Hi Dan,
The photos on the bearing page are a bit confusing. Frank makes fine VTF adjustment available (via the thumbwheel on the counterweight) for both the DPS and the Reference.
It's a no-close option. The only reason it isn't standard is because some folks get the hee-be-jee-bees over the concept of the thumbwheel - either from an aesthetic perspective or a sonic one.
I recently learned that the Model-2 has a threaded end stub for this same purpose. I sometimes learn about these arms from other Schröder customers. It's only fair that I share the info ;-)
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
Hi everyone,
Sounds like you all had lots of fun and gained some insight regarding the importance of proper turntable drive systems. Be it rim, tape or direct drive, it's about the right amount of torque vs platter mass with both the compliance of the link: belt, tape, idler( and consider the flux lines in a direct drive arrangement as a compliant link too!) and the frictional losses(bearing surface area, oil) being additional factors in this "equation".
I heard Chris' 380 prototype in march and realized right away that with some additional work, his effort would yield spectacular results. Can't wait for the finished version. RMAF, Chris?....
The Ref.arm that Thom uses has slightly too high an eff. mass to be ideal for the Universe, at least when the cart features the silver base plate. Tonally it will complement the Airy 3 better, since ebony has about the highest high frequency resonance damping properties of all woods suitable for making armwands. You may consider this somewhat of a sonic fingerprint. So pick the right cart(ZYX Airy 3, Lyra Helikon, even an Audio Technica AT OC9 - you get the idea...) and the combination will work like a charm, as long as the fres doesn't end up being too low(it would be difficult to build an ebony arm with an eff. mass below 15gr. without sacrificing stiffness).
Some time ago I tried to post a looong treatise on the correlation between arm design and the perceived differences in bass "authority" and dynamic "attack" between Unipivot, gimballed and "no"-friction-bearing arms. It never got out(moderator, did I do something wrong?). In part I was trying to explain how high frequency structural resonances can lead to the impression of a "faster" attack, just as a heavy bearing structure(often found in more "modern" unipivot arms) store and re-release energy to give that extra(exaggerated) punch on the bottom.
The Triplanar is an excellent gimballed design(if I may say so). Since the energy path is broken up("split" armwand) and the actual moving part has low mass(meaning actual mass, not inertia), it's bass reproduction leaves little to be desired.
The top end of the Triplanar is not entirely free of resonances which manifests itself not in a grainy or ill defined character, but in a slight tendency towards accentuating the leading edge of the note while foreshortening the trailing edge/decay of a signal, slightly diminishing "bloom" or the so-called harmonic envelope of an instrument.
The ZYX Universe is a great, marvelously coherent, musical performer, but also not entirely neutral. It slightly rolls off the top end and it is not as fast as some other contenders, namely the Lyra Olympos SL. It's presentation(particularly the midrange) is nevertheless very lifelike, seductive without being Koetsu-"juicy".It is this trait which make it an excellent match with the Triplanar, so I agree with Thom completely.
Now, a harder wood, with less high frequency damping, like the Jacaranda armwand(also lighter than ebony) featured in Chris' Ref. arm will give you just what is required to work perfectly for the Universe. I had less time than usual to finish the arm for the open house event. So the armwand has only about 15 coatings of oil instead of the usual 50-60. The result: a great match with Chris' Universe.
I've said before that the choice of wood is not one of sound and I'll stick to that. As a designer I'd rather hear what the cart does instead of building it's sonic mirror image. A user usually has a different goal.
But the treatment/damping difference shows how profound the influence of resonance control(armwand and elsewhere, quantitatively and qualitatively) can be. And how critical component matching even at this level is to get the most in terms of musical satisfaction out of it.
Both Thom's and Chris' tables will provide just that: utter musical satisfaction when partnered with the right arm/cart combinations. And if I had to decide, I'd do as my wife does:
"Honey, I bought both handbags".....(her only weakness ;-)
Right, if I had the money and space :-(
I'm well aware that this post might draw all sorts of criticisms/flames or "yeah, he had to defend his product again" replies. Please take it as no more than a personal rambling, a string of thoughts written down to make an excuse for myself for taking a break from work.
And for Dan ed:
Before I forget, the VTF finetuning feature can be added/ordered for all my arms, not just the DPS.
All the best,
Frank Schröder |
Thom,
You let poor audiophile Dan get away without hearing the best available arm/cartridge combo? We need to talk... ;-)
I haven't heard the Dyna, but I totally concur with Thom's differentiation of the Schroeder Ref and TriPlanar VII. With the same cartridge on each arm, the Schroeder is slightly better at tone and timbre, the TriPlanar is slightly better at leading edge transients and pace.
