I heard the Zanden in my home several years ago, and though scarcely the most finely detailed component I've heard it had the most remarkable reproduction of space of any phonostage (or any piece of electronics) I'd then auditioned. It simply put yards of air between images where other 'stages put inches. Plus its imaging was extraordinarily natural and life-sized. It was also exceptionally low in grain. I liked it very much, and still do.
That said, the ARC PH7 and the Audio Tekne TEA-2000 aren't the chopped liver that you imply they are. Both are remarkably realistic. |
BTW,and I only mean to be helpful with limited knowledge....From what I see,re: antiskate setting,one would set the thread so that the antiskate "bar/platform" is parallel at end of LP.Once the thread is done,and bar is parallel,"then" use the penny washers supplied, and/or "moveable" set-screw/pennywasher assembly to adjust antiskate.Of course "this" is ONLY from what I have read,but maybe something here can be of aid,hopefully.Otherwise I will keep quiet,as I have NO physical exposure to this apparently superb design.
I can only imagine how superb this arm can be once totally optimized.
Best. |
Phaser,forgive my enthusiasm for a voluminous manual,but I own a printing/graphic center,and "this" manual cost a few bucks to design.
Best. |
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,have you had sucess in getting the antiskate bar "parallel" at LP end groove?This is according to manual,and should be in new arm as well.The antiskate design on this arm seems extraordinary,and I am a believer in correct antiskate.
To me,the manual alone is worth the price of the arm.A superbly well written booklet,that makes those I have seen look meager!.....I mean... a diagram showing cartridge weights and how to mate the best counterweight balancing,to the extent shown here,is amazingly interesting.
Btw,I LOVE the comment made,in the manual....."don't listen to many posters on many web-sites"!
Gotta love it. |
An entertaining and insightful read Sirspeedy (not to mention Pat Cash).
The problem with the Copperhead anti-skate mechanism that I'm struggling with......is that the NEW one is different to the OLD one (which is the one still explained in the otherwise excellent Instruction Manual).
The NEW one does not have the 2 holes in the weighted arm mechanism for the thread to double-back and be secured to the clamping screw.
It now only has the 1 hole and I can't figure out how to correctly relate it now to the clamping screw.
Mark Doehmann is hopefully coming to my place to show me the 'tricks' but it would have helped if the instruction manual had been updated?......incidentally, the reason I've been told that the design has been changed is that feedback in-the-field is that the OLD design was causing difficulties for 'users'?
Despite all of this, the design of this arm has unearthed some staggering revelations. |
This post "will" eventually go somewhere.....towards the Copperhead arm eventually,but I need to bloviate first(I'm good at that-:) So....
There is a middle aged group of guys at my gym,that I am somewhat friendly with.I and my wife call them the "kidders club".They love to work out(not too hard)and mostly tell cute jokes to entertain themselves.Yet,their real passion is to point out to eachother how gorgeous some of the girls are!Not a single girl escapes them,and they will go out of their way to point out the subtle aspects of each lovely lady's attributes....Not unlike some things audio!
My personal association here(other than the fact that my wife is usually within a two machine distance from me, as I sweat, alot)is that I "DO" get a kick out of them!Very humorous!Very unrealistic too, in how they think they are viewed by the "far younger girls" about.I know this because I have a beautiful daughter in her early twenties,AND any guy over thirty is absolutely "ancient" to her(she views me as utterly finished).Of course some women need to see a high seven figure bank accountant,which probably takes twenty years off an older guy's age!
SO,although I view the posters here as far more realistic then the "kidders",the allegiance to the "almost unattainable" is similar. -:)
Final thought about vacuum platters,which is NOT the "world's end" for good sound,BUT...sorry,it is absolutely a superior clamping solution,and can easily be heard...Period!...The same holds(probably) for a 100 lb platter,air suspension and bearing,but I will never own one,and think the 100 lb platter would be better than my 16 lb one,unless the bearing wore out too fast.A definite possibility.
OK,next up(just my usual bloviating)....I love many of the wonderful products we talk about,especially many here,like the fabulous Raven,and I had "previously" thought the Davinci arm was probably great( I heard it twice,but did not know the set-up well)until Halcro's assessment,which leaves me thinking "what if it IS colored".Maybe,and maybe not,because some well heeled hobbyists LOVE it,and have multiple arms on multiple tables.
I am thinking of a particular experienced hobbyist,popular on these threads,who has the Davinci,Phantom,and Kuzma Airline.Not to mention the Triplanar,which he likes to.He LOVES the Davinci,and not once mentioned any coloration!....BTW,I am not negating Halcro's findings....Just hobbyspeak,for "thread fuel",which has been quite polite(rightly so).Fun reads!!
