Dear all,
this is a thread full of helpful ideas how to improve the installation of TTs and the whole system. I needed over ten years to find out that the most limiting factor for good sound is the listening room itself. Usually you cannot change the room's structure and you need to compromise on many topics. This was exactly my situation in 2006.
Then I decided to build my own room. It took me two years studying and doing preparations for the final design, building structure and all the issues for the potential technical and acoustical effects. At this place I do not repeat what I am writing on my page but let me express that besides of the best construction material the right size of the room, having enough space behind and above the speakers and also between the speakers and the listening position is most important.
Either you do it in a monitor setting very close to the speakers as Jonathan suggests or you do it like I did keeping reflections ( also the first reflections ) under control by putting special frequency related treatment material in the additional extra-ceiling and also breaking the waves by the
surrounding wall installations avoiding glass and flat structures at the same moment.
It may sound funny but it is a big challenge to create a room which breathes and still has some atmosphere, so you like to stay there and do not feel entering a bunker or a dead room. In the end we want to relax and enjoy the sound - not the distortions. I have to admit that some theories work pretty well when being implemented but there are lots of thoughts also in this thread applying on "small rooms" which definitely do
not work in my listening room. Not a big issue for me anymore.
Don't get me wrong, I don't want to highlight my special situation ( maybe a little too :^) . What could be more important is that if you have a nice system and you do think about an apropriate room you may put some efforts in this rather than rebuilding the system all the time, or shielding everyhing around you. We need to live with airborne and structural waves but you can do a lot of improvements.
best & fun only |
This thread moves fast, so pardon me for stepping back a few days.
Jcarr: Thanks for the response to my post regarding the placement of my rack. I recently changed my rack from an Ikea shelve that was low and wide to a proper rack that is tall and narrow. The change in dynamics and bass response was dramatic. The new rack as far back as it can go but less than 500mm (20") back from front face of the speakers.
Besides the the interconnects there is also the issue that my dedicated power line runs to an outlet located on the wall between the speakers. Moving the rack would require pulling the wires again or a long extension cord.
All this is to say, that my experience with the change of rack leads me to agree with Tuchan's statement that the most limiting factor to good sound is the room. Understanding and taming your room and its contents will likely have bigger impact than any gear upgrade. That is not say that good gear is not required, it is necessary but not sufficient. |
Dear Thuchan, Some Dutch Jew was reading the paper and suddently started to cry. His best mate Mos asked what the reason was. Sam : "Don't you see the Rockefeller is passed awy.''
Mos : 'I am really sorry but I had no idea that Rockefeller is family of yours.'
Sam: 'that is exactly the problem.'
Regards, |
I agree with Nick. The turntable may be the center of the system with which everything in the front end has a specific relationship, but the ROOM is the universe and the most important element in achieving good sound. |
Hi Nick –
Besides the the interconnects there is also the issue that my dedicated power line runs to an outlet located on the wall between the speakers.
IMO - I rate the quality of electricity as important as the room. I did not want to deal with extra cords and I know I have a problem with moving gear around a lot. I did not want to be at the mercy of the wall outlets. So I had the electrican install a shielded flexible dedicated line with 4 outlets on the end. This flexible line will reach back into the deepest section of the room if needed. My amps get plugged into it. This flexible line has provided me the freedom to place gear anywhere and experiment. For my neighborhood my meter has shown anywhere from 115 at the worst in summer to 122 depending on the time of year. I can remember years ago when turning on the amps and the lights would dim momentarily. Cheers Chris |
Dear Nandric,
we may help Sam... but then I have to enter Fleib's new church I guess .?
best & fun only |
Hi Henry
The Exclusive P3 is superb. It certainly has never had any feedback problems, so I am not sure where that comment came from.
The P3 has very sophisticated triple isolation (oil-damping + spring + rubber) which is isolated from the plinth. Isolation is down to 5hz. The motor structure and tonearm are on the same plane.
