Guys, guys, save your money and just join Woot's TurnTable.fm room instead! Today's Music Monday!

As an owner of the no-speaker version of the Vibe turntable, let me say that as a serious collector of vinyl this TT has it's uses. I use it to rip various VG- records I pick up at flea markets. The sound is pretty decent for a ceramic high output phono cartridge. The process of ripping vinyl to MP3 (or wav, as is your want) is GREATLY simplified by using Acousticas's "Spin It Again" software (note: if you install "Spin It Again" on your Windows 7 machine I recommend manually updating the siesta MP3 dll packaged with the software). For an example of a rip done with a Vibe Turntable, check out this link: http://lotusstp.tumblr.com/post/18253377997/from-his-lp-cheetah-beat-heres-happenings-ten

ionman wrote:There are some that feel that newer is never better than old.

So they put up with listening to all the flaws of vinyl, some going so far as to only using 1920's technology vacuum tube amplifiers to do so. The funny thing is, they claim that vinyl sounds BETTER. (Laughable and measurably not so.) Guess they just love that rumble and hiss of the needle following the vinyl track, and popping every time it collides with yet another piece of dust. (Plus the skipping, warped records, etc. etc.)

Some folks also prefer to use a kick starter on their motorcycles, a pull rope on their boat motors, and probably still have a rotary dial phone. And will insist that each is more reliable because there's "less to go wrong".

Whatever.

The funny thing is, the same "analogue purists" don't prefer to watch VHS tapes over DVD & Blu-Ray. They don't prefer the snow and "ghosting" of (now defunct) analogue Television either. So why they hold on to the belief that vinyl is better is beyond me. But I suppose as with so many other things... blind faith often trumps facts.

There are some records that never made it to CD. I know, for I have looked long and hard. Thus the ability to at least transfer them to mp3 is nice to have.

You forgot about the 8 track players :-)

Vinyl is still around because it produces a true sound wave without the digitizing and compression like MP3s. Even an untrained ear can pick up on the difference but a discerning ear can have trouble listening to compressed music.

The recording industry mastered albums to be played on vinyl up until the 80s when digital took over. Any music prior to that period you should play on vinyl. After that, it probably doesn't matter all that much.

melissyb wrote:"Sanford and Son"!

Blind Melon Jelly!

Is this as cheap as the Jensen someone gave me that only does 128 bit rate mp3 and doesn't allow for higher quality or wav output?

izzyizzo wrote:Is this "poor stylus" any worse than the needle on my old-sk00l 1978 Fisher-Price Record Player? It's iffy with 78s, but works OK when I tape a few pennies to the needle arm.

C'mon, people, there's no way. Maybe it's cheap, but I can't believe it's any more damaging than 50s/60s/70s tech.

I eagerly await being proved wrong. Go for it, kids.

70's and some 60's turntable technology far exceeded the junk being sold today. Just because it's old does not mean those people were great engineers. Remember they sent people into space with computers far less powerful than my cell phone. Vinyl was an art back then and there was precision and mastery put into the design of turntables. If someone thinks enough of records/albums to save them until now- that last thing you want to do is play them on this hunk of junk. Your Fisher price might have been junk, but there was Dual, Gerrard, B&O, Thorens, Technics...

edevans68 wrote:As the lyrics of one of the songs I have on vinyl says, "Take a chance on me." I'm in for one.

charlie poole?

ionman wrote:There are some that feel that newer is never better than old.

So they put up with listening to all the flaws of vinyl, some going so far as to only using 1920's technology vacuum tube amplifiers to do so. The funny thing is, they claim that vinyl sounds BETTER. (Laughable and measurably not so.) Guess they just love that rumble and hiss of the needle following the vinyl track, and popping every time it collides with yet another piece of dust. (Plus the skipping, warped records, etc. etc.)

Some folks also prefer to use a kick starter on their motorcycles, a pull rope on their boat motors, and probably still have a rotary dial phone. And will insist that each is more reliable because there's "less to go wrong".

Whatever.

