Yes Albert, Jonathan Valin's opinion is a subjective one and an entertainingly written opinion at that. I too am an analog enthusiast though my experience of different TT's is nowhere near as broad as yours. I currently use a Debut vacuum/Vector 4/ Orpheus combination which I find magical and have no doubt that many will find the Raven magical in their systems. I think your reference to the varying perceived differences between master tapes based upon the player used to replay them is interesting and if one thinks about it (which I did not when I wrote the initial post) differences in playback are just as inevitable with them as with a TT.
My point was really to have an objective standard against which two TT's could be judged as I could not see how something described as more accurate could be seen to be less emotive. I can, however see that the variation in perceived playback in tape makes that comparison flawed. I was suggesting an objective judgement to what is inherently a subjective evaluation. It just so happens that these subjective evaluations are often punctuated with descriptors which seem to portray objectivity e.g. accuracy. Not having a go at JV here just stating a difficulty any reviewer is faced with in conveying a subjective opinion in everyday language. |
I very much appreciate both the input and the thoughtfulness of so much of that input. Some very interesting ideas have been expressed in examining my query on accuracy vs coloration and their relationship to the emotionality of the music we listen to. The two terms I chose as a heading by the way because both were mentioned in the JV's review and for no other reason. While I deliberately steered away from comparisons of equipment a number of respondents have put in their two cents worth and I would like to respond to some of those comments also.
Before I do so , however I would like to state that JV's review could have been about any piece/s of equipment. That it was two TT's is really incidental and in truth for me more interesting to discuss as analogue is my passion. It was his assertion that what he perceived as being the more accurate sound was not as emotionally satisfying compared with his perception of the sound produced by a component(components actually as it was the combination of the Raven/Phantom to which he was referring) that he expressed as having a slight coloration that caused me to sit up and take note. If we were reading about two preamps the assertion would have triggered the same response in me as it is this assertion which appeared to me at first glance to be counter intuitive.
In considering some of your responses and in pondering my navel for a few moments, however it seems reasonable to conclude that indeed the coloration could add impact and even a heightened emotional response. Movie makers do it all the time. Just think how a strange camera angle, a super close up, a flash to another scene, lighting, sound and other manipulated cues can produce a far greater emotional response than watching something unfold in front of your eyes a few feet away. The super reality becomes more intense than the everyday reality. Also, as many have pointed out in this thread in slightly different words- 6 billion people, 6 billion realities.
For me this realization poses some interesting future choices. My perceptions are changed and whatever happens I know with certainty that I will "enjoy the pursuit"
Now I would like to mention something specifically about JV's Raven/Phantom Walker/Black Diamond comparison. Firstly, I believe JV did in fact refer to the combination, not the Raven AC sans Phantom in giving his recommendation. While I agree with Raul and others who mention the indisputable fact that to truly judge a TT's comparative performance against another the arm/wiring/cartridge/support/phono stage etc. need to be identical in this instance he was comparing one combination against another and I cannot see how this is invalid. It doesn't tell you how the Raven will sound with another arm but it does tell you how JV thought it sounded with the Phantom in his system compared with the Walker/Black Diamond. Caveat emptor as always.
I would add that I have heard neither table but have a tenuous relationship with both. I was in fact looking to buy the AC-3 when the Debut Vacuum/Synchro Wave came on the market on Audiogon(thanks for looking after it so well Strapper211) and the table that was bought to replace the Debut I now own was a Walker. In any event I am a very satisfied Basis owner with no thoughts of changing. |
Downunder, I have contacted Halcro(no response yet unfortunately) to see if I could arrange a day to have a listen to his Raven/Copperhead/Grandezza combination. I believe you live a little closer to him than me but maybe we could organize an intensive listening session in the not too distant future. How about it Halcro? |
To Asa. Mark you had me searching for Wittgenstein's Tractatus! Well I did post a philosophical enquiry. As you may have noticed this thread has begun an evolution in my evaluative processes and I now see myself heading towards that transcendent middle ground(who wouldn't want to be transcendent anyway as it sounds so cool) but with a leaning towards the scientific materialist school to maintain my comfort zone. Not quite ready for SET's just yet. I tend to find re assurance when I know that the piece of equipment I am listening to has achieved its end via scientific rigor rather than pot luck or a warm fuzzy feeling on the part of the designer. I don't find good measurements and good sound necessarily mutually exclusive as some on the outer edges of the Romantic Idealist school seem to think.
