Building high-end 'tables cheap at Home Despot II
Thanks Pat, the Shindo/Devore set-up certainly highlighted the Lenco's soundstaging and imaging abilities, as well as the particular strength of the Rega/Karat Ruby excellence in instrumental separation, due to the aforementioned speed. Michael and the others attending (hi fellas!) would be interested to know I later mounted an Oracle Thalia MC to the Rega, which is identical in construction and in specs to the Benz Ebony H (but with a retail price which is much lower), and there was a huge increase in bass reach and power (and the image is HUGE and instrumental separation excellent), so the Lenco/Rega pairing can go much further. And in a further paean to the Rega RB-300, since it has a dynamic downforce which the RB-250 lacks, it is much more versatile: using the spring, one can either reduce the effective mass (reduce the downforce to minimum and so bring the counterweight closer to the pivot point) or greatly increase the effective mass (by increasing the dynamic downforce, compensating by moving the counterweight further back), and indeed experiment with everything in-between to extract the best performance from any given cartridge in this tonearm. Add to that the higher-precision bearings and stainless steel construction, and you have a tonearm which, when re-wired, can go a very long way with high end MCs (especially when mounted to a large idler ;-)). It is, furthermore, solid and easy to use, and with its canted and decently-proportioned headshell, accommodates every cartridge I have ever tried with it, which I can't say for many tonearms. My rediscovery of this tonearm is due mainly to the ultra-fine solid core I recently found, which consequently has no spring effect to interfere with the bearings' freedom of movement, and which, being solid core, simply performs better than most, if not all, stranded alternatives. I'm not saying there aren't better tonearms out there, just that the Rega must be taken seriously, and when it is (paired with serious cartridges), it takes some beating. Anyway, exposure to Michael's system means I'll be reconnecting my Leak Stereo 20 (EL-84 amp like the Shindo), and see how it fares with the Mighty Lenco/Rega/Thalia combo!! The Thalia is slower than the Ruby, and could use the Leak's/EL-84's super-speed to compensate (I'm currently using the Pierre amp, which is a rich and tubey-sounding SS amp). In the meantime, it sounds like I've added a subwoofer to the system! |
Amazing that you persist Dung Beetle, as always, very constructive as always. So do like the insect you are, and do us all a favour and disappear until spring, at least. For those who, like Dung Beetle, may not be able to read and understand, by killer reasonably-priced match I mean in some ways as good as the current state of the art. But I know that the rest of you understood this. Limitations of insects and all that. Please ignore and excuse the interruption in our normal programming. |
Mikey, I am using Audio Physic Virgo II speakers and Joule amps (tube 70 w per). Bass was a tad lean when I used 35 w amps and improved with more oomph. However, I have room acoustic issues. So keep that in mind as well. Interestingly, even with Gershman monitors, the bass was good once I used the 70 w amps. |
Thanks for the welcome Michael/Oregon, and thanks for the kind words Michael/Mikeyc8. Hi M167607: my opinion here is not set in stone, but is a combination of experience (the Grados in particular seem happier on '250s, a friend uses this combo to stunning results) and seemingly near-universal consensus that the '250 is the superior tonearm. With MCs anyway, and with both rewired and with identical metal end-stubs/counterweights (RB-300), I always found the RB-250 relatively grainy and bright/harsh. With smoother/slower MMs (like the Grados), this would be counted a plus in many systems, leading to a better balance, which I think partly explains the adoration of the '250s. A complicated situation. The two tonearms differ as well in the vertical bearings, which are very different one from the other (and yet another reason the ‘250 is considered superior); as well as the spring-being-audible thing (I know all the arguments, but trust my ears), which can be addressed by simply applying some grease to kill any ringing, if one is really worried (but a fair comparison does reveal the ‘300’s greater smoothness/refinement, so what exactly is being heard apart from neurosis?), and preserve the extra flexibility the dynamic downforce offers. One has to remember that the whole ‘250-is-superior thing started with Origin Live, which established itself as a business by exactly this claim, offering upgrades to the ‘250 (just as the current slate craze for plinths started in Wales, a world exporter for slate, with no comparisons done against other stones) which became very popular. With MCs however, and also as the systems go up in terms of resolution and high-frequency extension, the picture changes and I find the RB-300 quite a bit more refined, and especially so as the MCs go up in quality. It also works extremely well with the Shure V15s, and likely certain other MMs. Anyway, it's probably more complicated than this, but I'll stand by the general sonic differences between the two arms, one being more aggressive ('250) and the other smoother and more refined ('300). Of course, as the MCs get better, especially in high-resolution, extended-highs systems, the RB-300 increasingly takes the lead. After hearing Michael's system, which excels in imaging, soundstage, and easy differentiation of instruments as I could definitely hear, I decided to re-insert my own EL-84 based amp, my rebuilt Leak Stereo 20. I’d already mounted my Oracle Thalia/Benz Ebony H (which I ended up with due to a series of accidents) to the Rega with excellent results, bearing out the superb quality of this currently maligned tonearm, as is fashionable today to do, people forgetting that once upon a time the Rega RB-300 was the new Enfant Terrible of the tonearm world, being a victim in the public mind of its own success. I am a media analyst by trade, a researcher who is paid to analyze how the reporting of facts and rhetoric are used to influence people’s thinking, and the results. So please indulge me as I find these developments fascinating, as I did the rise of the Belt and the “blacklisting” of the Idler. Many believe the Rega followed the SME V, being a cheaper copy. The reverse is true, as everyone knew back in the ‘80s: the RB-300 came out first, in 1983, to great acclaim. It won an engineering award for its extra-long casting. SME followed in 1984 with its prototype SME V (the finished product came out later), as SME themselves admit, showing a greatness of spirit seemingly utterly lacking today: “The new SME arm aims to solve a major headache in one bold stroke, one already partially addressed by Roy Gandy in his Rega RB300.” I often read, when I very infrequently cruise the forums to see what’s being said, about the very poor construction of the Regas. Excuse me, but what the Hell are they talking about?? Its one-piece cast armtube is evidently superb. Its bearings, horizontal and vertical, have no detectable play: anyone who has handled several tonearms can feel its evident superb quality. Are they talking about the plastic arm-lift/antiskating platform? Most tonearms have these made of plastic. And the Rega is cheap. It was the Roksan/Rega combination which knocked the then-reigning King of Turntables, the Linn LP12/Ittok pairing off its throne, as reported in the world hi-fi press at the time, none other. It was as a result of the Roksan/Rega pairing that the door was opened for varying designs, and brought high end American record players into the mainstream of hi-fi (the honourable ARs aside), by leading to the proliferation of design, since the Roksan broke the three-spring suspension rule, allowing the acceptance of alternatives (which many still resist, considering a three-spring record player to be still the only acceptable option). People often have to go after the Big Gun, not out of a desire for the “truth”, but simply because they are