beat_truck
Addicted Member
The tonearm on that looks harsh enough on it's own.If you think stacking turntables treat records harshly... skip to 0:54 in this video!
Does your Turntable stack records? Do you use this feature?
- Thread starter jeffpaletz
- Start date
vwestlife
Super Member
The tonearm on that looks harsh enough on it's own.
It's from the era when tracking force was measured in ounces rather than grams.
jeffpaletz
AK Subscriber
It seems like many of the people here who are afraid to stack records learned that fear with record players from the 50s and 60s. If those record players damaged records it was due to worn needles or too heavy of a tracking weight, not due to the changer mechanism. My question is directed to people who use modern turntables from the mid to late 1970s and newer, such as Technics, Sony, Garrard, Dual, BIC and other models with modern cartridges and styli and lower tracking force in the area of 1-4 grams.
The modern turntable I've used the longest is a Technics SL-1650 that I bought new in 1977. I used a variety of Shure cartridges including the M91ed, M95, an Audio Technica TK7E and since the mid 1990s a Shure V15TypeVmr with several OEM replacement styli. This setup is still my daily driver. I can assure those who are afraid of stacking their quality records that they won't be damaged by stacking. Many of my favorite records I've owned for decades still sound like new even they they've been played hundreds of time with the Technics SL-1650. Records like the Eagles greatest hits, ELO, Linda Ronstadt's greatest hits and way too many others to mention. Nearly all albums have raised edges and the label area is also raised. When as some have stated, the record comes crashing down, the areas with the grooves don't touch the record above or below it. Hence, no damage. Stacking turntables often cost extra. If they were not popular during the hey day of turntables there would not have been so many manufacturers who made so many stacking turntables.
I listen to records often and don't like to have interrupt what I'm doing to change the record so that's one reason I like stacking records. Sometimes I do serious listening and may opt not to stack as well but that's because I don't mind getting up to turn over the record.
The modern turntable I've used the longest is a Technics SL-1650 that I bought new in 1977. I used a variety of Shure cartridges including the M91ed, M95, an Audio Technica TK7E and since the mid 1990s a Shure V15TypeVmr with several OEM replacement styli. This setup is still my daily driver. I can assure those who are afraid of stacking their quality records that they won't be damaged by stacking. Many of my favorite records I've owned for decades still sound like new even they they've been played hundreds of time with the Technics SL-1650. Records like the Eagles greatest hits, ELO, Linda Ronstadt's greatest hits and way too many others to mention. Nearly all albums have raised edges and the label area is also raised. When as some have stated, the record comes crashing down, the areas with the grooves don't touch the record above or below it. Hence, no damage. Stacking turntables often cost extra. If they were not popular during the hey day of turntables there would not have been so many manufacturers who made so many stacking turntables.
I listen to records often and don't like to have interrupt what I'm doing to change the record so that's one reason I like stacking records. Sometimes I do serious listening and may opt not to stack as well but that's because I don't mind getting up to turn over the record.
steerpike2
Super Member
Its fun, but I only do it with 'special' records that I don't much care about and were not in great condition when I got them.
91r100gs
Lunatic Member
"This is part of a post I made a few days ago in the Music Forums. The pics and album titles were deleted."
My apologies for all the TD posts this AM. Brought my "Core 4" Tangerine Dream records downstairs to clean them on the RCM with Rob's Trition/Hepastat soulution. Gave them a listen on the main system. These are usually played on the Dual upstairs and usually stacked. After a year+ of only being dusted and stacked (15-20 times) on the Dual, I am happy to report that no "Citrus Hallucinations have been harmed.
No
My apologies for all the TD posts this AM. Brought my "Core 4" Tangerine Dream records downstairs to clean them on the RCM with Rob's Trition/Hepastat soulution. Gave them a listen on the main system. These are usually played on the Dual upstairs and usually stacked. After a year+ of only being dusted and stacked (15-20 times) on the Dual, I am happy to report that no "Citrus Hallucinations have been harmed.
No
Last edited:
kaplang
Works for me !
Play once and throw away records.If you think stacking turntables treat records harshly... skip to 0:54 in this video!
Doug G.
Lunatic Member
Hehe, that seems to be the attitude of that changer, doesn't it. "Get OUT of here!"
Doug
Eric Lloyd
Well-Known Member
The last one I had that stacked was a Dual 1228. I only ever used the single play spindle, though. But the girl I gifted it to does use the stacking spindle and loves it. She's very cool, but not cool enough to bother with this forum so she couldn't vote.
jeffpaletz
AK Subscriber
Since some people are posting pictures of very old grind-a-groove record players, models from the 1950s which damage records due to heavy tracking weight and other reasons, I've posted below two examples of quality Technics turntables which are also changers. I can assure people that over the 40+ years I've been using these, they've caused no damage to my records.
