Remembering the family audio system

A "Throwback Thursday" memoir

As threatened, er, promised a while back, I decided to write about the audio system my parents had when I was young. It was not an audiophile dream come true. But it had importance for me. It is the first system I remember. And it was the one that we used for many years, and made the idea of playing records a normal thing.

The system was a wedding gift. It was pretty simple: a cheap Garrard record changer (probably very low end, if not absolute rock bottom of the line), and a Panasonic stereo receiver and speaker system.

The receiver and speakers were an integrated system. One speaker actually held the receiver electronics. A lot like powered monitor speakers of today which often put the electronics inside one of the speakers. If I recall right, however, there was an option to use the receiver with totally different speakers via a jumper on the back panel.

The Panasonic was also probably very low end. There was exactly one input on the back panelm usable for tape or ceramic phono cartridge. But, even then, there were plenty of useless features included. There was motorized tuning. (Might be helpful if there was a remote of some sort, but there was no remote. It would have been faster and better to just tune manually, rather than stand by the receiver, holding the tuning button down.) There was a gauge that showed the "balance". Presumably it indicated where the loudest sound was coming from. Which you could tell by ear pretty easily.

On a plus side, though, the enclosures were pretty solidly made, and were probably real wood.

My parents apparently had the system as stock for about a year, and then upgraded. Someone they knew added a different cartridge--a Shure M44, I think--and a phono preamp. Such phono preamps were not rare--I've seen them advertised in old ads for people like my parents who upgraded to a moving magnet cartridge on a system that was too low end for a moving magnet cartridge input. But I like to think my parents were ahead of the times--they had a "phono stage" before 1970!

And that was the last upgrade that system ever saw. There never was a tape deck. (Even though I tried to sell my mother on the idea of a cool looking Panasonic 8 Track deck that looked like it was from the same era at a neighbor's yard sale!) There definitely was never a CD player. The only change that ever got proposed was a new record changer. The old changer never worked as a changer in all the years that I remember. That was probably for the best as far as preserving records was concerned. But I recall my father seeing an ad for a record changer on sale at Radio Shack. We didn't get it, and it's probably a good thing as far as record life was concerned. (Particularly since that changer was a BSR with a ceramic cartridge.)

This system probably would not win any audiophile awards, although aspects were probably better than a lot of mass market dreck of today. Certainly the build quality was better. I suspect the Garrard was also a better turntable than any cheap mass market turntable of today. It was idler wheel drive, so it would probably have had better speed stability than today's rock bottom belt drive turntables. My parents also probably did well in getting that Shure cartridge--I have to think if nothing else it was gentler on records than whatever was there originally. It would have sounded better, too, at least in absolute terms. Whether the better performance was noticeable through the Panasonic speakers is another question.

But even though the system wasn't audiophile dream, it did get used. It might have been used more if it had been a better system, of course. But my mother apparently played records pretty much daily while I was enjoying supervised play time as a small child. Later, I can remember her listening to records some evenings after dinner. And my mother started broadening her musical horizons when that system was still in service. So...as I say, that system has value in that it established the idea of playing records as a normal, every day thing.

The system lasted until I was a teenager. And then the problems started. The first problem was that my mother decided to move the system to a real stereo stand. Up to that point, it had lived on our dining room buffet. (I have no idea why it ended up there... I have to wonder if it wasn't originally a move to keep the system out of my reach.) The stereo stand looked nice--real wood!--but was not super solid. So the record player started skipping. (This was before I knew much about the care and feeding of turntables. Today I'd take one look, and at least have a pretty good guess what the problem is!) Then, not long after, the receiver picked up a hum--probably a failing power supply capacitor. So the system fell silent.

After the system was taken out of service, I had some idea of using the changer for 78 RPM records, but it was one of those projects that I never got around to doing. The closest I came was trying it one time. I think I ran it through a console mono unit I had (using the old phono preamp that my parents had used). I didn't have a 78 RPM stylus, but didn't care--the record was a battered, last survivor in a set of Rachmaninoff's Piano Concerto No. 2. Battered record aside, however, there was something that grabbed me. Was there something in the system--the idler wheel drive turntable or the tube amp in the console--that better served the music than the 80s rack system a few yards away? (I'd speculate yes, but can't answer for certain.)