Even side-by-side these differences are subtle. No one could be unhappy with either arm. Thom's standing advice is very good IMO: chose the arm that suits your budget and style, and that seems most comfortable to set up and live with.
I once urged Tri Mai to drill and tap the TriPlanar's end stub for a fine VTF adjustment screw, as Frank now does on his Model 2. I was disappointed that his recent upgrades to the TP VII didn't include this. O-rings work fine, but they are a bit hokey and they add 59 cents to the cost!
Now back to your regularly scheduled turntable thread...
|
Well, it sounds to me like Thom did get pretty close based on your last comments, Doug. And Thom also makes a valid point about the differences in systems and speakers. So I see no reason why someone could not be happy with either tonearm and either cartridge.
BTW, someone did post some pictures of the two new Teres tables over on AA. I guess the DD is a model 400. |
Thanks for the information, Frank, and also for the explanation of how the "same" arm/cart combo could sound different.
Now stop typing. Save your wrists for the tonearms! :) |
.
Sirspeedy,
.
Short but sweet....start saving for a Reference...It's that simple.
.
Rgds,
Larry
. |
Only 15 coatings of oil instead of 50-60!
Chris, did you get a big discount? Oil prices being what they are and all. |
Hi Doug,
Oil is cheap for me, I took an old Vyger turntable in trade and modified the rig a little bit.... 6 feet into the ground and I hit the neighbor's tank..... :-)
Cheerio,
Frank |
Hi Doug,
Yes, Dan heard only one of my two best available working combinations - the Triplanar / XV-1s.
In terms of the initial agenda, the Triplanar / Universe was scheduled for Sunday morning - planning on doing 2 combinations on Saturday and 2 on Sunday. Unfortunately for him, Dan had booked an early morning Sunday flight.
Because the Schröder / Universe combo was so sluggish sounding (for reasons we now know), I felt it necessary to give the arm another chance to strut its stuff - I mounted the XV-1s on it. Dan had after all signed up to the job of reporting back to Aoliverio.
By the time we made it to the Triplanar / XV-1s combo and listened for a couple of hours, time drew too short to mount the Universe. Knowing that it is the most documented of these arm cartridge combinations, (thanks to Doug), I left this pairing for last.
I'm hopeful, that I will soon see a Schröder arm wand which is compatible with both of my cartridges.
Heck, I'll even take one coat less than Chris' 15 coats Frank, but don't keep my anxious customers waiting on my behalf. After all, I do have a Triplanar that sings with the angels with both XV1s and Universe (hint ... hint ...).
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
Hi Dan, Frank ...
Frank's comments on drive systems and torque are spot on. He and I had a good discussion about this at CES - a conversation that verified everything I've learned in the past 6 years.
Any turntable drive system is a resonant system in engineering terms, with all of the associated components fitting into the equation:
- platter / bearing / oil viscosity
- drive interface (pulley/belt, idler wheel, direct drive) and their materials
- motor torque constant and motor bearing
If you change any single element (yes, even the oil), you've changed the system's Q - it's resonant behavior, for better or worse.
A few years ago, we experimented with some motors that had about 4 times the torque constant of our current motors. You couldn't put your finger on it, but they failed to satisfy.
In many ways, this higer torque motor sounded like good digital. Something was missing (listener involvement) , but it was not readily identifiable in traditional audiophile terms of frequency response, speed stability, etc.
Many people involved in the auditions actually liked the "sound", but I've learned to factor in what I refer to as the "demo room effect" - a component which initially grabs your attention because it is new and different.
While on the subject of auditioning and the demo room effect, I had an interesting conversation with Charlie (Azzolina Audio) about this. We've come to recognize two broad categories of customers.
1. The sort of fellow who powers up his system for an hour or two at most - the busy sort of individual who wants to have it "all" in a short period of time. My experience has been that this type of user profile gravitates towards a system tonality that tends toward the fatiguing side of the spectrum.
2. The other broad category is the fellow who lives with his music for hours on end. Charlie and I fit into this category. While I would never consider any of our designs to be lacking in inner detail, their virtues tend to be a bit more subtle - not calling attention to themselves.
Interestingly, the higher torque motor appealed more to user profile #1, but I dismissed it as musically unacceptable.
This is not a dismissal of high torque designs, but rather a comment on the many ways in which you can alter a design such that the parameters are mismatched. Ya pays yer money and ya makes yer choices.