Ok,next,and here is where I really envy Halcro(btw,we forgot Roy Emerson).....I have just downloaded the Copperhead owners manual....BOY this is a very interesting "read".At least to me!....I now have NO doubts as to this arm being a fantastic design!!!Sometimes the more info we get,the more we appreciate something.Knowledge is power!
Some interesting points mentioned by the designers,like the "clamping yolk" making 360 degree contact with the arm pillar.Similar to the Graham philosophy,but unlike the single knurled nob of the Triplanar.The all around clamp of the collar really makes the most sense,BUT Continuum uses TWO locking screws(my Graham Phantom only uses one).Continuum also uses two locking screws for the cue lifter assembly.Overkill?Doesn't seem that way to me!Really well designed touches,and I haven't got the time to say how impressed I am with the "apparent" effort that went into this design.Fremer apparently did not touch on many design aspects,in his somewhat "left wanting for more arm info" review.I view this arm more-so than the Cobra(which is probably amazing)because it represents a real world design.AND it is lightweight!MY Sota suspension would love it!
One thing I never gave much thought to,which is discussed in the manual,is the apparent increase in "pivot response time" due to a very low "weight/mass above the pivot assembly".This makes TOTAL sense to me!
I DO notice that my Phantom has significantly more mass,above it's pivot point,than my beloved 2.2 had.The Phantom definitely is a better sounding arm,but the added mass/weight somewhat changes the tonal character.Not bad,or good.Yet,different.Really different in presentation.I'm being honest!
I assume(if I understand some of the design principles of the Copperhead)that "this" arm will be BULLET fast!Also,the business of aerospace bearing design is way cool.Not to mention the "wand" material and overall product research,which believe me(or not) is appreciated by looking at the on-line manual.GOTTA be great!A usually silly assumption,but I guess I am correct!
BTW,Halcro....your problem with the antiskate looks to be rather benign,as according to what I see(pics)in the manual,you ONLY tie the thread to the bottom of the tower,and use the moveable, adjustment nob,and different registration holes for correct antiskate adjustments(above the arm tower,which does not need to be taken off again,from the diagrams).THESE TOO seem in a class of their own,as the percentage of antiskate shifts slightly,as the arm moves across the LP.A wonderful product!
BTW,Halcro,it is YOU who know this arm from practice,so my comments are simply from enthusiastic review of the manual.I could very well be wrong about ease of antiskate implementation,and other things,as I remember you claiming you had to take arm(or wand)off to access the antiskate ability.It seems less difficult from my review of the diagrams,BUT "you" definitely know better.....YOU lucky dog!!!
If I did not get my Phantom,THIS would be VERY high on my list.US dollar strength,or not!!
Best. |
I just want to add to SirSpeedy's comments about how easy it is to keep the platter clean for purposes of use of the vacuum clamp. I have a Basis Debut Vacuum. Aside from accidentally leaving the vacuum pump on when the unit is no longer in use, I have NO operational issues with the vacuum system.
An unwanted record can be used as a platter cover when the turntable is not in use. I use a Charlie Rich album a friend generously donated for this purpose, or a more "decorative" picture disc called "Benji's in Love" (the television mutt from the 1980's). I also use a microfiber cloth to clean the platter once in a while.
I have some concern about added noise, particularly at the beginning of a record, but I am not sure if I can attribute this to the vacuum clamp. |
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. |
I get what Halcro keeps repeating to you guys.
Most of Woschnicks design challenges are covered with the man himself in the StereoMojo and TAS reveiws.
Woschnick is satisfied with his designs. |
Dear Halcro: Please don't tell me that you can/could choose/deprive not to make a " tweak " where exist real evidence to achieve a high quality performance improvement only because maybe that ( from your point of view ) " tweak " could be a " fundamental revision " ???!!!!!!!
I respect your opinion but it is very hard to agree with it, at least on the subject on this audio thread.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Sirspeedy,
You and I are in total agreement.......at last! |
Dear Halcro: +++++ " But if you really wanted a vacuum hold-down table?.....why not simply buy one in the first place? " +++++
there are many reasons why we don't do it:
1- Maybe the ones out there does not like me or are out of my budget.
2- Maybe when I buy my TT ( with out it ) I never suppose that the Vacuum hold down exist.
3- Maybe knowing about the vacuum subject the TT that I buy ( with out it ) had a bargain/offer that I can't refuse and latter I add the vacuum tweak
4- Maybe knowing about the vacuum subject I decide to buy a TT ( with out it ) because that one ( like the Raven ) was the one that meets my TT's dream, latter I add the vacuum plattermat.