So, why would I want to remove the "decoration" plinth? It looks classy, sophisticated and timeless , yet like most plinths does not effect the sound quality or isolation abilities.
The Japanese engineers spent a lot of R&D on the P3 and it shows. I am sorry if you think anyone in their right mind would try to disassemble it. A tonearm rewire would be beneficial thou.
It was the most successful high-end & high-priced turntable in Japan for good reason. |
Dear Thuchan, Explaining a joke is the same as admit that there is no joke. Glad to see that you 'got it' but I deed not expect otherwise. For the 'possible others' I will refer to your country lady Marlene Ditrich. She was wondering why so many American women are dressed so tasteless. 'At present' she thought (we are talking 1960) 'one
can get very decent clothes for only $100.000.'
I thought that at present to build a 'decent' dedidicated listening room may cost much more. But I am more optimistic than Sam and may have a chance to become member
of the Rockefeller family.
Regards,
|
Dear Ct0517,
there is no argument against your position. Electricity installation is the start of a good system, even if you change some simple issues in a modest system. You discovered a flexible solution. I my case as I was able to influence nearly everything when building the room. My electrican installed three wide cross sectional lead cables in-wall mounted in the 50 cm thick ceiling going directly to the junction box.
I use a specially build passive connector box with many inputs, no filters.
best & fun only |
Dear Nandric,
hopefully Marlene and me have different experiences... Nevertheless if you start "living in a sealed world" you may end up like your parable shows. 100.000 is not enough...
best & fun only |
Here is an economical way to own a nice armpod. Buy the complete turntable for $150,000 :^) CHEAP |
Dear Thucham, You and Marlene Ditrich have of course different experience. My point however was that you both are/were able to spend a huge amount of money for your respective hobbys. The most people are not able to do this.
Then my assumption that a 'decent' dedicated listenening
room may even cost more than Marlene's $100.000 you yourself confirmed. I have no idea what you mean with 'living in a sealed world' as well what you mean with
'parable'. First of all I deed not invent those stories.So no 'parables' but facts.
Second I spent some considerable time in three different cuntries, got my Law degree in Holland and was university teacher for 35 years in Holland. So I have no reason at all
to think that I live in a 'sealed world'. On the contrary I consider my self as a world citizen. Besides I can pay for a 'decent' dedicated listening room but other 'things' are more important to me.
Regards, |
Henry, What tt is that? It's impossible to be certain that the arm pod is indeed independent of the tt, from that angle of view. |
Dear Halcro,
isn't it funny that someone who builds a nice looking TT (at least from a design point of view) thinks his potential customers are mad and fully standing outside of the real world. Who will pay the price they ask for? No one! I have seen and listened to the unit at the RMAF 2010. It is nothing spectacular about it unless that it's builder "flew to the moon with NASA" (not really...), was in touch with all unsolved technical issues the world is desperately questioning, and so on... if you read all the marketing lines...
okay it should have a place at the MOMA - yes! besides the first Transrotor etc.
best & fun only |
Dear Nandric,
oh yes, got your point very early. I mean Marlene seemed to live in a sealed world - not you! Marlene was able to do much more than me - maybe she also had more beautiful legs...
Your assumption about the listening room is quite right, but you know the plan and the implementation had a price. My wife was asking for a Japanese Garden and a big veranda on top of it. It also has an advantage, the room is fully noise sealed - which means I cannot hear her anymore when she is dancing on the veranda :-). but be assured she knows how to reach me...
You see it is not as simple as it looks and one usually does not need a room like mine. It is rather based on an ambition than money. Shure you can do it too but maybe you went not such crazy as me. Stay normal please!
best & fun only
best & fun only |
Lewm: scroll down this page, http://www.onedof.com/pictures and you'll see what they call the 'tonearm tower'. |
I see it now. Thx. That is one heckuva pod. Still would like to know the name of this table and who makes it, not that I am in the market. Does it really retail for $150K, as H implied? |
Just look around that website. It has all the answers. Yes, $150k.
