New Vs Vintage Turntable?

[Matt P]

Have you considered a Thorens TD-160? Visually similar to the Linn (even more so with an aftermarket solid wood plinth) and uses a very similar sprung chassis design (in fact the Thorens turntable design predates the Linn) 

 

the Thorens turntables are very well regarded but sell for far less then the LP-12.

 

I've split the difference and have one of each, the Thorens for 33rpm duties and a NAD 533 (rebadged Rega 2 with a different platter) for 45rpm.

 

the money i've not spent on a fancier turntable has been spent on more records and replacement stylii / cartridges.

 

 

Matt

[RAY AGAINST THE MACHINE]

Well …I don’t need this at all ! I will be getting this later on in the year ! How could I not?!?

[NancyJohnson]

Despite moaning frequently about these younglings buying vinyls (😏), I'm getting a bit of a vinyl itch on.  I don't know whether it's the having or the getting tbh.

 

There's about 100 albums and a few boxes of singles in my spare room, plus I have access to a ton of vinyl that comes through the charity where I volunteer.

 

For me, I just need a built in phono stage and wireless (Bluetooth) connectivity so I can squirt the output into a Sonos system.  This isn't going to be a full blown addiction thing.  It would be nice to just hear a few things that aren't on Spotify.

 

 

[Dan Dare]

4 hours ago, NancyJohnson said:

Despite moaning frequently about these younglings buying vinyls (😏), I'm getting a bit of a vinyl itch on.  I don't know whether it's the having or the getting tbh.

 

There's about 100 albums and a few boxes of singles in my spare room, plus I have access to a ton of vinyl that comes through the charity where I volunteer.

 

For me, I just need a built in phono stage and wireless (Bluetooth) connectivity so I can squirt the output into a Sonos system.  This isn't going to be a full blown addiction thing.  It would be nice to just hear a few things that aren't on Spotify.

 

An old FM tuner is a good thing to have, for the same reasons. Cheap to buy and, as long as you're in a decent signal area (proper aerials can be a bit pricey) and can get results with a piece of wet string, it can give you access to a load of interesting stuff.

[Matt P]

13 minutes ago, Dan Dare said:

 

An old FM tuner is a good thing to have, for the same reasons. Cheap to buy and, as long as you're in a decent signal area (proper aerials can be a bit pricey) and can get results with a piece of wet string, it can give you access to a load of interesting stuff.

 

when i bought my Denon TU-260L the guy in cash converters said it wasn't worth plugging it in to test as they never got signal in the shop, I plugged it in anyway and even without an aerial i got the bbc radio stations loud and clear, possibly the best £20 i spent.

 

I upgraded to a TU-1800 a while back which adds DAB as well, just using a fairly inexpensive aerial from john Lewis It works brilliantly. quite a few of the DAB tuners i've come across have got pass through connections on the back so you can plug the FM tuner into the DAB, and then the DAB into the amp, when the dab is off then it just passes the FM straight through, doesn't need an extra amp channel.

 

Matt

[Alicatt]

It's a Thorens deck I have here in Scotland with a SME 2000 arm with a Shure cartridge, I inherited it from my late uncle and he bought it in the early 70's also inherited his record collection. It plays very good still, just before he passed he got himself a Marantz CD player, he was 87 at the time.

 

Back home in Belgium, while I do have a deck it is a cheap digital one from Akai, mainly I play bluray audio or DVD-A or stream if I have to.

edit: Now I am home this is the Thorens TD 150 deck it is fed through a Sansui AU-555A amp to Mission Audio bookshelf speakers, With all the building and renovations the dust is everywhere here all needs a good clean

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by Alicatt

[xgsjx]

A wee twist in the turntable hunt…

 

Mrs saw the Technics SL 1200GR2 today & loves it. So that may be sitting in my living room in the not too distant. 😎

[dmccombe7]

On 03/01/2026 at 19:28, xgsjx said:

It’s fairly solid where the unit is sitting. It’s wood, but right next to brick wall.  Not much of a dancer. 