The funny thing is, the same "analogue purists" don't prefer to watch VHS tapes over DVD & Blu-Ray. They don't prefer the snow and "ghosting" of (now defunct) analogue Television either. So why they hold on to the belief that vinyl is better is beyond me. But I suppose as with so many other things... blind faith often trumps facts.

This is a misconception of a lot of vinyl fanatics/audiophiles. The large majority of people who are serious about vinyl aren't into it because "vinyl is magical, thus sounds better." You gotta realize that the 60s/70s/80s were weird times. You would have mono and stereo releases of albums. You would have albums that would have completely different mixing/mastering for each country. And then you have modern day mastering of classic albums where the audio levels blow out on the top end to give it that modern "loud" sound that people are used to. There are hundreds and thousands of old albums that sound better on vinyl, not because of the medium but because the source it was created from was just better.

Of course, you also have kids who have heard "the vinyl sounds better" and morphed it into "vinyl always sounds better." Which just isn't always the case. The thing that vinyl always does give you is your choice of cartridge/stylus, which does color the sound of the album, and the turntable, which can affect the sound (by sometimes even misrepresenting the music by playing it slightly faster than it was meant to be played).

Different sources/mixing/mastering aside, the sound of a high end cd player vs a high end record player comes down to preference. But there are real reasons to prefer one format over the other for specific recordings. Basically, it's cd player DAC quality vs. a hundred different variables that come into play with a turntable/cartridge/stylus.

davette59 wrote:

My guess would be that this will not work with a Mac computer, is that correct?

gak0090 wrote:The thing that confuses me the most, is even if this were a good device...what's the point? Most recordings are available digitally anyway- in a much cleaner and accurate form. If you want to listen to the analog vinyl attributes, you would want to play it on a good turntable when you listen to it. I love a well preserved vinyl record on a good turntable played through a nice system. On the other hand, trying to digitize a vinyl recording is kind of goofy to me- unless the recording does not exist in digital form commercially. And in the case you were going to preserve a recording that does not exist digitally, you would not do it on a $15 turntable where the tone arm probably weighs 1/4 pound.

Well, there are several answers to that, all of which will doubtless offend somebody.

1. I have about ten "peachcrates" of vinyl hanging around, some of it from my youth, some inherited. I'd like to make it accessible, and I'm never going to pay for it all a second time.

2. Some of the classical items are no longer in print.

3. I have a friend to whom I've promised for the past xx years that I'm gonna take all those 45's that we used to play on 78RPM during our junior high sleepovers to crack ourselves up. (Gitarzan, anybody?) So maybe I'll actually get around to it. Though not, apparently, on THIS turntable.

See? Everybody's BOUND to think at least one of those reasons is really, really stupid. :-)

danbooke2001 wrote:Being a child of the late 70's I have seen 'albums' progress from vinyl, cassette, CD, the ill-fated mini-disk, all the way to MP3. But I am confused, why is vinyl still around? I don't think I have ever purchased a 'record' or even know anyone that owns any. Just curious if there is a real reason it's still around or even supported for that matter?

It is because there are those who can hear the differences. Sony's Mini disk was a failure during the time of outstanding audio recordings on vinyl because the digital audio was compressed to an unacceptable sound quality similar to a 320kbs mp3. Today most people accept lower sound quality and the mini disk might have succeeded today had there been no other way to store digital music.
Vinyl played on good audio equipment sounds superior to any digital format, plain and simple. This device shouldn't even be labelled a turntable.

asian888 wrote:But, you cannot say that MP3 is better than vinyl.

Sure can, MP3s have variable quality so it matters on your source. If you come from a lossless format to a high quality mp3, you would end up with something better. Then again not everyone will spend the time to do this, they just pull their 128 mp3s from cds ><

I thought this effect was only something I saw with refurbed HP's Woot offers.
People go on and on about the video card isn't good enough, the power supply is lacking, it won't run recent bleeding edge game.
They ignore than super high end computers don't show up on Woot, that many people just the enough power to run Farmville, and many people don't have the need/desire to build a machine from parts.