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
Thom, that sounds very much like what we heard when Chris purposely cranked up the torque. The leading edges became hard sounding. You're description of this as being more of a digital sound is very good. It was a great demo of the effect of too much torque. |
Frank,
Are you sure that wasn't Tri Mai you were "modifying"?
Nobody's heard from him in days. ;-)
***
Thom's mention of the demo room effect and two listener types reminded me of a recent experience. Our new SPM speaker cables have less zing and obvious pizzaz than our old Blue Heavens. In the first few minutes (ie, in the demo room) we both wondered if something was missing, if HF's weren't a bit suppressed.
After a bit more thought and listening, it became clear that what was missing was bloat on the HF's. We discuss LF bloat all the time, but it occurs at all frequencies. Maybe we call that "smearing".
At any rate, once we stopped missing the excess "detail" from the Blue Heavens it became clear that the SPM's are superior from top to bottom. Violins sound more like violins and less like VIOLINS. Triangles and tambourines are the size they should be, etc.
Sorry for the digression. I just appreciated Thom's point and wanted to emphasize the risk in making quick judgements based on what sounds exciting.
|
WOW!!I'm really loving this discourse,and predict this will be "THE" anolog thread of 2006!!Great stuff,and much to ponder,for me.
Frank,I see NO reason you should feel like you're walking on eggshells,even if you want to help the apparently worthy,good word of mouth,you always get.Also,I hereby appologize for my dumb comments,of the past!
When I read a mfgr/designer's post I consider the content,which in your case IS quite plausible!The fact that you have added some of your own observations,which "might" stir the pot(I have NO problems there -;))is just fine with me,because you have the added benefit of some rather interesting conclusions!Having previously owned the Triplanar,I never felt I had the ability to get the high freq performance that my friend Sid got from his Air bearing design(BTW-I still don't).Even though the late,super wonderful guy,Herb Papier aided my somewhat imperfect arm/table match-up,I ultimately moved on.I'M STILL NOT ALL THAT HAPPY,BTW.So this is clearly NOT one of those "I now love what I have" posts!Yet you have alot more exposure than I do,and I appreciated you comments.
I do enjoy having some "juicey" afterthoughts bouncing around,in my head,after a well written post.Thanks!
BTW,you too Thom,and everyone else who is,and will be responsible for my "clicking" onto "this" thread ahead of ALL others.Hopefully for a long while!!
Best! |
Great thread - excellent insights into the challenges of system synergy. I agree with Doug and Thom about demo room first impressions.
I made the trip to Colorado a year ago and heard Galibier first. Thom was running a Lyra Titan on his Schröder Reference at the time. Whilst I appreciated the detail and incisiveness I was disturbed by the "leanness" of the presentation. So Thom set up his Micro Seiki MAX 282 with his trusty Denon DL103R which matched the rest of his rig far better and allowed me to forget about the system and enjoy the LPs I had brought along.
The next day I went to Chris's and started with the 200 series tables, which were clearly second best to the Galibier. When Chris switched to his 360 the detail retrieval was much improved, like focusing a lens on a camera. However on some challenging tracks I had doubts about the timing and speed of bass (as reported earlier in this thread and elsewhere). The progression through the Teres line however was seductive - the lower priced tables had the effect of setting a new baseline for me.
Fortunately I had another day in Colorado and was able to get back to Thom's to calibrate my listening impressions.
He set up his DL103R in his Schröder and even though the cartridge is technically inferior (in terms of detail retrieval) to the Urushi that Chris was running, I was able to hear and enjoy my music without the electronics getting in the way.
I guess my point is to acknowledge how difficult it is to compare competing components in different systems and I would suggest it's important to limit the variables and to go back to check component A again after component B.
The side bar is to confirm the lesson we all learn the hard way that good system synergy is never achieved by assembling the most expensive or most favored individual components.
Whilst it's great fun to hear products that aren't finalized and to hear experiments with motor torque, I can't help thinking that their effect is to overwhelm the listener and shift their perceptual baseline. Unhelpful for the listener but perhaps not the vendor who engages the listener in the product development process.
In my case, my choice was also influenced by the simplicity/reliability of the table because I'm 7,000 miles from Denver. |
Getting past the initial eye-opening lesson of what increased tempo can do to the reproduction of the music does take a little time. Just as with tone, dynamics, etc., Raul's favorite question is always present. "Does it sound like live music?" and I would add "Does it sound like the original performance?". As I said before, during the demo of the DD it was clear after some point that too much torque was actually detrimental to the presentation. So it begs the question as to what is the proper amount of torque that should be applied. How much pluckiness is too much? I agree that a valid comparison between belt and DD even in the same line, Teres in this case, may not be fair until that torque limit is known and applied. I wonder if Thom's experiments with torquey motors may have uncovered a happy medium if the motors hadn't been of fixed torque design. I have no doubt that if too much torque is applied that it would be a tiring thing to listen to, much like many CDPs.
