If Apple Designed a Turntable, This Is Probably What It Would Look Like

[MrRom92]

Look up the definition of a master recording and then look at all the flaws and issues and limitations one can have with vinyl. There are master recordings of every album/song. How many absolutely perfectly pressed vinyl albums are there and who keeps them in a dust-free clean room? It's a silly to say that vinyl is equal to a master recording.

I know exactly what a master recording is. I work with them on a regular basis, in all tape formats sometimes dating back to the early 1950’s. I have also been involved in all stages of actually producing and manufacturing records, and I have had projects in some of the biggest and best studios all over this planet.
I can tell you straight up, there is nothing that sounds like the original master tape. Full stop, end of story. Any copy or transfer is a matter of small compromises and trade-offs. There’s no escaping that fact. But I am in a better position than you or most anyone here to tell you which set of trade-offs gets you the closest.

Digital is “perfect”, it doesn’t degrade, it can be copied infinitely, it can be backed up in multiple locations, and beamed halfway across the globe in the blink of an eye. Unfortunately it also never sounds like the actual tape. It’s getting better, getting closer everyday. Some of the newest converters (with prices approaching the Jony Ive LP12) almost have me convinced. But it’s never quite the same.


The best vinyl pressings retain the magic. And lucky for you, no clean room is required. You seriously don’t think that’s how people regularly listen to records, do you? I’ve seen people’s listening rooms, people with a lot more money than I have; people with systems costing more than my life is worth… trust me, their rooms are anything but clean. These are record nerds we’re talking about here.
If you think records should be played in clean rooms, I’d hate to tell you about the conditions in which they’re often pressed, but that’s probably a story for another day.


You’d be surprised how many cases there are where an original master tape is lost or damaged and an old vinyl pressing is considered the best extant source for transferring/“remastering”
Even when you’re listening to CDs, downloads or digital streaming, you’re probably listening to more transfers of records than you realize.


Pretty cool that they manage to get so much out of dragging a diamond against a cheap piece of plastic.

 

[shevans]

I don’t post much here but..
this is a ****ing posh Fruitbox and at that a clone of the original TT before Ivor at Linn ripped it off. Best place is the bonfire and buy a £300 CD player

 

[Velin]

What is linking this video supposed to prove exactly? It certainly doesn’t answer what I asked of you.

It surely does. Not one supposed "audiophile" or expert, ever, said or disclosed Mobile Fidelity's vinyl records were actually made from digital DSD files. In fact, these experts, like fanboy Michael Fremer, repeatedly praised the purported "all-analog vinyl production" of Mobile Fidelity. Praised and praised. And vinyl lovers wasted millions, possibly tens of millions, praising and paying for the superiority of "all-analog-vinyl" when these fraudulent vinyl platters were actually pressed from digital masters. You cannot make this up. It's just too good. Too god. And yet, you don't see what this proves? The point escapes you? Really?

So-called vinyl expert after vinyl expert praised the purported "fidelity" of Mobile's records, claiming the superiority of all-analog-to-vinyl. Yet it was all a massive fraud and a big lie. Again, not ONE vinyl expert, ever, could hear or reveal the actual true source of these vinyl records was actually digital masters.

And watch the video. The reverse also is true: if you take inferior vinyl recordings, with their crackling, popping, hissing, you can always hear that in a digital conversion. Always. That is because digital fidelity is superior in every way -- which is precisely why so-called vinyl audiophiles didn't suspect a damn thing when MoFi was committing a massive fraud by pressing vinyl from digital files.

When the Mobile Fidelity fraud was disclosed, I looked back at the many, many post praising the purported "analog fidelity" of Mobile Fidelity's vinyl. Oh, the praise, the gushing, the ridiculousness of it all. And I laughed, and laughed, and laughed some more, as these supposed vinyl audiophile experts raced to delete posts praising what was, at base, digital masters. I say again, digital masters.

If you fail to understand the import of the video -- that is, if you truly cannot see how this massive vinyl fraud puts the lie to your belief in vinyl, and you cannot make the minor logical connection from the fact you can easily hear vinyl converted to digital audio, but even industry-leading "vinyl experts" absolutely cannot hear digital-to-vinyl -- I cannot help you.