"A first in the history of the audio turntables self-centering One Degree of Freedom or Onedof™ bearing eliminates the source of acoustic distortions associated with microscopic movements of all existing cylindrical shafts. With its unique precision Onedof™ bearing is holding massive spinning platter steadily. The bearing only permits the platter steady rotation about the vertical axis, passing through the center of the planet Earth. It is the only degree of freedom that the bearing leaves to the platter." |
Just look around that website. It has all the answers. Yes, $150k.
"A first in the history of the audio turntables self-centering One Degree of Freedom or Onedof™ bearing eliminates the source of acoustic distortions associated with microscopic movements of all existing cylindrical shafts. With its unique precision Onedof™ bearing is holding massive spinning platter steadily. The bearing only permits the platter steady rotation about the vertical axis, passing through the center of the planet Earth. It is the only degree of freedom that the bearing leaves to the platter." |
Lew,
If you go to the onedof site that Banquo sent and then 'click' on 'Designer'.....you will see the price. |
The brilliant force behind the marketing of the Onedof summed it up for me like a super nova with Oneduff's Youtube production, click on (resonances do not occur) in the suspension and damping section of this web site. |
Dear Halcro the Onedof makes that the DD Wave Kinectics see it as a " toy ".
Thuchan, I think that at least ( no matter price. ) the designer solve some " problems " that no other TT I know addressed, congratulations for that because this is a clear advance on TT design.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Aside from the fact that the name ONEDOF is rather funny in german, the claim that it is "a first in the history of the audio turntable .... eliminates the source of acoustic distortions associated with microscopic movements of all existing cylindrical shafts".
Nice try.
So we will hail once again a new hero - because it is part of the game.
I for one can see a hell of a lot more ideas in the Continuum (R.I.P.).
But as NASA is downsizing on manpower now a fast pace, a lot of now unemployed engineers will seek new ventures.
Audio may well benefit from a legion of former aerospace engineers now bringing their ideas to the more simple field of audio. |
For this kind of money I would insist on 4 belts at least.
Regards, |
|
Dear Dertonarm: IMHO you don'ty need to made that kind of comments on the Onedof and its designer.
I don't remember to read any single similar comment on your protractor design or with you even that you have a very long " tail " for comments about.
I think that every single audio item design deserve our respect even if we don't like it or we think is wrong.
Btw, Nandric I agree: at least four belts.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Raul, There may be some incosistency between your statement that 'every single...item design deserve our respect' and your agreement with me that (only) 3 belts on this TT make this TT to expensive. So we both are,I think, entitled to ask at least 4 belts for this price. However I am glad to see that the Mexican kind of humour is similar
to the Balkan kind.
Regards, |
Dear Raul,
in this case Dertonarm is absolutely right. You should not fall into the trap of marketing. There are other TTs which provide same stableness and bearing technology. Look at the EMT 927 bearing - and this is proofed in professional business since 50 years. Look at the Continuum`s bearing and do experience it in real life. As I said I have experienced the ONEDOF and I took my conclusions soundwise. Yes for 10.000 Dollar because of the nice design and the build quality - okay. But it is up to you going for 15 times the price because you think technologywise this is a major improvement. You only need to cross the border for a short flight to Denver, maybe at the next RMAF. Have fun!
best & fun only |
Dear Thuchan: I don't think is a " trap of marketing " and I think you either.
I'm not speaking about performance but I'm speaking about the designer contribution to improve the TT design. Remember that on the Onedof design exist registered trade marks/patents and I think that with out have in our hands a precise and clear proofs of that " trap of marketing " we could give him the benefit of dude, don't you think?
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Raul,
I do respect all technological inventions. Having a patent does not necessarily mean something, it depends on the topic the patent covers.
we need to look into it more deeply.
