Brinkmann Bardo

Answer to Homosapien - I brought my own tonarm and cartridges to be completely fair. New Ortofon AS-212s with 3 Ortofon LH-9000 headshells, one with a very low hour Micro Acoustics 2002e, one with a low hour Clearaudio Maestro Wood, and one with a low hour Ortofon 2M Black. Both tables set up using a Freikert alignment protractor, VTF set to exactly 1.25g for Micro Acoustics, 2.2g for the Clearaudio, and 1.5g for the Ortofon 2M via digital scale, VTA and azimuth set at level by using 2 Millennium turntable cartridge alignment blocks (http://www.m-puck.de/interanlageblockseite.htm). Both TT's leveled (at separate times) on same platform connected to the same sound (tube) system. In general, the Brinkmann to me seemed to have more toe tapping, Artemis seemed to me to have that too but gave a more emotional and natural presentation.

To homosapien, forgot to mention both TT's speed was checked and adjusted using a KAB speed strobe.

Best Regards

Dear Wjsamx, That has to be the most well controlled and precise comparison of two turntables that I have ever read about. If only audiophile publications would ever do as good a job. In the end, your opinion is subjective, but at least YOU know that the differences you heard must arise from differences in the two turntables.

Someone asked about the differences between the Bardo and the GP Monaco. The Monaco has an incredibly elaborate motor control system and uses a very expensive motor, but beyond that you probably can find the info on the GP website. One question would be whether the Monaco motor is coreless, etc. Obviously, the two tables differ in platter mass and construction and in overall mass. I would expect them to sound different.

I am considering the Bardo with the Granite base and the upgraded power supply. I am also considering the Sota Millenia with vacuum. Has anyone compared the two? do you have a preference?

thanks, Brian

Just caught this thread, and read with great interest. Kudos to all, especially the automobile/turntable analogy. Just wanted to comment, and perhaps revive this thread.

I went from a Bardo with 10" Brinkmann arm to a Kuzma Stabi with 4Point arm and the Kuzma set-up is more focused, detailed and has more weight! All in all a big win.

If you are using a Bardo, Oasis, or Spyder, please share you're thoughts?

I'm quite pleased with the Oasis. To put my comments into context, I'll include my recent turntable history.

I owned a Michell Orbe SE (AC motor) for many years; liked it, but finally could not tolerate its lack of speed control. I replaced it with a Clearaudio Innovation Wood, another belt-drive, which I owned for a couple of years. The IW was fast and lively with deep, solid bass and pretty good tonal balance that was biased toward leanness. I used a Phantom II and a Clearaudio Universal arm, much preferring the Graham.

The Clearaudio benefited hugely from the use of a Minus-K vibration platform. Everything improved, especially suppleness, depth, clarity, and tonal richness. After a few months, I removed the platform as an experiment, placing the IW directly on my Adona shelf and rack. The leanness that was merely a tendency when on the Minus-K became the deck's dominant characteristic, although it hadn't been so noticeable before I added the platform.

I replaced the IW with the Brinkmann Oasis a little over two years ago, and I like it much more. Lower noise floor, better articulation of instruments in space, very neutral and natural in presentation, with excellent speed stability (checked with a KAB strobe). It's beautiful to my eyes; ergonomics are simple and elegant; and the armboards are brilliantly engineered with extremely high tolerances. The same applies to the entire turntable.

I made the move mostly because I wanted to try a next-gen direct drive, and I'm glad I did. I find none of the edginess that some people attribute to lesser DD decks. I think Brinkmann's unique, holistic approach, using a special low torque motor with a high mass platter, overcomes the minute amounts of jitter that other DDs exhibit. I sure don't hear any. I have no desire to return to a belt drive.

Its integral screw-on clamp works extremely well but requires some getting used to: differences in screwing tension have sonic consequences, so you have to come up with a repeatable method.

It is important to note that the Oasis needs the Minus-K even more than the Clearaudio did. Placed directly onto the shelf in my Adona rack it sounds relatively hard and thin. All that goes away on a Minus-K. Great sense of space and soundstage, even tonal balance, accurate harmonic structure, etc. Now it does everything well. I very much recommend a platform like an HRS, Vibraplane, or Minus-K for this or any Brinkmann--for almost any turntable, actually.

In the same system, I also have a Nantais Reference Lenco Mk II with two arms. This idler-wheel deck has slightly better rhythmic grip and drive, and plenty of detail retrieval and coherence. However, it has a slightly higher noise floor, is a tiny bit less precise in articulation, and might be marginally less neutral than the Oasis. Speed stability as measured by a KAB strobe is a toss-up. Perhaps because of its 100lb+ plinth, the Lenco doesn't require a Minus-K nearly as much as the other two decks. I sold the one I was using under it.

I use a Phantom Supreme with the Oasis right now. I also use a Triplanar VIIuii with it sometimes.

That pretty much sums it up. I've never hear the Bardo so I can't comment directly on it. I find the Oasis much more attractive but that's just my taste. I'll add that a dealer I know preferred the Oasis, saying it has a fuller and richer sound. This was after I bought mine, so it wasn't a pitch.

I've become a big fan of Helmut Brinkmann, too. I bought my deck used from a European seller who is also a notable turntable and tonearm designer (long story). The clamp developed an issue. Helmut sent me the needed replacement parts free of charge, which I thought remarkable.

Hope all this helps.

Bill