This is NOT a studio quality turntable, it does not pretend to be.
This is most likely not the best unit for perfectly preserving your albums for all time.
If you have a box of records that you kept meaning to do something with, this might be for you.
If your starting a mobile DJ service this isn't the way to do it.

One would hope that no one would have illusions that a $21 dollar turntable is going to be the best of the best, but for someone trying to see if the box of albums in the basement is worth listening to... this is a good deal.

While there is some good information in the thread, it seems people seem to forget that for some people a record is just a record not a highly prized collectable to be kept in air tight containers and only listened to on special occasions.

bloewy wrote:Cowboy Dan,

Get yourself a tripod: Please!

While I have posted over 300 video reviews to woot, I haven't recorded a single one. I'm a video hunter not a video creator.

RE: the vinyl vs. digital debate.

I have hundreds of records and, as some have stated, there are reasons to own them. Better sound quality (NOT because vinyl is better per se, but because some masterings are better vs. the "loudness wars" CD remasters. For example 80's metal). Or possibly because there is no CD version and likely never will be, or the CD is so rare that needle dropping an LP is probably cheaper.

That being said, I'm sure that this turntable is pretty bad for that purpose. If you have a few scratchy LP's you want to do, maybe it's fine since it's cheap. But if you have hundreds or LP's that are actually worth something, I'd go with at least an AT-LP120. More money but you'll get much better results, especially with a cartridge upgrade.

I actually have LP needle drops (vinyl rips) that sound BETTER than the CD. Dead serious. You can capture some of that "warmth" digitally. Again, it's all about the mastering differences from the source media - sometimes the CD is better, but sometimes the LP is better.

aaroninneb1 wrote:ceramic needle is worrying you? It's hardness is next to that of diamond. Don't think it's going to ruin any records.

It's more a matter of smoothness, because bad needles just carve a trench in your records where the music used to be. The 7"-ish base means that 12" vinyls will have their outer rim fairly unsupported leading to more wobbliness. That the entire thing is made out of lightweight plastic means there's not going to be much vibration dampening going on--don't take a single step around the room while you're recording. On the other hand, the headshell is probably so cheap it won't be able to pick that up anyway.

Even if you went and put a decent needle on the thing it would still be bad and still not be something you should ever use on records you care anything about.

On the other hand, if you have a need to make new records sound like worn-out, mistreated antiques in six months or less, this turntable is probably a great deal.

cubbiemi wrote:While there is some good information in the thread, it seems people seem to forget that for some people a record is just a record not a highly prized collectable to be kept in air tight containers and only listened to on special occasions.

Dude, this thing looks to be just one step above using some construction paper and a sewing needle to play your records. Don't do this to your vinyl.

comivan wrote:Sure can, MP3s have variable quality so it matters on your source. If you come from a lossless format to a high quality mp3, you would end up with something better. Then again not everyone will spend the time to do this, they just pull their 128 mp3s from cds ><

Depends on the source mastering, not the target format you've chosen to you. A garbage LP is going to sound like crap not because vinyl is crap, but because the source mastering is crap. Same with MP3's.

I'm a big fan of high-bitrate lossy and I actually rip my vinyl to 24/96 FLAC as my "master", then down to 48khz AAC's for on-the-go (since that's one of the reasons for digitizing vinyl -- more portable). So the target format really isn't the issue. But compare my 256kps AAC to a remastered and brickwalled CD, and my AAC will sound better, at least to me.

Again, it's all about the mastering. I can't stand the "loudness wars" - it's killed dynamic range on a lot of modern recordings.

danbooke2001 wrote:Being a child of the late 70's I have seen 'albums' progress from vinyl, cassette, CD, the ill-fated mini-disk, all the way to MP3. But I am confused, why is vinyl still around? I don't think I have ever purchased a 'record' or even know anyone that owns any. Just curious if there is a real reason it's still around or even supported for that matter?

I have a box full of albums I saved. Dating myself, but would LOVE to get them on my ipod.