so motivated. This leads to unfortunate results, as knocking the Regas out of various forms of ignorance and misplaced aggression only promotes the Audio as Status agenda, making the ultra-expensive tonearms more secure in their assumed superiority (based on their price tags). I started the Lenco/Idler change as a way of combatting the Audio as Status sickness (I was laughing as I wrote out the title of the first thread, “Building high-end 'tables cheap at Home Despot”, knowing I’d be tweaking the noses of these types), but this is far from over, as it infects even idler fans (who go after such unobtainium as EMTs and automatically assume superiority, and ditto DDs, the rarer and more expensive, the more the assumed the superiority…the price tag is the product to these types, and this further contaminates the search for facts/truth). New exclusivity clubs arise, and Rega-knocking by ignorant budget audiophiles, relying also on Origin Live marketing, unwittingly supports and nurtures this agenda. Anyway, all that investigated and aside, installing the Thalia was like adding a subwoofer to the system after the Dyna Karat Ruby, but it lacked the absolute speed of the Ruby, as most, if not all MCs do. So I hooked up the Leak hoping to balance this out, and the result is music, glorious music: smooth, fast clear, lush, rhythmic, gorgeous. I suspect the longer I am away from the Karat, the less I “remember” its great speed. For now, I’m satisfied with the Lenco/Rega/Thalia, but will likely try the Karat again at some future point. Though ultra-fast and detailed/organized, the Karat is tonally/atmospherically threadbare as compared with the glorious richness of the Thalia/Ebony, not to mention the matter of the bass. Two presentations, both of them enjoyable (since both excel at PRaT and gestalt/togetherness). Anyway, have fun with your various projects/plans all, take what you read with a few tons of salt, do your own research, exercise that rarely-mentioned and fading thing called "critical thinking" (and by this I mean **thinking** based on knowledge/research, not blindly attacking for the helluvit) think for yourselves, and trust your ears!! 'Scuse me for this return to the past, Ranting Into the Void, it just happened, Vive la Lenco, Vive la Idler Wheel!! |
"I am a media analyst by trade, a researcher who is paid to analyze how the reporting of facts and rhetoric are used to influence people’s thinking, and the results." That makes sense. In perusing this thread when arises again and again I can see the inherant self promotion. I can see how it has caught the attraction of some out of mere marketing savvy vs deep content. Or rather remarketing common ideas as breakthrough notions your own. It is a job well done. . |
I am going to regale the audience here with a choice bit of wisdom, from one of the world's greatest writers, Khalil Gibran: "It is easier to write upon the water, than to teach a fool anything." We'll let that stand alone up there, apart were it can be savoured. Which, translated further, but at a lower level (meant more for insects and such-like) would mean "Don't waste time with fools." So, henceforth, I give notice I won't even bother to read posts from this source, the Fool Pool, life is too short and I have better things to do, this is a waste of my - and everybody's - time. If, in one chance in 100 billion, the posts have any value at all (but I think I am safe in assuming "NO"), then I profusely apologize. If, on the other hand, such posts reveal the smallness and meanness of certain characters, then this is the only wise way to deal with it. Like stepping in excrement, then stuck on one's shoes, it may not be my fault, but I'll take the smell of it into the next room I walk into. 'Nuff said. In my last and most recent voyage, I had brought a laptop with me, on which was downloaded years of research in science and history I accumulated through roughly 15 years of travel around the world. Various people I met around the world over this period had dreams of a man traveling with a typewriter, and then met me along the road. It was on this extremely lengthy travel-adventure that I discovered, in Helsinki (I met a beauty in the Greek islands, who agreed to meet me in Cairo, and I in turn agreed to follow her to Helsinki), the existence of the idler-wheel principle, and failing in my search for a Garrard 301 or 401 (before the days of the internet) found instead the Lenco. Upon my eventual return to Canada years later, I fell back into media analysis which, thanks to the internet was now done from home, with e-mail attachments. I had resisted the internet to this point (and still resist the cellphone), but had no choice. While on-line and bored, I discovered Audiogon (I feel for them) and started to make trouble - but ** constructive** trouble - via certain threads I initiated, debates I joined in on and, of course, the Home Despot thread/Lenco/Idler movement. Simply clicking on the links under my monicker confirms this, for those who think rather than excrete noxious airs. The time I will continue to devote to record players is limited, I am working once again on the book, which thanks to fortuitous meetings and findings, is once again on-track. I'm currently playing with an Antique Sound Lab AQ2006DT full-function all-tube preamp, being a great fan of the ASL sound (full of PRaT, slam and excitement) and it is a sweeeeetttt honey of a preamp. Makes me want to buy matching ASL amps. I love the budget ethos, I love the sound (Joseph and I see ear to ear on what music reproduction should sound like). For now I have it matched to the Leak, but it is soooo sweet I will also match it to the ultra-fast Mitsubishi dual-mono SS amp and see what happens. Can't stop fooling around. In the meantime, I have to re-tube my CJ PV-8. Anyway, remember the fun all, and watch what you step in. |
A while back in my travels I discovered the conrad-johnson PV10BL line preamp. There have been many posts on the matter but I have concluded thoroughly that RCA Command Blackpaltes doing 12AU7 duty are unsurpassed. A nice old school hazy schmoozy sound. A little fuzzy and compressed in comparison to other world class preamps, I must say, but when I makes a discovery I sticks with it. Upon my eventual return to Jersey I discovered the Hagerman Clarinet Line Preamp. As an expert on these things I must say that it surpasses the c-j handily in air, extension, and detail. But to stay with the PV well then I will provide a small service to you. There may be a little oscialltion that may make your tubes seem noisy. Not sure if this fault stretches back to the 8 but the 10 had it. See the following link for the fix: http://home.comcast.net/~omaille/audio/PV10BL/PV10BL.html Of course now you can say you discovered it. No need to thank me. My goodness Jean, hand me a napkin; I think I stepped in something. . |
Hi Jloveys, tell you the truth, until I hear it for myself, I can't say. Which is why I am commissioning two stone plinths, one of slate and one of something else. Also to realize - finally - that first dream I had of a marble Lenco back in the Helsinki days. But, my alarm bells ring when I read statements like "the best minds seem to be going towards slate", when, in fact, slate was never compared to any other type of stone and reported on and, as well, that the current slate craze started in Wales, world exporter of slate (and not much else, all due respect to the Welsh). Add to that various well-known crazes in audio, like digital amps (which lose their allure after one gets used to them) and the well-known audiophile equipment trick of emphasizing the higher frequencies in order to present bogus detail (which has worked repeatedly over the years), and the fact that stone will reflect energies far more than any type of wood so leading to this similar unbalance, and I have cause to be suspicious. Add, furthermore, the well-known propensity of many audiophiles to always look for the exotic and difficult over the simple and effective (consider cables, complex circuitry, multiple-layer podded belt-drive monstrosities, etc.). But, I also respect many of those espousing