/SP3.

    I have an old Matrox Rainbow Runner video capture card and a few other ISA cards somewhere. I don't know if it was ISA itself or Win95/Win98/NT, but I don't miss having to set interrupts and memory addresses. All hail Plug and Play!

    Edit: Looked it up and it was the ISA standard that required the setting of IRQs and I/O port addresses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industry_Standard_Architecture

    Soundblaster and compatibles: IRQ 5 and Port 220. Woe to any other device wanting to use those! Ahhh...memories!
    Last edited by lingyi; 4th Jan 2020 at 15:03.
    Quote Quote  
  28. Originally Posted by cornemuse View Post
    the only one I use since I got it, (at a church rummage sale $5!), A Pioneer PL51A direct drive tt.
    That was certainly a bargain among bargains! You can't usually get near one of those these days for much less than $200. My primary TT is a Pioneer PL-600 I snagged a few years ago for $129 because it needed a new tonearm belt, today they go for triple that. Comparable in looks/performance to similar-vintage Technics 1200mkII, but with full automation and clever suspended subchassis (rare in a direct drive). No direct drive sounds quite as nice as my Thorens TD-145 belt drive, but I can never get that damned thing to work well for very long. If it isn't a pulley belt slip issue, its a tonearm suspension issue, or motor noise issue. The better belt drives can sound amazing, but I've decided direct drives are so much less of a headache I'll happily "settle".

    Have an old Kenwood KR5030 stereo reciever with phono input. Dont know how old it is but was before they sold stereo recievers with remotes.
    Way before the remote era: circa late '70s. Good friend of mine just pulled his out of mothballs and had me come over to help revive it. Heavy sucker, very well built, still sounds good despite the aged caps and dust.

    A Magnavox CD player (Philips made in Belgium) The magizines used to compare new CD players to the chip in this one, even high end players like Nakamichis.
    Owned the Magnavox 650 for a couple years, back when it was "the" player that several high-end brands wrapped in a wood case and added bling to (coincidentally jacking their price from $200 to $900). It was very very good indeed, but once I heard my first Nakamichi it was gone. The second-generation 1986 Nakamichis (OMS-3, 4, 5II and 7II) switched from Phillips DACs to Burr-Brown DACs, and were the pinnacle of Nak's balls-out, no expense spared design and engineering. Nothing else sounded like them back then, and I've seldom heard better even today. I started with the OMS4, which cost me three weeks pay and began a love-hate affair that lasted 20 years (it took that long for me to finally figure out how to DIY repair the OMS-3/4 recurring, notorious loading belt failure). Replaced it with a used, top-model OMS-7AII in 2007, and never looked back. OMS-7AII retailed at $1500 new in 1986, and it shows in the billet construction and unique innovative touches like belt drive suspended subchassis (the only one-box CD player to mimic a classic Thorens vinyl turntable).
    Last edited by orsetto; 4th Jan 2020 at 16:05.
    Quote Quote  
  29. Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    United States
    Search Comp PM
    Awww...you guys are bringing back (sad because it's all gone) memories of my old audiophile days. My receiver was a Marantz 2385, the little brother model just below the one with an oscilloscope instead of VU meters! One of the amps gave out and that lead me to start disassembling my system. My speakers were the original Infinty RSb (Reference System), touted back then as #3 in the Infinity line, behind the RSa and the IRS, the $10K? 6ft Infinity Reference System in the late 70's. Of course it helped that these were the only three speakers in the line back then!

    Edit: As I mentioned above, my main turntable was a direct drive ADC (don't know if that had a model number [I think it was 1200, just like the Technics]) that was a bargain (at I think around $200) compared to other tables with straight line tonearms like the Thorens. [Reviews back then said that the tonearm alone was worth the cost and the TT thrown in for free!] And I got the original Dynavector Sapphire MC cart for the bargain price price of $275 through my cousin getting in J-Town in LA. Later when the Dynavector Diamond MK2 came out at the bargain price of $400 (the original was $1000), I upgraded to that. For those who aren't familiar with what set Dynavector apart from other carts, the cantilever was made out of solid (supposedly real) ruby and synthetic (some say real) diamond. Both had amazing sound back when I could tell the difference!
    Last edited by lingyi; 4th Jan 2020 at 16:39.
    Quote Quote  
  30. Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    quebec
    Search Comp PM
    i'd be very curious to compare audiofile equipment specs of the 70/80' with those of today ...

    all things being equal the real differences may be in the mastering and not the media ( digital vs analog)

    i may be wrong here but analog audio doesn't realy have a bitrate , bitdepth or samplerate..
    that's all for the digital domain .. a digital mastering printed to vinyl won't realy sound that different and an analog one can't really be burnt to cd..
    Quote Quote  



Similar Threads