No matter...while I'm sure I'd find that system my parents had appalling to my audiophile ears of today, there is a certain amount of sentiment. I have many happy memories of listening to records on that system.

Smartphone headphone jacks going away

Rumors flying about the Internet claim that the Apple iPhone 7 will have no headphone jack. So iPhone 7 buyers, be prepared to pry open your wallet for either new headphones, or an adapter.

And Android users...quit laughing at the iPhone users. You're probably next to lose a headphone jack. (Indeed, at least one Android phone has no headphone jack today.)

The reality is that the headphone jack will be going bye-bye on phones sooner rather than later. No headphone jack can mean thinner phones. No headphone jack could also good for the phone battery—the battery could probably be smaller and yet keep the phone powered longer.

And it's argued that audiophiles could benefit. Digitally connected headphones might sound considerably better than similar headphones powered from a headphone jack. Headphones won't be at the mercy of the limited headphone jack power, or “it was on sale when we designed it!” phone DACs. Headphones could also benefit hugely by being designed as a system, where the headphone will be matched to a known DAC and a known amp.

But a part of me mourns the passing of the headphone jack, anyway. There is huge convenience in having a standard that works across a wide range of equipment...from home to portable, and old to new. I've used my Grado SR60 headphones on everything from portable CD players to 1970s stereo receivers. It works on everything I've tried with (even if they could sound better with some sources, of course). And I've never needed anything more than a cheap adapter.

The transition away from conventional headphone jacks come at an interesting time. Currently, I'm using a $20 RadioShack “Its Just a Phone!” special. But I contemplate off and on moving to a smart phone, partly to have a portable music player.

A few months  ago, I was sorely tempted by a smart phone that was on clearance at a local store. It was a Windows phone, and since few want a Windows phone, it lingered...and lingered...and lingered. As it lingered, the price kept dropping until it hit something like $15. It hit something like $15. I had a struggle: that was a cheap price for a phone that got good reviews on the Internet, but I have zero interest in a Windows phone. Plus, of course, there was the question if the price would drop under $10. Answer: no. The two people in America who are interested in a Windows phone apparently stopped by that store. Either that, or the store gave up and tossed the phones in the Dumpster, saying: “Enough is enough!”

More recently, I've been having car troubles, which means I have had to use the local bus service to get around for the last month or two. The more I use the bus, the more I think it would be nice having a smart phone. I could do light Internet surfing. Plus I could listen to my own music, rather than the noisy bus engine, or that passenger who spends a 45 minute trip loudly arguing with an imaginary companion.

Assuming I did get a smart phone, there would be the temptation to keep any headphone purchase simple. Something “good enough” for background. Simple means cheap. I am, after all, the Mobile Home Audiophile. But it would be interesting to have headphones that could connect digitally, and—hopefully—perform better with a smart phone than standard headphones plugged into a standard jack. After all, I am the Mobile Home Audiophile.

We'll see what happens, I guess.

Thinking about my late mother

Recently, I've been thinking of my late mother. She was not an audiophile, at least not in the standard sense. But she could hear the difference quality audio makes. More on that later...

My earliest record playing memories involve the family stereo system. I may talk about this system for some Thursday Throwback Memoir. For now, suffice it to say that it was pretty much rock bottom. My mother played records a fair amount when I was young, low end system or not.

I have memories of some evenings when she'd sit in the darkened dining room listening to a record. I have one memory of us playing one record one day when I was home from school. Was I sick that day? Vacation? I can't recall—all I can recall was that day we played a record. She once told me that she'd often play records while supervising me as I played as a very small child.

What impresses me now is the diversity of her record collection. Some of it might cause some to roll their eyes—she had several 1970s Neil Diamond records. But there was also Beethoven, Carmen (her favorite opera), and flamenco guitar. As the years passed, she got very interested in a variety of world music.