5- etc, etc, etc
+++++ " I don't consider these changes to be 'tweeks'.........they are fundamental revisions to the designer's philosophy .... " +++++
IMHO what for you are fundamental revisions for other people are not. This is the kind of world where we live: diversity!.
You can accept it or not but such is life.
Halcro, there are many people that buy a Ferrari or a Porche and change the original tyres for a different model: do you think that those people are making a fundamental car design revision?
There are no perfect products ( any kind ) out there and there are some/many people that have a high common sense. Halcro the life is a set of continuos changes and the audio items are not an exception.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Halcro,I have been fortunate to have seen every one of those players mentioned,play in person.Unbelieveable athletes,AND Lew Hoad,if not for the back injury,would most probably be holding the coveted records many others now have.He was THAT good!!I know it,because I A/B'd him with all the other contenders of his era,and although my hearing may be in question,my eyes are superb -:)Rosewall wasn't bad ether(or Pat Cash).
Best. |
Phaser,
Once again I am in total agreement.
I am not against tweeks and power cord and cable experimentation.
This is where you have all misunderstood me.
I am against changing the basic principle of a component which you have already accepted and bought from a manufacturer.
If a designer decides to produce a non-suspended turntable, is it valid for a consumer to turn it into a suspended one?....it CAN be done!
If a designer decides to produce a valve driven amplifier, is it valid for a customer to change it to SS?....again, those with the technical abilities can do it!
If a designer spends years perfecting his turntable to play without a vacuum hold-down, is it valid to change his vision simply because it is able to be done?
A lot of you will say......sure it's valid. We may do whatever we wish to get the 'absolute sound'.
But if you really wanted a vacuum hold-down table?.....why not simply buy one in the first place?
If you wanted a suspended deck?....why not buy one in the first place?
I don't consider these changes to be 'tweeks'.........they are fundamental revisions to the designer's philosophy and I, being a designer (of buildings), do not take kindly to those who take it upon themselves to change my vision.
And Sirspeedy......if you really MUST depress me about current Aussie tennis players?.....the least you can do is talk about the Golden Days of Laver, Hoad, Newcombe and Roche!!? |
Actually,to add to Phaser's thought...here is what I do,on the rare occassion when I am bummed out by an equipment failure(God forbid)...In order to come out of the return,and sometimes lengthly wait for repair,I always inquire about further parts updating,or the possibility of an improvement somewhere,even if the mfgr does not normally offer this option.I have been extremely well rewarded by this.Read Arthur Salvatore's thoughts here,as they are my Bible of audio attitude,as of late!
Two years ago,my Power supply to my two chassis Rowland 8t amp developed a minor problem,but Jeff Rowland had a motorcycle mishap,that caused a lengthly wait.He is such a fine person,and I was SO into "what's out there that can be far superior" in my approach,that he got me a "one off" P/S design,that is absolutely extroadinary!I know this because my friend has the original(superb) design.Not close!!
Hence,I ALWAYS am looking for little tid bits to help my sickness.-:)
Best to all. |
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. |
Halcro,with respect.....you are taking things a little too seriously.Is it OK to try NOS tubes in a mfgr product having standard ones?Or adding a platter mat(as J.Valin did)to your table?Or adding a good A/C cord to product?Or in my case finding that a superb umbillical cord improves my table's power supply(and I improved the damping on my clamp).I had my pre/phonostage totally rebuilt,to amazing effect by Great Norther Sound(mod specialists extroadinaire)I am even thinking about adding teflon capacitors in the future,because these were not available some years ago,and I don't simply sell great stuff to get something new,if I know there are ways to improve it....etc,etc.
These are the types of "tweaks" that have greatly improved some folks' set-ups.
My friend Sid has ultra modded Infinity speakers,because he know SO many qualified folks that they persuaded him to do so.Result...Huge improvement!
What's your beef?Just be happy you have a nice stereo,and go from there.
BTW,years ago,I hated to touch my stuff,and virtually NEVER swayed from my dealer's set-up.I now hear my music a bit more clearly.
Lighten up,it's not your fault Patrick Rafter retired(my favorite tennis player of all time,btw)and Leyton hewitt is not going to win another "Major" title.Either is Roddick,but I'm still a happy guy-:)
Meant in the best of spirits.. |
Dear Halcro: First than all I don't think that I'm changing the designer products ( as a fact I accept it. Who am I for not do it?. No I have a lot of respect to any audio designer. ) because adding a platter mat IMHO is a simple add-on that if I don't like it well I take out: the same for a clamp or TT footers, etc.