Then there is the old rule of thumb that many people apply no matter what the subject is, but especially when technology is involved. "You don't want to be an early adopter." I do believe Chris is heading in a good direction with his development of the DD. However, I still ask the question of myself regarding how much is this new option worth to me and does it justify the cost. Another consideration is how long is it going to take to develop the controller and motor to the point where it is ready for the market.
Flyingred mentioned some great points about his choice of the Galibier and I am in complete agreement. I have always been of the opinion that two of the biggest factors in favour of the the Gavia (and Stelvio) are the simplicity of the motor system and the fact that one doesn't have to worry about major movement of the materials used. I also hold the belief that the metal vs. wood structure is more condusive to a dynamic presentation. It is also very true that follow up sessions without so many variations in equipment (tables, arms and cartridges) would probably have helped me to make a more definitive report about which table I preferred.
When it comes to the comparison of the Gavia and say the Teres 320 I haven't experienced anything that would change my opinion. I realize that this may sound like a contradiction from my earlier statements, but in fact, it is a clarification of where my thoughts are at the current time. I just can't honestly say that I can identify that I heard "this was better that that".
The points made about jumping on what sounds pleasing or "better" at the time is well taken. I admit, as I'm sure we all have, to having made equipment choices that latter turned out not to be what I was really looking for. |
Thom, I just realized we never played with the Anvil! :) |
Hi all this is just great news....but now I am so confused with all this informationa and so much to digest! I am swamped at work right now but need to get back to you all in the thread and via e-mails. The DD Teres looks great, the Schroder Ref is still high on my list but soooooooo long a wait?, the Galibier is still in the running as I had expected both tables to be quite good!
Rick |
Dan, Thom,
Thank you for sharing your observations on arm and cartridge comparisons. They seem very much in line with comments made earlier by Dougdeacon and Cello. Although it will be interesting to hear your thoughts with a proper mass Schroeder.
I wish I could have been there as well. Next time..
Andrew |
Flyingred,
Interesting your findings mirror mine, but in reverse. I heard the Teres before Galibier and had some difficulty hearing through the two different systems to the tables as did you. However, it was quite clear to me on first listen that the Galibier had a better grip on the music despite the system/cart/arm differences (Thom's the lesser cartridgewise). This was very telling to me and I needed not return for a second listen to the Teres line.
I had the luxury of a few return trips to Colorado, during which I was able to hear the Galibier in other settings and, suffice to say, the long torturous search was simply over at that point. |
I have the Schroeder reference with the Jacaranda arm. This arm has about 15 grams of effective mass vs the 18 grams that Thom has with the Ebony arm. I have the Universe with silver base weight and this combination works very well. The combination has great dynamics and attack as well as great tonal color. I am using on one of Thom's new graphite top platters and earlier Redpoint/Galibier tables. I suspect as Thom says I may be at the high point of what would be a good match for the cartridge but this match does work very well. |
Xsheaffer, I agree that if you hear significant differences and clearly favor one table then it would not make sense to go back. My interpretation of Dan's experience was that he liked the Galibier then scaled the Teres hierarchy - which was somewhat disorientating. Different isn't always better.
In my case, a year ago, many of the sages here were highly in favor of the Teres line whilst Galibier was hardly mentioned. So my auditions were already prejudiced (in favor of Teres) by reviews here.
As more audiophiles hear both tables the reports are balancing up the recommendations. I suspect that Thom has raised the bar with the graphite platter innovation.
I think it's essential though that anyone who's thinking of buying a good turntable should do what you, me and Dan did - take a trip to Colorado, check out both Galibier and Teres and let their ears decide. The relatively small cost of flights and hotels is insignificant compared to the outlay on a new table. |
Flyingred,
Again, same here. I had also heard much about the Teres and, looking back, I think I was prejudiced to like it better from all I had read and heard.
I can tell you the trip to Colorado to meet Chris and Thom is worth it in itself just for the experience of meeting the men behind, and the chance to listen to two of the finest tables you may ever hear.
And, yes, the new platter is a must-hear. |
Well it has been quite a journey for me. I've been all through the pros and cons on paper and in my mind. The choice between the Galibier and Teres tables really does come down to personal preference in all categories. At least that has been my experience. Like some of you have posted I have also read for quite some time about all of the wonderful virtues of the Teres tables. I can't remember exactly when it was that I first became aware of Galibier, but it struck me immediately that this could be the one. It has been 6 months since my journey began in earnest to purchase one of these tables and there was no turning back since I had sold my Basis 2500 at that time. (ok, I've since picked up a used Basis 1400 so I don't go completely crazy without vinyl.)
