Hello everyone,
I just returned from the US and I didn't get a chance to (nor felt like) check(ing) the responses to the RMAF session that originally was the subject of this thread.
First of all, I'd like to thank Thom for hosting the event, secondly apologize for the fact that the circumstances/conditions were far from what they ought to be to call it a valid comparison between tonearms.
I had no choice but to ask Thom and Joel if they'd agree to me using a different cartridge than the A90, generously supplied by Mike Lavigne(thanks again!), as it had issues that would have made a comparison invalid to begin with. Had there been a second Dynavector XV1s, I'd have used that, despite it being not my favorite cartridge.
The choice I then made had to do with what was available AND promised to be of high enough a quality to make the event "work" in one way or another. It might have been better(less risky) to cancel the show, but just because you found that the sweets purchased for Haloween were past their expiration date, you don't tell all the trick or treaters to go elsewhere, but you go back to the candy store and buy what may not be their first choice but still qualifies a CANDY.
The cartridge chosen had such different requirements in terms of loading and gain, that the Atmasphere preamp's phonosection would not have been a reasonable match. I suggested bringing what I was using in the Artemis room, simply because it worked there without any problem. No "team Schröder" trying to take advantage of the situation here. More like competing in someone elses skatepark with additional time required to mount the proper wheels after finding their concrete was different from yours at home. The targeted price tag on that phonostage(a prototype) was not known to me(nor, I believe, is it carved in stone). Irrespective of that, it was clear to me - and I tried to make it clear to Thom and Joel - that it was no longer possible to regard/call/sell the event as a "shootout".
About the playback levels chosen. It is not correct that the playback level on the Sussurro/Schröder/Artemis combo was always ~5db louder than for the XV1s/Thalea/Atmashere frontend. In one case it was the exact opposite and I did comment on that right after the track was over. This brings me to a very important deficiency of the entire session, one that would have obscured(to say the least) any outcome even if the only variable had been the tonearm. The volume control on the Atmasphere preamp(no criticism per se intended) is rather coarsly stepped where both Joel and I ended up using/having to use it. It was simply impossible to achieve level matching to within 1db and even that would be above my personal requirement(+/-0,2db max!) for a halfway objective comparison. I asked the listeners whether to go up or down in volume every time it was my turn to level match the playback. Now if anyone in the audience had a level meter, why didn't they come forward and say "wait, that's to high" or "turn it down a notch, please"? Actually, if you had done any level measurements, you'd know that it isn't possible to get even close without a test tone and a quiet room(instead of music playing). An iPhone comes in handy if you have Shazam on it, but as a level meter, well...
No odormeter app yet available for it either, but there were clearly too many people in the room that all had a long day. Relaxed listening it didn't seem to be. The original target was 20(25 people max.), I counted nearly 50 and might have missed some.
Despite all of that, I do not regret suggesting such an event in in the first place nor going through with it despite all of the above. And while it was obvious that not everyone's expectations were met, there seemed to have been easily as many people having enjoyed it as there were disgruntled ones. Now why is it that the latter group had numerous members(see posts above) that could clearly assign the differences they heard to just the tonearms that were used, seemingly omitting the influence of cartridge, phonostage, wiring?
A reminder. I suggested to invite EVERY tonearm designer/manufacturer/representative who considers their product worthy of the state of the art sticker. I deeply regret that it seemed to have been impossible for Thom to offer/give the Triplanar, the Reed, the Well Tempered, the Graham Phantom or Micha Huber's Simplicity tonearm(to name a few) a platform.
I realize that such an undertaking would be next to impossible to fit into the frame of a Trade Show evening, but if(with all the things we learned from this in mind) we'd ever do it again, any interested party should be approached/included, possibly at the cost of having to go with more than one host.
What did I get out of this? I met Joel Durand, who, apart from making an excellent tonearm, seemed to be as nice and humble a person as your are ever likely to encounter at RMAF, which, as far as such shows go, beats every other show for good spirited people. I'm definitely looking forward to our next meeting!