You are right I don't change any mods on cartridges, as a fact when I send any of my cartridges to repair I always " work/ask hard " for that repair leave the cartridge in original state.
No, I don't make any mods to tonearms I accept it. But many people makes: internal rewiring, IC cable, etc, etc and if we take electronics everyone change the power cord ( at least ) and put its amps over dedicated platforms, etc, etc.. IMHO I don't think that all this people are not accepting the product as it is.
The subject with TTs is that permit/allow to any one to make some very simple tweaks that does not change in anyway its main design with the hope that those mods/tweaks could improve the quality performance.
+++++ " What I'm never willing to blindly accept, is that those ' differences' ........are in fact IMPROVEMENTS. " +++++
I totally agree with you, I always support that when we make a change ( any one ) in the audio system chain the differences that makes that change are ( in some cases ) that: only a different performance but not always an improvement. Usually I only report/share audio experiences mods when IMHO appear an improvement not only a difference.
I think that we have a little different s point of view but at the end we agree on the main subjects that it is where it counts.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Raul,
If only life were as easy as Hi-Fi?
You (and many others), believe that you can improve all the individually designed components of a high-end analogue system.
And you in fact may have the electronic and technical understanding and ability to in fact do so.
But even YOU reach a limit of ability and practicality in the modification process whereby you are happy to accept the designers' products?
Why for instance, do you not change the boron cantilever of someone's cartridge to ruby to see how THAT might sound?
Why don't you remove some coils from your favourite MM cartridge to see how THAT might sound?
Why don't you change the line-contact stylus of your favourite cartridge to eliptical and see how THAT might sound?
Instead, you have dozens of cartridges which you use and accept for what they are, and how they are designed.
I'm afraid you cannot have it BOTH ways.
Either EVERYTHING can be improved by the user.... and SHOULD be.........or we insert and/or eliminate those components we can readily access which give our systems.....' proportion'.....as Stilskin likes to say.
Another problem I have with your readiness to change the designs of commercially available components, is that we.....the committed audiophiles out there....... no longer KNOW what you're talking about?
We must accept your word alone, that the changes have wrought sonic improvements.
Now I'm willing to believe that even minute changes can deliver large sonic differences.
What I'm never willing to blindly accept, is that those ' differences' ........are in fact IMPROVEMENTS.
It's hard enough to reach any sort of agreement amongst audiophiles with KNOWN components?............if we enter the land of ' trust me it's better....I wish you could hear it?', there will be no discourse available, simply a collection of individual stances of superiority. |
Myself and Phaser will have the pleasure of having a listen to Halcro's system this coming Sunday.
Should be a bit of fun and very interesting. |
Halcro,I, myself, never thought you were denegrating the employment of vacuum in any turntable...You have demonstrated your entitlement to your own opinions,and I have no problems with any of your thoughts.I have my own,as do many others.
Firstly I have "definitely" had good success in further improving my Sota Cosmos.I intend to introduce these modifications to my new series IV,as soon as it arrives.I have done so through years of trial and error,AND have run these mods through the mfgr who has no problems with them whatsoever(I believe Loyd Walker has employed mods,from learning experiences,on numerous occassions).I have also recently received multiple personal E-mails from a major foreign importer of the table(he loves the design,and carries three other expensive/high priced designs as well,but "now knows how good a maxxed out Cosmos can be"...his words)who wanted to thank me for turning him on to these minor mods,which just happen to add a "significant" degree of performance enhancements to an already superb sounding design.He went through each mod(I think there are about four)and was quite happy with the results,which will be employeed into many tables sold by him.
Sota's owner/chief designer(I know him very well)does not employee these(actually one,of the four has been employeed) as there are ergonomic issues,where some less experienced folks might not be as meticulous as others in committing to utilizing the mods,to best advantage.In other words,most folks are not like the audiogon crowd.They just want to play their music,and not worry about the last iota of fanaticism!
It would also increase the price,and there are mfgrs,like SOTA who really care about keeping money in their customers pockets.I know this from dealing with them for over twenty years!Hence,my absolute loyalty to SOTA's corporate "good character".
BTW,I used to like to NOT take the "five seconds" to "shut down" and change out my LP's,for each side too.It was when I had a Linn table,which did not accept a clamping system,so I kept it running and switched on the fly,like you apparently do.
These are all decisions we make to satisfy each of our ergonomic preferrences.Some folks like multiple arms/cartridges/tube topologies,and have no problem taking "whatever time" it takes to gain some enhancement.