I've now made the trip out to listen to both tables and I've also had the pleasure of hearing Doug Deacon's Teres 320. I can say that both Galibier and Teres offer terrific tables at very competitive prices to the more established manufacturers. Although I was not able to pin down the differences in music reproduction between these two I do think that will come with time. I also experienced nothing that would make me think less of either. I have sent Thom an email to let him know that I intend to go with my instincts that the Galibier is the best table for me.
Now that I've come to a decision, (which really was pretty easy in the end), it seems that my journey is coming to an close. A new one will begin soon when my new table is delivered! |
Congratulations on reaching your decision. You're right about the value for money. And you're also right about the journey - the real fun will start in a few months when your table arrives.
Have you decided on arm and cartridge? |
Congratulations Dan, what an experience this must have been for you. I'm sure you will be happy with your decision for many years to come. |
Thanks! I'm sure this table will be with me for many years, which is why I took my time with this.
I already have a new Triplanar VII and a Graham 2.2. I'm getting a Dynavector XV-1s for now. I'm still looking for something a little more compliant for the Graham. Maybe zyx airy 2 or 3, or Transfiguration. |
.
Dan,
.
Congratulations on all of your hard work and decision. I don't think you could go wrong with either a Teres or Galibier and I am sure you will be ecstatic with your decision.
.
A note of caution, the Airy3 and Graham 2.2 was not a suitable match at all in my system. The Graham was not able to control the Airy3. It was dynamic with great detail, but extremely harsh. Put the Airy3 on a Schroder Reference or Tri-Planar and you would be fine.. The UNIverse on the other hand was wonderful on the Graham 2.2. It is a lot more money, but well worth the difference and the UNIverse loves the Tri-Planar (ask Thom or Doug).
.
The Airy2 sounded better overall with the Graham 2.2 , but the UNIverse is so, so far better, it would be worth saving up for it. With the UNIverse, you would have a great match with either the Tri-Planar or the Graham 2.2.
.
Regards,
Larry
. |
Thanks for the waring, Larry. That's very interesting. So, are the Airys less compliant or is this possibly something that might be improved with the extra headshell weight? I was impressed with both the Dynavector and UNIverse. They each seem to have a characteristic over the other. The Dyna seems a tad more dynamic and the UNI seems to have more of a neutral tone. |
Dan,I cannot tell you how glad I am for you.I know the wonderful feeling of being able to make a buying decision for something we consider "special"!
It seems those special feelings were much more common when we were all kids.Remember when you got something you really wanted,for a long time?When you were about ten years old?Incredible RUSH of joy,back then!!Now those special moments don't come as often,yet you surely will have yours soon.You deserve all the fun/great moments that will be heading your way.
Now go get some more great vinyl!!
Best! |
Dan,
So which Galibier did you decide on? What was your thinking on the various models vs. costs, and how it would mate w/your 2 arms? Sounds like you'll end up with a winner either way. Cheers,
Spencer |
Dan,
Congrats on your decision and thanks for sharing your journey with us. I expect Thom's table will keep you spinning and smiling for many years, perhaps forever.
I believe Thom's shipping account with UPS has a mileage limit, and that NH is just beyond it. As a practical matter you could have him ship the table to us in CT. You could pick it up at your convenience of course, after I've done a thorough same-system A/B of course! <:~)
Our Airy 2/3 review mentioned exactly what Larry just warned you about. The Airy 3/Graham 2.2 combo was too excitable from the upper mids on up. Four of us spent an entire day trying to tame it, to no avail. Mehran does have happy Airy 3/Graham 2.2 owners, so it may have been something else in the system , but no other cartridge I've heard on Larry's Graham was so problematic.
The specific design goal for the Airy 3 was "greater freedom" than the Airy 2, which is neutral but rather "polite". The Airy 3 does provide far greater freedom (ie, dynamics), but it needs a well controlled arm. A TriPlanar will control the Airy 3, just.
If most of your vinyl listening is rock I'd be wary of the Airy 2. You might find it too tame. If the UNIverse is out of reach, an Airy 3/TriPlanar will provide ZYX's famed neutrality and also rock the house.
Get the SB option no matter which ZYX you choose. It will help on either of your arms. Consider the silver coils if you want a tiny bit of smoothing on leading edge mids and highs. (Like a Koetsu, but not as much.) Choose copper coils if you want crisper, more natural and more dynamic transient responses.