If you ever build a TT Raul don't forget to put the price tag over "100.000", this will raise attention. Look at the plastic buttons at the motor. Besides of the stable bearing what is so special, technically? one motor with three belts? the separate tonearm stand? - which looks very good, absolutely.
I like the stand's design! but I would not pay 20.000 Dollar for a stand, would you?
best & fun only |
I've asked via email the designer to come onto the thread and discuss his tt and especially his choice to do a stand alone arm pod. |
Dear Thuchan: Well, maybe not. Yes, I understand that the very high price makes a lot of noise in audio customers but: what if that high cost/price is worth of it?. I'm not saying that the Onedof is worth that price who knows but price is something relative and depends on many factors around.
Banquo363, good move: I hope he can join us here, welcome!
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dertonarm states, audio could very well benefit from the legion's of aerospace engineers whom maybe looking for new careers, this one example turned his focus to building a record player. I'm curious why.
Has it Onedof truly have radically new thinking behind this product? Thuchan says no.
My view it's over priced and that's an understatement, the web site is generally poor, has pictures of jets, helicopters and space vehicles , a list of career education and projects he analyzed and worked on and if he were alive at the time and worked on the Hindenburg design, that unfortunate disaster would never have had happened. Anyway I'm sure the Chinese would hire him, he could take his skis with him.
As goofy as I found some things on Onedof site, I pictured in my mind Jethro and Granny of The Beverly Hill Billy's pitching his product.
|
Banquo363,
I think your invitation to the designer is a great move and could both resolve people's scepticism about the pricing and (more importantly) add valuable data to the main concern of Halcro's thread: the added performance value of nude tt's and decoupled arm towers.
As always... |
The designer's name is Aleks Bakman and I asked him a few questions via email. He declined to come to the forum but gave me permission to post his responses.
First my questions, followed by his responses, followed by more questions followed by Aleks's final set of answers.
----------
"2 issues were raised. One pertains to this claim of yours: "A first in the history of the audio turntables self-centering One Degree of Freedom or Onedof™ bearing eliminates the source of acoustic distortions associated with microscopic movements of all existing cylindrical shafts."
It was said (not by me), that "There are other TTs which provide same stableness and bearing technology. Look at the EMT 927 bearing - and this is proofed in professional business since 50 years. Look at the Continuum`s bearing and do experience it in real life. "
I was wondering about your comment on this.
Secondly, it is said on that thread that standalone arm towers suffer deficiencies due to 1. the tt and tonearm being subject to different resonances, which differences cause distortion at playback and 2. relative motion between tonearm and spindle due their not being rigidly coupled which motion causes geometry errors.
I was wondering if and how you took these considerations into account in your design.
regards,
Minh"
-------
"Thank you, dear Minh, wonderful questions!
1. All cylindrical bearings have inherent problem of whirl described here: http://www.onedof.com/sites/onedof.com/files/images/Slide1.JPG
Onedof bearing eliminates this problem. Onedof bearing centers itself in all directions: up-down and in all horizontal directions. Onedof bearing restricts all translational movements of the platter: upward downward and to all sides. It only leaves one rotational movement of the platter. http://www.onedof.com/about-turntable
EMT927 has cylindrical shaft and ball bearing at the bottom, providing stiff load path to the supporting stand and associated high frequency resonances. This design does not eliminate whirl.
http://www.stefanopasini.it/EMT927F-main%20shaft.htm
http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=80621
Continuum has replaced ball bearing at the bottom of the shaft with the hydrodynamic thrust pad, but the shaft itself remains cylindrical and therefore it is whirling, i.e. wobbles and shifts side-to-side at the same time. It also is not restricted at the top, only at the bottom. These are microscopic movements, which are damaging to the sound.
Rotation shaft/platter assembly of the Onedof TT does not resonate at all, because the design of the bearing/suspension assumes non-linear stiffness, i.e. stiffness that constantly changes with any microscopic movement. Condition for the resonance, permanent stiffness of the suspension is eliminated by design of the Onedof bearing.