slate, which explains why I will go to the trouble of having a slate plinth made. Finally, slate is not the CLD material it is made out to be, what it is is endless layers of the same material, fractious exactly where these layers meet each other, which might lead to yet more detail emphasis rather than, like certain wood products, absorption of noise and neutral preservation of true tonalities and so forth. Marble and travertine, however, both made of conglomerates of disparate materials, far better deserve the characterization of "CLD" (and are beautiful to boot). Anyway, we'll find out, and I will report honestly, as always. Might be my farewell present to myself. In other news, I recently finished a Garrard 301 project, which involved a Loricraft power supply. I built it into an Ultra birch-ply/mdf plinth (larger than the usual 23" x 19" x 6" plinth), mounted both a Triplanar VII and a 12" cherry tonearm to it (and tested that with my Denon 103"E") and found it to be exceedingly good. This was definitely the best result I have ever gotten from a Garrard, and the fellow it belonged to reported it was the best playback he has ever heard (saying it handily outperforms both the exotic-material Raven and the SME 30) and that it beat his EMM Labs digital set-up (retrieving previously-unheard detail), though it's hard to say whether it was the mass, the power supply, or both. Coincidentally, in a recent talk with someone (I forget who now) I was told it was an underground understanding that Garrards sound best at 240V, and the Loricraft power supply allows just this. So, for those who own Garrards, it might be something to try to get a step-up transformer - assuming you have the "original" European wheels - and try this out to see if it makes an improvement. I've been playing around with that Antique Sound Lab preamp, and though it is not in the same league as the CJ preamps in audiophile terms (but not too far behind), it just has SUCH literally hair-raising timing (as so many of the ASL pieces have) that it has become my premier beloved preamp: when it plays MUSIC (even with digital!!), I just start to melt, to shiver, to experience that long-lost (since the ARC SP-8 days) Kundalini Effect!!! Caveat: according to the dealer here in town, you have a roughly 50-50 chance it will blow up on you. But I've always had good experiences with ASL gear. Now to roll the dice on an ASL Typhoon :-). My dealer will have a heart attack. Anyway, I'll soon also have my Sony 2250 set up in one of my Giant Direct Coupled plinths, that same beastie which I reported on a while back trampled the legendary Technics SP-10 MKII underfoot (but not a Lenco, using the same RS-A1/Monster Cable Sigma Genesis 2000 - currently the mind behind ZYX - on each ;-)). In addition, the Sony, which has an absolutely superb main bearing (clearly better than the Technics), DOES respond to power conditioners, quite well, further improving things. I'm thinking of putting an Oracle mat (hard metacrylate, not so heavy) on the Sony platter. Will report on THAT combo in the near future, before starting on the Rek-o-Kut. So, have an equal amount of fun, laddies and lasses. |
Johnnantais wrote: " So, for those who own Garrards, it might be something to try to get a step-up transformer - assuming you have the "original" European wheels - and try this out to see if it makes an improvement." If one is in the USA or Canada or anywhere else where the AC line frequency is 60Hz, the "European wheels" (assuming he means "motor pulley") are not necessary. The rotation of the motor is primarily dependent upon the line frequency. It would only be necessary to change the position of the links in the voltage changeover block to adapt a Garrard 301 or 401 to 220V-240V/60Hz. The idler wheels do not differ between 60Hz and 50Hz, or 120V/240V. I might suspect some difference between 50Hz and 60Hz operation, though. At 60Hz the motor is spinning 20% faster, perhaps increasing the "flywheel effect" of the motor's armature. |
Hi Gene, yes, I was about to correct that. Actually, one would suspect that increased flywheel effect of the motor should improve things. But, it may also make the motor more audible, leading to some sort of "break-up"/loss of control. So, this would be a case of comparing the two - with step-up and without - to see what the effect is. On the issue of SP10 MKII vs Sony 2250, I had already written way back that what I suspected was happening was a case of torque vs inertia. The SP10 has a much more powerful motor, and no physical system being perfect, this means the Technics platter cannot overcome the motor's speed imperfection/signature (which is quartz locking made audible). The Sony, on the other hand, has less torque (and is servo-controlled), allowing the platter to overcome the motor's signature, smoothing out any audible deviations from perfect speed. The other advantage the Sony has, like the Garrards and the Lenco, is that it can be Direct Coupled, while the Technics cannot. There are ways, however, to ameliorate the Technics' coupling, but it cannot be Direct Coupled the way the Sony can. And Direct Coupling makes a world of difference. Whatever the case, as with the Lenco back when I declared it a real Contender when the World seemed determined to dismiss it as, let's be frank, crap, so I now urge those out there to also consider this one, a Sleeping Beauty waiting to be taken seriously. Be playing with mine soon. Finally, I see the idler wheel making serous inroads, being brought back in various forms as well as being exhumed and revived from various basements. Of course, as in the beginning, I still believe the idler-wheel system is the superior system, various statements made by even idler-wheel aficionados, that no system is superior, being unscientific and based on nothing else but faith, motivated by a philosophy/atmosphere of political correctness (i.e. offend no one). Perhaps we offend the mouse when we state, with certainty, that the elephant is heavier and more massive, but this is simple fact. Perhaps we offend the fans of steam power that the combustion engine is superior, producing superior power in a much smaller package, at lesser cost. Nevertheless, this also is true. So why balk at similar differing mechanical/engineering systems in another arena? I see many of those who argued, back in the starting days of the original thread, that speed stability had been addressed sufficiently by the belt-drive system, and that stylus force drag was inconsequential. And yet even then the best LP-spinners relied on extreme mass to produce more stable speed (and why if stylus force drag was not seriously affecting speed stability?) and extra motors to produce more torque to overcome, indeed, stylus force drag? Many/most opposed me when I declared the belt-drive the inferior of the three systems (and still do), and yet many of these now espouse the growing DD phenomenon as well. Both the idler system and the DD system produce, like the combustion vs the steam engine, far greater results for far less economic investment. A $3K to $20 K DD system, produces equivalent or superior results to a $100K belt-drive system. Why? Because, like the steam engine, a far greater amount of carefully-machined materials is required to get equivalent results from a belt-drive machine, and this is at the root of engineering: producing results to a cost. Otherwise we would all be driving $100-million trains to reach equivalent-to-combustion engine speeds (and the analogy is apt: a $150K belt-drive – simple platter driven by a motor via a belt - is equivalent to the $100-million steam train). Maybe the DD will win the battle, but I have faith that the facts will eventually catch up to the various sources of prejudice - political correctness included - and the idler will eventually be found to have been, all along, the best of the three systems. An extremely slow-revolving motor system which, given the fact that this magnifies speed imperfections to a truly large degree, requires extensive computerized control to be workeable (DD); vs a system which relies entirely on a high-torque, high speed precision mechanical motor