Listening to some of her records helped me cope the month after she died. Some were old favorites she'd had since forever. Some were actually ones she'd never listened to that I'd bought for her at a yard sale. Her health was seriously bad at that point, but buying those records represented an act of hope—maybe things would get better. As it turned out, they ended up being more for my healing than they were for her.

As I commented before, she was not an audiophile, but she did appreciate quality equipment. As I mentioned before, I dragged her along with me when I went to hear my first good system when I was a teenager. She was more likely, I thought, to be taken seriously than an obvious high school student. And, at the time, she was talking about a new audio system. Not at the Linn Axis level, but it made a good excuse to go and hear one.

Funny thing, but I don't think she expected to hear much difference between a Linn Axis-based system and what she was used to. And yet, she immediately heard a huge difference. Proof that you don't need to be an audiophile for years, or have rarefied golden ears, to hear a difference. At least between “good quality” and “mass market dreck.”

Indeed, looking back, I'd trust her reaction more than mine in one way: she was less likely to get seduced by technological claims. She had about zero interest in the technology—all she cared about was playing records.

This last thought reminds me of something else: she never, ever had a CD player. Part of this was likely a dislike of modern technology in general. She also never had a computer, or, for that matter, any number of other modern gizmos. But she was convinced about the performance of LPs on a good system. Her only expressed interest in CD was probably a nod to “new releases” and also the thought that there might be value in a CD changer for background applications.

She also never had a quality system that was hers and only hers. I think I may have had an idea of upgrading what I ended up with, and sending the old pieces her way. But...there were zero upgrades. Plus her health started deteriorating about the time the good system appeared, and not long after, she wasn't able to live alone. Given that, it was just more practical to have one good system that could live in the living room. (As opposed to audiophiles who have a good system under lock and key. And then a cheap system the troublesome people they live with family can use.)

My mother has been gone for many years now. But I still think of her, and she still has influence on my audiophile life. She was the one who made playing records routinely a normal thing. Her willingness to expand musical horizons was a good example. And I'm indebted for her endorsement of quality audio. She could hear the value, and knew the importance of buying quality. Unlike my grandmother, who upon hearing about high end audio (particularly the prices), said something sarcastic like: “What are you going to do? Just listen to records all the time?”

I miss my mother, but at least the memories and a legacy lives on...

Tape recording

A "Throwback Thursday" memoir

I've been thinking about tape recording a lot this week. It's probably because of an article I read that mentioned that Monday was the 70th anniversary of the first public demonstration of tape recording in the US. A huge event—tape changed the audio industry forever. It was both good and bad—it gave flexibility to recording companies, but helped open the door for the overly processed recordings we all know and hate.

Tape also had a profound influence on home users, particularly the humble cassette tape. Indeed, cassette tape was a major format for teenagers when I was growing up in the 80s. Indeed, I imagine some teenagers then had a record collection of exactly zero, but had countless tapes. Teens of the 1980s could use cassette everywhere, unlike records. One could play tapes at top volume on the family stereo system when the parents were out. One could take tapes over to a friend's for that wild Friday night party. One could play a tape in the car while cruising around town. Or one could play a tape in class on a Sony Walkman in hopes of drowning out that boring teacher's lecture.

My cassette listening was limited to home. I didn't have my own car when I was in high school, and for some reason I think Walkman was prohibited at school. I don't even recall having any interest in having a Walkman.

For that matter, I wasn't much into prerecorded cassettes, unless there was no other option. Almost all the prerecorded cassettes I had back then were some sort of “low-fi” voice material. For example, there was a period I was interested in old time radio, and cassette was the common distribution format for old radio shows.

Most of my music tapes were recorded myself off of records I owned. Indeed, I was a good example of another trend of that era: the person who'd buy a record, but immediately record it onto tape. The tape was the daily driver format; the record was a seldom-used master format.