This discussion of stacking makes me hope that there is someone out there who needs the stacking spindle for a Technics SL-D5 or a BIC 960. I have both of these but not the original single play spindles. Anyone wanting to trade for originals? I will be posting on Bartertown as soon as other audio projects are finished.
jeffpaletz
AK Subscriber
I have a short spindle that will work for the Technics SL-D5 that I'd be happy to trade for the stacking spindle. PM me your address and I'll reply with mine.
kaplang
Works for me !
I have the Accutrac + 6 as my record changer turntable. It slowly lowers the records one at a time up to 6 LPs. The plater stops spinning till the record has set down. I think it is the least damaging to the record in second place to the Thorens TD244 that may or may not be better but is way more expensive.
The +6 turntable in the video is being controlled by the remote
The +6 turntable in the video is being controlled by the remote
kaplang
Works for me !
I've actually gotten to the point where multi-record albums that are not changer sequenced irritate me.
The only "record grinder" I own is a Garrard RC88/4. Its actually not terrible but its definitely the heaviest running machine I have. Its worse because of the GE RPX cartridge on it that is absolutely unwilling to deal with stereo records in a civil manner. I use it as my 78 changer. Its actually a very gentle 78 machine compared to a lot of 78-only players. Next worst is probably my Type A that runs around 3-4 grams. Also not terrible, especially with a conical stylus, but I can hear people cringing from here
My regular runners are a Garrard Zero-100 or the Lab 80, both of which run 1.5-2 grams very happily.
jeffpaletz
AK Subscriber
I have Garrard RC88/4 connected to a mono Magnavox radio console from the late 1940s. It has two 12" speakers and the amp has four 6V6 audio amplifier tubes. The main unit has AM and shortwave and is the "receiver" for the system in that you switch between the built in tuner, phono and the optional FM tuner which it has. The FM tuner has both the "old" and the "new" FM band. FM was originally on 42-50mhz, which is why TVs don't have a channel 1. The new FM band goes from 88-108 mhz. The Garrard is not original to the unit, the original record player only played 78s. Someone installed the Garrard as an upgrade before I got this unit.
I replaced the cartridge recently with a stereo ceramic cartridge so I can play stereo or mono records. The cartridge is wired to mono so I get both channels summed together. I believe it tracks at 4 or 5 grams which is what the cartridge is designed to track at. It sounds decent, though it's lacking in bass somewhat. I don't believe the Magnavox receiver has an RIAA equalization curve as part of the phono input since it was originally designed for 78s. It is a changer with the side push type of dropping mechanism. It uses a 45 stacking spindle that drops records from the stacking spindle instead of the side pusher. During the automatic cycle an arm comes over and touches the side of the record to determine what size the record is so it can lower the arm at the proper location.
I like bass so I don't use the system much for records. AM and FM sound great though.
I replaced the cartridge recently with a stereo ceramic cartridge so I can play stereo or mono records. The cartridge is wired to mono so I get both channels summed together. I believe it tracks at 4 or 5 grams which is what the cartridge is designed to track at. It sounds decent, though it's lacking in bass somewhat. I don't believe the Magnavox receiver has an RIAA equalization curve as part of the phono input since it was originally designed for 78s. It is a changer with the side push type of dropping mechanism. It uses a 45 stacking spindle that drops records from the stacking spindle instead of the side pusher. During the automatic cycle an arm comes over and touches the side of the record to determine what size the record is so it can lower the arm at the proper location.
I like bass so I don't use the system much for records. AM and FM sound great though.
Aerobat
Class A all the way
I've actually gotten to the point where multi-record albums that are not changer sequenced irritate me.
The only "record grinder" I own is a Garrard RC88/4. Its actually not terrible but its definitely the heaviest running machine I have. Its worse because of the GE RPX cartridge on it that is absolutely unwilling to deal with stereo records in a civil manner. I use it as my 78 changer. Its actually a very gentle 78 machine compared to a lot of 78-only players. Next worst is probably my Type A that runs around 3-4 grams. Also not terrible, especially with a conical stylus, but I can hear people cringing from here
Oddly, the only multi-record set I own that goes 1-4 and 2-3 is Deep Purple's Purple Passages. I currently have six changers in the house that date from 1950-1970, and three of them are converted to magnetic carts with the tracking force lightened up.
