The love/mostly hate here for Crosley

It does confuse me seeing people as I have in line at my record store (why oh why do they insist on having these junk tables laying around?) an "executive crosley" under one arm, and like $200 in new vinyl under the other. I'm always trying to explain, there's a sort of minimum line to cross performance wise for a turntable to really be worth your money and time. Materials, design, quality control in manufacture all require a certain cost to achieve it!

That said, I think its rude to insinuate that women are more disrespectful of it than men by nature. I have been to many HiFi stores demoing equipment at a price point that you would think came a long with a certain level of experience from the retailers, yet I commonly see them doing all kinds of silly things to records, the most common being the 'hold it a like a dead rat by the tail' thing....

 

Although I have talked someone out of buying something like this, I primarily think it's great when people enjoy music, really enjoy it and get into it, and if the device of their choosing happens to be a Crosley, who am I to object...

 

My first record player was, literally, a Mickey Mouse record player. The tonearm was Mickey's arm. It was dreadful, but I loved it at the time.

 

This made me laugh out loud.

Sadly.

 

I think the big appeal of the Crosley is the portability of it, the all-in-one nature. Picture a kid at college wanting to get into vinyl (which I think is pretty typical these days, right?) What, are they gonna go out and buy a whole piece-by-piece system and kill half the space in their dorm room and like $1000+ with it? Probably not. But an all-in-one lets them get it done in minimal space with minimal fuss.

So yeah, I TOTALLY get the appeal of the product. I just wish there was a better functioning option out there at that price range. An all-in-one isn't a terrible thing in and of itself. But a Crosley sure is a terrible thing.

Why don't we get a Kickstarter going and develop an all-in-one that doesn't suck? Sure it would likely cost more than a Crosley, but not THAT much more, right? I'm sure someone who cared about audio quality could get one out there for around $200.

 

All in one that doesn't suck can likely be done for lots of $$$$$. Remember, $500 didn't buy you much of a console in 1976 money. Today's newly manufactured ceramic cartridges are horrid rubbish. Quality costs money. So, I seriously doubt $200 will net you a quality all in one which does not ruin records, $200 in 1977 money sure didn't. And that is back when it took closer to $500-$650 in separate components to buy a decent basic integrated amplifier or basic receiver, a pair of decent efficient speakers, and a competent turntable and magnetic cartridge new on average.

 

I think you can get it done without ruining records, yes. As someone pointed out, you can take a Crosley and add a diamond and basically add only $10 or $20 in costs.

It doesn't need to SOUND great or be great quality; it just needs to not ruin your records. And for $200, you should be able to do that. Again, space and portability is the issue for most of these kids buying these things. NOT audio quality. What you and I would look for in a portable and what THEY are looking for in a portable are completely different things.

 

There is a thread of photo of rock stars playing records. There were many showing un sleeved records stacked all over the floor

 

Yeah

Pono should make one

 

It's not what the stylus is made of that's damaging records. It's the high tracking force, and you can't do without that in a system that has a loudspeaker built into it. It wouldn't be expensive to upgrade a Crosley with a magnetic cartridge using a lower tracking force, but when you turn the volume up the records will skip.

Instead of starting with a Crosley, let's say we start with an Orbit. That's $180 including a cartridge. Now we build in a small solid-state amp with phono preamp. In the lid we'll stash a pair of speakers, something like those little ones Radio Shack used to sell (Minimus 7 and their successors). A design challenge would be to make it portable so it could be carried around without the platter coming off and destroying the tonearm and cartridge. The speakers should connect with banana plugs, because that's easy.

Could something like this be made cheaply enough to sell at $300? I think you'd have a winner at that price. That's the base model; you could offer more expensive ones with tuner and/or CD player. Maybe a subwoofer option.

 

I think the $300 tag will turn them off. It's what can you produce under $150 that will win them over. The high tracking force is not good, but it's the cart that's REALLY doing the damage!

 

Sure, some people won't spend $300, but for those who might, there's no single unit they can buy. Which cart should Crosley be using, keeping in mind that you need the higher tracking force, and if you go magnetic you have to include a preamp in your under-$150 price?

 

Hmmm, not knowin

Without knowing what the tracking force is and wondering if it matters. Can they not have a diamond tipped one manufactured for them to their specs? If they have the buying power a change in the type of rock used should not increase the cost that much(?).

 

The Crosley needs a better tone arm with better bearings and a magnetic cartridge to not ruin records. And get the tracking force down to 3 grams. Which may be difficult to do for $200. Might be doable for $300. A diamond alone won't cure the issue. Arm needs to be less crude and accept a decent magnetic cartridge (also will need a preamp/RIAA stage to do).

A Shure budget cartridge like a M35x or M 44-7 or relative would be great here (the budget Audio-Technica conical equipped cartridge another good option tracking in that force range). Which would be happy tracking around 2.5-3 grams. The present ceramic cartridge Crosley uses is very poor. Stylus alone won't improve it. Their compliance is not consistent from sample to sample. That cartridge is now very erratic quality control wise.

