Cheap Vinyl
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
You are currently reading a thread in /mu/ - Music
Any cheap vinyl players (under $100) that DON'T damage your records?
Pic related, it's exactly what i don't want
>>65178388
Audio Technica is the cheapest you'll get for a decent player.
>>65178388
>>65178456
Just buy a fucking used turntable that has a counterweight. I got one for free from an uncle.
Seriously. Just go on craigslist.
>>65178456
The LP120, specifically. The LP60 suffers from most of the same issues that Crosleys and the like do.
>>65178388
Your cheapest vinyl is going to run 500 USD at MINIMAL! Anything lower will significantly ruin your records. Plus you need a decent phono amp (about 300 USD) and some good speakers (400 USD mininal). Then you will have a decent and medicore sounding turntable.
>>65178388
I got a crosley and it's shit. It hasn't damaged anything yet but it makes everything sound slow and watery. Get an audio technica, save up a bit more and get the 120 it's worth it
>>65178488
>LP120
>under $100
>>65178497
Get your head out of your ass
>>65178497
You can get most of that for way cheaper lmao
>>65178507
Oh yeah, didn't see that. Well, doesn't matter - a record collection is a money pit anyway.
>>65178512
Stop being a pleb. Vinyl is not a cheap hobby to get into unless you dont cre about rue condition and audio quality of your setup.
>>65178570
Sure it's not cheap but it's not a $500 entry fee.
get something used. talk to your family members, they might be happy to see their old stuff get some use.
>>65178456
I dunno the Project elemental is budget but decent the only downside is it has no dust cover
http://www.kronosav.com/sale-29/pro-ject-elemental-entry-level-audiophile-turntable.html
>>65178661
This was just a random site I dont know what its like but that's the turntable
>>65178661
That shit is going to leave huge dents in your vinyl. No wonder its so cheap.
>>65178497
>400 minimal for speakers
If you're an idiot who thinks the more expensive it is, the better it is
>>65178735
Hows it gonna dent it
>>65178570
m8 I have a Marantz TA-165 and Pioneer DX-55 hooked up to a couple of Polks and the whole setup cost me less than $200.
It sounds great.
>>65178570
>vinyl
>hobby
buying stuff is not a fucking hobby
>>65178934
Collecting records is a hobby? Playing guitar is a hobby, but to play guitar you need to buy one, an amp, and strings? I suppose you think the only REAL hobbies are sport dont you
>>65178388
>buying vinyl
lel, how is /mu/ still falling for this meme?
>>65178996
It's cool. And girls think it's cool.
>>65179107
tok pek
>>65178497
I actually have spent many thousands of dollars on a hifi setup and I can say you're full of shit. Shop used and be smart and you can put together a good entry system with a turntable for $100-200.
>mfw when 70 dollar
It works perfectly
>family friend gifted me a fully functional turntable
>bought used Sony speakers for $5 from the thrift store
>bought a used receiver from Value Village for $10
>the most expensive thing I bought was a preamp for $45
>also bought wires for $15
>mfw I have a decent setup that cost less than a hundred bucks
nice.
>>65178996
>falling for the "falling for the vinyl meme" meme
If you don't have the money to spare for a decent system, don't buy one.
Vinyl sounds good; its about on par with FLAC if the equipment is decent and if it has been pressed from master tapes and not a CD, but its not a superior format.
The only reason to get into vinyl is to satisfy your material fetishism by buying large physical copies of the music you love. Also to support the artists.
Do not buy if you don't have the budget.
>>65178388
there's a sony one you might be able to pick up used for about 100: http://www.amazon.com/Sony-PSLX300USB-USB-Stereo-Turntable/dp/B0015HOFZI
>>65179290
When it comes to /mu/-tier poorfagging, vinyl is worse because your thrift tore LPs are gonna be worn to some degree.
>>65179317
not that dude but i'll say even though i love records you're an idiot if you're getting into it trying to get the ultimate sound quality
>>65179317
Not necessarily. The original sound quality beneath the crackle and pops is the same. Many people actually prefer old vinyl because a lot of new vinyl has horrible mastering or comes from low-quality sources
HEY GUISE IS THERE A WAY TO PLAY MY BLACK PLASTIC DISKS BY DRAGGING A DIAMOND TIPPED NEEDLE ACROSS THEM WITHOUT DAMAGING THEM???? NEED HELP
kys
>>65179503
>caring this much
you first
>>65179481
It's not the crackles and pops that get you. The record surface gets physically worn every time you play it, no matter how good a turntable and cartridge you're using.
>>65179519
>not caring about that
>paying $25 for black plastic discs
lol
>>65178735
no it won't you dufus
>>65178488
Lp60 doesn't damage records.
get a used one, make sure it has anti-skate, a counterweight and that shit
Kids.
Vinyl records were abandoned by the record industry because they were inferior as a format. Even the lowly compact disk had a higher dynamic range than a vinyl record.
http://wiki.hydrogenaud.io/index.php?title=Myths_%28Vinyl%29
>Under no legitimate circumstances will the dynamic range of vinyl ever exceed the dynamic range of CD, under any frequency, given the wide performance gap and the physical limitations of vinyl playback.