I've actually not heard a cartridge I like on Larry's 2.2. Maybe follow SirSpeedy's lead and try a Transfiguration? He seems very happy with that combo.
|
Dan...my congratulations again on a very difficult decision. As I said to you this morning, your decision has helped me also in focusing on my vinyl journey as well.
Hey Sirspeedy...so well put....about those feeling of being 10 years old and getting something you longed for!!!! For me at 10 it was the Marx "Fort Apache" set. Now I want the Schroder/Teres/Galibier/Tri-Planer toy set!!! But seriously, I think we all owe a special thank you to everyone who contributed to this thread and especially to Dan_ed for taking the lead with this special trip. I suspect this is not over....no...I suspect this thread will continue just like a great novel. WE are just finished with one chapter. There are many more.......there's the "dougdeacon" and "cello" and "Xsheaffer" and so on, chapters......and also my chapter. I still need to decide on a new TT, arm (shoot, why sooooooo long for the Schroder) and new cartridge.
Again, Dan, thanks and congratulations!!!!! |
Spencer, I heard only the top of the line Stelvio. I'll be purchasing a Gavia, most likely with the Gavia platter. I know that Thom has a PVC platter that is the lowest cost and lightest weight platter. I've had something similar on a Basis so I know about where this PVC platter falls in performance. The Gavia is step up in price and includes the new TPI graphite platter surface as well as some added internal dampening. I believe this platter has all of the increased bass that the PVC would have with the added dynamics of the graphite surface. If I remember correctly Thom likens the improvement from the PVC to the Gavia platteer as that of a cartridge upgrad. The next step up adds about 25 lbs of brass internally to the Gavia. I'm sure this adds a bit more to the sound, but I could always add that platter later as an upgrade.
There is also a difference in armboards. The first is much like the arm seen on Teres tables, except not wood, which have a hole under the arm to allow mounting of arms with the cables that attach underneath. Then there is a new armboard with a massive hunk of metal under where the arm mounts. I don't know if this is solid or contains some dampening materials. This armboard works easily with arms that have the cables attached on the side.
Both the Gavia and Stelvio come with two mount points. All you need is the additional armboard. I think that the Stelvio plinth also adds some increased dampening. As far s I can tell there is an upgrade path all the way up through the full-on Stelvio. There is a new Serac table coming soon for a real cost effective application. Probably won't have the Anvil and additional arm mounts. I'm sure Thom will chime in at some point and give a better accounting of the differences.
Doug, I've already guessed I'll have to schlep this thing down for a bit of fun. I wouldn't be as concerned about moving a big hunk of metal as I would a big hunk of wood. (We can work out the schlepping later.) Considering we'd be listening with just about everything the same it would be a telling lasagnushi weekend!
So, you don't concur with Larry on the UNI/2.2? I have to admit is has been a bit of a pickle trying to determine what cartridges to settle on for the 2.2. I'd like to get something that works well on either arm. I really liked the XV-1s and the UNI surprised me at how well it handles most any kind of music. Nick mentioned liking some of the new Benz cartridges quite a bit. I've been seriously considering Transfiguration as well. As you know I do listen to mostly classic/alternative rock, but I'm also amassing a pretty good collection of jazz and mild country. Heck, I've even got 30-40 classical LP's. Throw in some blues and it becomes a pretty wide range of music.
Now I've got to build a stand to handle this hunk! |
Dan,
Thanks for the explanation behind your thinking. Makes lots of sense.
As far as the cartridge choice goes, I've got a mix of music similar to yours. What that translates to is a mix of 200g & 45rpm audiofeasts and $1 garage sale beaters with seeds in the double-LP spine. What I'm driving at is that one of the best things about my Airy 3S-SB is the way it works through surface noise on less-than-ideal LPs. Compared to most other cartridges I've heard, it makes those albums sound their best. Considering that much of this music is never going to be re-released by Classic Records, etc., it's a point worth adding to your decision criteria. If you take Doug's comment above about the 3 mating better than the 2 w/your arms,... well conclude what you like. We like our own gear, right?
Also, I'd to join in thanking everyone on this thread. All input pointing us to mutual vinyl nirvana is much appreciated. Cheers,
Spencer |
Great stuff keeps coming on this fun thread!
Rick,you must be getting pumped up,by now.Your table should be a fun purchasing decision too.BTW-As a child,I was dying for the Mattel "Bulldog Tank".Circa 1960.Never got one,as it cost 15 bucks,at the time.Yet my dad did get me a really nice alternative "Ideal"(the mfgr)tank.Funny,it may not have been motorized,like the "Bulldog",but shot missiles,and would surely be illegal to sell today.I loved it!