You're only preaching to the choir, I’ve been saying for a decade at this point that Mobile Fidelity’s releases took a dramatic downturn in SQ and have straight up sounded bad for years… now we know why.

Absolutely no one said this. I don't believe you. Before the Mobile Fideltiy fraud was made public, point me to a single public post, review, message, anything that shows vinyl-lovers or so-called vinyl audiophiles believed Mobile Fidelity's vinyl was pressed from DSD files. I defy you to show me even a single pre-fraud review or opinion stating MoFi's vinyl was based on digital masters, and that MoFi was lying and was a massive fraud. It doesn't exist -- precisely because no one could actually hear it.

I say again, if you fail to understand the import of this massive fraud, if you truly cannot make the logical connection between this massive "analog-to-vinyl" farce and what it means for the fidelity of digital versus vinyl, there is utterly no point in discussing it further. And the video makes this very clear, hence I think you simply refuse to see or concede the connection, and the point.

 

[chucker23n1]

The luxury $60,000 record player is the first non-Apple hardware project Ive is known to have been involved in since he and four other colleagues left the company in 2019 to found the design firm LoveFrom.

Glad he's no longer with Apple, then.

What a fall from grace. From friendly-looking computers for the people to drab luxury items for ascetics.

 

[redheeler]

Add another reason why I am so glad Jony Ive is not with Apple anymore.

Ive's fixation of making everything barebones and form over function while absolutely overpriced is in full display just from the fact this thing is $60,000, when most turntables that look like this are $200.

The worst part is there will always be people willing to buy it. They'll sell all 250 of these.

 

[darkpaw]

A turntable. Looks pretty standard to me. Stupid price. And his firm - not specifically him - designed a hinge, and changed square corners to rounded corners. Such design, many aesthetic, much wow...

Can we just drop the idea that Jony Ive is some sort of sage genius? He did some good work at Apple, and some really ***** work - why is the charging port on my mouse underneath? etc. And he's now got his own company doing things for companies that are nothing to do with Apple, the Mac and MacRumors. Why is this story even on here? Are MR going to report on everything Ive does?

 

[MidwestMacGuy]

I don't want to get into a long, back and forth about something that is relatively low on the pecking order of worldly-importance, but I'll rattle off a few things really quickly.

How is lossless streaming better than vinyl records?

No inner grove distortion, doesn't lose fidelity with each play, no ticks and pops, no wow and flutter, no need to clean before and after each play, no need for physical space to store it, higher fidelity playback, can be enjoyed at home via nice stereo system, while jogging, while in your car, while at work, while at a sports game, or even at a funeral (God only knows why you'd want to do that, but yeah) etc, can allow you to easily jump between songs, offers the ability to create playlists, no need to get up and flip the record over when its half finished, can store as many songs as you want on a record without the risk of the album sounding bad due to inherent limitations in the geometry of an LP, no need to buy new styluses when they wear down, no need to buy expensive turntables, infinitely cheaper... and on, and on... and on.

As of a month ago, I was in the other camp, so I'm certainly not claiming some sort of superiority. But my eyes have been opened. There's a reason the world moved on from vinyl records, and it wasn't marketing, or even just straight up convenience like a lot of us think. It's because it is superior to stream your music. Not perfect. Nothing is. But clearly, as you can see, its positives far outweigh any negatives you can come up with. For every one thing streaming doesn't do well compared to physical albums, there is at least twenty things that it does. So clinging on to the past in this regard really makes no logical sense at all. Actually, clinging on to the past never makes sense. It's the past. It's gone.

Yet record sales have taken off and Target sells records but not CDs. Sure I play digital at its best too. Use Roon with a TIDAL account and have whole house audio. Use Roon ARC to play my music on the go and I am impressed with the Apple Airpod Pros, but there are times where sitting down with one of my favorite records on my Rega P6 just feels better and is more enjoyable. Especially when I want to listen to a whole album like Randy Brecker LIve at Fabrik. I also enjoy my collection of Mahler sympohies by Michael Tilson Thomas and the San Fransisco Symphony on SACD. The five channel sound in Direct Stream Digital does blow away a turntable but you have to put the silver spinning disk in a compatable player. So primitive, I know, but if you love music that's what you do.