In the long run,the LP "side change thing" is mighty inconsequential when one factors in the significant improvement I personally hear from a good vacuum set-up."One" I even improved on,a bit!...I'm quite happy,as I am sure you are -:)
Best. |
Halcro,
I like the word "proportion"
The word itself can be used in many different situations, choices or events in life.
One example is this hobby.
Proportion,the comparative relation between things with respect to balance or symmentry.
Thomas Woschnicks hard work and listening has found a harmonious proportion with his turntable design.
What does he hear with his design that he is so satisfied with for now?
Who here has heard his system?
Halcro,you have found a harmonious proportion within your system using the Copperhead arm.
Who here has heard your system?
I like to think that I have found harmonious proportions within my budget for a system choice and the room its set up in.
The word proportion, I like it.
|
Dear Halcro: +++++ " Don't you imagine that before putting into production his ' masterpiece', he has tried everything to see if any improvements can be wrought in the prototype? " +++++
IMHO, I think that is almost impossible to try " everything " in a TT design specially something like the vacuum hold down system that it is not easy to execute ( plug and play ). I always stated that almost all the TT out there are " incomplete " products and one of the reason is that the designers/builders can't try/test " everything " and that's why we customers/users always we are " tweaking " in different ways ( platforms, clamps, power cords, Vacuum systems, footers, mats, etc, etc ) our TTs, Halcro there is no perfect TT ( not yet ).
+++++ " The only caveat I would have to this is..........once you accept the designer's choices, I find it hard to understand the fact that you think you can improve upon his design? " +++++
it is exactly what we do: looking how to improve the quality sound reproduction of our regular/line TT, the Vacuum hold down AT platter mat is a way to do that.
Now, you don't have to trust in what Emailists or I already told you about, just try it and decide: your call!
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
I never meant to denigrate vacuum hold-down.
I merely stated that the Raven doesn't employ it and for me, I like it that way.
All the other turntable manufacturers who DO employ it make it an integral element of their system and it obviously works.
Just as some manufacturers make suspended decks work whilst others utilise the unsuspended principle.
Some make belt-drive their movement of choice whilst others use idler-wheel/rim drive or direct drive.
I honestly don't know which one is the best or even IF one of them is potentially THE best.
The fact that they are ALL made to work well, demonstrates that whatever choices the designer makes, his execution is the critical factor.
I simply like the ease of not having to shut-down after every side to every record is played.
The only caveat I would have to this is..........once you accept the designer's choices, I find it hard to understand the fact that you think you can improve upon his design?
Don't you imagine that before putting into production his ' masterpiece', he has tried everything to see if any improvements can be wrought in the prototype?
If it were as simple as a clamp or he realised he had ' misjudged' by not utilising vacuum hold-down?.....why would his design be even making it to the ' short list' of top turntables? |
One other point regards to some claiming vacuum has a negative affect on sound...."That is total rationalization"!....I have heard two different Rockport models,the Basis Debut Gold Standard Vacuum(fantastic table)another early design(big bucks,but I forgot the name...it was at Michael Gindi's home,in the mid 1990's)and have owned a few SOTA vacuum tables.I am awaiting the newest Sota Cosmos series IV,but had the series I and III,and an earlier series IV.My friend has had the series I and series III Cosmos tables too,back ended by the Magico Minis.My new Phantom is sitting,mounted on my armboard,and awaiting the new vacuum table....I have heard my own vinyl on ALL these tables,and any stating there is some kind of negative effect of vinyl replay on a vacuum table is either not implementing it very well,or just mistaken!..."That" is an "absolute"!...
I don't mean to go on about this,but the subject was brought up.
best to all. |
My felings as of late is to give almost anyone the benefit of the doubt,if he/she is passionate and seems to know a bit about "things" audio/music.Even if I am really sceptical about something,I no longer think I can gain anything by being a contrarian,other than receive contempt from some posters,SO I just stay quiet.Mostly!!
The business of vacuum,I know very well,as I have lived with vacuum units(about four tables)over some twenty years.If anyone thinks it is hard to keep a platter clean,while owning/using a good vacuum table they are greatly mistaken!
I have NOT had a single pop or tick,that I can say with certainty happened from a vacuum seal,in my 2500 LP collection.However I DO have a dedicated(locked) audio room.My friend has a dusty environment,and has had vacuum for about fifteen years,and has almost no noise issues as well.
The solution to keeping the platter clean,from my expperience,is to simply brush the platter surface with a "facial make-up brush"!You know,the type of brush women use to put rouge type make-up on their face.Very inexpensive,at around five bucks(though there is a typical rip-off audio company selling one,made of horse hair for 80 dollars)....That's it!!..No noise problems,unless you are careless.
