[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ARSCLIST] [MLA-L] Requesting feedback on laser turntables
Like many, we found it challenging to get concrete information on the
Laser Turntable - whether it be third-party reviews or first-hand
knowledge.
So, we spent the past 6 months analyzing the Laser Turntable - everything
from subjective listening tests to objective measurements, while throwing
a wide range of LP and pre-LP material at the Laser Turntable (we will
call it the "LT" for short).
Following is an attempt at a review of the Laser Turntable. Be
forewarned that this review ended up longer than I anticipated. If you
want "specs" (not covered here), just visit www.elpj.com.
Eric Jacobs
The Audio Archive
www.TheAudioArchive.com
Acknowledgements
================
These tests were made possible by a very generous temporary loan of
the LT by a North American LT owner (thank you David), and also the
generous support of ELP who upgraded the LT up to the latest electronics
and recalibrated everything at no charge (thank you Mr. Chiba) so that
the test LT is as good as new.
Background
==========
The test was inspired by the need to find a means of automating
record playback for the purposes of high throughput digital
transfers, with the goal to achieve low-cost mass digitization
without sacrificing quality - certainly a difficult goal for
anyone who has made any serious attempts at this.
As part of the tests performed by The Audio Archive, we went so
far as to make a comparison CD and DVD-Audio disk (24/176.4) using
our reference turntable (Simon Yorke S7, SME 309 tonearm (NOT the
SME 3009), Minus K BM-1 vibration isolator), reference moving coil
cartridges (Lyra Helikon SL for LP, Ortogon SPU-GT for pre-LP in a
range of styli), and industry standard moving magnet cartridges
(Shure V15 for LP, Shure M44-7 for pre-LP). All the disks were
cleaned using a Keith Monks Mark IV cleaning machine.
Preamplification was either via a Millennia Media LPE-2 (pre-LP) or
a Boulder 1010 (LP) - the sonic cousin to the Boulder 2008. Analog
to digital conversion was performed using a Mytek Stereo192 ADC. We
feel that these components make for a pretty solid bench test, and
a fair test of the ELP LT.
The CD and DVD-A are then used to rapidly switch between the laser
turntable and conventional styli for performing listening tests
using a reference quality CD and DVD-A player. Using a digital
medium to test an analog playback device is not a perfect test,
but trying to remember sound as you move a record between turntables
and while swapping cartridges and styli can be very difficult and
laborious. So the disks and this methodology were invaluable.
These test disks are available upon request from me if you are
serious about evaluating the laser turntable. They include a
16-page write-up describing each track - there are a total of
43 tracks covering a wide range of groove geometries, materials,
and genres from 1921 to 1985. If there's a lot of demand for
these disks, I might ask you to cover the cost of media, packaging
and postage - about $5. A written review is a pretty poor
substitute for actual listening. But I'll try...
Compatibility
=============
As some have already mentioned, colored disks cannot be played.
Even dark brown will not work.
On the other hand, acetates (up to 12") can be played. In fact,
one participant in these tests (thanks Jerry) brought over an
8" acetate that had become completely delaminated from the
aluminum substrate. Unplayable.
Miraculously, after adhering the acetate layer to the substrate
using post-its (yup), it played!
Other areas of compatibility include record thickness. A record
which is too thick or too thin will produce an error.
A record which is especially dirty will also fail to play.
Records whose lead-in and lead-out groove diameters or label
diameters do not conform to current RIAA standards might fail,
might omit the inner or outermost grooves, or may require you
to cover the label with a black disk (included) to prevent
reflections that might cause the LT difficulties.
Other limitations include:
- no vertical cut records
- groove walls must be 45-degree or nearly so
- groove bottom must be a "V" or flat - no spherical cut
grooves
- groove shoulder (top of the groove wall) cannot be severely
rounded
In spite of these limitations, the reality is that 95% or more
of the material I put in the LT can be played. In our tests, we
went out of our way to find the corner cases - we were trying to
make the LT fail, to test its limits. So naturally, we found
failures.
Damaged Records
===============
The LT has an amazing transient response. This is due in part to
the fact that the light from the laser is effectively massless
(no inertia), and can respond instantaneously to groove changes.
When the laser encounters a break, the transient is so rapid that
you can hardly hear it. No pops - and at times barely a tick. In
many cases, you would not even know the record is broken. Cracks
are virtually inaudible.
In the case of gouges and pits caused by needles dropped on the
record, the result is equally astounding. No skip. No pop.
Keep in mind that the LT has 5 lasers - one for each groove wall,
two to track the groove, and a fifth to compensate for up to 5mm
of warp. There's a lot of technology in the LT.
Sound Quality
=============
First impression - it's noisy. Pops, clicks and crackle are
louder. Background noise appears be louder, too. If the record
is clean (cleaned on a Monks or Loricraft), the noise level is
nearly the same as a conventional stylus. The difference between
a visually clean record, and one that has been cleaned on a Monks
or Loricraft is dramatic. Just clean the record if you have any
doubt.