And the above article is a comparison between CDs and vinyl, never mind the lossless digital formats we have available today.
When you buy a vinyl record you're not paying for high fidelity, high quality sound, you're paying or a piece of plastic and a cardboard sleeve.
>>65179813
>When you buy a vinyl record you're not paying for high fidelity, high quality sound, you're paying or a piece of plastic and a cardboard sleeve.
Breaking news.
>>65178996
what kind of eating establishment is this
>>65179813
>When you buy a vinyl record you're not paying for high fidelity, high quality sound, you're paying or a piece of plastic and a cardboard sleeve.
oo rlly? i dint no!
>>65179813
CDs are inferior to digital download because, unlike CDs, they're not bound to Red Book formats and you can crank to a more superior quality than 16-bit/44.1kHz. With buying CDs you're also buying a piece of plastic in an acrylic case.
Of course, stuff like HDCD and SHM-CDs exist, but they cost as much, if not are much more expensive than new vinyl records, so why bother?
>>65179813
Ha! Jokes on you. I collect vinyl for the same reason my mom collected beanie babies: because I'm fucking stupid.
>>65179915
>so why bother?
That's the question I'm asking. When you can download a lossless version of a record (for free) why would you bother buying a vinyl record?
>>65178483
this man, look up record stores or audio repair places. they always have solid gear for cheap and it's always been worked over and tuned up
>>65180005
Why not both?
>>65178456
>>65178388
>>65178488
I have the LP60 and it plays all my vinyl just fine. I have Future Islands, Gorillaz, Arcade Fire and Washed Out and they all play perfectly. I can always use the set up on my computer speakers (without an amp!) or my headphones and all the albums sound great.
The next vinyl I'd like to get would be Smash and In Rainbows
>>65178388
>Any cheap vinyl players (under $100) that DON'T damage your records?
no
>Pic related, it's exactly what i don't want
nice bait
vinyl is an expensive hobby. why would you even want to buy records if they're going to sound like shit on your sub-$100 player?
>>65180053
Nah, I'd rather avoid wasting my money on frivolous unnecessary shit.
>Be me, 22
>Have 4000 dollars worth of vinyl equipment hooked up in my man cave
>big ass jbl speakers from some time in the 70s
>crank that shit halfway and i can hear it all throughout the house with no distortion or sound mesh
>neighbors can clearly hear my music from inside their living rooms
>get complaints all the time
>gitofmylawnandmydick.jpg
Sound so good i can fuck it.
Thanks kev you are a good pal.
>>65180153
>Not having enough money to waste on frivolous unnecessary shit.
Its an expensive hobby anon, dont be mad.
>>65180194
when i grow up i want to be like you
>>65180293
>when i grow up
MODS?
>>65180131
this is b8, right ?
>>65180153
Do you have any kind of fun at all?
>buying vinyls in 2016
>being this hipster
>>65179694
Haha.
Bye, son.
>>65182123
Hipsters are buying CDs in 2016.
Vinyl and Tapes are Urban Outfitter Casual tier.
>>65182123
it hasn't been hipster for a couple years now, everyone from my friends with pop taste to my grandparents who hadn't touched a record in 30 years have working turntables now
>>65182126
Not him but LP60 doesn't track as hard as Crosleys and similar, because of the moving magnet cartridge type (even though it still tracks kinda heavy for this type), while cheap ceramic carts present in these chink crap tables are literally required to track heavy in order to play back properly.
>>65182167
>tapes
see the thing with vinyl is that even if it's imperfect it can sound pretty fucking great with a well kept record and a half-decent setup. tapes are absolute garbage unless you have excessively rare dolby-s self recorded metal tape on the right deck
>>65182192
i had an LP60 that actually tracked too light, most records played fine but some newer ones tended to skip (because of louder mastering maybe?) i ended up giving it to my mom since she still has all her 70s and 80s records and they play fine on it
>>65182210
>not being a tr00 kvlt music listener
>>65182251
>kvit
i dont even know what this means :(
>>65181920
Trust me you dont. About 450 hours of overtime and its only May. Money out the wazzo but life.. ;_; no life
>>65179813
I buy vinyl because the mastering tends to be better than the highly compressed digital, not because the format is inherently superior
>>65180194
My dad has an old set of gigantic cabinet speakers where the only issue is with one of the connections to the amp, apparently. I've been meaning to see if they can be easily repaired, since they're just sitting around unused, but I live in an apartment so I can't imagine I'd be able to get much use out of them.
>>65182267
you didnt even spel it rite
>>65179813
>The most important thing to retains is that vinyl sound can't be compared to numeric sound because it's completely different.
The entire thing just boils down to "depends on who you ask and their personal preferences." It's not a scathing critique of vinyl.
>>65183160
also
>Myth: Vinyl is better than CD because it reproduces higher frequencies than CD
>The recording/tracking ability of vinyl is easily at least 50 kHz depending upon the cartridge and stylus profile, and perhaps as high as 100 kHz.
How isn't this a contradiction? CD is only capable of going up to 20 kHz.