One vivid memory of that era was getting blank tapes. A local college's bookstore—where I shopped for mundane school supplies when I was in high school—had a huge barrel full of blank BASF Type 1 tapes. It seems to me they were cheaper than other tapes, plus these tapes served me well—I don't recall ever having a BASF tape fail on me. So I could go in and get a new notebook I had to have for dreary homework, and stock up on tapes. And, if I were really lucky that day, they might have a display of records on sale. (Records were not a routine item, but every now and then they'd have specials. I think they were routinely remaindered records.)

That college was also probably my introduction, indirectly, to tape in the first place. During the 1970s, my mother did some study there, and at some point she had to  get a tape player to handle some spoken word tapes. She got a cheap portable Panasonic, and I remember her surprising me with her purchase. She started playing a Neil Diamond tape (which she presumably bought with the recorder), and brought the player into the dining room. How cool! A little black box plays music! No stereo needed! Fortunately, I wasn't an audiophile then, so I didn't notice how bad the sound quality was!

As far as I can recall, I surprisingly never did much with mix tapes. Actually, it might be more accurate to say I did nothing. The closest I came was when I helped my mother tape some of her favorite records—she was sold on the idea of putting the wear on tapes. The tapes often had blank space at the end, so my mother's idea was fill up the space with a favorite song, which might come from a different record.

These home recorded tapes helped keep some music available for the period right  before I got my first good system. At that time, the only audio system I owned was an old mono console unit that was a conversation piece in my bedroom. I had an old tape deck lying around, too, that turned out to be electrically compatible with the console. It was probably not the best sound possible, but the alternative was no sound.

My interest in cassette tape ended about the time I got my first decent audio system. Indeed, I had half-known that would happen—I figured that once I had a good turntable, I'd be more interested in playing the record itself. And, as the local dealer pointed out, record wear was not a huge issue when one uses a good turntable. Indeed, I remember once asking the dealer about LAST record preservative. His response was along these lines: “I don't carry it. We carry turntables like the Linn, and when you have a Linn, you don't worry about record wear. Records don't wear out on a Linn.” Perhaps he'd overstated the case...but record wear definitely is less of an issue on any good turntable, be it a Linn LP12 or Rega RP1, than, say, a 1970s console stereo BSR. (Old joke: BSR stands for “Bound to Scratch Records.”)

So when I got a decent system, the cassettes were a casualty. I kept spoken word tapes. The music tapes I'd recorded from records a few years before went bye bye. I can't say I really ever regretted that decision, although it might be interesting to play one now just to hear how bad a tape recorded on the rack system I used in the 80s sounds to my audiophile ears of 2016!

Linn Axis turntable

A "Throwback Thursday" memoir

The Linn Axis is the single most important turntable I’ve encountered on my audiophile journey. Period.

The Linn Axis was released about 30 years ago. (Typing this makes me feel old: I remember when it was a “newly released” turntable!) At that time, Linn’s claim to fame was the Linn Sondek LP12 turntable. While they were making other products, such as speakers, the LP12 was probably the first thing people thought of when they thought of Linn. And the buyers of Linn speakers almost certainly had an LP12.

There was one small problem with the LP12. Or maybe I should say big problem: the price, which was out of the reach of many people. And so the Linn Axis was born to bring Linn turntable engineering to a new, lower price point.

The Axis was sold with a Linn tonearm—a couple of versions of the Linn Basik, and then finally the Linn Akito. It was also supposedly available without arm—at least at one point—although I have never seen any Axis that had anything but a Linn arm. Likewise, I’d guess the majority of Linn Axis buyers also bought a Linn cartridge, such as the Linn K9.

The Linn Axis got good reviews, and it seemed like many buyers were happy.

As I said earlier, the Linn Axis was the most important turntable on my audiophile journey. The reason is simply because it was the first good turntable I ever heard. I frankly heard it on somewhat of a lark. A local dealer advertised Linn turntables, and even the Linn Axis cost as much as what I thought one might spend on an entire system. Could a turntable actually be worth that much? There was only one way to find out: audition it. Although, privately, I was guessing it wouldn’t offer enough to really justify the price for “normal” people. It would be suitable only for those with a Mercedes 560 SEL, top of the line Royal Doulton for daily dishes, and so on.