Tonearm needs very massive support, to prevent high frequency resonances. If I added this weight (~15 lb) to the suspended mass of 50 lb, the symmetry of suspension loading would be impossible. In any case tonearm and platter would never be resonating coherently because they are so different in shape and acoustic response. Besides, suspension works only when the platter spins. I cannot add tonearm support to the rotating mass. The task of the designer is to prevent all vibrations as much as possible. If it is not possible, one has to damp suspicion. Onedof does both: does not resonate and damps external vibes coming from environment.
However, this is all theory. I like the sound of Onedof, but I had never heard Continuum or EMT927.
Ask more questions, Minh.
If your co-bloggers need answers let them read my web site, using links, that I have given above. ...
I am sorry, Minh, I made a mistake. Tonearm tower weights only 8 LB"
-----------
"Dear Aleks,
Thanks so much for taking the time to answer my questions.
Regarding the tonearm tower, several of us on that forum have taken to having our own towers fabricated by machinists we know. Two of our main concerns were weight and materials. Regarding weight, some of us were of the view that the heavier the better. Thus, many of our towers are 16-21lbs. The idea is that mass loading the tonearm would dissipate errant vibrations and also that increasing weight would prevent accidental movement of the entire tower (thus messing up tonearm geometry). Evidently, with your 8lb tower, you seem unconcerned with what troubled us. Are we just being neurotic? On another note, how do you ensure that external vibrations coming up from whatever platform the tower sits on doesn't make it into the tower and then into the tonearm? Is there a design feature that takes this into account. [You might have answered this already in your response below, but admittedly I couldn't follow all of it (I'm no scientist, that's for sure).]
Secondly, regarding materials. We have made towers ranging from brass to stainless steel to various combinations. What is your tower made from? And what main considerations went into choosing the material(s).
Do I have your permission to post our exchange on the forum site? I believe many others would find your answers useful.
FYI: links to your site have already been posted.
I should say, lastly, that I find your turntable extremely tasteful and beautiful. Congratulations and best wishes!
Regards,
Minh"
---------
"Dear Minh,
thank you for the compliment. Yes, what I wrote to you is in public domain.
I do have a scientific background, but I am practicing engineering for 35 years. I am always trying to make myself clear to anybody. I avoid acronyms and abbreviations, I avoid professional vernacular. Still, if you do not feel comfortable with my language, ask again.
I think, the heavier the tonearm support - the better, but after some point extra weight does not make any difference. What does make difference is the stiffness of the load path from the stand to the tonearm. That does not change with mass only, but also change with material stiffness. Aluminum is three times less stiff than steel and 2/3 as stiff as aluminum bronze. Combination of mass and stiffness of the load path creates acoustic response of the system, which is the set of characteristic frequencies at which the system generates resonances. One should be talking about particular frequencies and how to deal with resonant response, rather than in general terms. My tower is made out of aluminum 6061 T6. I did analyze its acoustic response using finite element model of the tower housing and optimized its design to avoid some modes of vibration ("mode" is a change of shape that structure takes, when it vibrates). Some modes of vibration propel distortion upward and therefore are more damaging.
I will take your questions, Minh very seriously, and I will post answers on my web site with some illustrations. It will happen after the show in Denver.
Thank you for your questions and for your compliments, Minh.
By the way, tell the guys, NASA does not build any flight hardware, corporations do. NASA is a government agency, like US Post Service. NASA delivers staff from down here to over there." |
This method is very old actually. One first produce the so called 'state of the art' with a pricetag nobody can afford and than the trickle down models which 'promisse', say, 90% of the technology implemented in the 'state..'. The money was supposed to come from those of course. Ie get the attention first with some crazy price.I was always impressed by Infinity . I mean the big one's for which I really needed Rockefellers. But Nudell got bankrupt 3 or 4 times ,if I remember well. And I am really sorry for
his misfortune: I still like the guy and those big ones which I still can't afford.