Well,on my own analog front,I did get back my Cosmos,from upgrade,recently.It sat in it's box for the last month,in my den.Unfortunately my Rowland has been out for service,and it is still with Rowland.
I have been a bit bummed out by the service length of the amp(well over two months as of now)so let my Cosmos just sit in the box.Well,as my whole family is coming over tomorrow for my son's med school grad party,my wife basically stated that if I did not set up the Cosmos,and get it into my listening room,and out of her den,it would be "toast".
I painfully(by myself,and with a tennis injury)unpacked the Cosmos and then inspected it.Sadly(in a good way)it looked great,yet it is incredibly frustrating to not be able to hear music again.Even my CD's!!
I DO envy(yet am really happy for all of you)those who's biggest concern is whether or not to upgrade or tweak their equipment.I'd be happy just to hear a noisey(in Joisey)LP these days.
Best! |
.
Dan,
.
If I may pre-empt Doug (Doug, with your permission), he will not have any encouraging and supportive words for you regarding the Graham 2.2.
.
All of the ZYX's are excellent cartridges in their price ranges, but the issue is more with the 2.2's ability to handle them rather than the other way around.
.
The UNIverse seems to be quite happy with what ever tonearm it lands on and the XV1-s is a great cartridge as well (but for my money not quite the joy that one gets from the UNIverse). The Airy3 does not do so well on the Graham 2.2, but the Airy2 works well with the 2.2 but lacks so much that the Airy3 has to offer when mounted on the right arm.
.
For me, the no-brainer is to get a UNIverse as your next cartridge (providing that the budget allows) and you will be fine wherever you end up with regards to tonearms.
.
If life were perfect, I would own a Schroder Reference and a Tri-Planar VII (I am half way there). After that, I would want to have 3 cartridges: UNIverse, Olympus, and an XV-1s. Put any combination of the above on either the best Teres or Galibier and you can start focusing on your pre, amp, speakers or wires.
.
I hope life gets a bit drier for you and the family.
.
Rgds,
Larry
.
|
Thanks to everyone for the support. Hang in there Speedy, that amp will come back and be all the better.
It does look like we're having a change in the weather to more dry air for the next week so maybe things will really improve around here. No complaints from me, though. My only problem through all of this is not being able to get the grass cut. Oh damn! Another weekend of uninterrupt vinyl has come and gone. I don't know how I make it through!
I guess it really is a no brainer about the UNIverse. I'll just have to see how the budget handles it. I'm already making plans for amp and speaker changes so I do want to have something left. |
Thanks for the education. It has been fascinating. Now, to complicate things further, has anyone compared some of the finest high mass, unsuspended designs (Galibier, Teres, Redpoint, etc., etc.,) with the finest suspended designs (Avid, Oracle, etc., etc.,). We probably know the arguements for both sides by now and that execution is more important than which design. Are there any small Galibier-like shops that manufacturer suspended designs? I think I recognize that any choice, as long as the arm/cartridge/table combo is synergistic, will be a good one, but are we really sure all the damping/weight, done very well, is the better choice. As I've said when I started this thread I have a suspended Avid Volvere and was looking to upgrade. One thing I believe is that with my table and Systrum rack (which drains and doesn't damp) the vibration just floooows into my concrete floor. But, also, my choice to a/b borders on nill. Anyone have anything to volunteer in this area? |
Hi Richard,
I've been woefully behind on this thread due to working on some background issues. As I wrote to Dan_ed privately, I'll expand on the Anvil and other questions in the next 36 hours.
Regarding suspended designs, there's a new keeper of the Merrill turntable flame. Check out the AR Vinyl Nirvana site at: http://www.vinylnirvana.com/
Specifically, it's my understanding that Anthony Scillia is carrying the AR/Merrill torch. The direct link to that page on this site is: http://www.vinylnirvana.com/ar_mods1.shtml
IMHO, the Merrill turntable (evolved from George's mods of the AR), is the best suspended turntable I've ever heard.
Back when Chris first met me, it was my trusty Merrill that made him get back into vinyl after some 20 years of buying into the promise of digital. I had heard many contenders to the throne over the 9 years I ran my Merrill Heirloom and they all fell short of the mark by varying degrees. I've not heard the latest Oracle, but this is perhaps the only other suspended turntable I'd consider. But that's just me ...
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
Dan,
Congrats. Great decision on the Galibier and Triplanar. |
Dan,
Lasagnushi is a secret password, used only by a few cognoscenti during their most sacred rites. If you post it again Jyprez, Swampwalker and I will send Opus Galibier after you!