So, my proposal is a better way to improve the Crosley. It will cost more but will be a real improvement, and cope with the tracking issues Crosley has and the record wear. The present Crosleys track 6-7 grams force and the tonearm is crude and clumsy. Ceramic cartridges made today are too inconsistent quality to be an option here.

 

Methinks, you're thinking too big. Most of the damage comes from the contact point, a diamond will cut that down by a great magnitude. And it will last longer. A great deal of damage occurs because the cart wears out so fast. And you are thinking of existing carts, the cart needs to work with their fixed mount arm, and maybe, just maybe a higher end model with a P-Mount cart. These only need to play LP's and not do a lot of damage for the next owner of the LP. The typical Crosley owner probably rarely spins vinyl anyway. I own vinyl that i played on a crappy Sony badged stacker BSR with "flip style" stylus that still play/sound wonderful. But, I kept them clean and played the diamond side of my "flipper" stylus.

 

Is that the new vpi player?

 

Slick Willie, when your Sony was built, there were still decent ceramic cartridges manufactured. Today, there is not. You could go buy 12 of the cartridges used in Crosley phonographs, and 4-6 of them would have such stiff cantilevers they'd chew up a styrene 45 single in one play. That cartridge (and a few similar offerings newly produced, all have the same issues). As you would have if you still used that Sony and had to replace your cartridge today. That is why I suggested what I suggested. It's the only viable way. For the P mount cartridge to be used, the tonearm on the Crosley would have to be upgraded even more than my suggestion. I was thinking the cheapest consistently decent cartridge which was rugged enough for newbies, and had a chance on an altered, improved Crosley arm. If this was 10 years ago, I'd have chosen the Stanton 500 AL heavy duty DJ cartridge (which would have been even easier) not to mention cheaper and maybe could have been used on the existing Crosley arm design. Talk to Gary Stork at V-M Audio Enthusiasts, he sees the current ceramic cartridge quality issues a lot with his customers. He is at www.thevoiceofmusic.com

 

No, it doesn't retail for $1000! What was VPI thinking with that new one? Really? At that price point - I don't know what else to say....

 

OK, maybe I am confused, if they had a stylus that would work on their fixed mount arms with a diamond, would that not help a lot? Where is the "ceramic" coming into play?

 

Well that is the brainchild of the new president of vpi. You would have to ask him.

Sometimes change and expansion can have drastic and horrendous results with a brand. I have a feeling vpi will be one of those companies where the Golden years were the HW ones not the MW ones.

 

The ceramic cartridges made today have a high amount of defectives with either too stiff stylus cantilevers and hardened up, rigid suspension (which ruin records fast) or dead. The company overseas who makes these doesn't care about improving them. This is a known fact on vintage phono and radio forums. Which is what I am talking about. The issues Crosley faces are also faced by owners of vintage record players as well. I remember when there were truly good ceramic cartridges available which tracked great at 2 grams (Zenith/CBS Laboratories Micro-Touch) and reasonable output. Go see YouTube and radiotvphononut's channel. He talks about this a lot as he repairs a lot of vintage record players. The quality and dependability of ceramic phono cartridges is far from what it used to be in the 1960's and 1970's peak years.

 

Well, McLover, if you feel all is lost with the ceramic with a diamond route, then all is lost. To go MM or MI, would be too cost prohibitive, IMO. Might as well go with what I feel is the finest cheap table, a Music Hall USB-1. But then what does one play it on.............still $500 to play vinyl - not going to happen for this demographic. A "better" ceramic diamond tipped cart is the only alternative I see, and that adds cost also.

 

I don't hate ceramic cartridges. Good ones anyway. But mistracking and too heavy tracking forces ruin records. No Stereo record needs to be played at more than 4 grams tracking force. And needs acceptable compliance. Mistracking ruins records. What "better" Ceramic cartridge is there which record player manufacturers can buy? Answer, there is not. This is not the day when there were makers like Electro-Voice, Tetrad, Euphonics, Sonotone, and similiar who made respectable quality ceramic cartridges. The Audio-Technica AT 3400 conical (1 1/2-3 gram tracking force) is a $20 cartridge. A cheapo IC phono preamp can be done for $10 in parts. Another $30-$35 can improve the tonearm enough to use it. Which means our youth will stick with records and enjoy them for life. And not have their grooves chiseled out of them. And with Leetac's (Crosley's real manufacturer in China's buying power, those prices can be slashed. P.S. I like better old consoles and compacts (quite a number have ceramic cartridges in them). The Zenith Micro-Touch, the other V-M made changers in them which tracked at 2 grams, had good response, and gentle on records, the Sylvanias, the Magnavoxes, the Motorolas, and their ilk I love greatly. So, please consider that.