 

[darngooddesign]

Add another reason why I am so glad Jony Ive is not with Apple anymore.

Ive's fixation of making everything barebones and form over function while absolutely overpriced is in full display just from the fact this thing is $60,000, when most turntables that look like this are $200.

Wait... do you think JI set the price?

 

[MrRom92]

It surely does. Not one supposed "audiophile" or expert, ever, said or disclosed Mobile Fidelity's vinyl records were actually made from digital DSD files. In fact, these experts, like fanboy Michael Fremer, repeatedly praised the purported "all-analog vinyl production" of Mobile Fidelity. Praised and praised. And vinyl lovers wasted millions, possibly tens of millions, praising and paying for the superiority of "all-analog-vinyl" when these fraudulent vinyl platters were actually pressed from digital masters. You cannot make this up. It's just too good. Too god. And yet, you don't see what this proves? The point escapes you? Really?

So-called vinyl expert after vinyl expert praised the purported "fidelity" of Mobile's records, claiming the superiority of all-analog-to-vinyl. Yet it was all a massive fraud and a big lie. Again, not ONE vinyl expert, ever, could hear or reveal the actual true source of these vinyl records was actually digital masters.

And watch the video. The reverse also is true: if you take inferior vinyl recordings, with their crackling, popping, hissing, you can always hear that in a digital conversion. Always. That is because digital fidelity is superior in every way -- which is precisely why so-called vinyl audiophiles didn't suspect a damn thing when MoFi was committing a massive fraud by pressing vinyl from digital files.

When the Mobile Fidelity fraud was disclosed, I looked back at the many, many post praising the purported "analog fidelity" of Mobile Fidelity's vinyl. Oh, the praise, the gushing, the ridiculousness of it all. And I laughed, and laughed, and laughed some more, as these supposed vinyl audiophile experts raced to delete posts praising what was, at base, digital masters. I say again, digital masters.

If you fail to understand the import of the video -- that is, if you truly cannot see how this massive vinyl fraud puts the lie to your belief in vinyl, and you cannot make the minor logical connection from the fact you can easily hear vinyl converted to digital audio, but even industry-leading "vinyl experts" absolutely cannot hear digital-to-vinyl -- I cannot help you.



Absolutely no one said this. I don't believe you. Before the Mobile Fideltiy fraud was made public, point me to a single public post, review, message, anything that shows vinyl-lovers or so-called vinyl audiophiles believed Mobile Fidelity's vinyl was pressed from DSD files. I defy you to show me even a single pre-fraud review or opinion stating MoFi's vinyl was based on digital masters, and that MoFi was lying and was a massive fraud. It doesn't exist -- precisely because no one could actually hear it.

I say again, if you fail to understand the import of this massive fraud, if you truly cannot make the logical connection between this massive "analog-to-vinyl" farce and what it means for the fidelity of digital versus vinyl, there is utterly no point in discussing it further. And the video makes this very clear, hence I think you simply refuse to see or concede the connection, and the point.

Many thought their records were bad sounding, they were far from universally loved even when everyone was under the impression they were all-analog. But nobody could’ve known they were using DSD transfers for their records, because they had a reputation and we had no choice but to take their word at face value. There are any number of technical or artistic reasons something might not sound good, it’s not like someone can put on a digitally-sourced record and go “aha!! I hear digital!”
Fact of the matter is, they lied. That’s why they’re being sued. It’s really not some kind of big gotcha to point the finger at the victims and blame them for believing exactly what they were told.
If you go to a restaurant and the chef takes a whiz into your soup, you might not immediately suspect urine but you sure know when something tastes wrong.


At the end of the day, you have never directly heard or handled a single analog master tape, not one. So no, you are not in any position to argue against the benefits of an all-analog signal path. And if you are somehow arguing that the mere presence of a digital intermediate somehow improves the sound over a record where one isn’t used, then Mobile Fidelity likely has a position for you on their PR team.