Regards, |
Dear In_shore, my comment was indeed meant rather sarcastic.
In the sense that many hear the call, but very few are in fact appointed ( this phrase is much more phonetic balanced in german .... ).
While audio physics no doubt are much less critical and demanding than aerospace, the criteria are much less obvious and defined.
Deserves every product respect per se?
Just because it is there and just because it bears a serious price tag?
Let a new product - with so far only one sample made - proof it's claimed performance.
Why giving away laurels ahead.
But then I may be too critical and have a habit to regard something "new" always somewhat sceptically.
|
Dear Nandric, today in audio the big buck is no longer made by trickling down. Unless you have very large production facilities, huge output and the subsequent large quantity discounts with materials procurement, you have little chance to really make good profit that way.
At least not in high-end analog audio any longer.
Too small total numbers.
As a good portion of our passion deals with proud ownership and image, high priced gear sells better today than most modest price components.
Especially as this type of consumption is nothing one exhibit in public.
Setting up serial production for a US$2000 turntable is just as hard and time consuming as doing the same for a US$12000 turntable.
And it is the planning and setting-up of production which is really the challenge. |
The messenger deserves an extra discount. Oh no- not again this kind of habits and exchanges without staying to one's product. I have experienced this in Germany, pls. not here on Audiogon. Hope I am wrong on that - we will see in the future...
Best & Fun Only |
Does anyone knows someone who actually has bought an Onedof turntable.
Would be interesting to learn which tt it superseded and whether the owner has any thoughts/comments about it performance. |
Thanks, Banquo, for going to the source. I won't understand the design unless or until I see a good engineering drawing of his bearing, nevertheless. I got nothing from his description, but he is to be credited for trying. In a sense, I agree with Raul, I hate to see us audophiles condemning a piece of gear for its price, per se. But I also agree with the others who look at this turntable and cannot see where is the $150,000-value. This is the designers fault for not using enough chrome and lucite doo-dads and for not including an elaborate stand to hold the whole thing up. These latter items tend to make us "believe". Look at that Clearaudio Statement, for example. Now THAT's good marketing. (The product makes me ill, however.)
The YouTube video is ridiculous. There are dozens of turntable/shelf combinations that can pass that test for well under $10,000. But it does not prove the tt is not "worth" $150K, either. |
Dear Lewm, yes, no chrome - but look at that shiny golden finish. Given the sky-rocketing gold price of recent months, that should give enough cosmetic proof of quality in the mere audiophile sense we're accustomed to these days.
BTW - what song/singer is that in the video?
Me being music-wise rooted in the 1950s and 60s with very little of modern origin, I would honestly like to know.
I kind of like the tune. |
Is that gold or polished brass? I tended to think it was the latter. Don't know the identity of the artist, but I am not curious, either. |
Dear Lewm/Thuchan: The 150K on this TT is no different from amplifiers on that price range and those amplifiers looks more deceptive than this Onedof.
Could an audio item justify 150K+ price tag?, certainly it can. Could any one of us justify those 150K+ in an audio item?, again certainly yes.
On one side there are a lot of hidden work on an honest audio item design during the research on that design and during its different kind of tests ( scientific or subjective. ), I'm speaking in general and not taking in count each step on that audio design, as a result all these kind of main work depend on the designer's skills and how " unique " and ambitious are his targets. Many times these main work takes not months but in some cases years of hard work because it is not only that the designer already has the design " finished " but the whoile project has several " stages " and each one represent research and tests, example: Aleks choosed aluminum 6061T6, do you think this was at random or just comparing through internet? , certainly not as Aleks posted he made analysis and I assume against other materials.
This is only an example but like this design/build audio item stage there are a lot more that ask for the same quality of researcg and tests proccess.
Now, it is not only that the design can fulfil designer targets ( mechanical, electrical or the like. ) but that the design can fulfil customer expectatives for the price tag.