I don't think Larry and I disagree on the UNIverse/2.2 as a combo. The UNIverse is well behaved on every arm it's been tried on, including the 2.2. That combo would give you no problems. It's just not as alive or involving as the UNIverse/Schroeder and UNIverse/TriPlanar combos.
Larry has posted similar impressions in the past, so I believe we're on the same page. Of course if you buy a UNIverse you'll soon be able to repeat our 2.2 vs. TriPlanar comparison using your own table. Then you can tell us.
As Larry suggested, if it were me I'd sell the 2.2 and buy a Schroeder to pair with your TriPlanar. Based on the posts on this thread and your own recent experience, a UNIverse/TriPlanar + XV-1S/Schroeder setup would have the cognoscenti flocking to your chambers.
|
Obewan, please forgive the transgression of one who is but a wee nematode on the path to audio enlightenment!
Now if I can just find that extra $12K I had lying around. . . |
watch out for the wrath of Doug, I have a poor EL34 laying in my basement that dared cross his path! |
Hi Nick! Yes, I remember Doug bragging about how he put a hurtin' on you once. :) |
Dan,
You left that extra $12K here. Wasn't that your share of the lasagnushi?
Nick,
I'm a pussycat. Paul's the one who turned that EL34 into a puddle of melted glass. I think he biased the amp up to 800mv or something. Apparently it sounded fabulous for a minute or two. Then the glow frightened the neighbors!
|
It may have been the glow combined with the soundtrack from close encounters of the 3rd kind.
How did you get all the mud out of the living room anyway?
I hate it when people hijack threads.
Back to turntable comparisons |
Dan_ed: Congratulations on your decision. I purchased one of Thom's tables in 2004. You should know that the temporary "abode" the table was shipped in, was absolutely bullet proof. So much so, that I kept the crate and discarded the turntable. Well maybe not quite...{grin}. Seriously, I consider my Galibier Quattro an heirloom and like his equipment and support, Thom's packaging in 2004 went above and beyond; and given his constant efforts of improving everything he does, his temporary turntable "temples" are probably (if that's possbile) even more robust today! After the Quattro order, I fondly recall update e-mails from Thom regarding the status of its fabrication. The excitement mentioned in the above posts bought back mine, especially after just mulling over some of the communications in '04 with Thom. Rather than explain, I will copy the following excerpts (hopefully Thom doesn't mind their publication): To Thom: Sharing your "learning" experiences is welcomed. Knowing of the development and birth of my Turntable, makes it a more personal and rewarding experience. Do I get to go in to the delivery room, or are pre-birthing classes required?
While it's an understatement to say that I'm excitedly looking forward to seeing, and getting my hands on the finished product, those feelings are tempered with the knowledge that it's important that you're taking the time and care to make sure the "infant" has all its fingers and toes, and meets your rigorous requirements. Moreover, all "great" things are indeed worth the wait, aren't they? From Thom: Funny you should mention the delivery room. I got together with a few folks on Saturday evening. One of them will be getting a Quattro from the same "litter" as yours. I decided to bring one of the platter carriers (the
aluminum part of the platter) along to wet his whistle. He was bonding with it all night, and then suddenly blurted out "put your hand on it, I think I
felt it kick" ;-) Dan_ed, Im sure you will enjoy your new Galibier Gavia as much as Ive enjoyed my Quattro. If after your table receipt, and if you were so inclined, posting your observations (on the 'gon, or in this thread) would be welcomed....Cheers, Mike |
I concur with sirspeedy, this thread has been very enlightening. Seems the folks on the analog forums are far more civilized and helpful than participants in digital.
I have the TriPlanar VII/UNI combo on a Micro Seiki RX5000 and am quite happy. The UNI is still breaking in and our good friend Doug D has been a great mentor.
Dan: your welcome to stop by at anytime (I'm just over the border in MA.)if hearing the arm/cart combo is of any help.
Thom: The high end needs more people like you. It's so refreshing to see a person in the biz that sincerely supports the hobbyist. You are to be congratulated.
Bob |
HaHa! Bob, we have met in the past! I bet I can still drive right to your door. We are very close indeed and we should get together for some listening sessions. Do you still have your Basis? I have progressed more into the music you enjoy so I'm sure we could enjoy some jazz together. |
When I read about the meltdown at Doug's I couldn't help but image some poor schmuck audio dude who caught just a glimpse of nirvana right before the Three Mile Island melt down. Morbid, yeah, but funny in a whacked sort of way. |
