Raven v Walker. Colored v Accurate?


This post has been generated following Jonathan Valin’s recent review of the Raven AC-3/Phantom combination in TAS. What intrigues me is not that JV has been lucky enough to review and buy or have on permanent loan yet another world’s best product. A truly astounding strike rate for any reviewer it must be said. Rather, it is what JV readily describes as the colored sound of the Raven/Phantom combination and the apparent appeal of this sound compared with what JV described as the more accurate sound of the Walker that piques my curiosity. This is not, I hasten to add about the relative merits of either table or their arms. The intention is not to have a slug-fest between Walker and Raven owners.

What really interests me is how it is that a product that in the reviewer’s opinion more accurately conveys what is on the source material is perceived as somehow less emotionally satisfying than one which presumably exaggerates, enhances or even obscures some aspect of the recorded information, if one can accept that this is what colored sound or the product’s character is. It appears counter intuitive and the deliberation of the phenomenon is making me question my own goals in audio reproduction. These have been pretty much on the side of more accurate is better and more emotionally compelling with due consideration to financial constraints in my choice of equipment in achieving this goal.

On face value and if you can accept the hyperbole it appears that the colored is better route is a little like going to a concert and putting on a device that allows you to alter the sound you hear. You twiddle a couple of knobs, sit back with a smile on your face and say “Ah! That’s better, that’s what I want it to sound like” You like it but it’s not necessarily what the musicians intended you to hear.

It seems logical that the closer one can get to accurately reproducing every piece of information recorded onto the medium then the closer you should be able to get to the actual performance, together with all the acoustic cues existing at that performance. I am making an assumption here that the recording medium is actually capable of capturing these things in the first instance.

We have our 12 inch pieces of vinyl on the platters of two systems under evaluation. We are not in the recording booth. The musicians are not on hand to play the piece over and over so that we can compare the live sound to the master tape and even if we did every performance is unique so we can never compare a second or third live performance with the one we just recorded. How then can the accuracy of a turntable/arm/cartridge combination and its ability to convey the emotion of the recorded event truly be evaluated? Ideally we should at least have the master tapes at hand to play on the same system in which we are evaluating the TT’s. The comparison will of necessity still be subjective but the determination would seem to be more believable than if the master tape were not part of the evaluation. If the master tape gave the listener no emotional connection with the musicians then I would contend that there would be something fundamentally flawed in another part of the playback system.

So in evaluating the two combinations would the more accurate combination be the more emotionally appealing? I cannot see how it would be otherwise unless we just don’t like what has been recorded or the way it has been recorded, the musicians have not made an emotional connection with us and the slightly flawed copy is preferred to the original. Is this why God made tone controls?

I have used the words seems, appears and presume quite deliberately, not to have a bet each way but because I am cognizant of the fact that we are, in audio reproduction dealing with the creation of an illusion and creating that illusion with people who have varying levels of perception, different experiences and tastes, different playback media and different physical replay environments so the task at hand for audio designers, humble reviewers and even we poor consumers could not be more complex.
phaser

Showing 7 responses by albertporter

Having heard both the Universe and the Dynavector I'm not surprised at the results of this listening test. The Dynavector is one of the three or four best cartridges ever made and the Air Tight PC-1 is another.

When I had the Universe here on a friends Basis with Graham, I was totally under whelmed. Not my cup of tea. On the other hand, I plan on buying a Dynavector XV1s soon, to compliment my Air Tight.

Each to their own and so forth.
Halcro, your review is up. Perhaps the format change caused you to miss seeing it.

Really nice review I might add. I wish I had the opportunity to hear the DaVinci 12" arm. I was SO close to buying it when I did my Technics rebuild and went for the SME 312S at the last minute.
Thanks Albert,
Gosh.....I didn't even know that section existed?
I don't think many people will be aware of it?
Oh well.

Halcro, until the last few days, it did not exist.

This is obviously a new Audiogon format. I discovered this by clicking around the site. I had no advance warning about this change and just as surprised as you are.

I've been here several years and the old format was both familiar and simple.
Just one more small example of the murky nature of all this. In a recent listening session in a very evolved, very high end system not unfamiliar to some here, we changed out the support "cones" underneath the power supply for the motor controller for the turntable. How much more removed from the signal chain can you get? Well, the difference was between very good and unlistenable! So which is the sound of that component?

I can testify to the truth of Tim's statement, it was my system we were testing on.

Even more odd, it was NOT the Walker Black Gate controller and matching Walker Proscenium Black Diamond table responding violently to footer swaps under it's power supply. It was my rather ordinary Technics SP10 MK2 and it's factory supplied outboard AC/DC box.

What Tim did not hear are the interconnect cables I've compared since then, running between my SME 312S and Aesthetix Io phono stage. Each of these cables can seem as big a sonic swing as switching between the Dynavector XV1S, Air Tight PC-1 and Koetsu Jade Platinum cartridges.

I'm not saying you can make each cartridge sound like the other by just swapping cable, but rather the differences BETWEEN these cartridges are drastically altered by the tonearm cable. This to the point, that a wrong decision could easily be made about an arm, cartridge or even an equipment match.

Another variable is loading. If you terminate the Air Tight PC-1 into the typical input 47K ohm load, it's performance is very disappointing. Too much high frequencies, no bass and obvious distortion. Reset the load to 240 ohms and it's one of the two best cartridges I've ever heard.

I wish it were not so complicated, but it is. This is exactly why I am so hesitant to type in absolute answers in threads at Audiogon. There is much to consider to get remotely close to absolute. It turns out to be a continual learning process with small gains eventually adding up to big ones.
Raul

Dear Albert: Do you want a better quality performance on your SP-10MK2?, if so then change all the internal/external electrical power cable from the wall socket through the Power supply, umbilical cord and inside the TT.

I've installed an IEC connector, rewired the power supply and replaced the AC cord as well as replaced all the power supply caps with Black Gate and Nichicon.

I have not replaced the wire in the umbilical cord and inside the turntable. I'm still searching for a MK3 and if I can't get one, I'll continue to evolve the MK2.
The fact that Jonathan Valin described the differences between these two world class tables well enough that it prompted you to start a thread is a testament to his skill.

Even if he describes one table more "accurate" than the other, that's his subjective opinion. Anther person may listen to these two tables and think the Raven is more accurate. Valin has done a good job, If you take his experience with you it becomes one more ingredient in a recipe for great sound.

Personally I'm so damn happy with analog I get goose bumps with most of them if fitted with a good cartridge. I own the Walker Proscenium Black Diamond and love it, but I've also owned two dozen other turntables and all made great music for the era I owned them and the price I paid.

I should add, I have some master tapes and they are indeed startling as a reference, the source by which to judge all turntables.

The problem is, master tapes sound different when played on an Ampex 351, a Studer A80, a Technics 1520 and so on. Master tape is just another tool to learn from. Conclusive in it's quality and inconclusive as to which playback machine renders playback of THAT tape perfectly.
Halcro,

Go to forums, recent discourse last 12 (or 24 hours). Scroll down past New Topics, Virtual Systems, and you will see Product Reviews.

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?ranlg&1207200679&read