Importance of cleaning - obviously, it is very important. If you
play the same record on separate occasions, must you re-clean it
every time? No. Absolutely no. In fact, I find if you clean a
record well once, and store it in a clean sleeve between plays,
there is no need to re-clean the record. Practically speaking,
you only need to give a record a good cleaning once. I have not
had a chance to test other record cleaning machines like the VPI
or Nitty Gritty with the LT, and cannot speak to the results with
those record cleaning machines.
Assuming you have a clean record, the LT will still produce
slightly more background noise - a kind of low-level "hiss". It's
as if the laser is so sensitive it picks up every imperfection in
the vinyl. I don't know if this is what goes on technically, but
this is what it sounds like. This additional background noise
can make recordings sound slightly less dynamic, although I never
measured the actual signal-to-noise ratio or dynamic range of the
LT.
Remember my earlier comment about the transient response of
the LT? Here again is where the LT really shines above a
conventional stylus. Timbre and transients are truly life like.
Once you start hearing past the background noise, the realization
that the piano sounds more right than you've heard it before, or
the drum just sounds realistic, you start getting sucked into the
sound - and the lack of color - of the LT.
The timbre and transients were the turning point for me. This is
the point where I got past my first impressions and heard what the
LT is really capable of. As I understand, Keith Jarrett (piano) and
other musicians use the LT - and I fully understand why. Even the
$2200 Lyra Helikon SL, considered by many to be a very fast, accurate,
and musical cartridge, did not get the piano timbre as right as the
LT. On the other hand, I think the Lyra gets the dynamics of a
recording more right than the LT.
On a very subtle level with stereo recordings, the LT image is not
quite as well defined in my opinion. In my measurements of the
LT, I found a phase error between the left-right channels which
occurs around 18 kHz and becomes more pronounced above 25 kHz. It
is this high frequency phase error that might be attributed to the
slightly soft image. On most stereo recordings, this is not
noticeable - but if you have a recording which has been carefully
mic'd to produce a strong image, you can hear the difference. To
put this in perspective, the LT still images significantly better
than a Shure V15 cartridge.
If you don't listen to live music with regularity, you may never
realize that the LT is so harmonically accurate, and you may
only focus on the higher noise floor. But this is a myopic view
of the LT.
Benefits
========
The big benefit is no record wear. You can "play" a mint never-played
record on the LT, and afterwards it will still be considered mint
and "never played". If you have materials that are so precious
that you never play them, you can finally listen to them on the LT.
The laser is mounted on a linear tracking head - there is no tracking
distortion.
I've already mentioned the timbre, transients, and harmonic "rightness"
of the LT - a big benefit to anyone who is familiar with live music.
Applications
============
Indeed, the LT is completely analog and provides no equalization - the
output EQ is flat. You will need to properly equalize the output (ie. RIAA,
NAB, etc.) by connecting the LT to a phono preamp, just as you would a
conventional cartridge/turntable. The output level of the LT is
comparable to a moving magnet cartridge, so it offers good compatibility
with most/all phono preamps.
Because the LT is easy-to-use, does not wear the records, and effectively
eliminates the risk of scratching and damaging records, it also makes for
a good access tool when the cost/time/risk of making access copies is high.
In an environment where "immediate access" is important, such as in a
library or archive, the LT provides an alternative to making digital
transfers for access. Just clean the record for the client or patron,
and play.
Record stores can also use the LT to play records for customers without
risking damage and wear.
Again, assuming clean records, the LT would work very well in an FM
broadcast environment where the noise characteristics of the LT would
be below the noise levels of the FM signal. Given that no expertise or
special set-up is required, most anyone in a broadcast station would
be able to operate the LT. It also eliminates the cost of replacement
styli.
The LT makes for a useful addition to any large record archive. It
allows records to be previewed, and checked for condition and problems
before transfer with a conventional stylus. Or the records can be
transferred directly from the LT.
The LT's laser system is very flexible. It can play a very wide range
of groove geometries, from LP and microgroove, right on up to grooves
that would require a 6 mil stylus. Not only does the LT provide
automatic groove width detection and an infinite range of equivalent
styli sizes, you can also move the laser up and down the groove wall
to avoid worn regions.
Price / Value
=============
The ELP Laser Turntable is absolutely unique, built to order. As I
understand, there is nearly 100 man-years and $25 million of research
and development that went into making the Laser Turntable a reality.
It started its life in the research labs of MIT, then further
developed in the Silicon Valley of California during vinyl's peak
in the 1980s, and finally commercialized in Japan in the 1990s.
If you look at most high-end turntables, tonearms and styli, they are
designed by small teams, and often by a single person. Considering what
went into the making of the Laser Turntable, the price is not
disproportionate.