Back in the here and now I am very interested listen to Halco's Raven AC-3, particularly as his amps are very much in the scientific, measurements are all camp. Should be an interesting mix. |
Piedpiper, I was just having a little fun as I believe Asa was and maybe still is a SET devotee. I think they can sound spectacular. |
Halcro, you have compared two arms on your table in your system with a limited number of cartridges. You have a preference for the new Copperhead over the Grandezza. This new, correctly aligned and constructed Copperhead is in a "different universe" vis a vis the Grandezza. Irrespective of what you have heard in other systems, to proclaim "absolute" status for the Copperhead based on your two arm comparison is drawing a little too long a bow don't you think? I'm happy you feel so pleased with the sound of your system with the Copperhead installed but it is just possible that you could be equally enamored of another combination you have not as yet heard. There are a lot out there! |
Halcro, I am referring to your answer to Sirspeedy. Even if we accept your contentious assertion that to get to the master tape you must have the Copperhead where does that leave the Cobra? I'm sorry but there simply cannot be two absolutes. It simply is illogical.
Did Continuum say to themselves " well I think we can improve on the Cobra and retail the result at 1/3 the price!" I don't think so. Wouldn't do much for the sale of Cobra arms. Without having listened to either I can concede that they may have inadvertently achieved this aim but as far as one reviewer you quoted, Michael Fremer is concerned they have come close to the performance of the Cobra but not exceeded it. If we were take Mr Fremer's opinion as fact(and I am not suggesting that we should do this) then the Cobra is your absolute and you are in fact not hearing all that is on your LP's via the Copperhead. He at least has heard both arms in his system and on a table of the same manufacture which should presumably be optimized for performance with each other.
Now it also may be possible that the combination of Raven AC-3 and Copperhead(leaving aside the cartridge interaction that you see as a non variable with the Copperhead) is such a symbiotic match that it transcends all other combinations in revealing the absolute truth on the LP. This may be the case but I tend to think the likelihood of it being so in all set ups and thus an absolute is not something I would be betting my house on.
|
Halcro, as a SS rather than tube guy I used to find it rather strange that someone would pay a substantial sum for say a tubed phono stage and immediately replace some or all the tubes and then claim that they were in sonic nirvana. I mean, why didn't the designer see the error of their ways and use those tubes in the first place? I think there are at least five possible explanations. I'm sure someone will add more
1. The customer is correct and the designer got it wrong
2. The designer is correct and the customer got it wrong
3. The new tubes are in fact better but only in the customers system
4. The customer is hearing changes that the designer would not see as improvements
5. The customer is correct and the designer knows they are correct but for cost/availability considerations the tubes are not included in the standard product
I think the last point leads us on to a very important consideration when we talk about modification rather than just tweaking things like power cords. Very very few products are produced as cost no object designs. The Continuum Caliburn or Basis Work of Art are two which comes to mind which do in fact appear to be "cost no object" designs. With almost every product there is a cost/sales volume consideration which must be observed if the designer/manufacturer is to stay in business. Therefore almost every design is inherently compromised and as such may be able to be improved via the judicious use of higher performance/higher cost parts. The designer may in fact want to incorporate these parts in their design but cannot due to cost constraints.
Also, as Sirspeedy has mentioned as time goes by new components with higher levels of performance become available and can be incorporated into an older design with great effect on sound quality. Even the Caliburn and Work of Art are produced with materials, components and procedures of today but who is to say that major improvements will not be available in a few years time that make these statement products seem crude in comparison?