I'm still using my old Sony deck from 70's. I replaced the cartridge on it, no idea what it is tho but it still works fine but doesn't get much use these days.

If you find the stylus jumping a bit do you not just adjust the balance weight to prevent jumping. Its not something i've ever had a problem with. The manual told me how to set the weight and its been there ever since.

Its a NAD power amp with Mission and Bose speakers. I tend to use CD's more or if practicing the set list just fire in the laptop to a spare input channel.

Think if i was buying a new deck it would be direct drive rather than belt which i've had to replace twice on mine over the years.

Dave

Edited yesterday at 10:44 by dmccombe7

[SumOne]

11 hours ago, xgsjx said:

A wee twist in the turntable hunt…

 

Mrs saw the Technics SL 1200GR2 today & loves it. So that may be sitting in my living room in the not too distant. 😎

I'm a big fan of Technics. Have had 1210's for 30 years with only small bits of DIY maintenance needed. So getting the 1200GR2 I'm sure would be the last deck you'd ever need to buy.

 

.....however, I'm not certain the 1200GR2 (or older versions like 1200 and 1210's) are ideal for home listening. Isn't their main design for them to be built like reliable tanks to withstand DJs doing stuff like this: 

 

 

 

It's like getting a tank to do the school run. A lot of unnecessary cost, bulk and toughness, while missing some features that would be nice to have.

[xgsjx]

47 minutes ago, SumOne said:

I'm a big fan of Technics. Have had 1210's for 30 years with only small bits of DIY maintenance needed. So getting the 1200GR2 I'm sure would be the last deck you'd ever need to buy.

 

.....however, I'm not certain the 1200GR2 (or older versions like 1200 and 1210's) are ideal for home listening. Isn't their main design for them to be built like reliable tanks to withstand DJs doing stuff like this: 

 

 

 

It's like getting a tank to do the school run. A lot of unnecessary cost, bulk and toughness, while missing some features that would be nice to have.

I used to DJ quite a bit back in the 80s & 90s.  The majority of the time was on 1200/1210 decks.
I know that they're associated strongly with DJing rather than home HiFi, but from the research that I've done on the Mk7 decks, the GR2 and the G are more aimed at the HiFi market (they do a standard version for about £800, which is more aimed at the DJ market).  HiFi shops sell the GR & G, but rarely the standard & DJ shops rarely offer the GR or G (some do, but not many).
 

[SumOne]

21 minutes ago, xgsjx said:

I used to DJ quite a bit back in the 80s & 90s.  The majority of the time was on 1200/1210 decks.
I know that they're associated strongly with DJing rather than home HiFi, but from the research that I've done on the Mk7 decks, the GR2 and the G are more aimed at the HiFi market (they do a standard version for about £800, which is more aimed at the DJ market).  HiFi shops sell the GR & G, but rarely the standard & DJ shops rarely offer the GR or G (some do, but not many).
 

 

Ah right, I stand corrected. I thought that Direct Drive wasn't ideal for hi-fi and the 1200 types were all DJ focussed.

 

Either way, years of DJing and playing in bands means my hearing wouldn't tell any difference between hi-fi and fisher price!

 

 

[xgsjx]

4 hours ago, SumOne said:

 

Ah right, I stand corrected. I thought that Direct Drive wasn't ideal for hi-fi and the 1200 types were all DJ focussed.

 

Either way, years of DJing and playing in bands means my hearing wouldn't tell any difference between hi-fi and fisher price!

 

 

From what I’ve read, both Direct Drive & Belt Drive have pros & cons. 
Direct drive is more stable, but there can be vibrations from the motor. 
Belt drive reduces motor vibration, but can be less stable (especially if the belt hasn’t been changed for a while. 