designed specifically for that purpose, counterbalanced by the required amount of inertia, requiring a platter which, given concentration of mass at the periphery, need be no more massive that 10 pounds or so, thus obeying the engineering aim of cost vs performance. And that's what it is all about. Furthermore, purely mechanical systems are far easier to repair and restore than complex circuitry and computerization, furthering the aim of cost vs performance (but not the time-honoured economic principle of planned obsolescence). So, to those who love the idler sound but continue to deny years of accumulating evidence, I say pull up your britches, accept the daily-growing evidence, and join in the battle for scientific truth! Politics has no place in scientific research/investigations, and never has (though this doesn’t mean politics hasn’t contaminated/compromised scientific research/findings to a truly horrendous degree). I keep hearing/being told that the Lenco has limits. Like the political correctness thing which, in the utter absence of evidence, offered simply as a given (like the old given that the Sun revolved around the Earth, which, actually and come to think of it, at least had some evidence to support it, that being that it certainly **looks** like the Sun revolves around the Earth) says that no one system is superior to another, being simply a matter of implementation. Where is the scientific evidence for either of these two statements (all systems are equal and the Lenco has limits)? And as written, if it costs twice as much (or more) to get similar results from system A as from system B, then, very simply, system B is superior. Likewise, where is the evidence that the Lenco has limits? Apart from the pure hearsay of those who for various reasons (none of them objective and based on evidence) keep saying this, there is no evidence. Like George Bush who, in the absence of evidence, simply kept repeating that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, until, eventually, he was believed by a majority. So far I have personally compared my Lencos against belt-drives and other pricey machines to the $50K level, and often receive reports of similar experiences from around the world, both direct to me and on various forums. Like any recipe in a kitchen, just because someone follows the recipe, doesn't mean the same results will be guaranteed, and lesser results doesn't invalidate the recipe. That's why there are recognized levels of talent, from middling through chefs. So, the upper limits of the "regular" birch-ply/mdf Glass-Reinforced Giant Direct Coupled Lenco has not yet been found, especially in the currently belt-drive-dominated marketplace, which is how this whole thing started, and what I was aiming at in the beginning, that being the context/battle. But say the upper limits of the Lenco had been reached at the $50K level? What would that mean? Say a new Lenco was manufactured today, as it is with pressed metal chassis, eight-pound balanced platter and 1800 rpm motor and smallish main bearing balanced on a ball bearing, and sunk into a 65-pound birch-ply/mdf mass. Would it come anywhere near $50K retail? Not even close, given the standards of engineering of materials and cost of materials. So, back to manufacturing to a price, the Lenco proves the idler-wheel system superior to the belt-drive, at any rate. I not only continue to espouse the birch-ply/mdf recipe because of its extreme effectiveness, but also because the experiment is not yet finished. My own experiment that is, in which I am trying to prove the superiority of the idler-wheel drive, which so many find offensive due to the current philosophical atmosphere of political correctness (which I emphasize again is a social, not scientific application). By rushing off in a million different directions (materials, implementation, etc.), this experiment fizzles out, and we are back to that tired old canard that no one system is superior to another (tell that to the auto industry, which according to this philosophy should re-instate the steam engine), all depending on implementation. And again: you say this based on what precisely? Examine your assumptions, for that is precisely what they are. And the identification and elimination of assumptions is also what science is about. Anyway, many will be happy, for a variety of reasons, to see me go away, including those who want to erase me from history so they can then benefit in a variety of ways. I'm a pain in the ass, I know, but it's the squeaky wheel that gets the grease/attention. By confining yourselves to out-of-the-way forums, you do not affect things to anything like the degree you do when you participate in a general forum like this one. Keep on reporting in, keep on adding -**postively**- to our store of knowledge/evidence. The idler wheel is back with a vengeance, and this would not have happened without seriously squeaky wheels, out in the public eye, in the face of the industry, on something like Audiogon. Anyway, soon I’ll have to direct my energies elsewhere, and I’ll simply be watching from a distance (I can hear the sigh of relief), but I predict the continued inroads of the idler-wheel system, as fact and science – AND economics - finally overcome political niceties and various personal agendas. In the meantime, of course, Vive la Lenco, Vive la Idler Wheel!! |
Johnnantiais, Your posts are interesting. I do have some questions for you. In your system description you list a number of turntables but NO system info. Do you listen to your turntables through a full range system? How do you evaluate your changes, you must obviously use some speakers and electronics, what might they be? Bob |
Turntable is an addictve hobby. For me since I started tweaking my turntable I had so much reward that the rest of my system is secondary. Not that it has no importance, but improving the front end to the limits makes the whole thing sound better and better . Many times I wanted to upgrade my "average" speakers to very expensive ones I ended buying a top flight tonearm or cartridge, with matching phonopreamp. Why ? Because I feel that the improvement will be more effective than a new pair of speakers. The way to have the best out of your actual turntable considering economics makes the hobby a pure pleasure. Thanks to idler wheel and isolation techniques,... |
Hi Bob, actually, my system is a mish-mash of mostly vintage components as, like Jloveys, I tend to spend my money on the source: record players (Lencos, Garrards, Technics SP10, SP25, Sony 2250, etc.), tonearms (JMW 10.5i, RS Labs RS-A1, Rega RB-300, various vintage tonearms) and cartridges (Oracle Thalia/Benz Ebony H; Dynavector Karat Ruby, Decca Super Gold, Grado Statement Master, AKG P8ES, Empire P10E, etc.). So, first of all, I get to hear my Lencos in various state-of-the-art systems quite often, and so rely on my "true" findings on these demonstrations. As well, I tend to change components in and out quite a lot, in search of special synergies which lead to astounding PRaT and gestalt (nothing less will do) and also to hear various aspects of the experiments with record players I am conducting. But, I'll list my current reference components. For preamplifiers I currently favour a variety of vintage CJ preamps, which I found, after comparisons, to be sonically superior (especially the phono stages) to many current favourite phono stages (including the EAR 834P, sorry chaps). These include the CJ PV-1 (dead quiet with a stunningly accurate phono stage, and line stage), the CJ PV-7 (gorgeous romantic BIG and intimate sound I never tire of), and the CJ PV-8, which has monstrous gain (and so can take low-output MCs straight in), terrific musical excitement and superb bass. For pure pleasure, however, I prefer the ASL AQ 2006 DT, which faithfully communicates the incredible Lenco/Idler way with both gestalt and timing/PRaT better than anything I've ever heard (and so which is, for this specific application, my test equipment). But it's shortfalls in both bass and some detail prompt me to test with the others. Or the vintage Sony stuff, being the superb 2000F, which has been