Best Hardware for Classical Music

True.

You can read about it here: http://mypipeorganhobby.blogspot.com/2009/05/saint-sulpiceparis.html


If my comment was construed by anyone as a thread crap please accept my apology.

 

The husband of one of my wife's friends is remodeling his house to incorporate two pipe organs.

 

Not by me, rather the opposite. Far to many people use the simulacrum as the ideal, instead of the real thing.

 

1970 was the year of the Beethoven Bicentennial -- a big deal at the time. (DGG was releasing a near-complete Beethoven discography for $299.50) I was a senior in high school, spending all my money from part-time & summer jobs on audio gear and records. Subscribed to both Stereo Review and High Fidelity. Learning audio basics and reading the music reviews were the best part of those magazines (oh, and Rodriguez' cartoons!)...
But where have those great music reviewers all gone? David Hall, James Goodfriend, Bernard Jacobson, George Jellinek, Martin Bookspan, Eric Salzman, Irving Kolodin... yeah, gone, along with most of the classical music industry.

But speaking of Hardware (ahem!), those magazines put the "face" on the brands that their classical-leaning reviewers felt were prime. It seemed like every one of them used a Shure V-15 cartridge, for example.

 

Part of why the Shure 97xe is my daily driver. I have owned a lot of different cartridges, including a couple of high-output moving coil cartridges from Sumiko and Audio Technica and moving magnets from ADC, Empire, Pickering, Stanton + moving iron from Grado. I keep coming back to the Shure cartridges for a variety of reasons. Have to admit that #1 is the ability to cheaply and easily swap out the stylus. I do needledrops for others, make sure that the styli are in good condition. The other reason is that the tonal balance of the Shure cartridges is closer to reality than what I've heard from most other cartridges, many of which tend to exaggerate the presence range or the treble. Finally, they do track well, not always the case with "High End" cartridges.

 

No argument from me there. I used a Shure M91ED in my earliest turntables. (Still have it, but needs a new stylus.)
I have a Shure 97xe on a removable mount that slips into one of my Empire 'tables. I alternate between it and a Denon DL-103R, which has similar characteristics (though is MC). Very smooth and honest, particularly in the mid-range frequencies. And, as you say, a great tracker.

 

My first 'real' turntable was an AR XA with a Shure M91ED cartridge. Jico makes replacement styli for the 91 as well as the 97. Someday I'll be flush enough to get the Jico SAS stylus for my 97xe.

 

Ahh... the AR turntable. A classic! Alas, I started out with an H.H.Scott 2506 receiver that had a Garrard turntable mounted on top (w/Pickering cartridge). Soon upgraded to a Garrard SL72B, which I ordered through the Lafayette catalog. For 1 cent, they threw in an Empire 888e (I think) cartridge. It didn't take long to determine I needed a better cartridge, so I bought the Shure M91ED. Upgraded to a Kenwood amp and used its phono input...
Also had a pair of H.H.Scott S-10 speakers that sounded excellent with classical music -- very rich bass and smooth mid-range. Wish I still had them.

 

My first system was that AR AX, AR amp [integrated] and a pair of AR-3's. Reading and re-reading Consumer's Reports convinced me that was the ultimate. The AR-3's had bass galore and a notch in the presence/lower treble band that sucked out some of the pops and clicks and ticks. Large Advents did most of the same tricks, but rolled off the rest of the top octaves as well.

The speakers I'm listening to the most these days is voiced in a similar fashion, the Infinity 2500:



The bass goes down to 40hz. Being a ported design, it's more efficient than the AR's and Advents. The upper octaves are in place but a little lower in output than most speakers. I'd say that sort of tonal balance is 'right' for classical music, a little more distant and smooth sounding than what would work for rock.

 

My name is TonyACT and I don't have a turntable

 

Did manage to do a number of recordings as assistant for recording engineer [and unknown patron saint of early music] Peter Nothnagle. A couple of sessions were recorded at the home of someone who struck gold in Silicon Valley, built a room for a pipe organ. Good room for recording vocals [which is why it was used].