For the record(pun intended..:-) : I did build the first tonearm with a magnetically stabilized and damped thread bearing in 1978, a time when there was no internet or other means for a 15year old to research what was "out there" to copy or use as an "inspiration". No neodymium magnets, Kevlar, Dyneema... either back then. SmCo was the strongest magnetic material available back them, few monofilaments were usable at all. The arm looked a lot like some of the rougher DIY-Schröder "clones" you'll find on the net(couldn't afford a lathe 'til I was 18).So while I hold Bill Firebaugh's work in the highest regard, he is not my dad :-)
Back to chief philosopher D. Brakemeier, aka Dertonarm and the definition of value...
See ya'all next year (or sooner :-)
Frank |
Kostas 1.Well said and with that we should all say 'Good Night" and end this discussion |
'Value', as a concept, cannot explain why humans value oxygen but are not being prepared to spend their money to buy any quantities of it.
'Marginal Utility' is a better concept in that respect: it explains the hefty premium people are prepared to pay for luxury goods according to tangible or intangible (such as 'perceived status') benefits.
It is possible that one man's 'marginal utility' is another man's foolishness, but, hey, we live in democracy :-)
Because of the subjective nature of 'marginal utility', that only partially is amenable to logic, it is impossible to synthesise the polarised views expressed in this thread.
This, though, should not be an obstacle in having more events like the one organised by Thom in the RMAF 2010 |
"Price is what you pay, value is what you get" -- Warren Buffett
Value is then in the eye of the beholder. The cost of materials Picasso used to create "Guernica" amounted to a few dollars, yet the value of his creation is incalculable. On a larger scale, price and value meet on the open market.
On a personal scale, high end manufacturers allow me to experience a facimile of Coltrane's genius; a tremendous value to myself which I am fortunate to share with my immediate family. Nor is it possible for me to assign a value to the friendships that have resulted from participating in this hobby and sharing the joys of music. This has immeasurably enriched my life.
I would not be so presumptious to assign a different value to anyone else. |
"the volontè génèrale versus the volontè de tous"
How can the general will be different from the will of all? I'm at a loss to see the difference.
...just trying to understand. |
However - a roman gladius, its blade made from the special alloy produced by a certain celtic tribe in the area of lake Chiemsee in southern Bavaria ( because the soil there was contaminated by millions of fragments from an exploded comet which exploded in the sky above their territory a few hundred years before ) had an inherent quality which by far exceeded (in all critical aspects of "performance" such as hardness, durability, weight etc.) all other swords of its time for 3 centuries and won the roman empire the pre-dominance in Europe. Not everyone thinks that Rome's dominance was a good thing. So- are you saying this is a good thing or a bad thing? It still seems like a matter of declaration... |
Hello Frank
I hope I don't get anyone in trouble.
I am after a replacement for my ZYX Universe.
At the show, did you tell Larry Denham of TTWeights Audio that his Black Onyx / Talea ll / Allnic Puritas was the best analogue at the show?.
I have already placed my order for the Talea ll, and am now looking at the Puritas. I will say the Black Onyx is the best table I have owned, though I have not owned many.
Billy |
Atmasphere, I still believe that true value in the sense of the word has nothing to do with declaration or point of view of people but with its inherent quality.
Yes - today "value" in the mind of most people is only applied by the thinking of the customer and it's acceptance ( or success ) in the market.
Which tells nothing about the true meaning of the term value, but a lot of our modern times.
Consequently the true value can only recognized by the objective expert ( impossible in audio...;-) ... ).
Finally this comes down to the old conflict of two apparently similar on first sight, but in truth totally different positions - the volontè génèrale versus the volontè de tous.
It is obvious that my own position is firmly with the first camp.
While today's market and it's participants have to deal with the omnipresent second.
We live in the world we created - no one to blame but ourselves.
Wouldn't you too like to design your OTL's without taking into accounts many "market calls" and "fashions of the day" ?
Only a rhetorical question .....;-) .... |
Thom_mackris, your last post certainly shows that your spare time can't be all that limited...;-) ...
Value is of course kind of a label and assigned by people. As thus it can never be universal nor objective in any way.
Value in the sense that most people understand it today is only individual.
However - a roman gladius, its blade made from the special alloy produced by a certain celtic tribe in the area of lake Chiemsee in southern Bavaria ( because the soil there was contaminated by millions of fragments from an exploded comet which exploded in the sky above their territory a few hundred years before ) had an inherent quality which by far exceeded (in all critical aspects of "performance" such as hardness, durability, weight etc.) all other swords of its time for 3 centuries and won the roman empire the pre-dominance in Europe.