While I don't think I am every likely to look at upgrading the MOSFETS in my power amp, I did modify my Marantz SA11 S1 CD/SACD player. The (at the time, since improved of course) full RAM mod improved the performance of this player by a significant margin across every parameter. Could Marnantz have made the unit sound as good as the RAM mod? Probably better but the cost would have been so high by the time it reached retail that they would not have sold very many. The designer may have been happy but the accountants would not have been and we all know who generally has the final say. Because they do, we get to modify. |
I would have to concur that the extraordinarily detailed manual reveals a very well thought out arm which should allow very precise and repeatable adjustments. I love the counterweight mechanism and ability to make very fine adjustments. Unlike Sirspeedy, as good as the manual is I would like to arm to come with it!! |
Halcro, many thanks once again for the great hospitality you showed Downunder and me. A most enjoyable day listening to both well known music and some new which I would like to hear again. While we listened to the Grandezza with the Universe and the Copperhead with the XV1s and therefore the comparisons between arms were less than ideal, I agree with Downunder that the Copperhead /XV1s combination was far superior. I must sate up front that it was the first time I had heard either arm or either cartridge and the system's balance was different to mine.
We were hearing in my view more the differences between the arms than differences between the cartridges. The Grandezza sounded rather bloated and less articulate. I am not talking nuance here. The differences were truly significant. With the Copperhead/XV1s combination the sound was far more controlled with little apparent emphasis in any part of the audio spectrum and just more natural and compelling in presentation. More detail if you will but with a greater level of relaxation as well.
For me, the Copperhead/XVis came closer in overall balance to my Vector 4/Orpheus combination. Given this listening experience, the Copperhead really looks like a contender. An impressive performance and well worth further enquiry as far as I am concerned |
Halcro, in this instance I do not think the difference in sound between the two combinations is due to the Copperhead's pre-eminence in its field as the sound of the Copperhead/XV1s combination was very close to what I listen to every day as I mentioned in my post. Unfortunately you have not been able to listen to my system which while it has a quite different balance has that same ease/clarity you get with the Copperhead in the chain. I think it is just that the other combination for whatever reason - possibly an impedance mismatch with the phono stage(just grasping at straws here) just did not sound right.
It is always very difficult to compare across systems as we clearly have different priorities in our in our listening expectations but if a voice sounds natural it sounds natural. This was not the case with the Grandezza which leads me to think that there is something fundamentally wrong somewhere in the set up. I hope you find out what it is. |
Dgad, re the Adjust +, a 180 gm pressing is included. I agree it looks very interesting. I think I'll be getting one. |
Halcro, do you think it possible that you are overstating the "vision thing"? By this I mean it may be possible that a designer comes up with an product that is less to do with a grand vision and a meticulous attention to every possible performance parameter and more to do with his level of expertise and/or his level of technical and/or financial resources and a desire to compete for sales in a larger rather than smaller segment of the market. I refer here to the inverse relationship between increased cost and potential buyers.
Sure there are some designers whom I would think fit into the grand design group but surely not all and I think they are in the minority. I would think the vast majority build to a price point, swallow hard and at times sacrifice their loftier goals to economic reality. Would you feel less compelled to maintain their design integrity and make some major changes if the rewards were to be had?
In referring this back to Raul's point regarding the use of a vacuum clamping mechanism could it be that the Raven designer did not incorporate this feature for reasons other than design philosophy? I would think that the tooling costs associated with using a bespoke design would be considerable and perhaps out of reach of a relatively small scale manufacturer in the early stages of their existence. Thomas may come back and refute this of course and say that he rejected the mechanism on other grounds but he would not have been the first nor the last designer/manufacturer to reject this technology on purely economic grounds. |
This was not actually a cartridge review. Rather, it was an opinion on two arms each using a highly regarded cartridge. Both, for this listener in an unfamiliar system. It would be unfortunate if what was clearly observable - the high level of performance of the Copperhead arm was lost in a debate on the relative merits of the Universe and the XV1s. We did not have the opportunity to exchange cartridges but if we had I have a feeling that the differences between the cartridges would not have been as great as they were when in different arms.
One conclusion I feel I could make was that I would not like to have the 12" Grandezza with the Universe as my reference. From what others have said on this forum the Universe is capable of top notch performance and I have no reason to doubt this but I feel this is not the arm for it. Similarly the Grandezza may truly shine with another cartridge.
I will repeat, however that what I heard with the Copperhead leads me to believe it is capable of superlative performance and I have a feeling that its performance in Halcro's system was not as yet optimized (counterweight positioning and anti skate settings). I will await with interest his views once the designer has had the opportunity to tweak the arm. |