As to the sonic impact of vacuum,to me it is a common sense attitude,coupled with "not even having to be a careful listener",it is just "that obvious"!Inner details stand out in bold relief,and if you have one of the elite arms and cartridges,you will notice something special,and in less than a few platter rotations.This is one feature I can unquestionably state is just "fabulous to have"!You want to take advantage of that fabulous platter composition you have?Well,it makes good sense to "almost" bond the LP to that platter,which eliminates any air pockets under the disc from vibration during play.No standard clamping system will give this result.AND some are pretty good,but the brass ring belongs to the finest vacuum systems.With these you truly have a disc that "truly" weighs as much as your fancy platter.Not a bad thing.
That is definitely "not" to say it is a "must",but if you have lived with it for as long as me,you don't want to be without vacuum....Personally I believe (though the subject is still open to debate,to anyone,"except me")that the non vacuum mfgrs have an easy dismissal of vacuum,as more of a marketing tool,than actual confirmation of it not working well.It certainly would not be easy or cheap to add to existing products,but had the CD not come around,I think there would have been a bigger push towards vacuum tables.....Just some thoughts-:)
Best. |
Dear Emailist: Two days ago I posted on Halcro's review and ( between other things ) give to him my advice to add the AT 666 to his Raven.
Like you say I'm ( till today ) convince that a vacuum hold down record is a must to have in any decent analog chain.
Yes, the improvement on the bass ( low bass/mid bass: tight, clean, pitch, no overhang, less coloration, etc, etc ) is really shocked and to believe we have to hear it, but the improvement is not only on the bass ( but only this fact is worth the effort to find the AT666 ) but at the other frequency extreme where we have more precise/definition on the high frequencies with a pristine presentation and ovbiously that in the midrange we find a quality improvement too. When the whole audio frequency spectrum " suffer " a quality improvement we have many other benefits in other reproduction areas: soundstage, focus, inner detail, less distortion, less coloration, etc, etc.
I know that many people are against these kind of Vacuum systems ( Walker, Halcro, Alvin/Monaco, etc, etc ) but I know too that many other audio/music lovers are in favor of it, if not ask to a Sota or Basis TT owners ( for name some ) that are very satisfied with the Vacuum hold down system.
I put in this way: ones you hear/heard it you can't live with out it!!!.
Of course that this is only an opinion and like every opinion a subjective one.
Trade offs??, of course there is nothing perfect ( yet ) out there: we have to be ( a must ) very carefully to clean perfectly the AT vacuum mat and the records side ( time consuming )that goes directly on the AT mat every time we play any record/LP, if not the dust ( small and invisible ones ) pass to form part of the recording ( stick ) and ( over the time ) your records could convert a little noisy.
If any one can live with it then the AT 666 add-on is worth the effort, you will enjoy it for ever.
Btw, Emailist IMHO you have to leave the underside of the AT666 like it is ( I already try something like you posted and does not works in good way ):
+++++ " The AT666 exhibits no kind of ringing when tapping it once it is placed on the platter. " +++++
this means its working right on target!.
recondition??, I own at least four of these AT666 ( old ones ) and what I do to " recondition " the rubber seals is only to clean/wash with water ( tap water ) and soft soap, then dry with a cotton clothe and finally I use a stick tape ( scotch ) over the out and inside rubber rings to take out any small dust, it works.
Emailist very good " move " with your AT666!, enjoy .
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
This is a great thread and I enjoyed the AC-3 Review.
I was thinking of getting the Copperhead when it was just released, but ended up just keeping the Phantom I had. Now I'm obviously glad I didn't get an early production run Copperhead, but is something I will now consider (though the setup issue scares me a bit)
This is a bit off topic, but concerns something Halcro mentioned about TW not liking vacuum hold down, or a clamp.
Indeed with my lowly little Raven One, I found I didn't like the Millenium Clamp or mat. I felt they both subdued the music, however with the mat, the clamp seemed better than no clamp, (though I don't use either.)
Last week I got a nice vintage AT666-EX vacuum hold down add on platter.
I am shocked at how much more information and bass I am getting. The realism of instruments had risen quite a bit with the add on platter.
The clamp now is beneficial sonically, and helps keep more of the vacuum
till the end of the LP side (though a small bit of air does leak in by the end of the LP- any tips to help this (I already clean the rubber on each listen - I am thinking maybe recondition the rubber seals with a fluid? Maybe Raul can comment since I know he loves the AT666.