That is an inherent product quality which has nothing to do with individual point of view, bias or price tag. There are similar examples today ( if few - and even fewer in high-end audio ).
We all have very different biases and what one may call a gifted or ingenious design means nothing or just being mediocre to the other.
Lets just assume that a person is every bit as deep into the design process of preamplifiers, poweramplifiers, turntables and loudspeakers as the persons/designers you think are the most gifted. But he has long progressed from a level which is still thought of as state of the art. But that person has no financial interest anymore and - that is important now! - does not tries to "market" a "product" and thus is no competitor on the market.
It certainly makes little to no sense to discuss here any aspects of philosophy - if I want to do this with an audiophile on Audiogon, I will send a PN to Nandric, as I know he is both willing and able to follow certain paths in philosophy and has enough knowledge, cultural education and background to do so.
So much for my arrogance and yes, you may indeed interpret my posts correctly, but that is a reflection of your own imagination and will tell you something - independent of the quality of my english which indeed in neither my first language nor my only one. But it serves me good enough to follow anything written here and I may have little problem to walk without your guidance - through english and through audio.
You are a dealer and need to support the products you sell and to defend your position - fine with me. |
None of this stuff, no matter how expensive, will ever get me back to that night when I was 17 years old, sitting in a tiny nightclub in New Haven (Connecticut), listening to John Coltrane play and watching him at work, as he was standing about 6 feet from my table. It was snowing hard outside, too dangerous to drive, really. So he and his quartet just kept playing on for many hours in the darkened room, while I tried to pretend I was old enough to be in a bar. But that experience and others like it is why I can enjoy Coltrane on my car radio, and at some level it is why I pursue this arcane parallel art form known as "hi-fi". It's all linked together but all different as well. I would rather not question it, in fact. |
Atmasphere, very well put. You can also use Tarskian aproch
in terms of satisfaction conditions: 'x satisfied Fx and Gx'. Dertonarm and I are still 'victims' of our philosophical education with Aristotelian 'essences';the inherent qualitys in the things. Quine made this joke about
the 'essence' (aka ratio) of humans: 'federless biped'. Ie
both desriptions of 'man' are true.
Regards, |
Dertonearm your comments appear to be trolls. I cant believe that youre actually serious. As you expound on your own philosophy however, you are taking crack shots at the work of some brilliant designers Ive had the opportunity to meet. Only because of this, am I following up. You obviously have much more free time than I do.
I did not say that Occams razor is the ONLY valid design approach, but rather that it is A VALID APPROACH, and one that I adhere to. Its a metaphor for an approach, and nothing more.
Time and again, as I look at audio components, the ones of lasting value are those which are the result of pairing down of unnecessary design elements, unnecessary points of failure, as well as ones that, while they may be based in solid theory, are an utter failure from a perspective of producing a musically involving component. We still dont know everything we need to measure, and unless you can contribute something to this body of knowledge, you have to deal with it.
With regard to the topic of paring down the unnecessary (or what doesnt work), Ill give you two examples.
*** NOTE *** while composing this post, I see that Atma-sphere made some parallel comments regarding feedback.
In the development of a phono stage, Mike Sanders of Quicksilver followed the path of regulation. It produced beautiful square waves ... and irritating musical reproduction. Try as he might, with different regulation schemes, he continued to return to an unregulated supply.
Before you go about misinterpreting these comments, I am NOT arguing for or against regulation. This example is about one designer who focussed on a solution based on the skills he brought to the table, with an eye on the final design goal satisfying musical reproduction. Someone else might solve this problem very nicely with a regulation scheme.
Theres a phono stage (name witheld) which uses 9 small signal tubes to regulate each channel of its power supply. Thes tubes in turn have their filament supply regulated by LM317 regulators. Whether this section of the power supply circuit is the reason for the bleached (lacking in tone color) and undynamic, and uninvolving sound, is something that I cant say for certain, but it is certainly characteristic of a design approach of: if a little is good, then more must be better.
I see this (approach of excess) over and over again in our industry the piling on of extra circuit elements. One designer I know calls it gratuitous parts selection. It fits into a pattern that too much hi-fi gear falls into gear that does everything right except satisfy the listener.