So I found some records. (Somehow, I’d heard one should take one’s own records.) At the time, I was still in high school, so I dragged my mother to the dealer. I figured she’d be taken more seriously than a teenager. Plus she was even half considering buying a new audio system, so we might as well start with hearing a Linn turntable system.

At the store, the demo system ended up being a Linn Axis/NAD Monitor Series amplifier system/Linn Index speakers. The sales person dropped the first record on, and within seconds of it starting, I understood the value of this system. It wasn’t just for the mansion-dwelling crowd. It simply sounded better—at lot better—than any system I’d ever heard.

The turntable demonstrated two things. First, a good turntable gets more music off the record.  Secondly, it demonstrated that LPs were still viable sources for audio systems, even in the CD era.

After hearing that system with the Linn Axis, I set two basic goals. First, I started aspiring to have a good audio system. Secondly, I decided it would be based around a turntable like the Linn Axis.

More than 25 years later, I am a much different person in many ways. But it’s interesting to note that I still strongly value quality audio. It is simply more enjoyable to listen to a good system, and one uses it more often and for more serious listening. It’s also interesting to note that my preferred source still remains the vinyl LP.

I now wonder what would have happened if I hadn’t heard the Linn Axis that day. Would I have ever discovered quality audio? Would I have become the vinyl die-hard I am? Would I even have any records today?

Unanswerable questions... All I know is that I’m glad I did hear that system with the Linn Axis all those years back.

8-track Adventures

Note: this was written for April Fools' Day, 2016. Thus, it is not to be taken seriously!

Recently, while poking about a dusty thrift store in Seattle, I came across an old Radio Shack 8-track player. It was pure 1970s—down to the simulated walnut veneer on the case. It was only $4.95, including a stack of 8-track tapes. I bought it. I figured that it would make an interesting conversation piece in my listening room.

Of course, I couldn’t resist trying it out in my audio system. The sound was—as I expected—appallingly bad. It was so bad, in fact, that I could not bear to listen long enough to form any opinions past “this is horrible!” Although, the one problem I did note was speed instability—long notes, for example, had a tendency of noticeably wavering. Even my neighbor—who can’t hear the difference between cassette tape and CD—could hear how bad it was.

And then...the thought hit. It wasn’t surprising that it was appalling, 8-track player or not. Anything would likely sound that bad under the same circumstances. It was powered from cold after who knows how many years of storage? I’d made no effort to clean it. I was even using the supplied, well-aged interconnects! If you are going to condemn 8-track like a good audiophile, I thought, you should at least start by giving it a fair shot.

So...I cleaned the RCA connectors. Cleaned the heads. Replaced the belt. And then ran it for 24 hours straight to warm up. (An 8-track player, unlike a phono cartridge on a high end turntable, is easily run in. Just shove in the cartridge, and it will keep running forever...) I dropped it back into the system, using a pair of Nordost interconnects.

And wow! The sound improved at least 100%! Musical notes were far more stable now (probably due to the new belt). Indeed, it was impressively stable. Bass was now impressively solid.

Beyond this, it was now involving. I listened to the stack of 8-track tapes that had come with the player. With each new tape, I intended to take detailed notes. But I quickly lost myself in all the supplied musical gems, whether it was Greatest Rock Hits of 1978, or Bach.

My favorite tape was one featuring an accordion. There was so much emotion to the performance! One song touched me so deeply that I thought tears would get squeezed out of my eyes with each squeeze of the accordion.

Somehow, the 8-track player served the music. It got out of the way of the performance. The only reminder it was there would be the occasional click as the 8-tracker player changed channels.

All this—with just a cleaning and new cables! What more could I do? I got to work. New Shunyata power cord. Spikes under the 8-track player. Damping compound in the 8-track player case. The sound quality improved with each step.

In the end, the sound was staggering. Impressively stable. Deep bass. Good treble. Palpable midrange. Transparent sound. Explosive dynamics.

I couldn’t quite believe what I was hearing. A second opinion was in order. So I hauled the 8-track player to a local dealer, and compared it to turntables. The best turntables, of course, out performed the 8-track player. But we both agreed the 8-track player totally slaughtered every turntable in the $500 and under price range. It made them all sound like Fisher-Price. We had to go to go to a Rega RP6/Denon DL110 to get a turntable/cartridge combination that could compete.