The instrument height is better as well - I so wish someone would make a modern version of this device out of a material other than Aluminum. (TW's secret Delrin mix, or Copper would be nice)
My next step will be to have the underside of the the 666's alum platter coated in AVM paint to help with vibration. I am thinking aluminum is not the ideal material for a plater mat, though it feels very solid once on the Raven One's platter. The AT666 exhibits no kind of ringing when tapping it once it is placed on the platter.
Also of course the AC has copper as its upper layer while the One has no metal, so perhaps I am getting some benefit just from adding a metal top layer. |
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. |
|
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 already do it and it " works " great!!!!!!!!!
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
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.
|
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. |
I don't think Halcro had any agenda regarding "the best",other than sincere enthusiasm for something(here the Copperhead)he is currently smitten with.Personally that is just fine with me,but I don't believe the intent was to persuade anyone to sell his/her current arm for the Copperhead.....Those with vast equipment experience(many here) take certain claims with a bit of healthy scepticism,BUT there are some(like me) who get enthused enough to file the input away for another time,when we "might" be looking to replace something.
This is how I view the well written review of the apparently superb(I have no doubt)Copperhead arm.
Of the experiences I have had,the modded Air Tangent/Titan-i combo was the best,by far,but I have no idea if it was the absolute best!
I believe Halcro(forgive my assumption if in error)did not relate the "absoluteness" of the Copperhead's superiority on the scale of "nothing could be better",other than the Cobra.I took away the implication of a stunningly good product,that reveals exactly what is hidden on my LP's.....
I "assume" other contenders can do "similar" things,like the Kuzma Airline.Another arm I am dying to hear,but am not holding my breath.Also,Kuzma has released another potential pivoting "winner",which is shown on the web-site.
From a turntable aspect,the Raven IS fabulous,as I heard two different and wonderful demos,by Jeff Catalano of High Water sound.Two different arms/cartridges,which each stood out in exemplary fashion.
For the "interested explorer" out there, there is a table that absolutely fascinates me,and happens to look amazing(an understatement)...it is the Rolf Kelch Reference!!!...Most likely very expensive(making the Raven a bargain),and with a long waiting period,BUT you "have" to see this table for yourself.An improved version of the amazing(I've heard it)Thorens Reference.Another classic design
Best. |
Halcro,
ditto Phaser.
Despite appearances reviews and reviewers are famously limited. I used to try to draw the kind of conclusions you are drawing, based on published reviews, professional or otherwise. It is certainly a very attractive prospect. IMHO the universe will always be just a little bit bigger (infinitely actually) than the desire and ability of our egos to put it in a tidy box.
At the very least, I can easily point out a number of contenders that didn't make it on your list, such as the Walker and Kuzma Airline arms (which will probably never be heard on any other tables than their own stable mates), the Airtangent, the Basis Vector, and the Schroeder to name a few, with others lurking in the wings eager to prove their worthiness in the right set up. And I'm sure that fans of the Monaco and other tables would have you include their favorites in your list of tables.
IME, the more I get around, the less conclusive all of this gets. There are simply WAY too many variables, all of which interact to a shocking degree, not least of which is personal taste, which, try as we might to claim neutrality etc., factors hugely. And the higher the resolution the system, the more shocking it becomes.
And then, just when you think you have it all figured out, along comes Raul! ;-)
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?
You can certainly make an "educated assessment" based on publications and/or direct experience, just not a very conclusive one. And the more we wise up to all this and stop trying to assert the unassertable the more useful those writings and experiences will be. In the end we can be happy with our choices, not because our egos can proudly claim their definitiveness but because the products they represent are wonders of love and ingenuity and they allow us to experience the miracles of nature and the human heart through the magic of music. |
Phaser,
Well of course there are many tables, arms and cartridges out there.
If we follow your argument, there can be NO declaration of SOTA in High End Audio because no-one will ever hear every combination of deck, arm and cartridge.
We must rely on others to provide experience and knowledge (just as we do with car reviews) and narrow down the ' contenders' .
Mikey Fremer has heard many more tables, arms and cartridges than I ever will. So has Jon Valin.
There is enough anecdotal evidence on Forums such as this one to make an assessment that the top arms include the Phantom, the Triplanar, the Davinci Grfandezza 12" Ref, and the Cobra.
There is general agreement among posters here and Fremer and Valin that the top turntables include the Walker, the Rockport, the Raven AC and the Continuum Caliburn.
There is some anecdotal evidence from these Forums that the Davinci is better than (or at least equal to).....the Phantom and Triplanar.
I've heard the Caliburn with the Cobra and the Raven AC-3 with both the Davinci and Copperhead.
If I can't make an educated assessment based on the above, we should all stop reading and writing about the High End. |
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! |
Sirspeedy,
Raul has continually proclaimed the arm/cartridge compatibility issue and I'm willing to accept it for existing arms.