In writing the above, I can anticipate your hearty objections that there must be objective criteria to which the designer is held accountable. Well guess what? We (as an industry) are still trying to figure out what to measure.
I had breakfast with Ron Sutherland (Sutherland Electronics) at the Audiofest. Ron told me the key challenge he faces (from a design discipline perspective) is to know when hes done to stop piling unnecessary elements into a design.
Ron revisits his design goal to determine whether hes achieved it, in the context of the design architecture he laid out. A corralary of this is of course to re-visit the design to see if you inadvertently bypassed your end point, and to strip away the unnecessary components. This was the background to my Mark Twain quote about taking more time to write a shorter letter. It was apparently lost on you.
Lastly, your proclamation that something has only the value that ascribe to it is a bit extreme. The market as whole determines the value of something. You or I may disagree with the market, but we still have to deal with the fact that we are but two individuals with opinions. We can make an individual case for our opinions, and perhaps sway opinion in the process... or not. One thing is clear - we wont sell our case by proclamation.
Lastly, perhaps you didnt intend to come off as being arrogant, but this is how I interpret many of your posts. I believe that that English is not your first language, and perhaps this is the source of the communication problem. In any case, I have limited time to walk you through this.
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
Dertonarm, And sorry - no, I do not think that something simply has the value that people put on it.
I still have the naive thinking, that the real contend -i.e.: the inherent quality ( in the very sense of the word ) of a product/something ultimately qualifies its value. Value comes out of declaration. I am pretty sure that 'inherent quality' is an assigned value also. Is this the idea that there can be 'quality' regardless of what people think? 'Quality' by itself has no meaning, and meaning is only ascribed by humans, so far... Not to put too fine a point on it, but my own efforts have been entirely to get as close to the original musical experience as possible. IOW, in service of the music only. Its cost me- for example I built our amps without feedback, because feedback violates a fundamental rule of human hearing. This limits the amps to speakers that are OK with that... if I was really going for 'high end', I would have had feedback so I could sell the amps to more customers. So I just drew a distinction between serving music vs 'high end'... Or did I miss something in your comment? |
Interesting turn of discussion here... I am quite in agreement with Dertonarm regarding the differences between sound and music reproduction. I have had a number of profound "moments" over the years with cheap sound systems, as well as great ones, and in concert halls (no preference, in those cases). In these moments one doesn't think about the sound reproduction anymore--the message is in the music. In fact, I would contend that, if possible, the best way to hear music is by reading a musical score (or playing it), when possible; no intermediary, human and/or mechanical. But that's another story...
To me, one of the fundamental advantages of the live event (or the musical score) is that you can choose what to focus your attention on. Sometimes, what is most moving in a piece of music is pretty well hidden inside the texture and that, most often, will not be revealed by mechanical systems of low-ish resolution. It might not be the case for Beethoven's op.132, granted, by Schoenberg's Pelleas?? It's not just a question of getting the sense of space, dynamic range, etc; the problem is mostly that on car radios, you can probably hear the main tune, perhaps the bass line and a bit of something else, but unless you already know from past experience what's inside those thick textures and therefore can somehow "make them up" as you're listening, you aren't going to get much of it. My point is that one reason to strive for higher resolution--for me!--is to be able to have the same kind of choice when I'm listening to a recording as I do in a (good) concert hall: sometimes I want to pay attention to a secondary line, or further inside because it says something more important than the main line; or because I hadn't noticed it before. Or I want to hear specific notes inside chords because they lead to something unexpected; or whatever... pick your favorite music, that works just as well. Those things are an integral part of the musical experience.
Then, again, sometimes, it's the most obvious stuff that moves you, and then any old system will do, I agree.
Music is a source of knowledge as well as of enjoyment.
Joel |
Talea Manufacturer Policy regarding bearing swaps noted. :-)
Thanks, Joel. I apologize for mis-speaking. |
Manufacturer disclaimer: Dan_ed wrote earlier:
"The jewel cup (of the Talea) is slightly more difficult, but can be pressed in and out by hand, assuming one has strong fingers. In any case, it is pretty much a field replacement."
No, it is not: this is not something that should be attempted by the user! One needs a special tool in order to remove this part. This operation, if ever needed, should be done by the manufacturer.