declared by some superior to the latest run of ARC equipment. But, if I say this out loud, then there are those who will use this to discredit my record player findings, so please, hush ;-). For amps, I truly have two reference pieces: one rebuilt-to-modern Leak Stereo 20, with all modern top-of-the-line resistors and so forth, a wonder; and a 100-watt SS push-pull Class AB amp a country gentleman built just for me, which so far has wiped the floor with every bit of kit to come my way. I don't know how he did it, but it sounds much like an SET - with an SET's crystal clear delivery, utter lack of grain and purity of tone - but with limitless dynamics. Another wonder. And, again, I love the sound of various vintage Sony amps, being two mostly, the 3130F, and the 3140. They both beat the crap out of most modern amps in the areas of dynamics and rhythm/timing/PRaT. Seems timing is fast becoming a fogotten art. Which is one reason I push the Lenco/Idlers so much. For speakers, if I want full-range, then I hook up my big Klipsch Cornwalls, which are superb in every aspect, but they scare even me (especially with an idler behind them), so for the moment they are downstairs. My current reference are the Technics SB-4s, which are three-way flat-diaphragm metal honeycomb driver speakers, high sensitivity, and utterly transparent. No audiophile cred, but Hi Fi Answers, back in the day, declared this Technics technology revolutionary and the wave of the future, they are incredible, that rare beast often discussed but never found: a dynamic speaker which sounds like an electrostatic. A few well-heeled audiophiles have recently come into my listening room and been stunned, and gotten up to examine what appears to be an ordinary, unremarkable speaker...until you hear them. I also use Klipsch Heresy 1s, AR 2ax's (nothing does percussion instruments, including piano, like an older AR) and the favourite of many who have auditioned my systems over the years, the ESS AMT4's, which many consider the best woofer-to-tweeter match of the entire ESS Heil Air-Motion Transformer lineup. But, recently they were finally beaten in every way by the unassuming Technics SB-4s. All of the above I found to be quite the superior of such darlings as Proacs, which I have tried in my system (but apparently Proacs need tubes to truly sing). I am currently considering either Magneplanar 1.6s (to hear my Lencos in my listening room via a planar), or Vandersteen 2CEs (great with percussion, dynamics and rhythm). And a few others. Finally, cabling. Excuse me, but cabling is a swamp I don't want to get into. I do believe and concur that they indeed make a sonic difference, but what exactly is happening? No one truly knows. So, I trust my ears and close my wallet: I use solid core for speaker cable (single-strand 24 ga.) and Petra for interconnect. Before you laugh at the last, often available for less than $10 for a six-foot pair, I have very often brought them with me into cost-no-object systems, accepted challenges against favoured $1K interconnects, and left with $10 in my pocket, minus the cable. I am quite satisfied with these, and I no longer search. My experience with audiophiles who promise to try 24-ga. solid core in their system goes like this: they insert the cable into their system, listen for precisely 5 minutes, declare them horribly thin-sounding (interestingly exactly as they look) and without bass (in spite of my warning they take 7 hours to burn in, and again as they look). They then buy cables at $1K to $2K, burn them in for six months/1000 hours, then declare them incredible, with the caveat they require 6 months to burn in before they can be fairly judged. Which explains why they are still considered bad-to-middling. So, there you go, my system is extremely changeable/fluid, and in addition and sadly, if I listed my various systems, many would take this as an excuse to throw away my findings. So I leave them guessing. I do have a single semi-constant system out of all these options however I am very familiar with, in order to hear what is going on in my various experiments: either the PV-7 or PV-8 (most often the PV-8 for its superb bass, precisely where Idlers and DDs outperform belt-drives most audibly), the 100-watt SS amp (ditto bass), and the Technics SB-4s (surprising bass from these 3-way stand-mounters). Using the RS-A1/Denon DL-103E combo, I test each record player with the identical set-up to be fair and minimize variables. And then, of course, once I am certain and infused by the fire of discovery, it goes out to some state-of-the-art system to be tested full-range/current (someone always curious). |
You're welcome Bob. I also rely on reports from afar: for instance if you look under my system, there is the report of the fellow who owned a Platine Verdier/Schroeder tonearm/Koetsu Urushi combo, and who reported it's easy defeat by one of my replinthed Direct Coupled Garrard 301s (oil bearing) matched with a Dynavector DV-507 MKII/Denon DL-103 combo. Such reports as these are very common too. As I continue to underline, if such a report comes from the very owner of said megabuck belt-drive (or indeed the distributor of others), then it is reliable, since he/she has no reason to support the cheaper 'table. Hi Michael, the answer to the elliptical-tipped Denon is phonophono in Berlin, they are the only ones to offer a simple substitution of the original conical diamond with an elliptical one, without touching the cantilever. They reported this was much better than the Denon DL-103R, which they also sold. But, they are funny, as they will not simply take a new DL-103 and re-tip it: you have to use your DL-103 (or DL-103R) first, and THEN send it to them for re-tipping. As to the collar, it just takes elbow grease and the appropriate set of pliers. It'll come off. You may have to remove or simply bend some of the rest of the tonearm hardware in order to get a sufficient grip. And over in my system, the Oracle/Benz continues to burn in (becoming more and more detailed and controlled with time, sounding more Karat-like in this sense, but with deep bass), and the re-wired Rega RB-300 continues to show its mettle by both handling the Benz and showing this progression, with precision, clarity, and musicality. I've also finally picked up a Gates idler-wheel-drive, super-heavy-duty, as if I didn't already have sufficient of these projects!! |
Hi all, the other night I once again heard vinyl sounding like Master Tape, on a vintage system which still sounds better than any other I've heard, backing up those Fab Electro-Voice speakers (simply the best I've ever heard, period, The End) now residing in an overstuffed listening room. By Master Tape I don't mean simple detail (though that was there) or imaging and so on (which was all there), but the utter absence of the sound of a mechanical system: no stylus dragging on vinyl, no sound of any sort of friction, no intrusion of any sort, which only becomes audible when it has disappeared (and then your ears perk up and you say WHAT?!?). Mounted on the traditional Giant Direct Coupled Glass-Reinforced Lenco was a rewired Rega, and mounted on THAT was the latest-edition Dynavector 20X-H (which was, in audiophile terms, slaughtered by my Dynavector Karat), with new Micro-ridge diamond. I sat there stunned as I recognized that sound: the sound I heard back on Cyprus when the Ultra-Giant Lenco (100 pounds) duked it out with the EMT 930 and won. I remember being struck there when I first that sound (of Master Tape...or better, as the owners of the EMT, who made master tapes of various ensembles playing in various spaces, said) coming from the EMT/RS-A1/Shure V15V, a then from the Lenco (but with even superior fluidity and power and resolution than the EMT). The Shure as well had a Micro-ridge diamond, and I'm now wondering if this utter lack of a mechanical sound (of friction or "working") is due not only to the Lenco - which continues to be THE most fluid-sounding, and yet powerful, turntable I've ever heard - but also to the Micro-ridge cartridge? Now I don't think I've got any Micro-ridge cartridges (maybe the Karat Ruby), but I will definitely