Technics’ ΔΣ-Drive on the GR2 & G models are coreless, which they say is “designed to seamlessly eliminate even the tiniest vibrations originating from the motor.”, so it should be the best of both worlds.🙂

[Leonard Smalls]

There are hifi buffs who swear by Technics decks, spending thousands on arms, carts, isolation, "clean" power etc, though not many other turntable brands (not even EMT!) use direct drive motors, preferring the extra level of isolation a belt gives (on my TT the motor is in a separate very heavy billet aluminium cylinder, and a new belt is £50!

Even Verdier use belts, despite having a magnetic bearing meaning the platter effectively levitates...

Still, I've heard Technics decks sounding very good indeed.

[dmccombe7]

1 minute ago, Leonard Smalls said:

There are hifi buffs who swear by Technics decks, spending thousands on arms, carts, isolation, "clean" power etc, though not many other turntable brands (not even EMT!) use direct drive motors, preferring the extra level of isolation a belt gives (on my TT the motor is in a separate very heavy billet aluminium cylinder, and a new belt is £50!

Even Verdier use belts, despite having a magnetic bearing meaning the platter effectively levitates...

Still, I've heard Technics decks sounding very good indeed.

Thanks for that. I just always assumed that direct drive meant less maintenance with belt replacements. Interesting to see the trend is more towards belt drive. I'm guessing belts are made from better quality materials these days. 

Dave

[Beer of the Bass]

I have an ancient Pioneer PL11, predecessor to the PL12D mentioned earlier, that uses an idler wheel drive - neither belt nor direct drive. Other than fitting a newer Audio Technica cartridge when styli for the original Pioneer cartridge got hard to find, it's just worked for years without having to think about it much. 

[BigRedX]

Isn't the advantage of the Technics direct drive decks that they have a near instantaneous full-speed start which you need for mixing?

 

I remember from my student radio days that we would have to wind the record back about 1/3 of a turn from the cue point so that it would be up to the required speed by the time the music started and you wouldn't get an audible pitch change at the start of the track.

[NancyJohnson]

Reading the comments here (and elsewhere) about belt vs direct, how to get the best out of your system etc. 

 

What I never seem to read much is how vinyl is a flawed and degenerative delivery system (but plenty about how all those rumbles, crackles and pops add character to the music) or how turntables are trying to negate outside issues.  Christ, I remember how even walking across the room would cause my old deck to rumble.  My brother had bricks in his rack in an effort to negate outside influencing effects.

 

We've come so far, haven't we?  My mum was playing Led Zeppelin albums on a stereogram which played at 16, 33, 45 and 78.  The stylus being able to flip 180° dependent on what you were playing.  She regularly played old 78s.  Nobody cared about whether you could hear a bit more high-hat or low end.  Now it's all, 'I paid £500 for a tone arm and it makes such a difference.'

[BigRedX]

5 minutes ago, NancyJohnson said:

Reading the comments here (and elsewhere) about belt vs direct, how to get the best out of your system etc. 

 

What I never seem to read much is how vinyl is a flawed and degenerative delivery system (but plenty about how all those rumbles, crackles and pops add character to the music) or how turntables are trying to negate outside issues.  Christ, I remember how even walking across the room would cause my old deck to rumble.  My brother had bricks in his rack in an effort to negate outside influencing effects.

 

We've come so far, haven't we?  My mum was playing Led Zeppelin albums on a stereogram which played at 16, 33, 45 and 78.  The stylus being able to flip 180° dependent on what you were playing.  She regularly played old 78s.  Nobody cared about whether you could hear a bit more high-hat or low end.  Now it's all, 'I paid £500 for a tone arm and it makes such a difference.'

 

Because most vinyl lovers are in denial. There are all sorts of technical issues that affect what can be cut to a master disc in the first place and then what will actually be playable on a typical system once the results have been stamped out of a pice of hot plastic. As much as vinyl lovers would like to tell themselves otherwise, the final stage of the manufacturing process is hardly one of precision and finesse.