Does it deliver on value? Only you can decide. I think it depends on
the size and nature of your record collection, and what aspects of the
recorded music are important to you. If it's timbral honesty and accurate
transients you are after - the Laser Turntable delivers in spades. If
an absolutely silent black background is what you want - this is not the
turntable for you.
If you do archival work, the LT can be a real problem solver for damaged
records. The LT may pay for itself - at least in part - when you consider
the fact that it provides an infinite range of styli from microgroove to
6 mil, and the ability to DYNAMICALLY, WHILE PLAYING move the laser up
and down the groove wall to avoid the worn region. Considering how many
custom styli from Expert Stylus it would take to duplicate the same
capability, the LT may actually be affordable - especially since the
laser does not wear out like a stylus. Also consider the amount of time
it takes with a conventional styli to find the unworn portion of the
groove wall. There are real economic benefits to using the LT in an
archival environment.
Of course, if you need ease-of-use and want to minimize wear and potential
damage to your record collection - the LT is impossible to beat.
Maintenance
===========
Finally, talking to other LT owners, it appears that the LT might need
a major tune-up every 4-5 years. With shipping from North America, this
might cost you on the order of $1000 to $1100. This is also consistent
with what ELP recommends regarding maintenance.
Also, the less you relocate/move the LT, the better off you are. The
record transport mechanism is sensitive and heavy, and if you don't
properly lock the mechanism down (a simple screw, easy to do), you can
do some real damage to the LT.
With some common sense and a bit of care, the LT is otherwise rugged.
Warning - Audio Soapbox
=======================
I actually enjoy listening to both conventional styli and the LT.
Each one produces a different experience. Most, if not all, audio
equipment choices involve compromises in sound of one sort or
another. Particular as the equipment becomes more resolving of
detail, you start hearing more of the good and the bad in a each
recording. Sometimes more accurate becomes less enjoyable - the
real crux of the audiophile dilemma.
Rather than making choices between better, you are making choices
between different - it becomes a matter of personal preference, not
an absolute right or wrong. Just because someone says something
sounds great, you really need to hear it for yourself and judge
for yourself. The more listening experience you have - live music,
recorded music, different venues, different equipment - the better
equipped you will be to make these judgment calls for yourself.
End of Audio Soapbox.
Summary
=======
In my opinion, the LT sounds better than most of the conventional
turntables/styli found in many institutions and commercial environments
(for example, Technics/Shure). The LT is a serious audio component,
not just a novelty.
When comparing the LT sound to reference audiophile equipment in the
same price range - again assuming a record that has been cleaned - any
preferences will depend on the nature and condition of the recording.
If the recording is live with acoustic instruments, I might reach for
the LT first in order to capture the realism of the transients, harmonics,
and instrument timbre. If the recording is a heavily layered and
processed studio recording, I might choose the reference audiophile
equipment. If the recording is dominated by quiet passages, making any
noise stand out more, then a conventional stylus might be preferred. If
the record is damaged and especially noisy, then perhaps a conventional
stylus. If the record skips, is cracked or is broken, then the laser
turntable might be best. And sometimes, it's just unpredictable whether
I will prefer the LT or a conventional stylus.
If grooved media makes up a large part of what you listen to or transfer,
the LT can be an important tool to have. By no means does it replace
a conventional turntable and stylus, but it is a valuable addition that
will augment your access and transfer capabilities, and your listening
experience.
-----Original Message-----
From: Music Library Association Mailing List
[mailto:MLA-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Steve Henry
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2005 12:04 PM
To: MLA-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [MLA-L] Requesting feedback on laser turntables
Hello everybody,
Has anyone out there purchased/considered purchasing/used a "laser
turntable" made by ELP of Japan? Our library administration is
considering purchasing such a device and has asked the music library for
feedback. I haven't had much luck finding print reviews, and the
reviews I've found on Websites tend to be rather dodgy and come to some
wildly differing conclusions.
We would be using the laser turntable for preparing streaming audio
course reserves. The material we would be working with is slightly rare
in that it has not been reissued on CD, but none of the LPs are precious
resources or anything, so wear and tear isn't a major concern. I
suppose digital technology would streamline the digitization process,
but I'm not sure that justifies the >$10,000 price tag. There doesn't
seem to be any consensus about sound quality produced by the laser
turntable as compared to a conventional turntable. I am also especially
concerned about maintenance and repair, since ELP is the only company
that services the turntables, and they are only in Japan.
I would appreciate any comments, and thanks in advance.
Steve
--
Steve Henry
Assistant Music Librarian
Theodore M. Finney Music Library
University of Pittsburgh
B30 Music Building
Pittsburgh, PA 15260
412-624-4128
shenry@xxxxxxxx
*************************************************************************
To leave MLA-L, send the command SIGNOFF MLA-L to
LISTSERV@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx or send an e-mail message to
MLA-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To suspend mail temporarily, send the
command SET MLA-L NOMAIL to LISTSERV@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The MLA
homepage is located at http://www.musiclibraryassoc.org/