Thank you.
Joel |
Dear all, There is this strange conviciton that we intend to impress or show off with our audio-system. But impress
who? All of my family members and all of my friends (one
excepted) think that I am crazy to spend so much money for
my system. Besides all the ladys without exception stated
that they would request divorce if their guy would dare to
buy speakers as I own (Usher BE-20). I have no idea why but
the ladys somehow think that the home furnishing is some kind of their prerogatives. So no wonder that we from all
parts of the world seek for some understanding or empathy in this forum. We are, it seems, strange people.
Regards, |
Nandric, - that was a real good one !!!
Best,
D. |
All I can say is that before I jumped into the higher end I did not own, nor did I listen to, any jazz or classical music. I have about 2000 records now and the fastest growing part of my stash is jazz and classical music. For me, high-end stereo has provided an exposure to and a source for this music beyond having to travel into the city. In short, I can listen more often to music that I haven't had major exposure to and that has expanded my enjoyment of music of all genres. The better my playback gets, the easier it is to hear and experience the inflection and nuance that the players use to interpret the scores. Yes, I have had those special moments while listening to a song on the radio or on the cdp in my truck. And they are special moments, but I have more of the special moments in my listening room as well. It is still the music that moves me, and high end audio allows me to hear even more of it.
Frankly, the best system I heard at RMAF was the one I turned on when I returned back home. ;-)
FWIW, IMO, etc. |
Dear Nandric, ..."But my quess regarding Dertonarm system is that the Dollar value of it would allow him to spend the rest of his life in a concert hall." - that may be true, but you can apply that to many Audiogon'ers set-ups.
Meanwhile I am really tempted to post a virtual system ..... ;-) .....
As I said - I too like the sensation of great sound, but it has nothing to do with my love for music. I - for me myself - do draw a line of distinction here. Sound here - music there. They rarely do need each other. |
Dertonarm & Syntax, Your storys rimind me of this chef cook at Maxime: 'there is nothing as tasty as a good cooked potato'.
Regards, |
Dear Syntax, I am not able to see Dertonarms 'system' so I
can only quess but I can see yours. Your system is in my opinion in contradiction to your opininion as stated. But my quess regarding Dertonarm system is that the Dollar value of it would allow him to spend the rest of his life in a concert hall.
Regards, |
... Without love for music such attempts look to me as absurd ... Well, this is subjective. When you like the music it doesn't matter from what kind of source it is coming, MP3, Car Stereo or Gramophone. High End Audio actually used to have a goal: perfect reproduction of the sound of real music performed in a real space. That was found difficult to achieve, and it was abandoned when most music lovers, who almost never heard anything except amplified music anyway, forgot what "the real thing" had sounded like. Today, "Good" sound is whatever one likes. |
Dear Nandric, as much as I am taken with truly great sonic reproduction and the way it can open up certain aspects in complex music textures (Mahler Symphonies, Schoenberg - "Pelleas and Mellisande" for instance...) - I honestly meant that high-end audio is utterly obsolete for the enjoyment of music.
The most moving moments in music in my experience were via kitchen radio or car radio - it was a matter of the moment, the right music and a certain mood which created those unforgettable moments.
It was never because of the sound.
There are great moments in audio - no doubt and no argument.
I have them every day, but that has to do ( at least in my experience which of course is purely individual ) with sensual receipt of great acoustic sensations.
And you will find ( most likely have already ...) audio fanatics whose record collections in size and musical "content" clearly show, that love for music has nothing to do (for them...) with high-end audio.
To me High-end audio is about SOUND reproduction - not music.
Each has it's meaning to me - in the right frame of context and importance.
And I strive every bit as hard as everyone here on Audiogon for the best possible (individually spoken ...) sound in my set-up.
But Beethoven's Op.132 can bring tears to my eyes while riding by car in the night - via low quality broadcast.
Best,
D. |
Dertonarm, Your eloquence is staggering but I am very puzzled with your statement: 'high-end audio has nothing to
do with love for music'. I know that describing something one way or the other matters so it may be the case that you meant 'high-end' in pejorative sence but to me it is about having music at home and attempting to get as near as
possible to the 'real thing'. Without love for music such
attempts look to me as absurd.