 

My current band are contemplating a vinyl version of our album (CDs still sell exceptionally well in our genre) and if we do it is likely to have a different running order to accommodate the limitations of the medium as well as having some the the more extreme stereo effects collapsed to mono in order for it to be capable of being cut.

 

For me, any records I bought as a teenager simply don't sound right unless they are played on my old dansette that cost £8 from a junk shop in 1973 and played one side of the stereo mix much louder than the other. These are versions/mixes of those records I am used to and everything else sounds wrong no matter how superior the reproduction might be.

[martthebass]

1 hour ago, BigRedX said:

 

Because most vinyl lovers are in denial. There are all sorts of technical issues that affect what can be cut to a master disc in the first place and then what will actually be playable on a typical system once the results have been stamped out of a pice of hot plastic. As much as vinyl lovers would like to tell themselves otherwise, the final stage of the manufacturing process is hardly one of precision and finesse.

 

 

You have a point from a technical point of view but to suggest vinyl lovers are in denial is inaccurate.

 

I have a budget/mid level system with a Rega RP3 turntable for vinyl, Rega Apollo CD player and a Rega Brio R amp.  I'm even beckoning in the 21st century with streaming using a Wiim Ultra.

Now I have some albums on both Vinyl and CD and despite my aging ears I can hear distinct difference between the media; I'm not going to advocate one medium over the other but there are times when I prefer the vinyl and others the CD.  It's hard to put into words but vinyl can sometimes give a more immediate delivery and a warmer more involving experience.  There are times when the vinyl seems flat and less dynamic compared to the CD.  These differences are probably more apparent when you go to a true high end system.  Now you may ascribe what I've just said to lack of objectivity but the enjoyment of music is quite often a subjective experience and opinions differ........much like the insistence that amps based on valves are superior to transistors.

[xgsjx]

2 hours ago, BigRedX said:

Isn't the advantage of the Technics direct drive decks that they have a near instantaneous full-speed start which you need for mixing?

 

I remember from my student radio days that we would have to wind the record back about 1/3 of a turn from the cue point so that it would be up to the required speed by the time the music started and you wouldn't get an audible pitch change at the start of the track.

Direct drive has many advantages for DJs. The near instant torque is more important to scratching rather than just mixing (try scratching on a belt drive deck, after the scratch, when you release to play the track it gives a warble that many lofi buffs would love 😂).

Another advantage is the stable bpm. If you’re DJing with a belt drive, then you’re not guaranteed a consistent speed, especially if you’re doing a little scratching. 
 

Back in the 80s I had a pair of Citronics (pronounced Shitronics) belt drive decks, they were not fun & took a lot of patience to get a mix to work. 😂

[prowla]

1 hour ago, BigRedX said:

 

Because most vinyl lovers are in denial. There are all sorts of technical issues that affect what can be cut to a master disc in the first place and then what will actually be playable on a typical system once the results have been stamped out of a pice of hot plastic. As much as vinyl lovers would like to tell themselves otherwise, the final stage of the manufacturing process is hardly one of precision and finesse.

 

My current band are contemplating a vinyl version of our album (CDs still sell exceptionally well in our genre) and if we do it is likely to have a different running order to accommodate the limitations of the medium as well as having some the the more extreme stereo effects collapsed to mono in order for it to be capable of being cut.

 

For me, any records I bought as a teenager simply don't sound right unless they are played on my old dansette that cost £8 from a junk shop in 1973 and played one side of the stereo mix much louder than the other. These are versions/mixes of those records I am used to and everything else sounds wrong no matter how superior the reproduction might be.

 

Well, I've never heard a digital system that hands-down beats a top-flight vinyl one; there's just something slightly detached about its performance.

 

38 minutes ago, martthebass said:

You have a point from a technical point of view but to suggest vinyl lovers are in denial is inaccurate.

