Pro-Ject Debut III or Music Hall mmf 2.2LE

lextek · 25346

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline matthewmckay

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • Posts: 103
Reply #15 on: February 27, 2012, 03:41:25 AM
I think checking out audiogon for a used table/cart combination in the sub $500 range would be a smarter approach.  You might end up with a considerably better setup for the same amount of money.

and then do yourself a favor and buy a seduction... because everyone deserves one.



Offline lextek

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • Posts: 88
Reply #16 on: March 03, 2012, 11:33:50 AM
Got caught up in the convinence of computer audio.  Now rediscovering my CDs.  Thinking about trying vinyl.  My question is an entry level (Pro-Ject Debut II w/NAD PP-2) "outperform" an older Marantz DV-8400 w/Cambridge DACMagic?
   As far as source material my taste in music has changed since I bought my LPs and some of my CDs.

Bob Lasky


Offline Noskipallwd

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
    • Posts: 353
Reply #17 on: March 03, 2012, 08:59:44 PM
Bob, once again I have to fall on the side of this topic being subjective. I have a reference series Marantz cd player, and I have stated that, to me, a little souped up 500 dollar Project RM1.3 sounds better. My suggestion is to find someone with a turntable, friend, dealer, fellow Bottlehead who will let you do some ab listening with your Marantz or an equivalent. Vinyl can be expensive, and for some, tedious. I would hate to see you spend the money only to find it is not for you.

Cheers,
Shawn

Shawn Prigmore


Offline Laudanum

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
    • Posts: 916
Reply #18 on: March 04, 2012, 03:41:50 AM
I agree with Shawn.  Very subjective.  My CD players are not "reference" but I'd spin the majority of my LP's over the CD versions and my turntables and carts are modest.    I dont think I can say that all the LP's are technically "better".  They just sound more engaging and simply sound better to me.   But my initial reference was with vinyl as my main source and I think that plays a part in what sounds "right" or "better".
« Last Edit: March 04, 2012, 06:37:21 AM by Laudanum »

Desmond G.


Offline Dr. Toobz

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
    • Posts: 432
Reply #19 on: March 04, 2012, 05:11:29 AM
I have a Marantz SA-8001, which was a highly-rated SACD player that came out around 2006. I also have the aforementioned Music Hall turntable, going in to a C4S'ed Seduction.

On this setup, there certainly are recordings that I prefer on LP, while others sound much better on CD/SACD. For example, a mint-condition, stereo copy of John Coltrane's Giant Steps sounds much more open and detailed than the remastered CD version (containing out-takes) played over the Marantz. However, when I digitized that LP (96/24) and burned the files to a CD (44.1/16), the CD I mastered sounds just as good through the Marantz as playing back the actual LP on the turntable. On the other hand, a mint copy of Rush's Moving Pictures sounds far worse on LP than an older CD pressing (pre-remaster) through the Marantz. Also, any SACD I own tends to sound as good as my vinyl setup, without the pops, crackles, and decreasing treble towards the inner part of the platter.

I have concluded that much of the difference in sound between the two instruments on my rack is probably due to differences in mastering versus attributes of a particular format or device. Vinyl's pleasing qualities are easily replicated when digitizing an LP and playing it back through the Marantz, so the vinyl is either mastered better than its commercial CD cousin, or is adding euphonic distortion to the signal that is not present in the commercial CD pressings. SACD's also tend to have much attention paid to them during the mastering stage, so it's difficult to say whether the better sound is due to the delta-sigma "DSD" encoding or the fact that somebody actually paid attention to the audio before slapping it onto a disc. In my opinion, a lot of older vinyl albums sound "better" than the later CD versions for that same reason - the margin of error for mastering is far smaller on vinyl than it is on CD, which is why it's common to get a nicer-sounding, less compressed version of a new recording on LP and a brickwalled, "loudness war" version on CD. Metallica's 2008 album is such an example. The tonearm would literally leap out of the grooves if somebody tried to master an LP that way!

I'm just old enough to have bought my first albums as records, so I think that may factor into why I've held onto my vinyl setup. However, if everything were offered on carefully-mastered SACD's, I'm not sure I would bother. The fragility, limited play time, surface noise, and finickiness of vinyl can be frustrating, which is why in the past 5 or so years I've tended to digitize and archive any new LP acquisitions and listen to the high-res digital copy on a DAC, or burn a 44k version to a CD. All the things I liked about the record are still there, with the benefit of the record staying in great condition on my shelf.




Offline Wanderer

  • Full Member
  • ***
    • Posts: 210
Reply #20 on: March 04, 2012, 05:28:38 AM
Got caught up in the convinence of computer audio.  Now rediscovering my CDs.  Thinking about trying vinyl.  My question is an entry level (Pro-Ject Debut II w/NAD PP-2) "outperform" an older Marantz DV-8400 w/Cambridge DACMagic?
   As far as source material my taste in music has changed since I bought my LPs and some of my CDs.


Only partly on topic. Don't know the Pro-Ject table but have heard NAD PP-2 and found it nothing special. I was surprised by this because "in the day" I worked for shop that sold NAD when the 3020 came out. The phono stage in that intergrated was quite impressive while the newer PP2 really just sounds like a "same-old-same-old" mass market add-on.  Cambridge 620p is better bet by a long shot if going low cost solid state.

I have built a Bottlehead Seduction and that is, of course, in a whole different league.       

Hate to see you deside against LPs because you did not give them a fair listen with decent electronics.   

Kevin R-M