Ah ... the written word ... it can sometimes be our worst enemy. Ask me how I know this ...
It was surely brave of Dan to try to summarize his experiences of his weekend: sleep deprivation, jet air travel, strange systems, etc. As time rolls forward, I'm sure we'll have more folks posting opinions that diverge by 180 degrees from Dan's - or maybe it's 540 degrees ... when one's head starts spinning, it's difficult to count the revolutions. I look at all of this as an expanding pie, and look forward to more comments - irrespective of which manufacturer "wins" - we all win ... including the consumer.
Not to put words in John's mouth, but he had one other major advantage over Dan ... having more than a casual a familiarity with both Chris' and my systems.
This brings up a consideration about auditioning analog in unfamiliar systems. Last week, I had a discussion with someone who asked me if anyone auditioning my gear ever brings a CD or two to play ... to help in triangulating on my system's general characteristics. No one has done this to date, but I will make a point of suggesting that people do so in the future.
We all know that digital front ends can be as variable as any component in the signal chain. Choice of DAC, grounding strategy, distortions in the form of jitter, variations in the analog output stage can all (to name a few) produce an entire range of sonic pallets. Still, there are some constants about digital that can be instructive in terms of auditioning analog, and this point is a wise one to consider.
-----
One thing to come out of this thread is the reinforcement of an alternative distribution model - what David Robinson of Positive Feedback calls "Craft Audio". I prefer the term "Artisan Audio", as the former term connotes basket weaving to me. The concept is valid however, with people like Nick Doshi (who built Doug's preamp) garnering a grass roots following. This model is by no means a new one, but public discussion makes it more "real".
To me, the relevant aspect of this model is not so much that Nick, Chris, or I are more talented than designers working with larger companies. This may or may not be the case. There are two attributes of this small manufacturing model that have the potential to confer unique advantages however: (a) price/performance, and (b) niche appeal.
The first part has to do with the pricing structure - the fact that every dollar spent on product development translates into fewer dollars at the retail level. The second aspect is that smaller manufacturers can follow their own song, knowing that if they are true to themselves, that their referral network will grow, and that like-minded individuals will seek them out (if you build it they will come).
Please don't take this pricing advantage as anything but a theoretical one. We have all seen too many components loaded with expensive, boutique parts that sound like drek. The small-scale designer could easily be tempted to load a preamp up with $10 Vishay resistors, but at the end of the day, he still has to be (a) competent, and (b) know what music sounds like. I have heard all too many fabulous components which were assembled with what are essentially floor sweepings to know that the chef is as important as the ingredients.
There are quite a few products in the traditional distribution network that are both outstanding performers as well as offering great value. Recently I auditioned a single ended amplifier by Quicksilver Audio - an amplifier in its late stage of prototyping which is projected to retail for $2K. If this amplifier gets the respect it deserves, it will cause the manufacturers of quite a few 5 figure amplifiers to sweat.
I've admired the work of Quicksilver since the 1980's, and finally got to meet Mike Sanders after last year's RMAF - with him having moved to the Colorado Front Range (relocating Quicksilver from Reno, NV last year). My earliest impressions of Quicksilver (dating back to the mid 1980's) were of an honest company which produced products that sold for more than a fair price - a company that always emphasized classical design techniques and values - hard-wiring, conservative operating points, reliability, and support. In short, they're my kind of company. What I did not know about Mike until meeting him is that he has really been working to push the sonic envelope as of late.
I use Quicksilver as an example of a company that offers incredible value while following the traditional distribution model because I have had the opportunity to follow the company - first, from an outside perspective, and now getting to know the man behind the product. Two channel audio is being killed by charlatans (you know who you are), and if honest companies like Quicksilver get their due, then two channel will survive and the music lover will benefit. I think it's safe to speak for Chris that we'd both be honored to be thought of in the same category as companies like Quicksilver.
Cheers,
Thom @ Galibier |
H John,
I do realize that sometimes what we post and how we post can impact someone's business. When ever I post an opinion on a component I do try to think things through so that I don't post something that would be seen as a condemnation. It is very hard to give an opinion or express an impression on the internet and get the point across. Face to face, or at least phone to phone, will always be the best form of communication. Anyway, what I though you were suggesting I had done was what I try pretty hard to avoid. Thanks for posting back and letting me know that I did not slam either Thom or Chris. Appology accepted, but not really necessary.
I hope you do get a chance to listen again to both tables as I would have loved to stay another day to do just that. I was hoping that someone else who had attended both events that Sat. would offer their opinion. It was tough to come to a solid conclusion with so many variables involved, and I could really use some confirmation or dismissal of what I thought I heard with the Teres DD. Perhaps we'll get a chance to do this again in some fashion at RMAF.
Just for the record, I have had not thought about these tables or their differences since I sent Thom a deposit to buy the Galibier. I am just that comfortable with my decision. |
Hi Dan,
I'm sorry I didn't reply sooner, I should have. Again, I appreciate the time you took to review the two types of tables . I think I was too harsh with my comments. I didn't pick up on the differences in pace and tempo between the DD and the tape drive but that doesn't mean they weren't there. It sounds like you were careful and gave your honest opinion. You can't ask for more than that. Please accept my apology. All we can do is listen and give our opinions. If I get another chance, I'll take a closer listen.