be looking into this new wrinkle. I've heard the E-V system several times, and yet not until I mounted the Dynavector to the Lenco did I hear that particular Master-Tape-like quality, to the extent that it HIT me. The rest of the components were my own CJ PV-7 (itself very fluid, silky and musical, and with the E-Vs a Master of Bass) and the humble ASL Wave 20 monoblocks. Doesn't sound like much, but thanks to those E-Vs (and the sound-room which eliminates their brightness), simply the best I've ever heard, and that by FAR. The E-Vs retrieve detail from the electronics out of all proportion to what one would normally expect from those same electronics. God only knows what would happen if high-resolution electronics were hooked up to those E-Vs. Might not be a good idea. I still don't know exactly which particular E-Vs these are, except that they belong to the era of the famed Patricians (which had 30" woofers, the largest ever made!!!). In building this particular Lenco, I took the normal care in putting it all together/modding it/adjusting it, and noticed as well, as always, that until everything was put together just so - in addition to the usual motor and main bearing rebuilding/balancing/etc. - and by this I mean the Direct Coupling screws tightened just so, the bolts tightened just so, and so on, the Full Lenco Magic was there, but not in full strength. Once it was dialed-in, it was OBVIOUS....sounding spectacularly Lenco-like (and those who have heard modded Lencos know what I mean), with its full measure of limitless power with an utterly fluid sound...like the Amazon in Full Flood. But once that Micro-ridge cartridge was set up and heard in that E-V system....Master Tape. So, don't be sloppy or cavalier!! Anyway, having pursued the Kundalini Effect (timing SO potent it raises the hairs on the body and causes **frissons**...which I still pursue) which so far only a good idler-wheel drive can deliver, I will now pursue this Master-Tape-like sound (also idler-wheel-related, Analog speed stability which depends on torque-aided inertia, in my experience so far), and see if indeed it does come down, at least partly, to the Micro-Ridge cartridge. But also, in both cases, spectacularly good speakers were being used: in the one case the E-Vs, and in the other Quad ESL-57s. Oh, and tubes too in both cases. Oh, and on the budget front, I've written it before and I'll write it again: the tonearm cable (5-pin DIN type) which comes with the vintage Audio Technica tonearms (which usually run about $200) is SO good it's worth it to buy one of these tonearms and ignore it and use the cable, or keep the cable and sell on the A-T. I've compared it to several pricey tonearm cables on such luminaries as Graham tonearms (vs a Hovland cable) and such-like, and I just tested it on my newly-acquired SME V, which came with the Van den Hul M. C. D501 Hybrid Halogen-free cable which comes standard with SME Vs and...the A-T slaughters it. More detail, more bass, more depth (MUCH more), better and more extended highs, better timing (music just ROCKS more with this cable) and so on. So, if you already have an Audio Technica tonearm with the silvery/gold/metallic sheath, then hang on to it! The rest of you, look for A-T tonearms with the original cable, if you have a 5-pin DIN connector. More Lenco Adventures on the horizon, as well as other idlers, DDs, and so on (maybe even a belt-drive!!). Have fun all!! |
Hello Not sure if this is the proper venue to post this but I am going to go ahead anyways because the praise is well deserved I want to personally thank Jean Nantais for going out of his way to help me troubleshoot a squeak that was coming from the platter Jean walked me through various tests to narrow down the issue. His last e mail for the night was at 9.00 pm and he emailed me again this morning to see how I was getting on . I'm happy to report the source of the problem has been identified and the problem has been fixed Thanks To Jean and others i'm happy to be spinning vinyl again without any noise interruptions. Jean your service is top notch and will continue to read with interest as the Lenco momentum moves forward |
Hello Jean! Can you describe "just so" a little more in realtion to tightening the direct coupling screws and the plinth screws? I myself have finally got a MC (Ruby 2) set up on my Trans-fi Terminator/L59. Its a different kind of awesomeness than the MMs I have been listening to. I just refurbished my Loesch MC preamp in anticipation of a soon coming showdown with the almost built S&B LCR RIAA preamp. TIME... TIME ... I need more TIME!!! (I only have to dummy up the PS.) Mike |
Thanks for that, Musicfile, just continuing what I started back at the beginning of 2004, can't turn my back on that since I got you guys into this mess ;-), though eventually I'm going to live in a cave overlooking the sea on a Greek island, like Caliban, getting tired of shoveling snow :-). Hi Michael, by "just so" I mean screw down the Direct Coupling screws so the contact is firm, but not so much you deform the top-plate surface; ditto the four bolts, which should be tightened only so much as is required for the edge of the top-plate to be seated firmly against the plinth surface, as over-torqueing can also deform the top-plate at those four points. Deformations of the top-plate is stress, and stresses can be heard as a hardening of the sound/upper midrange and also affects PRaT/timing. The whole idea in traditional CLD plinth-building is also to avoid stresses and make contact/gluieing as perfect and firm as possible, so take care in clamping. The more perfect the clamp, with the least amount of stress (forcing each layer to "behave" via clamps to the point there is warping is a sonic no-no, and makes further clamping difficult) is also heard. Eliminate stresses and make as perfect and firm and even a clamp as possible, which means the CLD mass is a single non-resonant and neutral mass (the varying maerials do cancel each other out, something the birch-ply/MDF combination does very well, the utter tonal accuracy can be heard, as well as the dynamics across the frequency spectrum which are not emphasized or depressed at any frequency) and this is heard too. Like any recipe, the more perfect the execution, the more perfect the result. Once the plinth one firm mass with no stresses, and the bolts and screws screwed down just so, it can be heard, and leads to the Master-Tape-like sound, and very definitely to the Amazon in Full Flood sound the Lenco does so well, when compared to ANY record player out there, including the famed EMTs. This is because, while the Lenco does not approach many classics out there (Garrards, Thorens TD-124s, EMTs, etc.) for build quality, its design is highly evolved, and there may be an element of chance here too: I mean, while the Denon DL-103 after 40 years continues to astound, did the Denon engineers know what they were making when they made it?!? It is evident from listening to a Lenco in any condition (original plinth or not, though replinthing brings out these qualities more) that it is intensely, EXTREMELY fluid-sounding, more so than any other record player I have ever heard, and I have heard very many high-end spinners, up to the $50K level (more than this has so far escaped me). This is because of the combination of vertical idler-wheel (which does not stress the bearing rotation like a rim-drive by pushing outwards) with platter with much of its mass concentrated on the rim (more so than any other turntable to my knowledge, though the rim-drive EMTs may match it here) which is hidden beneath the surface of the top-plate (giving it that elegant, modern look) and finally, that designed-for-playing-records-motor, high mass high speed and so self-regulating 1800-rpm motor (its own momentum - a combination of speed and mass) serves to smooth out its own speed imperfections. Put it all together, and one gets what I have written back since the winter of 2004: "Due to the high rotational speed of these motors, great relative mass and so high torque, no expensive solutions need be made to address the weak motors now used in high-end decks. The