 

[Velin]

But nobody could’ve known they were using DSD transfers for their records, because they had a reputation and we had no choice but to take their word at face value. There are any number of technical or artistic reasons something might not sound good, it’s not like someone can put on a digitally-sourced record and go “aha!! I hear digital!”

Right. Because DSD and lossless digital is the best, premier format, period. "Nobody could've known" because humans cannot hear it as DSD and lossless are currently as good as it gets. It fooled all the analog uberfans. Fooled.

And critically, the reverse is not true -- any schmo can pick out a vinyl to lossless digital. That's because vinyl to digital transfer is filled with the small skips, pops, even hisses. I've heard it. You've heard it. Everyone hears it. That is because vinyl is inferior, as is analog. All of it, inferior. Confirmed by the MoFi fraud, and many, many other things.

It’s really not some kind of big gotcha to point the finger at the victims and blame them for believing exactly what they were told.

Sure it is. This is the perfect example of "the emperor has no clothes." They were told it's analog to analog. These so-called vinyl audiophiles couldn't pick out a DSD transfer if it hit them in the face -- because digital is the premier format. Fooled them all, and I don't care what they were told. They have ears. They can perceive. They perceived nothing. Swallowed the snake oil, as they all do.

At the end of the day, you have never directly heard or handled a single analog master tape, not one.

This thread is about an overpriced turntable. All turntables are overpriced -- because vinyl is terrible. The MoFi fraud confirms it in spades. Spades. All of them, fooled by digital masters in junk analog vinyl, in the most obvious way. Spending big bucks for a vinyl record, claiming it sounds superior because it is analog, yet the master is digital. I don't care how you slice it and dice it or try to explain it away. You cannot explain it away. The facts are damning, the conclusion both obvious and unavoidable, as I previously laid out.

Tapes also suck. Lossless formats are superior in every way, as is the media, as is the ease of use, storage, everything. Putting sound on rust-coated painter's tape will always be inferior to the mathematical beauty of lossless formats. But we'll have that debate when some grossly overpriced FisherPrice tapeplayer claims it too is superior to lossless digital files -- just as all the MoFi defenders claimed their fraudulent platters were superior. Same fish, different frying pan.

 

[MrRom92]

Right. Because DSD and lossless digital is the best, premier format, period. "Nobody could've known" because humans cannot hear it as DSD and lossless are currently as good as it gets. It fooled all the analog uberfans. Fooled.

And critically, the reverse is not true -- any schmo can pick out a vinyl to lossless digital. That's because vinyl to digital transfer is filled with the small skips, pops, even hisses. I've heard it. You've heard it. Everyone hears it. That is because vinyl is inferior, as is analog. All of it, inferior. Confirmed by the MoFi fraud, and many, many other things.



Sure it is. This is the perfect example of "the emperor has no clothes." They were told it's analog to analog. These so-called vinyl audiophiles couldn't pick out a DSD transfer if it hit them in the face -- because digital is the premier format. Fooled them all, and I don't care what they were told. They have ears. They can perceive. They perceived nothing. Swallowed the snake oil, as they all do.



This thread is about an overpriced turntable. All turntables are overpriced -- because vinyl is terrible. The MoFi fraud confirms it in spades. Spades. All of them, fooled by digital masters in junk analog vinyl, in the most obvious way. Spending big bucks for a vinyl record, claiming it sounds superior because it is analog, yet the master is digital. I don't care how you slice it and dice it or try to explain it away. You cannot explain it away. The facts are damning, the conclusion both obvious and unavoidable, as I previously laid out.

Tapes also suck. Lossless formats are superior in every way, as is the media, as is the ease of use, storage, everything. Putting sound on rust-coated painter's tape will always be inferior to the mathematical beauty of lossless formats. But we'll have that debate when some grossly overpriced FisherPrice tapeplayer claims it too is superior to lossless digital files -- just as all the MoFi defenders claimed their fraudulent platters were superior. Same fish, different frying pan.

