Spend $15,000 to spin records?!?!

by Blair Lovern

DMN has a fascinating review of a turntable that costs what we in the trade call "a butt load" or something like that.

You must be kidding me?

The Dallas Morning News has a fascinating review of a turntable that costs what we in the trade call "a butt load" or something like that.

Bottom line: It "sounds very, very good."

Excuse me? If I were to pay $15,000 for a box that plays stuff that once got someone to grab Thomas Edison by the lapels and scream, "WOW!" it must sound better than a good with two very's attached. Something like that better kick everything's ass back to China. And when I say "everything" I mean to include all that is known to man, including abstract thought, myths, half-truths, wishes, hopes, dreams and even China itself. Oh yeah, and it must be made of solid gold, contain jewels and valuable pirate coins and print money that can never be detected by anyone in the federal government - and it must contain a warranty that if by some freak of nature a person in the federal government found out about it and I go to jail, then I must get out of jail immediately, no questions asked, no record, no nothing, plus I get a $10,000,000 annoyance fee bonus awarded to me, free breakfast at Cracker Barrel for life, free dinners at Joe T. Garcia's for life, I get the machine back and everyone goes about their business like nothing ever happened, because it also comes with a potent serum that drugs all parties involved except for me and makes them forget everything that just happened except everything that didn't involve me and this $15,000 thing.

From what I can gather, it doesn't do any of that.

Staff
Verified User
Anonymous

David Gouldin, says:

Haven't spent much time around hardcore audiophiles, have you Blair? $15k for a top notch piece of analog equipment like this is not unreasonable. I'm not going to be buying one ... but you have to realize that quality audio gear costs a lot of money, especially analog stuff. If you have a hard time swallowing the cost of a nice turntable, try researching the cost of high end 2" tape machines. And if you gawk at that, don't even bother looking at vintage Neve gear. You might have a stroke.

Verified

3 years, 3 months ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Blair Lovern, says:

Yeah, you are correct. I am not really an audiophile when it comes to listening. But specifically I am into guitars and, generally, know what the music industry offers its customers. Do you know how much I have drooled over a pristine, real 65 Super Reverb? Man, it's been a lot of drool. But I'm not going to buy one for reasons I won't bother with here.

I've had those Fender blackface/silverface/CyberTwin/vintage/new ash/alder/poplar/rosewood/mahogany/Made in Mexico/Made in Korea/Made in the USA arguments so many times with folks, talked to all kinds of people with all kinds of experience, income, knowledge, etc. and know you can easily drop a lot of money for gear that some other person not into your world would think you are total nuts-o. When it comes to guitar gear, I am certifiably nuts-o.

I'm just not going to spend that much money on something that plays yesterday's technology. No wait - the 19th century's technology. It's time to move on, is my thought.

Now if you're into records and can afford this and want it, go buy it. And if you invited me to your house to see it I would say, man, that's cool. And I'd tell my friends, "Hey, so-and-so bought this pretty cool thing." (Right before I said, "WHAT AN IDIOT!")

HAHAHA! Just kidding. Er, hold on. Not really. It's just not my cup of tea, that's all.

Staff

3 years, 3 months ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

David Gouldin, says:

Now when you find yourself arguing with somebody over which $200 cable sounds more transparent, then you know you've crossed the line between discerning and just frivolous. But honestly, man ... "yesterday's technology" sounds a HELL of a lot better than a CD when played through the right gear. Digital can come as close as it wants to approximating analog, but it will always be just that: an approximation. Analog's the real deal and always has been. There are advantages and disadvantages to both, but in a direct comparison, all other things being equal, a record will beat the crap out of a CD in sound quality.

Verified

3 years, 3 months ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Blair Lovern, says:

Agreed - analog is very cool. I've never bothered with it on the listening end. I used to want a Echoplex machine really bad, for example, but the costs (not just $) to keep it operational aren't worth it to me now. Then you start going analog on everything else, get point-to-point amps, etc. and you are racking up some serious $$$. If some studio has that stuff, then fine. But on a personal level the sound difference is not worth the price to my ears. Then again, I'm not a pro so I can certainly understand the difference in thinking.

With all due respect, the DMN guy doesn't have the background to properly review ultra high-end stuff to even try to alter my thinking. And most DMN readers aren't going to buy this thing, either. This is the kind of review that belongs in Stereophile or something.

Staff

3 years, 3 months ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Blair Lovern, says:

Speak of the digital devil http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedconte...

Staff

3 years, 3 months ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

Jesse Hughey, says:

A friend of mine goes to audiophile listening parties, where guys show off their equipment. One dude's set-up cost him something like $80,000. His speaker cables alone cost more than my entire home stereo. They routinely do things like cryogenically freeze all metal components and electrical outlet boxes. But you know what makes a really good speaker cable? Just cut a length of heavy-duty electrical extension cord.