Sincerely,
John |
Hi John,
I tried to give my "report" based on my impressions after a very long day topped with another 5 hours in the evening. I tried to listen passed both unfamiliar systems (BTW, that was my most extensive session with horns) and just tune into the tables. Really hard to do with a 2 hour break in between unfamiliar systems. I do remember trying to pick out the reported warmth and smoothing of the Teres line and it was apparent on the birch table. The increase in dynamics with the 320 was a bit step up and more to what I rememberd from the Galibier. BTW, I still believe that one day I'll find out that the Galibier definitely has the better resolution.
Perhaps if I had started at Chris's and then gone to Thom's, or if I had gone back and forth a time or two I could have come to a more divining statement between the Galibier and Teres sound. I actually may have subconciously, since I have voted with my checkbook for the Galibier.
We'll have to agree to disagree about my stating my impression of Chris's new DD table. I know Thom encourages every one to go a listen to the Teres line as he believes that it plays to the strength of his tables. So I can't see how you would think it is somehow harmful to give an honest impression. You don't agree with me and that's ok. Would you be willing to state what you thought of the new DD Teres? I'd be willing to listen to what you have to say and wish you had spoken up sooner. I did point out that there was a diference in arms and cartridges, but I do believe there was an unmistakeable difference in tempo that the DD had. I don't think the arm and cartridge alone could make up for a perceived difference in speed. Dynamics, most definitely. But, hey, I've been wrong before. If you have read past that one post you will see that I later also questioned what I had heard. Was the applied torque exagerated, overstated, unrealistic? Maybe. I got the impression Chris is not completely satisfied and will be making more changes and improvements as he sees fit. So, perhaps once he's done we can talk some other poor sucker into listening to both the Stelvio and DD and then sticking his neck out and telling us what he/she honestly thought.
Best,
Dan |
Hi Dan,
My name is John Pessetto. I meet you at Chris' place during the shootout. I listened to both systems on Saturday and I thought the sound at Thom's place was significantly better. Of course, it is impossible to say how much the tables contributed to the sound at each place.
You thought the direct-drive turntable was hands down the best of all the tables you heard. I don't see how you can make that conclusion. First, I don't understand how you can reasonably say that the direct-drive table was the best table at Chris' place because each setup had a different arm and cartridge. The direct-drive table was using a Schroeder arm and a Universe cartridge, pretty hard to beat. The tape-drive table at Chris' place had a different tonearm and cartridge that was not in the same league as the Schroeder-Universe combination. I know it is alot of work to put the same arm and cartridge on each table. However, I don't see how you can make any meaningful comparisons unless you do. As a result, I don't see how you can say the direct-drive table was better than the tape-drive table at Chris' place, let alone make a reasonable comparison of Thom's table to those at Chris's place. I appreciate the difficulty of making very careful comparisons. I enjoyed your comments until the last paragraph where you state which table is best. I consider both Thom and Chris friends. Both of them are in the business of making turntables. Because they are both in the business, I think these type of comparison can be helpful or harmful to their business. I think it's ok to say which sound you liked best but to say which table was the best under these conditions is just speculation. Thanks for all the work you did and for sharing with us. I know it took a great deal of time and effort to review both systems and share you impressions of what you heard. Thanks
All the Best,
John
|
Dan_ed: Like your son, my "young" son of 25.5, will be the proud owner of a Galibier one day, and lots of software to play on it. He's taken this hobby of ours as his own, and has already received hand-me-downs -- Aragon electronics, and a Thorens tt. In fact, his first post Computer Science degree job, is with Klipsch Audio. So, while there is a concern that this hobby may be on the decline, in my household, it will continue....Mike |
Hey Dan, you're right ...we have met. I sold my Basis some time ago and now have a MicroSeiki RX5000. This is also a high mass non-suspended table (ala Galibier,Teres, etc.)which just "gets out of the way" of the music. |
Mike, thanks for sharing your experiences from the early days! That was most enjoyable reading from the perspective of receiving a "new born".
Interesting that I was just talking with my wife about how I could easily pass this table on to my son (a young dude of 26) and feel quite comfortable that he would be able to enjoy the best of vinyl playback for many, many years to come. Thanks for your vote of confidence and for sharing your experience. |
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. |
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. |
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 |
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 |
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,
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!
|
Hi Nick! Yes, I remember Doug bragging about how he put a hurtin' on you once. :) |
watch out for the wrath of Doug, I have a poor EL34 laying in my basement that dared cross his path! |
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. . . |
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.
|
Dan,
Congrats. Great decision on the Galibier and Triplanar. |
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 |
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? |
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. |
.
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
.
|
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,
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 |
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...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!!!!! |
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,
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,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! |
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,
.
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! 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. |
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. |
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? |
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! |
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. |
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. |
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. |
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. |
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 |
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 |
Thom, I just realized we never played with the Anvil! :) |
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. |
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. |
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! |
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.
|
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. |
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 |
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 |