 

I have a budget/mid level system with a Rega RP3 turntable for vinyl, Rega Apollo CD player and a Rega Brio R amp.  I'm even beckoning in the 21st century with streaming using a Wiim Ultra.

Now I have some albums on both Vinyl and CD and despite my aging ears I can hear distinct difference between the media; I'm not going to advocate one medium over the other but there are times when I prefer the vinyl and others the CD.  It's hard to put into words but vinyl can sometimes give a more immediate delivery and a warmer more involving experience.  There are times when the vinyl seems flat and less dynamic compared to the CD.  These differences are probably more apparent when you go to a true high end system.  Now you may ascribe what I've just said to lack of objectivity but the enjoyment of music is quite often a subjective experience and opinions differ........much like the insistence that amps based on valves are superior to transistors.

 

As you wander up the performance chain you tend to find that some albums sound distinctly worse than others.

With something like a WiiM Ultra you can do room-modelling eq.

Some digital transcodings do have tweaks done to the levels which can come across as being more dynamic.

 

In general, a lot of the loss in fidelity of any reproduction is down to a cloth-eared engineer or producer in the studio or mixing room.

[Leonard Smalls]

1 hour ago, NancyJohnson said:

Now it's all, 'I paid £500 for a tone arm and it makes such a difference.'

Maybe 40 years ago!

A bottom end Rega RB220 is £265. If you want the top Rega it's £1500.

My favourite tonearm, the Moerch DP6, is £2815 (I haven't got one!). An SME V will set you back five grand!

And if you want a high end cartridge, a DS Audio Grand Master Extreme is £18995...

Personally, I've got a slightly lower range SME arm on my very heavy acrylic Clear audio turntable with Audio Note cartridge through an EAR valve phono stage, and it sounds awesome.

Though now that I've been reminded that I'm in denial I realise that it couldn't possibly sound any good, and will take it straight down to the charity shop...

[ezbass]

I have nothing to add to which is format is better, or which turntable drive system is best (other than they all have their shortcomings) and my shot hearing probably couldn’t tell anyway (no probably about it). However, I watched a video the other day about vinyl ownership. There were some statistics mentioned (they might have been complete BS of course) said that only about 50% of new vinyl purchasers actually an own a deck to play the medium on. For some, it seems, it’s about ownership of the latest cool thing, or displaying the sleeves as artwork (I can get my head around the latter, it’s what I really miss about vinyl, not displaying it, but interacting with it, whilst the album played. I gave all mine away). 

[NancyJohnson]

Isn't there some correlation between desire vs. price vs. ownership where people will just go, 'Oh, it definitely sounds better than the old one.'

 

It's the same with (meandering down a muddy path) pickups and strings and tonewoods.  (This is why Paul/Milehouse Studios You Tube stuff is such a delight to watch; small pots, pickups, wood etc. "It makes no difference.  It's all bullshit.")

 

I concur with @BigRedX, some stuff - like my old Sparks, Sweet, Mott The Hoople singles - needs to be played on an old Dansette.  No amount of £2k tonearms are going to make those babies sound better.

[prowla]

I have to say I've gone digital.

But one day I'll get my LP12 out of the loft and set it up again.

 

Meanwhile we have a pic'n'mix the usual arguments:

• Digital is more accurate than vinyl.
• Vinyl has more feeling than digital.
• Digital has more dynamic range than vinyl.
• Digital sounds like sandpaper.
• You must be mad if you spend £2k+ on a needle.
• CDs are limited and you can't spread jam on them and expect them to play.
• Vinyl LPs warp.
• Anything above £250 and you can't tell the difference anyway.
• Some albums sound better on this and some on that.
• Anything above £251 and it's all a placebo anyway.
• My vinyl sounds no better than my digital when played over Bluetooth.
• It's about the music not the system.
• Go out and listen to some live music.

Edited 45 minutes ago by prowla