CowboyDann wrote:While I have posted over 300 video reviews to woot, I haven't recorded a single one. I'm a video hunter not a video creator.

We all have specialties!

bellehelene wrote:Well, there are several answers to that, all of which will doubtless offend somebody.

1. I have about ten "peachcrates" of vinyl hanging around, some of it from my youth, some inherited. I'd like to make it accessible, and I'm never going to pay for it all a second time.

2. Some of the classical items are no longer in print.

3. I have a friend to whom I've promised for the past xx years that I'm gonna take all those 45's that we used to play on 78RPM during our junior high sleepovers to crack ourselves up. (Gitarzan, anybody?) So maybe I'll actually get around to it. Though not, apparently, on THIS turntable.

See? Everybody's BOUND to think at least one of those reasons is really, really stupid. :-)

I can appreciate those reasons. But for someone to go through their 60s,70s,80s regular "pop" music collections thinking that this is a good idea to change it all to mp3 is ridiculous. The time and effort is not worth what you can purchase those titles for already digitized.

gak0090 wrote:Vinyl was an art back then and there was precision and mastery put into the design of turntables. If someone thinks enough of records/albums to save them until now- that last thing you want to do is play them on this hunk of junk. Your Fisher price might have been junk, but there was Dual, Gerrard, B&O, Thorens, Technics...

Fine and dandy -- but what I mean is, am I damaging vinyl with this any more than I would have been with a "regular person's" record player from 30-40 years ago?

I'm hearing all the gloom and doom about destroying my LPs, yet I'll bet this isn't any worse than whatever player my mom has in the attic. But I'd like to know whether that assumption is valid or not.

In other words -- will the non-audiophile-with-a-pretty-good-idea-crowd please speak up?

danbooke2001 wrote:But I am confused, why is vinyl still around? I don't think I have ever purchased a 'record' or even know anyone that owns any. Just curious if there is a real reason it's still around or even supported for that matter?

Vinyls are physically inert, and not as prone to degradation over long periods of time (will your grandkids even be able to figure out how to play your CDs? How about your VHS tapes? What about the metal oxidation...). 12"s typically haven't had the dynamics crushed out of the record to promote "loudness", which is still important for a few bands out there. Also, there's a lot more room for cover art on a record.

...and with today's electronic auto-sync, it's important for DJs to be able to prove they actually have some hand-eye co-ordination--otherwise you might as well just plug in your iPod and call it a night.

izzyizzo wrote:Fine and dandy -- but what I mean is, am I damaging vinyl with this any more than I would have been with a "regular person's" record player from 30-40 years ago?

I'm hearing all the gloom and doom about destroying my LPs, yet I'll bet this isn't any worse than whatever player my mom has in the attic. But I'd like to know whether that assumption is valid or not.

In other words -- will the non-audiophile-with-a-pretty-good-idea-crowd please speak up?

Good question. And I would consider myself a non-audiophile.

This device has a few cons that anyone with vinyl that they care about should be aware of:

1- No tracking / anti-skating adjustment
2- Uses a ceramic cartridge

My two cents: This thing probably tracks heavy and will not be nice to your vinyl. However, if you only intend to play an LP once to digitize it, your LP will probably survive that. But I wouldn't use this as something to play back records on repeatedly as you WILL damage your records eventually.

As for older record players, there were good ones and there were bad ones as well. So your mom's player could actually be superior. Or if it was cheap to begin with it could actually be worse than this device. No way for me to know. I had a cheap record player in the late 1970's and the records I played repeatedly with it are all damaged now.

roebeet wrote:So your mom's player could actually be superior. Or if it was cheap to begin with it could actually be worse than this device. No way for me to know. I had a cheap record player in the late 1970's and the records I played repeatedly with it are all damaged now.

Thank you -- good answer (or, "quality," as they say here). I was getting close to giving in to the vinyl snobs by cracking open a Pabst Blue Ribbon and trying not to spill it on the $300 vintage-style flannel shirt I bought just for the occasion.