 

I find it interesting that this thread is overwhelmingly about vinyl. I own nice gear for vinyl and CD playback (by way of a server). Almost all of my listening to classical is via the music server. I like the total absence of a break in the music and the total lack of ticks and pops (a MUCH bigger issue with classical music on vinyl because of the huge dynamic range between softer and louder passages).

Most importantly, one simply cannot get recent issues on vinyl; if you want new recordings and new music by living composers, one MUST have a digital setup. Most of the recordings that were issued on vinyl have been reissued on CD; I have FAR fewer lp recordings that are unavailable on CD than I have CDs that were never issued on vinyl. Also, unlike popular music, the current recordings of classical music have consistently very good sound; companies like Channel Classics, BIS, Chandos, Harmonia Mundi, turn out really nice sounding recordings. Many of the older labels, like DG, have also upped their game. DG is a particularly interesting label. They turned out very important recordings in the 1970's and 1980's that were made into some pretty nasty sounding lps; many of the digital reissues are significantly better sounding.

The really BIG plus for collecting classical on vinyl is the low price of software (aside from audiophile reissues). There are few recordings where one would pay more than $1.00 per album. This allows one to collect a substantial library for little money. Used CDs continue to demand significantly more than this amount.

 

I will have to admit that I am a tinkerer with audio. Manage to find gear cheap or for free, hook it up in weird ways:



Right now the garage system is configured differently. But the old, funky, Magnapan panels and the a/d/s/ 400 speakers [the little ones at the top of the stack] are still the core of the system. Now I have them hooked up to an Onkyo SR 606 AVR, with the Maggies and ADS speakers configured as front left and right. My Maganapans have the treble panels rusted out—what can I say? They were free. So, I have bypassed the crossover and now have the mid/bass panels hooked up directly to the amp. I'm not sure exactly when the Magnapan panel's treble collapses. I'd guess in the vicinity of 6khz. In any case, the Magnapan mid/bass panels contribute a lot of energy in the lower mids, flesh out the sound with cello, double basses, baritone voices. Manages to produce a more convincing illusion of a concert hall. As the Onkyo SR 606 is a surround receiver, there's a pair of Paradigm Titans in the back as surrounds. There's a cheap, powered sub [not seen] set up to produce the bottom octave. The mid bass of the Maggies is probably their best feature in this configuration. Coupling them to the a/d/s 400 speakers results in enough treble to fill in the rest of the audio spectrum. The a/d/s speakers have no beaming in the treble, are nearly as inefficient as the Maggie panels, so they work together well.

As soon as I clean up the space, I'll take a new photo.

 

Well, for me my Thorens TD150 with stock arm and Shure V15 mk3 using IFI phono stage .
It is connected to Leak TL12plus x2 via a Tisbury passive pre.
Soundstage is large and deep,bass is-full but quite neutral. Clarity is striking!

 

I recall the AR-3a was THE speaker of choice when I was putting my first system together... though out of my $ range then. Advents got good reviews, but always with the caveat about being power hungry.

You and I appear to be on the same wavelength about equipment for classical music. I've attended many concerts and recitals, using that experience to assemble gear that comes close to what my mind's ear recalls. Early on, I felt that my system (and many I auditioned) had too much high frequency "sizzle" (emphasis), mid-range coloration, and low-end bloat. It sounded superb for rock and most jazz, but classical instruments never came across entirely convincing.

Decades of upgrades and auditions later, I settled on the British KEF Monitor Series RDM3:

Specs sound surprisingly like your Infinity, as a reflex/ported design with a solid, tight bass and freq. range of 40-18k hz (+/- 3db). Most important was the ultra-flat midrange without coloration. Piano, string instruments, and especially vocals, sound completely natural and so very "right there" in the room. There is no treble emphasis, which makes them seem "rolled off" at times, yet the highs come through bright and clean when the recording calls for it. (I have a pair of nice Quad speakers for my home theater system, yet these KEFs will reveal higher frequencies than the Quads when playing the same music.)

Also important was speaker efficiency. I power these with a tube amp (Cayin A-88t) and enjoy it's warmth--though it took some tube rolling and a bit of bias tweaking to get it to open up properly.

 

I love all the reality posters!