Regards, |
Thom, first of all - the "principle" of novacula occami (Occam's Razor.... or more precise: Occam's scalpel ) is NOT a principle of nature nor ever used in that way by the man to which it's origin is related, but a phrase from a 19th century mathematic ascribed to an early 14th century german religious scientist (who again borrowed it from Aristoteles...) and then during viktorian times adapted in the hey-day of economic theory.
Personally I think it is an erratic phrase in the way it is used and promoted in our poor educated modern times and I like the phrase "nature knows no compromise" a lot more - but that's purely personal and again against the mainstream.
But ..."The principle of Occam's razor is a valid design approach - whether you like it or not." ...... of course, but the undisputed fact that it is indeed a "valid design" approach today (at least in the last 3 decades and ever increasing the past 10 years..... (BTW - I have studied marketing and industry-design in the late 1980ies)) doesn't tell anything about its value or whether that's good (in the positive sense ) or not.
And sorry - no, I do not think that something simply has the value that people put on it.
I still have the naive thinking, that the real contend -i.e.: the inherent quality ( in the very sense of the word ) of a product/something ultimately qualifies its value.
Certainly I am somehow in opposition to "modern ( read: today's...) approach", but I can live quite comfortable with that fact.
For me the price of something never automatically went hand-in-hand with a quality sign.
We have in contrary the omnipresent problem, that today something ( especially in high-end audio...) is not taken seriously at all (regarding it's level of performance ) if it is not in a certain ( high...) "price-range". |
Dertonearm,
The principle of Occam's razor is a valid design approach - whether you like it or not.
If I understand your post (not an easy thing for me) you appear to be in agreement with me on the point that something has the value that people put on it - whether it's for a luxury item or anything else.
Thom @ Galibier |
Read the second paragraph again, Bill.
Much as you'll hate to admit it, you'll find yourself in complete agreement with me. Let me put this in simpler terms: hi-fi is NOT a life changing pursuit. We are talking about LUXURY items.
The point is however, that there are those who would look at a finished product - a simple collection of widgets - and say "I could have done that, and for a mere fraction of the price". The point is however that they have not done it.
Herb Papier came up with a brilliant design which has stood the test of time. Joel Durand patented azimuth adjustment on the fly. Frank Schroeder has his own innovative solutions.
Time will tell us where the latter two's innovations fit.
What's not to like?
Thom @ Galibier |
I still want to know how good that mammoth bone sounds. Did we gloss over that?!? |
Ummm... Syntax, I fear you have misunderstood my post, which you saw fit to quote. To say that the named tonearm designers "attempt(ed) to advance the state of the art" is not to say that in my opinion they have actually done so. I am not in a position to do that, because I have never heard any of the tonearms in a controlled setting, i.e., my own system. Perhaps you know better than I whether any of them succeeded. I intended only to say that it is nice to know that the art of playing vinyl is alive enough to elicit their efforts. As one of my sons likes to say, it's all good. |
Thom,
With all due respect.SAY WHAT ??? |
Cure for cancer and new tonearm comparison?
That's a hoot.
"You can't be serious"
-John McEnroe
Get real. |
We certainly will find enough phrases and epigraphs in the long heritage of literature to fortify todays audio design's fruits and let them enter the scene surrounded by golden shims of light.
Honestly, as mentioned by me and a few others before in other threads: designing a tonearm and searching for a cure for cancer has nothing - NOTHING - in common. And if a tonearm asks for 1000s of hours of R&D and enormous sums of money and labor, then its "father" is in the utterly wrong profession.
Mark Twain, as well as the tragic french pilot who has given us the "Little Prince", would at best raise one eyebrow in amusement about the fuzz we are making about our little toys.
I think many of us just take this nice, but utterly unimportant passion (and don't get me wrong: high-end audio has nothing to do with love for music !) far too important and thus want to see the enthusiastic audio amateurs, who eventually turn into audio designers (but only in High-End of course), right up there on Mount Olympus Artias next to the great scientists and artists of history.
This is neither high technology we are talking about nor the pinnacle of science or art. These are simple tools. Either they are made to meet their blue book design goals or not. That blue book was complete or not. The designer had recognized all issues or not. The finished product solves all those issues or not.
You - or me - like it or not.
As all simple things, it comes down to simple terms.