No offense, PBR crowd: we're just on different wavelengths. (Yes, I KNOW I could probably resolve that with better shielded cables. But that's exactly my point.)

izzyizzo wrote:Fine and dandy -- but what I mean is, am I damaging vinyl with this any more than I would have been with a "regular person's" record player from 30-40 years ago?

Probably so, but even if it's not, it's needlessly destructive to do this. There's serious design problems with this thing that someone who isn't an audiophile (but isn't half-deaf either) is going to be able to hear easily when used side-by-side with "real" equipment.

The lack of adjustable armature weighting is very bad. Without being able to adjust the vertical pressure from the needle, sound quality will be dreadful if you buy a new needle that expects a different weight where otherwise a mere $25-30 purchase could probably improve the sound (and the survival prospects for your records).

Turntables unfortunately need mass to absorb vibrations coming up through the floor. This thing doesn't have any. If you have pet mice, put them on a low-fiber diet because if they fart, the needle may skip and scratch the record.

Records aren't designed to be played dangling over ledges. Anything larger than 7" put on this thing will have the record flexing under it's own weight and the weight of the armature. That's going to deform and degrade the output even more.

The huge difference between the crap record players from "back in the day" and what we have now is that getting vastly improved playback from a decently designed turntable is largely a matter of spending a hundred bucks or so instead of a thousand or more. You can buy something from a thrift store that just has some heft to it, a steady drive, and an armature that lets you replace the entire headshell, put really good needles on it, and get what would pass for "audiophile" quality back then (and probably be notably cleaner than what people who buy crappy units have grown used to).

izzyizzo wrote:Fine and dandy -- but what I mean is, am I damaging vinyl with this any more than I would have been with a "regular person's" record player from 30-40 years ago?

I'm hearing all the gloom and doom about destroying my LPs, yet I'll bet this isn't any worse than whatever player my mom has in the attic. But I'd like to know whether that assumption is valid or not.

In other words -- will the non-audiophile-with-a-pretty-good-idea-crowd please speak up?

Let me see if I can answer your question better. If these albums/records were originally played on poor quality record players- then you will do them no more harm (the damage was done already). If someone had a nice system back in the day, and their vinyl was always played on a good turntable, then I would not subject it to this (not even once) if they ever intend on playing that vinyl again on a decent turntable.

Again, it all depends. If someone has a half-dozen scratchy records from their youth that they just want to digitize, this thing is dirt cheap and will do that for you (and if the records are already damaged, one play on this thing isn't going to make them much worse).

But if you have a large collection of decent records that are in good shape and worth more than this player, and especially if you plan to play them back more than one time, I wouldn't use this player as it's too risky over time.

If you want a decent budget device, avoid this and those low-cost IONs and buy an AT-LP120 instead. The only con with the AT-LP120 is the included cartridge (which is OK but tracks a bit heavy) but it's easily upgradable. The AT-LP120, at $220, is not cheap but it's actually good bang-for-the-buck. Again, it depends on what you expect to get out of the device.

It's USB items like this (and that USB hula dancer) that put an end to 8 track tapes. Do you really want that all over yer hands?

comivan wrote:Sure can, MP3s have variable quality so it matters on your source. If you come from a lossless format to a high quality mp3, you would end up with something better. Then again not everyone will spend the time to do this, they just pull their 128 mp3s from cds ><

"Lossless" is a marketing term to make consumers think there is no loss to the compressed digital file. This is a complete lie. And there is no mp3 that can even come close to an uncompressd audio file.

ProppaT wrote:This is a misconception of a lot of vinyl fanatics/audiophiles. The large majority of people who are serious about vinyl aren't into it because "vinyl is magical, thus sounds better." You gotta realize that the 60s/70s/80s were weird times. You would have mono and stereo releases of albums. You would have albums that would have completely different mixing/mastering for each country. And then you have modern day mastering of classic albums where the audio levels blow out on the top end to give it that modern "loud" sound that people are used to. There are hundreds and thousands of old albums that sound better on vinyl, not because of the medium but because the source it was created from was just better.