Perhaps 8-track was a lot better than we’ve been giving it credit for all these years. Understandable, as I think of it, because 8-track was never heard at its best years back. Audiophiles used LPs or open reel tape. 8-track was mostly used with cheap, junky systems. Those systems restricted the performance—just like you wouldn't hear LPs at their best when played through such a system.

Or perhaps all that I said above can be explained by the fact that I'm posting this on the first of April...

Edited 4/2/16 to add note at start.

Denon DP-300F

"How much does a turntable cost these days?"

Someone (who is not an audiophile) recently asked me that question. And, like usual, it was a struggle answering it, because of all the variables involved. Are we talking new? Used? (If used, how old?) What are the quality expectations? And so on.

In this case, I mumbled something along the lines of "about $450, for a Rega RP-1." For whatever reason, the RP-1 came to mind first, although there are a lot of selling points. It has decent sound, seems to be well made (and might last 20+ years like older Rega Planar 2 turntables), but has a price that's not too horrifying for the non-audiophile.

But...perhaps I went too high. Maybe the right answer is $330 for a Denon DP-300F.

Indeed, the $330 Denon has two huge selling points for the first time buyer. (These are the people most likely to ask "how much?") It's $330 vs. $450. One thing I've noticed with people in the real world: they like their audio equipment cheap. For example, many audiophiles will see a $2,000 phono cartridge, and light up like a Christmas tree. "Wow! I bet that would sound great playing my audiophile 45 RPM records!!!!" Meanwhile, a "normal person" will shudder. "$2,000? For a needle? I bought my last system for 10% of that!!!!"

The Denon also has the selling point of convenience. It has full automation.  Hit a button and it starts playing. Hit a button and it stops. It also stops when it reaches the end of the record. Just like a CD player, except the discs are bigger. Convenience is always a selling point for non-audiophiles.

The convenience has even interested some audiophiles. I've read of many people who've bought one as a second turntable. Perhaps a bedroom system, where the auto-shutoff is handy if one falls asleep while listening to the gentle sawing of strings. But the Denon is always a second turntable. The main turntable remains the Linn LP12/VPI/whatever.

The Denon also has an advantage of some upgradibilty. The cartridge can be replaced. The built-in phono stage can be bypassed to use an external phono amp. Thus one can get started for $330, and, as funds allow, make upgrades.

I had sort of assumed the Denon might "only" be good as a second turntable. But recently, I've had a chance to hear the Denon, and even hear it some good systems. (It was one source used with Quad ESL-57 speakers that I heard a while back.) And I've been impressed. It's hard to gauge exact sound quality - I've only heard it in "other" systems, and with unfamiliar LPs. That said, what I hear suggests that many will find this turntable perfectly fine. It certainly would suit many first time buyers, and be revelation to those using a junky "plastic deck" turntable.

I also think more seasoned audiophiles might be happy. Someone who mostly uses digital, but still has a few old LPs, might be perfectly happy. And I think I could use this turntable as my primary turntable, and live to tell the tale.

Of course, the Denon has its limits. I think the Rega RP-1 would be a huge step up. But that comes at a cost of more than $100 extra, and the loss of the automation. The Denon also has a "plastic" feel, and between that, and the added complexity of the automation, I would doubt the Denon would be a 20+ year investment. (Unless used lightly.) But, while there are limits, it's worth remembering that this is a $330 turntable.

I was talking to someone recently about the Denon. He actually owns one. Like me, he has heard a lot of good turntables the last year or so. He can hear the difference between the Denon and a $2,000 Rega. And yet, he's happy with the Denon. Happy enough that when I saw him he was looking for used records to buy. Which shows the turntable is doing something right. In the end, what matters is not the detail, bass, or even suppressing surface noise as much as possible. What matters is doing a good enough job of playing music that you will actually use the turntable to play records.



Edited 1/23/18 to remove dead link.