That these toys do ask and fetch the prizes they do, says nothing about their quality, but a lot about us - the all-praised and all-cherished customer. |
Well said, Thom. Your sense of perspective and practicality are impressive. I hope I get a chance to meet you at RMAF 2011. |
If someone develops a cure for testicular cancer and the solution took 5 years of development, involving 50,000 person hours, millions of dollars, and it requires $2,000.00 in materials to implement per patient, what is its worth to the cancer patient? Of course in hi-fi, none of us has a gun pointed to our head, with our life on the line. We're debating angels on the head of a pin over luxury / aspirational items. In all of these conversations, I grow just a wee bit weary of the naysayers who look at an elegant solution and try to ascribe a value based on not having been in the trenches, and not understanding how much effort was involved in arriving at the solution. I have yet to find an elegant solution in hi-fi that doesn't involve simplicity, and the quote on the Galibier home page is my guiding principle: "You know you've achieved perfection in design, not when you have nothing more to add, but when you have nothing more to take away."
... Antoine de Saint-Exupery The simple, takes time, blood, sweat, and tears to arrive at and reminds me of a comment by Mark Twain: "I would have written you a shorter letter, but I didn't have the time."
... Mark Twain The proof is in the pudding ... Cheers, Thom @ Galibier |
... but I am perfectly willing to believe (i) that the overall excellence of phono reproduction depends nearly as much upon tonearm/cartridge matching as it does on the excellence of the tonearm design, and (ii) that some other tonearm design could be "better" using my favorite cartridges. I am happy to see that Talea, Reed, Schroeder are not afraid to attempt to advance the state of the art, and perhaps they have... May I say, that dreaming or believing has nothing to do with knowledge, engineering and real quality from geometrics and material mix? I am impressed, that the Statement "State-of-The -Art" is given so easily. May I ask why? I think, their pricing is State of the Art and from what do we benefit if these guys are successful? Empty wallet? I agree, then walking is a bit easier...and can someone please explain what do I have from a perfect cartridge/tonearm matching when the Arm itself is nothing special? A real State-of-the-art Arm will give you better sonic results even with cartridges which are a bit outside of the 8-12 range. This is completely useless, too because wood, titan, composite, aluminum, tubes dampened inside, has total different energy transfer rates...or quality of bearing, ability to guide a cartridge etc. |
DT, Herb Papier, inventor of the Triplanar, lived in Wheaton, Maryland, a suburb of Washington, DC. Hence the origin of the original full name of the tonearm. Triplanar moved to Minnesota after Herb died, so the "Wheaton" moniker is no longer appropriate.
The Triplanar has been my primary tonearm for 15 years. I like it very much, but I am perfectly willing to believe (i) that the overall excellence of phono reproduction depends nearly as much upon tonearm/cartridge matching as it does on the excellence of the tonearm design, and (ii) that some other tonearm design could be "better" using my favorite cartridges. I am happy to see that Talea, Reed, Schroeder are not afraid to attempt to advance the state of the art, and perhaps they have. We all benefit if these guys are successful. By the way, whither the Grandezza? |
The Talea bearing pivot, should it ever need replacement, can be replaced with a small allen wrench that is included in the kit. Lift out, drop in, snug up the set screw. The jewel cup is slightly more difficult, but can be pressed in and out by hand, assuming one has strong fingers. In any case, it is pretty much a field replacement. I've done it myself on a prototype model after Joel sent me an update to the bearing. And, the Telea bearing doesn't adjust itself as the stylus tracks across the grooves. |
Dave, I think Atmasphere was not referring to "wear" when he noted the superior rigidity of the Triplanar vis a vis the Schroeder or Talea.
This is about the ability of a given tonearm to transfer energy ( mechanically .... but it has huge sonic impacts ).
The feature of being able to "adjust" a magnetic bearing and thus the produced "tone" may indeed sound attractive and tempting to some. |
Dgad, 10 steps,wonderful.I recall my son taking his first steps walking toward the turntable while Dizzy was blowing his horn on "No More Blues" from On The Riviera.
What happened to your Phantom ? Oh no did she....... |
Jtinn.Thank you for the explanation.I hope you took no offense to my question.My phone is of standard fare.Used only for calls and I think I can take a picture if needed.