platters on the Lencos weigh about 8-10 pounds, with much of the mass concentrated on the periphery: the old boys understood flywheel effect to ensure stable speed. The Lenco platter is a single cast piece, of a zinc alloy of some sort, very inert for a metal, and then machined and hand-balanced in a lab. No ringing two-piece platter problems to overcome. Even the motor is hand-balanced in a lab, and weighs something like 3-4 pounds, and runs silently on its lubricated bearings. Think of it: a high-torque motor spinning at well over 1500 RPMs (compared to a belt-drive motor's average 150-300) which pretty well wipes out speed variations by itself. The idler wheel contacts the motor spindle directly, while contacting the platter directly on its other side, thus transmitting most/all of that torque without any belt stretching. Many high-end decks offer thread belts which don't stretch, thus giving an improvement in sound. The Lenco does the same with its wheel. But the platter is also a flywheel, and so evens out whatever speed variations there may be in the motor. It's a closed system (motor-platter, platter-motor) and speed variations brought on by groove modulations don't stand a chance in this rig, and it is clearly audible." So it comes down to preserving speed stability in the face of stylus force drag - and considering the various mega-buck record players we know just how serious this effect truly is, from multiple motors through to extremely high-mass platters, which in spite of ridiculous price tags, DO show just how much more information can be retrieved when one proceeds on the assumption stylus force drag is VERY serious....along with motor speed imperfections, which must be countered by high mass and multiple motors and expensive electronics aids - and the ways we use to achieve it. Each method of achieving true speed stability - as opposed to the bogus speed stability claimed by many belt-drives in which, like the clever accounting methods used to make various businesses, including banks, use averaging methods to achieve much better figures than they would under older calculating methods - leaves its sonic signature, as THERE IS NO PERFECT SYSTEM ON EARTH. Sorry folks, but that's the way it is. While spending quite a lot of time on the island of Bali, I noticed that the cats all had crooked/broken tails. This is because the Balinese believe perfection is not allowed on Earth, and cats being perfect creatures (according to the Balinese, they are incredibly graceful and beautiful and balanced, like the sonic signature of a Lenco ;-)), the Balinese break their tails when they are young. Before the e-mails start pouring in, I do not condone this or support it, just presenting a philosophical/physical reality: THERE IS NO PERFECTION ON EARTH, and, as the Balinese believe, this is SO true it is not even allowed. So, what about the Lenco/Idler way of doing things vis-a-vis the other two systems? Well, as you all know, I believe the belt-drive is barely worth talking about, it is, in engeneering terms, a disaster. This doesn't mean it doesn't give pleasing results, it does, and I have enjoyed many pleasurable hours listening to my vinyl on various lower-end and high-end machines, from the Rega Planar 3 (my first serious machine) through a variety up to the Maplenoll Athena (with 40-pound graphite platter). BUT, the motors are not designed for playing records (off-the-shelf from other applications), they are weak, the belts introduce unacceptable variables...it is, in short, a disastrous idea. It is only the very badly set-up idler-wheel drives of the time (set up to maximize rumble and diminish its sonic potential as idlers were designed and manufactured originally during Mono times, and in Mono there is no rumble) which made the belt-drive solution seem so good. I've written it before and I'll write it again: if it takes from $40K to $150K to realize the potential of an elastic/thread driving a platter via a cheap motor, then the system is literally bankrupt. Engineering is about manufacturing to a price point, and if we built our bridges according to the principles enshrined by belt-drives, then they would cost $100 Billion dollars each, on average. Then DD. This is a better solution than BD, in terms of getting the job done. But what is presented as a technological tour-de-force (WOWZIE!!) - the extensive computerization - is, in point of fact, a weakness. Remember the Balinese and their cats. There is no perfect system on Earth. The faster a motor spins, the more its own momentum will work to eliminate departures from absolute speed stability. The slower it runs, the more its speed stability imperfections will be audible. DD runs at 33 1/3 rpm, necessarily, for a 33 1/3 speed. Given the extreme slowness of rotation, it requires the extensive computerization/circuitry to control it and hold it to accurate speed: this isn't a plus thrown in, but a bandaid which is required by the slow rotation and exposure of this world's imperfections. Not that it doesn't work once the kinks are worked out, but complex circuitry and computerization isn't an elegant solution (as multiple motors, belts, drive-belt-driven flywheels, electronic aids and montrous platters are not), necessary yes, elegant no, elegance being simple and not complex. In DDs with lots of torque (like the SP10s), this means the computerization is audible, given the slow speed of the motor, and the insufficiency of mass needed to overcome the motor control circuitry/computerization, which becomes audible as all SP10 MKIIs sound (haven't tested the MKIs, which are servo-controlled and not referenced to a quartz crystal's pulsing, and MKIIIs): somewhat digital in their delivery, dry (which some laud as "accurate" when "analytical" is the better word), dynamically constrained (which some might describe as "controlled"). Which is not to say that quartz-locking is inherently a-musical, as my rebuild of an SP-25 demonstrated, which ended up sounding very fluid and musical. This is because the SP-25s torque is MUCH less than that of the SP10, which means in turn that the platter has sufficient mass to overcome the imperfect motor's sound signature, AND, the SP-25 can easily be Direct Coupled, and Direct Coupling helps keep a 'table stable, and also eliminates many audible problems, including various types of noise/vibration/energies. Many quartz-locking DDs sound clinical, dry, and dynamically constrained, but the SP-25 experiment, AND the Sony 2250 experiment, shows that DDs CAN be very fluid. Many belt-drives easily beat many quartz-locked DDs in the fluidity sweepstakes, because their gross speed instabilities are **analogue**, meaning that they fluidly and from pure momentum go from too fast to too slow, with no quartz pulsing imposing its sonic signature onto the works. Which shows that to many, it is easier to live with flawed but fluid sound than with accurate but start-stop/"digital" sound. Unfortunately, the wow is much more audible than with either DDs (quartz-locking or otherwise), and so on sustained notes and so forth, even belt-drives into the stratosphere show their spots on such sustained notes as piano decays and so on. Still, that fluidity counts for a lot, and so many prefer the less accurate but more fluid sound of a BD over a more accurate but "digital-sounding" quartz-locked DD. Finally (you knew it was coming) we have the venerable Idler-Wheel Drive, which combines the torque of the bigger DDs with the fluidity of a musical BD (and some BDs have managed to impose a digital sound signature, took a lot of work to achieve this ;-)). This is because Idler-Wheel Drives DO have a lot of torque, which is why all record changers up into the '70s were idler-wheel drive. Don't believe all that impressive complicated mathematics which concludes that belt-drives have more torque than idlers: simply use the finger test, try to stop an idler with a finger, try to stop a belt-drive with a finger. End of complicated mathematics, which like the statistics which support the superiority of belt-drive in speed stability and current Big Business accounting practices, is a fiction. The Idler-Wheel