But I'm envious-- this is far better than my garage system.
Do you actually get a car in there, too?

 

A TD150 from 50 years ago... wow.
Are you the original owner? Have you restored it?

 

Ha!

 

It depends on one's history with collecting music. By the time CDs emerged in the early 80's, I already owned about 2,000 records (vinyl as you call it). I wasn't about to chuck all that music and repurchase it again on CDs--many of which sounded too bright and brittle, compared to the original LP. Some of my original LPs have never appeared on CD; some that have lack the original artwork and liner notes.

Granted, there are newer recordings/releases that are only on CD... and, yes, some older recordings have been remastered (particularly in recent years) to sound better on CD. For those, I have a CD player.

 

The AR-3 was better 'voiced' than the AR-3a. The music appreciation class at College of the Sequoias had 4 AR-3a's in surround [1973/4]. The 3a had the upper mids a little more suppressed. Overall impression was 'muted'.

While the voicing of your Kefs is probably similar to my Infinity 2500s, there's little doubt the Kefs are superior speakers. the Infinitys are simple 2-way speakers. Right now, they're for a bedroom system. Java is relaxing* to the strains of Musica Antiqua Koln playing early German Baroque music on a Peters reissue of a Emi/Odeon original:


* This is about as relaxed as Java ever gets.

 

The simulacrum is better for me for rock concerts or any amplified music that is played too loud. I've been to an amplified jazz concert that was too loud with ear plugs. For classical though, the real thing beats a recording even when I'm seeing a mid-range orchestra like the NSO.

 

All well and good to say that attending concerts beats recordings but George Szell, Klemperer, Monteux, Rudolf Sserkin, Lili Kraus, Vegh and many others whose performances I enjoy aren't giving concerts anymore.

I'm a bit surprised at the way this thread turned into a discussion of old turntables and old speakers.

My recordings are all on computer files with software that makes it easy for me to find and play what I wasnt to. Once I passed 1000 CDs, I couldn't remember everything I had;the JRiver software does a flawless job.

In our home office, powered Audioengine A5s do a fine job for near field listening. In our library, we've used 3-way active Waveform Mach 17 speakers for about 15 years. Amps have come and gone in that system. link to picture below.

https://naturelover.smugmug.com/Other/Library-music-system/i-spgj64q/A

 

And to queue up in my listening room performances from artists of this caliber who are performing today is simply incredible.

 

No

no. I bought it about 6 months ago ad my 401 is awaiting new plinth. Is used with Sme4 and Benz glyder.
Had big plans to replinth it( thorens) and get platter polished etc, change the arm which has a poor reputation.

Thia is what i have done.
1. Thiroughly cleaned and polished.
2 . It cleaned up amazingly well.
3. Cleaned main bearing ,and re- lubricated with Liquid Bearings(from U.S.)
4.fitted phono sockets to plinth, thus enabeling me to experiment with cabling for pf loading.
5.adjusted the springs to achieve 20 second bounce and level arm etc
6. Obtained 2nd headshell. Ortofon 520 mounted in original.
Fitted new van den hul wires(unsolder original wires and clean and polish the 1 mm pins)
7. Fitted V15 mk3 body . To this i bought a Jico vn35 stylus(not sas)
Aligned. Set at 1 gram.
Set pf at 450 and 47k on IFI phono stage.(i used Van den hul 102 hybrid interconnect between turntable and IFI)
All i can say is that i was not prepared for the superb sound quality that it produced.
The Ortofon 520 is lovely, but the V15, wow. It just sounds right, VERY neutral! Always in control, deep clean bass and treble up with the best
I honestly could not wish for better, You know the old adage, its like having a whole new record collection.
Not sure whst to do about 401.
I mean that the Thorens/V15 has exceeded the sum of its parts, at a fraction of the cost of running 401 and Benz Glyder.
Record wear is an interesting subject, as the Shure tracks at 1 gram and the Benz at 1.8. And the shure reveals damage done by costly MC,s used over the years. As till v15 i have always been a mc man.
Cost aside, the Thorens has taught me something, to use your ears and make your own choice based on the sound produced.
Very happy man!