Some of the posts on this thread are very passionate and made by members like yourself that have far superior systems then I.Possibly even more listening experience then I.But one thing that I have learned over many years of listening is that in audio no one can say something of equal quality is better in a short period of time.This is true if everything else in the system is exactly the same and in this case if I read correctly it was not.
I'm sure all of us at one time or another thought product "A" was better then product "B" only to make another comparison a few days later and find that you now think the opposite.
I havn't heard the Talea and it very well may be the great tonearm that others say it is.
I recall the Graham and Wheaton shootouts.
(I preferred the Graham and had two over the years)Others purchased Wheaton's,They were not wrong.Both were and still are top performers.I guess what I am trying to say is simply "don't rush to judgement".And I do wish the maker of the Talea arm a successful journey. |
Goldeneraguy: "There's an app for that!" I have an iPhone and when I sensed that when the Schroeder was being played at louder volumes, I pulled my phone out and started measuring. |
Ed,
Amazing. 10 steps in a row yesterday. She loves the music. She also knows how to turn on my preamp among other things. I have a feeling a little longer and I need to pack my turntable up. She loves Dad's toys. The best arm to have kept now gone is the Phantom. Removable armwand and all. |
The Triplanar uses a bearing that is harder than either of the arms in this discussion.
The schroder arm uses a magnetic bearing that doesn't show wear in the traditional sense and furthermore any "wear" that "may" show up can easily be corrected for since the bearing characteristic (hence the tone) is adjustable. dave |
Syntax,
How much do you want for your mammoth bone?.... :)
Joel |
Syntax,
Your mammoth bone has been planted in Mother Earth, absorbing Her energies, for thousands of years, now permeated with all the positive energy of Mother Earth, the Earth Spirits, and her Commune with Father Sun. That's gotta be better than C37... build yourself a different VTA tower and offset pivot/gimbal system (and of course, a different azimuth system) and you may have yourself a contender for next year's RMAF. I bet Thom could arrange a third armboard and if we get a phono with multiple inputs, might as well make it three. :^) |
Thank you Darren ,Hows the new family addition coming along |
Goldereraguy,
Invitation is still open. My system sounds better than last year. Would you believe due to the change of a resistor on my RIAA stage. If you provide yourself, I will provide scotch & the like. We can do a shoot out depending on what is on hand. But in my case, lets do High Resolution files to Analogue. IMO high resolution is getting very close and the cost of entry is not that bad. |
I have put off going to RMAF but after reading this thread I am determined to be there for 2011.
I also thought I would be in Aruba last year and get to hear Dgad's system,but you know what they say about the best laid plans.
Reading this thread with all of its bobbing and weaving it seems no one can throw the big knock out punch to end this fine debate.
I do have one question for Jtinn.Having the best seat in the house for the listening session why would you happen to have a SPL meter with you.
I hope to meet everyone at RMAF next year
Best to all |
I was not at RMAF this year, but plan/hope to be there for 2011, where I hope there will be an encore. Since vinyl is (gasp!) my secondary source, I never expect to own one of these reference arms. But we can all learn from these demonstrations and Monday morning quaterbacking. Thom recognizes these lessons: All of these comparisons are inherrently flawed...
The takeaway from all of this, is that these are show conditions, with varying samples, and only a general sense of what this gear sounds like can be ascertained...the biggest takeaway is that we can build relationships with fellow audiophiles which can better serve us as in the future. . And as dertonarm so succinctly noted: I for one do still believe (sounds better then "I know"...) that tonearm and cartridge (if its an LOMC then add the matching SUT to the list ) do form ONE integrative mechanical spring/mass-system and none can be "judged" ( if at all ) - not in absolute terms nor in subjective - without the other. I could not agree more. There is never going to be an objective, universally applicable "BEST" tonearm. When you add in the vagaries of an audio show w odd rooms, uncertain AC (and A/C), etc., etc., a demonstration like the Schroeder/Talea should be fun first and informative second. By no means dispositive. But fun. Did I mention fun? Even tho I was not there, my hat is off to Thom for "sponsoring" and to Schroeder and Talea for agreeing and providing the product. That stuff ain't cheap and the demo was not without risk (both real and marketing)! Congrats to all for making it happen. Hope to see you all in 2011. |