Drive uses the platter as a flywheel to control the very powerful motor, the motor's own speed acts as a flywheel itself to smooth out speed instabilities, and the coupling between flywheel/platter and motor is much more effective via the wheel than the similar relationship between belt-drive motor and platter: good grip (unlike tape and thread), no stretching and contracting as with rubber belt. Of these, the most successful combination of flywheel/platter to motor is the Lenco, which signs itself in EVERY system by its INTENSELY FLUID and powerful/irresistible sound signature (perhaps another imperfection, but a supremely musical, powerful and beguiling one), instantly recognizable by any who have heard Lencos. So, don't be fooled by bogus "accuracy", which is in fact a gross colouration: music does not come out of a lab, it is supposed to come from the heart and, if we are lucky, the recording engineers capture this, and for those lucky enough to have one, the Lenco captures this in all its glory. There are also various means to emphasize detail, but emphasis is not creation: the Lenco (Direct Coupled to high mass) preserves/recaptures, ALL of the information, but it is presented naturally, without emphasis, across the frequency range. Read reviews of the megabuck vinyl spinners, and see how rare an attribute this is: what separates the Men from the Boys is not EMPHASIS, but natural and unhyped presentation of information, with all its soul intact. Amen :-). So, phew, I'm pooped and Christmas is on the way, so Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, don;t know how much time I'll have to spare between now and the holidays. Vive la Lenco, Vuive la Idler Wheel!!! |
Dear Jean, With all due respect, and speaking as a happy owner of one of your Giant direct-coupled Lencos, I must nevertheless take issue with some of the bald statements you've made in this last post, many of which are repeated from previous posts. First of all, a quartz-locked drive system is naught but a servo system that is referenced to a quartz crystal oscillator. The quartz reference idea came along much later than the servo per se and was thought to constitute an important advance. With the quartz reference, the servo works better, not worse. (For example, the Micro Seiki DQX-1000 dd table is said to be superior to its predecessor, the DDX-1000, based on the quartz reference that distinguishes the former table from the latter.) Having said that, it's quite possible that you are correct in your ranking of the relative sound qualities of the various dd tables you discuss; your opinion carries some weight with me, because I believe you've actually listened to them all. However, your reasons why one dd table might sound better than another are pure speculation and should be labeled as such. (You invent an hypothesis to suit your listening results; this is bad science.) If you've done any actual experiments to compare a servo-drive with and without its quartz reference in the context of a given turntable, I'd sure like to know about them. (This is possible with my Denon DP80, and I intend to try it.) I just hate to think a newbie is swallowing the whole enchilada, so I felt it necessary to make a comment here. No animosity is intended. Carry on. |
It's not bad science to invent an hypothesis to suit your observations. Of course that's what one does. But it is bad science (and an abuse of common sense) to do so without bothering to learn about the mechanisms at play in and around the phenomena under investigation, and it's bad science to promote your hypothesis as a result without testing it in a variety of ways. I've no idea whether Jean is at all guilty of this. Carry on all of youz. |
I said: "I've no idea whether Jean is at all guilty of this" So you should not have said "Jean does propose his hypotheses as facts, without having done the experiments necessary to prove the hypotheses, as you also suggest". And FWIW, and it's worth a lot, proof is out of the question here. This is the real world, not math. |
Rnm4, I have and had no intention of starting a fight. All I'm saying is that when one says X is due to Y, Y ought to be true. If Y is not true, then it cannot be a cause of X. Without being specific, I take issue with some of Jean's Ys (his presuppositions). I did write the first time that by all means Jean is entitled to his opinion of these different dd turntables, and that in fact I respect his opinion as a good listener and one who has done a lot more critical listening than I have. |
Rnm4, The same goes for me. I only wanted to enliven the discourse. There's really no way that Jean could have an underlying motive when he states that he likes the Technics SP25 better than an SP10 MkII; I hope it's understood that I also think that this is a non-issue. I just wanted to talk a bit about what does or could possibly cause the differences in sonics among the dd's that Jean mentioned. |
"So, don't be fooled by bogus "accuracy", which is in fact a gross colouration: " ... I'll say!!! Since all those records have been mastered on a Technics drive then all those sources are unreliable? Or isn't it a good thing to play back on a motor that approximates the mastering motor as close as possible? These are just questions which arose as I perused Mr. Nantais' inciteful and authoritarian prose. |
So Jean delivered my new Lenco L75 in a 75 lb Cherry Plinth yesterday. He also lugged over a pair of Klipsch Heresies, his home brew speaker wires, Music Boys Petra cables and a couple of cartridges - a Decca Super Gold and Empire 10PE for me to try out, I ended up keeping the Empire and the Music Boys. I've never heard of the Empire Moving Iron cart before, but it was an improvement over my 20XL and a bargain to boot. If anyone has any info on this cart please send me a link. So now I know what Jean's talking about when he refers to "Amazonian Flow" and speed stability. This deck has this in spades. As a result of the firm grip on the speed, the timing and pacing of the music is amazing, hard to describe but its quite evident. Imaging and details are also greatly improved over my Pro-Ject 9.1. In the meantime I'll continue to listen some more and enjoying the music! |
Another Gobsmacked testimonial that, intended or not, deflates the windbag naysayers and swats down that pesky fly. Thanks Mikey, for getting us back to what it's all about. Never quite understood whether they hate the message or the messenger, anyway. Glad you're enjoying the trappings left by Mr. Nantais. He does invariably seems to snare some great sounding items up there in Franklin's frontier. Wishing all a better New Year. - Mario |
Hey Hxtl, Remember the word "fronting"? That was a big one in the 70's. It stood for when someone was putting on a front, making themselves something they were not. The thing about idlers, and anything else for that matter, was that the old was being looked at as clunky. For instance, the fronts of buildings were being covered with metal hiding and damaging the old stonework. I do not remember anyone in my neighborhood, of which and audiophile was not to be found, having anything like a Lenco or Garrard idler. Not unlike today, -people- wanted "cool" which at that time did not include the old aesthetic. A Lenco is a most un-cool looking thing. The Garrard maybe a step better; the Thorens looks like a dinosaur. It's a cool to be square aesthetic. This whole thread throbs with "love is in the air" .... But not a lovefest for any idler. "phony Beatlemania has bitten the dust" - Clash |
This is my almost completed DIY Turntable. All I need is to do is finish the Arm Pod. The Arm Pod will have an SME style mount machined into the top plate. Click the links below to have a peek and tell me what you think? Ask questions if you wish. My DIY Turntable Front View My DIY Turntable Top View |
Gadfly.... you have totally lost me, LOST me. I was remarking on you and Jejune's back and forth, nothing more. I really, really do not understand your last post, the reasoning behind it, and what exactly you are trying to say, other than you don't like idlers, which we ALL know anyways! so, ...... your point? |