What I'm claiming for the Copperhead is that we simply can no longer view this as an arm which has a 'sound' which matches well with some equipment and some cartridges.
The Copperhead (and probably Cobra), is an 'absolute'.
If you want to hear the Master Tape you MUST have the Copperhead.
This Forum is about the Raven vs the Walker prompted by Jon Valin's review in TAS which was trying to determine his analogue REFERENCE deck.
We're all quite happy to find the best absolute turntable (without qualification).....but we think an arm cannot be the absolute BEST.
I'm claiming it CAN be.......and then the quality of all cartridges is judged simply by their performance in the BEST arm. |
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. |
Raul,
I think you have misunderstood the review slightly.
I preferred the Davinci only above the OLD Copperhead (which was faulty).
Once the NEW Copperhead was installed, it was simply a different universe. |
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,sorry to bother you about this,but I wonder if as of this date(Thursday) you still prefer the Copperhead to the Davinci 12 incher.I find your thoughts fascinating(in the "best" way)and enlightening.When someone like yourself goes to this length,and apparent honesty,I am all ears!!
I have read about quite glowing experiences with the Davinci,but your comments,while not condemning it,makes the Copperhead appear the "breakthrough" you claim it to be!Fascinating to say the least!
Your honesty about the apparent severe ergonomic issues,with regards to antiskate,hopefully will be addressed.The arm seems way too good for this to be the case....Funny,how Fremer did not even allude to this!Makes forums like this one all the more valid!!
BTW,an interesting point/comment that I read from another "long standing hobbyist" who was a thinking person,as well as a very good listener.....His assertion was that we each need more than one cartridge type(as well as arms too)to be able to differentiate the different aspects of LP's that came from different eras,as well as being cut in different parts of the world.This guy seemed passionate about "protecting mankind's heritage of history and music that is preserved on LP".The only way to do so,according to him,was/is to have different stylus tip types for the different Lp/cutter types,as well as mastering techniques used over the years,as well as different arms for specific cartridges.....Funny how dumb I realize I am as I had always wondered why so many folks actually like/need more than one cartridge,or arm!Sure makes sense(something I don't have much of:-).
Best. |
Dear Halcro: IMHO I think that you point out ( other than the Raven high quality TT ) some very interesting subjects.
One of them is the high tonearm importance in the analog audio chain and I agree with you about.
For some time and due to my self several experiences I'm supporting the critical link tonearm/cartridge over the TT link, my words were something like this: " with any decent TT the differences ( quality performance ) were made by the right tonearm/cartridge combination ".
Reading between " lines " in your review you really like the " colored " Davinci tonearm over the Cooperhead ( at least is " addictive " ) that for what you posted is an almost non-colored ( non-distortion ) tonearm and this fact is what make the whole differences and that's why you prefer the Cooperhead on piano.
I respect that you prefer the Davinci in other kind of recordings but IMHO if a tonearm/cartridge combination do things in good way ( like the cooperhead ) with piano recordings then it must ( I can't understand why it did not ) do things well too with any kind of music, of course that maybe the Davinci colorations likes more to you that the almost non-colored Cooperhead.
This Cooperhead fact ( low distortion/coloration ) brings to my mind what I'm just experienced ( right now )with my first ( own design: Guillermo and I ) tonearm prototype that let me heard/hear recordings ( that I think were very bad ones ) for the first time and this is possible only because the very low distortion/coloration tonearm design!!!!!, I have to add that this happen too with my Phonolinepreamp: as a fact any of you could have this quality performance experience when you change a link in your audio chain for a better ( lower distortion/coloration/noises ) link quality performance design.
Halcro, IMHO I think that not only the low output MC cartridges could make the " job ". Now, that you already have the right " tools " maybe you could compare those LO MC cartridges against some MM ones like this one:
http://cls.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/cls.pl?anlgcart&1212337930
or a Nagaoka MP-50 or Grace Ruby that you could buy right now for a few low dollars, try it don't miss the opportunity to know a " different " lovely audio/music experience, I'm sure you will be very happy to put some very low money where it counts.
Regards and enjoy the music.
Raul. |
Halcro,thanks for taking the time to write,and photograph such a great "read"!
Best to you,and good luck with the fabulous set-up. |
|
Halcro,
Hugely appreciate your comments and observations...When you added the other motors and new motor controller to the Raven, was there a big improvement in speed accuracy and the fundamental drive of the music, notwithstanding the differences of the arms? |
Halcro,
Good work on your review. |
I can't find it under its own title? |
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. |