Of course, you also have kids who have heard "the vinyl sounds better" and morphed it into "vinyl always sounds better." Which just isn't always the case. The thing that vinyl always does give you is your choice of cartridge/stylus, which does color the sound of the album, and the turntable, which can affect the sound (by sometimes even misrepresenting the music by playing it slightly faster than it was meant to be played).

Different sources/mixing/mastering aside, the sound of a high end cd player vs a high end record player comes down to preference. But there are real reasons to prefer one format over the other for specific recordings. Basically, it's cd player DAC quality vs. a hundred different variables that come into play with a turntable/cartridge/stylus.

Well said.

Isn't it legal to download the MP3 files from the internet if I own the record?

Yeah! Where is the USB 8-track player? Oh wait, all I have is a bunch of records. My brothers jumped on the 8-track band wagon, but I stuck with records. Too bad I don't have anything to play them on. Maybe later. This one looks too cheap for me.

efficient wrote:You forgot about the 8 track players :-)

Vinyl is still around because it produces a true sound wave without the digitizing and compression like MP3s. Even an untrained ear can pick up on the difference but a discerning ear can have trouble listening to compressed music.

The recording industry mastered albums to be played on vinyl up until the 80s when digital took over. Any music prior to that period you should play on vinyl. After that, it probably doesn't matter all that much.

I should open a vinyl recovery business. I have and use high end audio gear including a decent direct drive turntable with an Ortofon VMS 20E cartridge connected to a PC via a Creative Labs sound card and Cool Edit Pro software that creates the closest to perfect transfer of vinyl to CD audio available. Friends and family are totally amazed how "unbelieveable" the sound quality is. You will never do anything close to good with this $15 childs toy.

Don't do it! I'm sorry, Woot, but as a musician, music lover, and historian, I have to speak out against your poorly considered decision to market this product. Here is why:

The issue isn't how cheap/expensive the device is; but the quality of the needle, and how the needle is held as it plays the record.

Remember - the needle will be scraping against what may be rare/valuable records. You can easily ruin a record by using a poor quality needle on it. I suspect the quality of this is so poor that it will ruin a record after ONE PLAY. If you don't believe me, do a little research on this issue.

Sorry but the fact is that if you want to play vinyl, with the least risk (because all needles will do a little damage), you need to get a high end needle and a device that will float the needle properly in the groove of the record, or you are going to trash it.

So instead of saving money, you will be throwing money and value away by destroying your records.

I have to agree about the quality of the "needle". My last turntable has a needle that cost $116.00 on sale. No way a needle or ceramic cartridge would touch my vinyl. I bought a conversion kit, it is hard, you must stay by the record if you want to break the songs into individual tracks. Anyone have a better piece of software? I'd like to burn these old records into MP3's or CD's for the car.

Please listen to this wise person (EvilDagmar).

Albums are becoming rarer by the day. Why risk destroying them for no good reason?

You may think that Dad's or Grandpa's turntable is junk, but if you know nothing about turntables, you can't really tell by looking. The clunkiest, heaviest, bulkiest looking one may be choice.

If you are anywhere near a reasonably large town, it probably has a used audio shop. Within you will likely find astonishing gear being sold for practically nothing. This is because most audiophiles must have cutting-edge equipment at all times. Hence they sell off their still amazing gear in near perfect condition just because it's slightly out of date (and I mean, could be less than a year "out of date"). A store like this should also be able to sell you new (don't go with a used) cartridge/needle.

The best use for this item would be for your kids, if you had some old vinyl you don't care about anymore. For $15 they can go to town and see what record players were all about in the day- they can even DJ it out and do some scratchin. But I don't think this should be used if you value your vinyl collection in any way.

bvizy wrote:Isn't it legal to download the MP3 files from the internet if I own the record?

Not in the US. Doesn't matter if you own the LP -- if you get caught downloading MP3's it won't matter in court if you own the CD, LP, eight track, etc. It's the act itself that's not permitted.

(I'm assuming you meant downloading as in downloading from a P2P site, not a legal transaction like buying an Amazon MP3 album).