What exactly do you think you’re listening to when you’re listening to digital? Where do you think the sound came from in the first place?
A tape, if you’re lucky. Or a transfer off disc!
You’d be surprised how frequently an old pressing is used as a source for whichever latest “remaster” or what have you. And no, vinyl playback is not littered with “small skips and pops” or anything of that matter.
Seriously, you are only proving yourself as someone who has probably never even listened to a record on a half decent system. No educated person would describe the experience as you do.
You must be pleased by nothing if you think analog media sounds horrible, because that’s where the vast majority of music you listen to originated in the first place.
Maybe you’re best off just sticking to MIDI music

 

[smoking monkey]

A little disappointed with the design.

I was hoping for something like this... I actually owned this back in the 80s. It felt like the future, although I'm sure the linear arm wasn't as good as a non linear arm. Still, it was good fun!

 

[smoking monkey]

And critically, the reverse is not true -- any schmo can pick out a vinyl to lossless digital. That's because vinyl to digital transfer is filled with the small skips, pops, even hisses. I've heard it. You've heard it. Everyone hears it. That is because vinyl is inferior, as is analog. All of it, inferior. Confirmed by the MoFi fraud, and many, many other things.

As with anything analogue there is a charm and beauty to it that you just don't get with digital. Look at CGI in movies. I think many actually prefer practical effects even though it can't show as much, I think we now know that limitations are actually a good thing. Less is more sometimes...

 

[inkswamp]

I feel like if Apple truly did produce a turntable, this would be close in terms of looks but they would pretty much eradicate the entire tone-arm/needle assembly. Apple's aesthetic seems to abhor moving parts and overly complicated aspects of a design. I suspect they'd replace it with a single, non-moving device that reads the record with a laser.

 

[mjs916]

Dropping $60k on this record player would be unapologetically stupid! 🤣

Or as Jony would say “Profoundly” so.

("music has always been profoundly important to me.")

 

[George Dawes]

Tbh this is more like what Apple would come up with with jony’s many ‘influences’ , he certainly ripped off David Lewis and Jacob Jensen as much as Dieter Rams imo

Beocentral - Beogram 8000

The definitive Bang & Olufsen reference

beocentral.com

Tangential arm with an advanced magnetic drive , when bang & Olufsen really were cutting edge

‘The Beogram 8000 used a new system called “Tangential Drive”, a form of direct drive that used “linear motor” technology to give smooth, silent and controllable power to the turntable. In simple terms, the motor coils placed a magnetic field at a tangent to a metal drum under the platter. This had the effect of pulling the drum through the coils in a manner that was smooth and free of “cogging” and “stepping” effects. This layout was at odds white the techniques used in the typical Japanese direct drive turntable, which tended to use hall-effect motors based around rotating magnetic discs and multiple electronically-commutated coils in an arrangement that was fundamentally not “stepless”.’

 

[Analog Kid]

LoveFrom completed the work pro bono, and has no contract or other financial arrangement with the company.

That's a disaster waiting to happen... If there isn't a document somewhere defining who owns what, even if there's no money changing hands, there's a train wreck coming.

 

[arobert3434]

No. I'm rubbish at describing things like that.

If you want to know more, have a read of this: https://www.whathifi.com/linn/klimax-lp12/review

That's a review of a standard LP-12 that's about a third of the cost of this special edition. There are many reviews on the internet of the LP-12, you'll be hard pushed to find one that doesn't rave about it.

I'm not defending Linn for selling a $60,000 deck here, what I'm trying to do is point out that this is one of the best record decks in the world and the standard models are priced accordingly. The majority of readers will never have heard of Linn and because it looks like a £200 deck, they'll compare it as such.

It's like comparing a £1400 iPhone with a £100 Chinese copy smartphone.

They're selling a limited edition version with two parts designed by Jony Ive (the hinge and switch). They'll sell out very quickly and these will become collectors items.

The thing is, if you had one of those raving reviewers compare the LP-12 and a $300 turntable in a blind listening test, they wouldn't be able to tell them apart. Or if they did they'd likely as not "prefer" the $300 one, until the curtain was pulled up, at least.