In the past corporation like Mathusita-Panasonic took 9-10 engineers and given to design/build the Technics SP-10 or the EPC-100CMK4 and this corporation not only gives the task but gives them all and any kind of resources to acomplish the product.
Please ask Aleks or almost any today audio item designer where are all those human, tools and $$$$ to fulfil his design: there is almost no one resource other than the designer positive " emotion " and stand alone skills. In many ways the today audio items designers works as artesans more than as a corporate " figure ".
Yes, some way or the other money has to fluence to these kind of manufacturers.
Hopw can we think that this or that high price tag audio item is worth that price?, only when we hear/heard in our system against other similar audio products or in any other controled environment audio system.
Till this moment I give Aleks the dude benefit. We all are not rookies and I don't think Aleks target through that Onedof was to deceit us, I think is very difficult to deceit people with audio/music deep experiences like all of you: so the Onedof could have " something " to say on playback.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
The interesting parts for me and this thread are his remarks about the self-standing tonearm towers. At least with his design, he seems unconcerned about the arguments against them. Furthermore, when he writes, "In any case tonearm and platter would never be resonating coherently because they are so different in shape and acoustic response" I take that to imply that rigid coupling of tt and tonearm via a plinth does not offer the advantages that some on this thread claim for it--or at least that what Aleks believes.
I wish someone would comment on the other technical assertions he made in his emails and on his website. They strike me as substantive enough to merit a conversation (as opposed to useless sarcastic remarks). They are not ad copy, that's for sure. He made a claim about the bearing design being novel and some quickly dismissed it--what now?
Of course, all this technical stuff is distinct from the quality of the sound, as he himself says in his email.
Thucan: what are you talking about? If by 'messenger' you mean me, then I should say that I never heard of Onedof until I saw Halcro's link above. I certainly have no financial relationship with them. I should disclose however that if he were to offer me that turntable for free I wouldn't turn him down :). |
Dear Banquo363: Thank you again, very enlightly.
Regards and enjoy the music,
Raul. |
Dear Raul,
i have one advantage if you let me put it into these words. I have seen and listened to this turntable. So pls. take your chance and convince yourself in Denver. Then let's continue this discussion. Okay?
best & fun only |
Dear Raul, All that you say about the current state of high level R&D in audio is probably true. On the other hand, modern designers have available methods for machining parts both for beauty and for function that were never dreamed of when those Technics engineers went to work on the SP10, for one example. Further, we now have transistors, ICs, resistors, capacitors, etc, that far outperform the 1970s vintage of the same items. It's kind of a trade-off between the good old days and now. And in the end, the person who is buying this turntable needs to be convinced that somewhere in there are some unique and transcendent qualities that make it worth the price. That too is the job of the designer/inventor. I would also reiterate that I already stated I do not hold with those who condemn things purely on the basis that they cost "too much". But, sorry, right now I just don't see $150,000 here. I will keep an open mind until I have a better understanding of the unique qualities of this piece, if it has any. If I decide to go to RMAF, I will look for it there.
That bit about the tonearm mount and the turntable/bearing resonating at different frequencies is possibly more true for separates than it is for turntables with integrated tonearm mounts, IMO. (But I don't want to flog that horse here any longer.) |
Even if one hears the ONEDOF at RMAF, how will he/she be able to isolate the sound of the table from the rest of the system? Pardon the pun. And what will the rest of the equipment in the system actually be?
I went to RMAF last year for the first time and spent most of the weekend listening to different tables, arms and cartridges. Some combinations sounded great, but I certainly did not gain any real understanding of what any individual component actually sounded like. |
I agree. I would rather hope to find out more about how the bearing is constructed by talking to someone in the know, first hand. The bearing seems to be the crux of the justification for astronomical cost. Otherwise, the tt looks like it could fit into the TT Weights line-up quite nicely, as a representative belt drive and at TT Weights pricing. |