 

[arobert3434]

The time when you still had to put a physical device on or into a machine was magical. Our way of consuming music today does not have any magic any more. And I will never pay for a file made out of zeros and ones. A record collection was something you could give to your children or grand children, but decades of Spotify subscriptions will cost you a lot of money without leaving any value.

Unless you value your enjoyment of the music in the moment, I suppose?

 

[darngooddesign]

View attachment 2230024A little disappointed with the design.

I was hoping for something like this... I actually owned this back in the 80s. It felt like the future, although I'm sure the linear arm wasn't as good as a non linear arm. Still, it was good fun!

I think I had this linear-arm record player back in the 80s; IRC, mine had the stylus in the lid. I thought it was really cool and it was supposed to be better than traditional because the arm was always parallel to the grooves. I agree that it seems like futuristic tech.

 

[pakupakuman]

I think I had something that looked like that in the 1980s!

In fact mine was better as it had blocks around the turntable which became still when spinning at exactly the right speed. They seem to have missed theirs off.

Technics SL1200MK3, maybe?

 

[MrRom92]

Technics SL1200MK3, maybe?

MK2 more likely, but practically the same thing. Either way, there were lots of turntables with strobe markings on them besides the 1200. It’s a feature on some tables even going back to the 1950’s. Simple and it works!

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

I know exactly what a master recording is. I work with them on a regular basis, in all tape formats sometimes dating back to the early 1950’s. I have also been involved in all stages of actually producing and manufacturing records, and I have had projects in some of the biggest and best studios all over this planet.
I can tell you straight up, there is nothing that sounds like the original master tape. Full stop, end of story. Any copy or transfer is a matter of small compromises and trade-offs. There’s no escaping that fact. But I am in a better position than you or most anyone here to tell you which set of trade-offs gets you the closest.

Digital is “perfect”, it doesn’t degrade, it can be copied infinitely, it can be backed up in multiple locations, and beamed halfway across the globe in the blink of an eye. Unfortunately it also never sounds like the actual tape. It’s getting better, getting closer everyday. Some of the newest converters (with prices approaching the Jony Ive LP12) almost have me convinced. But it’s never quite the same.


The best vinyl pressings retain the magic. And lucky for you, no clean room is required. You seriously don’t think that’s how people regularly listen to records, do you? I’ve seen people’s listening rooms, people with a lot more money than I have; people with systems costing more than my life is worth… trust me, their rooms are anything but clean. These are record nerds we’re talking about here.
If you think records should be played in clean rooms, I’d hate to tell you about the conditions in which they’re often pressed, but that’s probably a story for another day.


You’d be surprised how many cases there are where an original master tape is lost or damaged and an old vinyl pressing is considered the best extant source for transferring/“remastering”
Even when you’re listening to CDs, downloads or digital streaming, you’re probably listening to more transfers of records than you realize.


Pretty cool that they manage to get so much out of dragging a diamond against a cheap piece of plastic.

The clean room reference was sarcasm, meant to describe what would be needed to keep your vinyl free from dust and dirt (pops and clicks), which in my opinion, is a deal-breaker if you're spending $100,000 to play back music that sounds as much as the original as possible. Which was my original point -- spending 100x the money as what is really needed to get 95% of the vinyl experience just for that extra couple percent.

I have a decent turntable and a bunch of vinyl (most of which is from the 80's) that, in my opinion, is well-suited to the medium I am playing back.

If only every song and album was available on the "best vinyl"? They're not and I would guess most people's collections are much like mine, with lots of vinyl that has seen better days (even though I did use Discwasher back in the 80's and proper album covers). Again, pointing back to my original post.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

View attachment 2230024A little disappointed with the design.

I was hoping for something like this... I actually owned this back in the 80s. It felt like the future, although I'm sure the linear arm wasn't as good as a non linear arm. Still, it was good fun!

I had something similar from Bang & Olufsen. Linear tracking turntable. It was a thing of beauty. I wish I still had it.
That, and a pair of imported Stax electrostatic headphones. Oh well.

 

[CWallace]

Bang & Olufsen made some incredibly cool looking kit back in the day. Was always a treat to look at their showcase in the local high-end A/V store in the 1980s as well as their retail store in the late 1990s.